Prospect Info: Sharks Prospect Info & Discussion Megathread XXI: "New, improved, and wayyyy too much info" Edition

[Mr Fahrenheit]

I have my doubts that Granlund will fetch a 1st round pick as a rental but the rest is pretty agreeable to me.

If he has a similar season as last, he will

 

[OrrNumber4]

I don’t. When people are having a debate, I tend to agree with one side or the other. The “loudest” is just the loudest. When I post an opinion and another poster disagrees and wants to shout me down. I let them. They haven’t changed my mind but I don’t enjoy getting into the kind of debates that are usually had here. I expect there are lots of people like me who either agree with my point….or don’t.

My big issue is that sometimes opinion should become fact; as we flesh issues out "agree-to-disagree" becomes silly.

For example, my particular triggers include effusive praise of DW, ridiculous criticism of Grier, and defending Thornton's playoff play.

Also, people on this forum are naturally optimistic, so a dose of realism from @Hodge is appreciated. He's very good at reminding people how competitive the NHL is, and how difficult it is to make that league.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

If he has a similar season as last, he will

Like I said, I have my doubts. Granlund as a rental to a playoff team is probably a winger with little interest in being re-signed. He also would have to come in at the full 5 mil cap hit because we can't retain on him. If another team gets involved to do the retention for us, it's coming out of our return. And not that this necessarily means much but both times that Granlund was traded, it was in-season and he struggled to finish the season with his new team. And this is under the assumption of that similar season. Granlund had 23 of his 60 points on the power play that he's not guaranteed a spot on. He was second in PP ice time overall and first in PP TOI per game. Celebrini is almost certainly going to eat a lot of those minutes. Granlund will have to beat out one of Eklund, Celebrini, Smith, Zetterlund, and Walman for a spot on the top unit. It's certainly doable for him but it's also doable for him to be relegated to the 2nd unit too. The same sort of thing can also happen to his even strength minutes. The quicker Celebrini finds his footing in the NHL, the sooner he will see increased ice time that will almost certainly come at Granlund's expense.

 

[Star Platinum]

Honestly I don’t mind @Hodge’s perspective on players and prospects; it’s often an interesting counterpoint to the board’s though line. That being said, the way in which it’s delivered seems to condescend and belittle others, or the entire community, as much as possible. It’s not challenging to see why their posts illicit the vitriol, often warranted, that they do.

This is hardly exclusive to Hodge; frankly, it seems to be the default persona of online thought exchange. I’ll not plead innocence either; I’ve done my fair share.

Personally, how I engage here has shifted pretty significantly over the last few years. I like to think of myself as a good citizen and someone capable of growth. I’ve shared my perspective when I feel like I have something worthwhile to add; to let my perspective speak for itself, and to leave room for others value things differently, work from different baseline assumptions, or simply see things differently. I’m not trying to win any arguments here. I just want to follow the Sharks, learn more about prospects, scouting, and the game of hockey, and hopefully in doing that in an overall positive way someone else can glean some benefit. Also if there’s a cheeky laugh to be had, I’ll go for it.

I’ll also say, that a good third of the time whatever I’ve written just goes unposted as it doesn’t further the conversation in any productive or meaningful way. Lots of combative rebuttals end up in the trash bin.

Great post.

I've done the condescending thing in other forums as well, though it's usually been in response to someone pulling that card first. The Internet makes it very easy to do as there are no repercussions to that kind of behavior. As I am pretty new to this board and not at all any sort of expert on hockey, I share my opinions, but with the knowledge that having never played the sport, I'm just making educated best guesses most of the time based on what I observe.

I'm old enough to have been on the Internet back from the very beginning (back before there were a World Wide Web) and the tone was a lot more polite back then. You had the beginnings of troll-like behavior from some folks, but a lot of it was just a pleasant exchange of ideas. I enjoyed it a lot more then. I would be lying if I said I didn't sometimes enjoy taking the stuffing out of someone rhetorically that I thought had earned it, but we're all here for a common purpose - we root for the same team. It's actually probably the most pleasant place I visit on a regular basis on the Internet all things considered.

I'm gonna try my best not to slip into that type of posting, but if others do, I can always just read what they say and then not respond. Or I could choose not to read if it gets to be an issue.

 

[Gecklund]

My big issue is that sometimes opinion should become fact; as we flesh issues out "agree-to-disagree" becomes silly.

For example, my particular triggers include fffusive praise of DW, ridiculous criticism of Grier, and defending Thornton's playoff play.

Also, people on this forum are naturally optimistic, so a dose of realism from @Hodge is appreciated. He's very good at reminding people how competitive the NHL is, and how difficult it is to make that league.

There’s a difference between realism and what hodge does.

 

[Juxtaposer]

A normal reaction:

“Wow, it’s awesome to hear that Svoboda looks great at the WJSS camp. I maintain, as I did the day he was drafted, that the Svoboda pick was strong in terms of getting a player with a high floor that has a good chance at being a 4C caliber player with a play style and physical tool kit that really fits the mold of what we see on winning NHL teams. Having those guys for their cheap productive years homegrown is valuable when you’re contending and worth spending a relatively high pick on. I hope Svoboda continues to prove people wrong and has a great freshman NCAA season leading to a meaningful WJC role this winter.”

What Hodge says:

“Everyone here are complete f***ing Pejorative Slurs for not gobbling up management’s dick and instead having their own opinions. I’m always right because I parrot the opinions of real professionals. NHL front offices are invariably perfect and you should never ever criticize them or dare to think that you might have a better idea because you are not a professional.”

Also Hodge: “Why am I the only one who can’t have an opinion???”

It’s really as simple as that.

 

[coooldude]

A normal reaction:

“Wow, it’s awesome to hear that Svoboda looks great at the WJSS camp. I maintain, as I did the day he was drafted, that the Svoboda pick was strong in terms of getting a player with a high floor that has a good chance at being a 4C caliber player with a play style and physical tool kit that really fits the mold of what we see on winning NHL teams. Having those guys for their cheap productive years homegrown is valuable when you’re contending and worth spending a relatively high pick on. I hope Svoboda continues to prove people wrong and has a great freshman NCAA season leading to a meaningful WJC role this winter.”

What Hodge says:

“Everyone here are complete f***ing Pejorative Slurs for not gobbling up management’s dick and instead having their own opinions. I’m always right because I parrot the opinions of real professionals. NHL front offices are invariably perfect and you should never ever criticize them or dare to think that you might have a better idea because you are not a professional.”

Also Hodge: “Why am I the only one who can’t have an opinion???”

It’s really as simple as that.

The thing I extra like about this post is that it provides a model for healthy engagement on the boards. At our best we have great discussions that push each other to stretch our points of view without assuming we are smarter than the other, or belittling if someone makes a mistake.

Hell, Hodge and Jux had a back and forth like that (extremely constructive) not a few days ago and I think on this very thread.

I think Hodge has a lot to contribute when they're at their healthiest, and I hope this last page or so gives some clear examples of what's appreciated and what's not.

 

[sharks_dynasty]

The thing I extra like about this post is that it provides a model for healthy engagement on the boards. At our best we have great discussions that push each other to stretch our points of view without assuming we are smarter than the other, or belittling if someone makes a mistake.

Hell, Hodge and Jux had a back and forth like that (extremely constructive) not a few days ago and I think on this very thread.

I think Hodge has a lot to contribute when they're at their healthiest, and I hope this last page or so gives some clear examples of what's appreciated and what's not.

Hodge needs to go on another mushroom journey and he will be just fine.

 

[hohosaregood]

So I will say that I like the bottom 6 mold they're aiming at. Most of these are good forecheckers and/or good at grinding along the boards. Kinda like what we saw out of Lorentz and Eyssimont. I feel like the more I watch and understand hockey, the more importance I place on puck retrieval and winning board battles on the half walls. I think this is really where a lot of value comes for a winger. Like if our defense is getting pressured and their best option is chipping it up the boards, the guy who needs to get that puck out is the strong side winger. Same idea with F1 o-zone retrievals. If we're chipping and chasing, big bodies going hard into the corners will more likely keep the play alive. They may not end up as NHLers but there are components there that could get them to the NHL.

 

[Crankshaft Mechanic]

I've always thought the "oh? you think you know better than anyone in an NHL front office? " attitude is so funny. Are we really that high on the average NHL front office? There are inefficiencies in every market, and certainly professional sports. The NHL is, in a global context, a middling professional sports league. Teams are businesses, and some are better than others—but they are definitely not all composed solely of the "best and brightest."

Silly to think that it's not possible for keen outside observers (aka some internet scouts) to identify gaps before some insiders do.

 

[Star Platinum]

So I will say that I like the bottom 6 mold they're aiming at. Most of these are good forecheckers and/or good at grinding along the boards. Kinda like what we saw out of Lorentz and Eyssimont. I feel like the more I watch and understand hockey, the more importance I place on puck retrieval and winning board battles on the half walls. I think this is really where a lot of value comes for a winger. Like if our defense is getting pressured and their best option is chipping it up the boards, the guy who needs to get that puck out is the strong side winger. Same idea with F1 o-zone retrievals. If we're chipping and chasing, big bodies going hard into the corners will more likely keep the play alive. They may not end up as NHLers but there are components there that could get them to the NHL.

I feel like the Sharks, when they were good, were among the best in the league at puck retrieval and winning board battles, but that it was counterbalanced by the elite teams in the league being far better at maintaining possession of the puck.

 

[Hodge]

I've always thought the "oh? you think you know better than anyone in an NHL front office? " attitude is so funny. Are we really that high on the average NHL front office? There are inefficiencies in every market, and certainly professional sports. The NHL is, in a global context, a middling professional sports league. It's definitely not composed of all "best and brightest."

Silly to think that it's not possible for keen outside observers (aka some internet scouts) to identify gaps before insiders do.

I might have agreed with this post 10 years ago but since then, teams have scooped up the few genuinely intelligent public analysts and lapped the public sphere several times over.

We got a front row seat to what happens when you let someone with zero professional hockey playing or scouting experience run your scouting department because he has an Elite Prospects subscription.

 

[gaucholoco3]

The thing I extra like about this post is that it provides a model for healthy engagement on the boards. At our best we have great discussions that push each other to stretch our points of view without assuming we are smarter than the other, or belittling if someone makes a mistake.

Hell, Hodge and Jux had a back and forth like that (extremely constructive) not a few days ago and I think on this very thread.

I think Hodge has a lot to contribute when they're at their healthiest, and I hope this last page or so gives some clear examples of what's appreciated and what's not.

I will say as a mostly observer of the back and forth between Hodge and the board, Hodge is at fault but the way people react is just as irritating. Most of what Hodge posts is intended to get peoples blood boiling. But everyone still falls into the trap without just seeing it for the shtick it is.

 

[The Nemesis]

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5683795/2024/08/07/world-juniors-roster-projection-2025/

(Paywall)

Wheeler, Pronman pick WJC rosters for Canada, USA, Sweden, Finland.

As you might expect, it's heavy on Shark content

Canada would have Dickinson (slotted on the left side of their 3rd pair in this exercise) and obviously not have the services of Celebrini

USA has Musty (3rd line LW) and Svoboda (extra forward) while conceding the very remote chance the Sharks would release Smith for the tournament.

Finland has Halttunen (1st line RW)

and Sweden has Edstrom (1C), Sahlin Wallenius (2nd pairing LD) and Axel Landen (3rd pairing RD)

Toss in Kirsch as an almost certain member of the Swiss team and that would be a very exciting tournament to watch from a Shark perspective and includes basically all of our noteworthy U20 prospects

 

[Pinkfloyd]

I will say as a mostly observer of the back and forth between Hodge and the board, Hodge is at fault but the way people react is just as irritating. Most of what Hodge posts is intended to get peoples blood boiling. But everyone still falls into the trap without just seeing it for the shtick it is.

The schtick is trolling and the boards tolerates it to a degree. People reacting to the trolling in a largely genuine way is hardly as irritating to me compared to the actual trolling going on. I thought the purpose of a message board here is to join a community of fans that enjoy the same team we do. I don't see how it benefits the community to have someone pretty routinely call those that disagree with them an idiot or insinuate as such. We're not idiots in the sense of not knowing that it's schtick. We're idiots in the sense that we've seen this person have plenty of agreeable takes and insightful commentary w/o the flaming theatrics but he chooses to employ them in a manner that is detrimental and clearly unnecessary. We're idiots to continue to treat him with some level of respect and charitability that he doesn't reciprocate in a consistent manner.

 

[hohosaregood]

On the topic of Hodge-isms, thinking back at DWJr's drafting, I don't think size was the issue. I think that it's more that those guys didn't really have many standout traits. Like I guess Ferraro had high end hustle and Merkley maybe had great passing touch but it was mostly a group of prospects that had good traits, not great traits. And only the 2020 draft was particularly small with the forwards.

 

[OrrNumber4]

On the topic of Hodge-isms, thinking back at DWJr's drafting, I don't think size was the issue. I think that it's more that those guys didn't really have many standout traits. Like I guess Ferraro had high end hustle and Merkley maybe had great passing touch but it was mostly a group of prospects that had good traits, not great traits. And only the 2020 draft was particularly small with the forwards.

Norris and Ferraro were Burke picks.

The "fairness to DWJr" argument is that, at the time, picks made from 2017-2021 (with his diminished influence in 2017 and 2021) were mostly praised. I think Hamaliuk and Weatherby were the only picks that were widely panned, though many analysts didn't like the Merkley pick. In particular, the Chmelevski and Chekhovich picks were DWJr's pick at their core, and widely celebrated as great picks.

 

[Mattb124]

I will say as a mostly observer of the back and forth between Hodge and the board, Hodge is at fault but the way people react is just as irritating. Most of what Hodge posts is intended to get peoples blood boiling. But everyone still falls into the trap without just seeing it for the shtick it is.

There is an easy way not to fall into the trap, or to even be tempted….

 

[coooldude]

On the topic of Hodge-isms, thinking back at DWJr's drafting, I don't think size was the issue. I think that it's more that those guys didn't really have many standout traits. Like I guess Ferraro had high end hustle and Merkley maybe had great passing touch but it was mostly a group of prospects that had good traits, not great traits. And only the 2020 draft was particularly small with the forwards.

For sure, it's not just about the size thing, but it does play a role:

• 2021, Eklund fell to 7 because of size, kind of seems like the best version of DWJr's strategy and let's hope Eklund sticks. Cardwell 5'11". Not a clear story because Guryev and Laroque and the rest aren't small
• 2020 was rough at the top 2. It's not like there were a whole lot of big hits right afterwards, pretty weak draft overall, but the picks didn't go great and were both likely small wingers at their best.
• 2019 Kniazev wasn't a bad pick, and there wasn't much else happening after that anyway. First pick at 48 and only 5 total picks isn't exactly setting your scouting team up for success, more a function of DW selling the farm to try to keep us competitive than DWJr's fault.
• 2018, of course, Merkley. Not only was he small and had a bad attitude/immaturity, but of the next 8 D's taken, 6 of them played more games and are active now.
• 2017 Ferraro was when he was Dir. Hockey Ops, not scouting. So I don't think he gets credit or criticism for 2017 and before.

It's not a big sample size but the signature pick is probably Eklund, and many of the other picks are in that similar mold.

 

[Lebanezer]

Norris and Ferraro were Burke picks.

The "fairness to DWJr" argument is that, at the time, picks made from 2017-2021 (with his diminished influence in 2017 and 2021) were mostly praised. I think Hamaliuk and Weatherby were the only picks that were widely panned, though many analysts didn't like the Merkley pick. In particular, the Chmelevski and Chekhovich picks were DWJr's pick at their core, and widely celebrated as great picks.

I believe it was stated in an article or interview previously that the Norris Ferraro draft was the first DWJr. ran.

 

[OrrNumber4]

I believe it was stated in an article or interview previously that the Norris Ferraro draft was the first DWJr. ran.

It's possible, but Norris and Ferraro did not fit the mold of his draft picks at all, while they fit Burke's very well.

 

[Shark Finn]

This f*cking board. One poster just keeps getting all the attention they want but definitely don't deserve. It's sad.

 

[OrrNumber4]

Looking at the prospect group, it's easy to imagine a situation where players like Cardwell, Graf, Bystedt, Lund, Edstrom, etc. outgrow the AHL and have earned NHL minutes, but the Sharks don't have the space to accommodate them.

Previous iterations of the Sharks had talent AND age/experience in the top half of the team, so they could afford to baby a Setoguchi with Thornton or play a Pavelski on the third line. Maybe in 2-3 years Celebrini and Smith are dominant players getting 80+ points a season, but would they be able to coddle a Musty/Cherynshov, or take the heat of a third line composed of rookies?

How many spots on the team (or top/bottom 6) should be reserved for veterans, if any?

 

[sampler]

Looking at the prospect group, it's easy to imagine a situation where players like Cardwell, Graf, Bystedt, Lund, Edstrom, etc. outgrow the AHL and have earned NHL minutes, but the Sharks don't have the space to accommodate them.

Previous iterations of the Sharks had talent AND age/experience in the top half of the team, so they could afford to baby a Setoguchi with Thornton or play a Pavelski on the third line. Maybe in 2-3 years Celebrini and Smith are dominant players getting 80+ points a season, but would they be able to coddle a Musty/Cherynshov, or take the heat of a third line composed of rookies?

How many spots on the team (or top/bottom 6) should be reserved for veterans, if any?

This is a great truth of the wonderful way the sharks integrated their rookies under DW. None ever were expected to be stars off the bat. Coach, pavs, Labanc, pickles, clowe, Hertl, etc all came up under the guidance of jumbo and patty and were not the faces of the franchise at 20 years old. All had at least a short stint in the A under Sommer too.

This is why adds like Toffoli are huge and I’d say the sharks need two more bona fide top 6 vets with lots of playoff experience. It’s why I reallllly wanted Marchessault. It’s also why I mentioned next summer being soooo important to deploy the cap space on real quality not big money on bottom six guys like goodrow or Wennberg. Those guys are fine and serve a role, but can’t take the pressure off the kids and they aren’t gunna score goals regularly.

Same on D. We cannot rely on Dickinson to play 25 mins/gm at 19 or 20 years old. We need two top 4 D minute eaters. This is why I hope they target Ekblad or the like. Again, use that 40m cap space to get vet leaders to mentor mukh, dick and the rest.

Personally I think they need three top 6, or 4-5 top 9 forward vets. They have Toffoli as one top 6. I’m willing to put zetterlund there if he keeps moving up. Maybe Eklund too. So one more high caliber top 6 vet would be good. Grandlund might qualify but frankly I’d like a more top 3 level 30+ goal, 60+ pt guy.

This puts three good vets+celly, smith and Eklund in your top 6. Wennberg+solid 20g/40pt vet+ musty in your top 9.

Then the fourth line sheltered mins is where you start bringing guys up on a line anchored by goodrow. They start at 10-12 mins per night of low pressure with easier D matchups. If they look great, they can play themselves into the top 9. Injuries and struggles also inevitably happen so there will always be at least one or two top 9 slots available for call ups/4th line rooks to play up.

This is why I don’t mind Kunin/grandstrum/dyllandrea/Kostin etc for this year as smith and celly are the only likely top 6 slots so they need vets for the rest. But starting next year, you don’t want a player like Kunin blocking the chance for a kid to get 4th line experience to start.

I think the main theme is that every line should be built with one or two vets (top line with two 30-30 vets+ cells, 2nd line with two 25g/50+pt vets+ smith, third line with two 40pt vets +musty, 4th line with a solid checking guy like goodrow+call ups with the fourth line serving as a launching point into the top 9 for the kids that excel there.

same should be in D if possible:
Mukh+solid top vet
Dick+solid vet
Thrun+vet

So we need to sign one high level top liner (draisaitl, marner, etc) and possibly one more Toffoli level player depending on how Zetterlund and Eklund progress or a surprise explosion from someone like Dyllandrea or kostin.

2025-6:
Star+toffoli+celebrini
25+goal vet-Eklund-smith
Wennberg-Zetterlund-musty
Goodrow-call up-call up

Grundstrom and dyllandrea can slot in if they emerge like Zetterlund as clear top 9s. That could save having to sign one vet but unlikely. Or Cardwell/gush/bords makes a giant leap.

Basically this year is the major tell tale year for a lot of guys to set up summer 2025. Well know what we have in Cardwell, gush, bords, Bystedt, and maybe even Halttunen as they have pro seasons. Musty may well get 9 games tryout too and may make the team. We will also see how the other guys like Edstrom and chernyshov develop. We’ll also see how celly and smith handle the limelight and whether they will be ready for reliable top 6 roles in 2025. It’s hard to know if they will be 30, 50, or 70 pt players and if they can handle the D responsibilities.

It’s hard to know what they need in summer 2025 just yet, but generally I think you want a roster of at least 2/3 proven NHL players, leaving room for 4-5 rooks at forward and 2 rookie D knowing you might get another couple rooks a look after the deadline if vets are traded and throughout the year for injuries.

Simply put, I think they will need at least one more star vet forward and at least 1, though likely two star vet D. Good news is, they will have 40m in cap space so I see no reason they cannot land those guys of Grier sells a cup winning future. Draisaitl at 12m per. Ekblad for 10m, etc.

They can afford to dish term and $$$ next summer as the cooch and pickles contracts will have just 1-2 years left opening big money in 2026 and 2027 for these high end card and resigning the expiring elcs. They also will be able to see that if their forwards develop amazingly well this year, they can be cornerstones in a trade to acquire the top F or D as well. This is kinda how DW got to add Boyle and burns.

 

[sampler]

I would also add that, as I posted earlier, the sharks could get a 1st for Granlund at the deadline. If so, they will add at least 4 more very good prospects in the 2025 draft. So, again, they will have so much young talent that they can actually afford to trade some away for cornerstone established guys as early as next summer.

Grier, to his credit (and his luck), his given himself a nice runway.

Of course I could imagine a pretty bad scenario too where Celly and smith both really struggle and clearly are not ready for top 6 roles just yet while Bystedt, cardwell, gush, haltunnen, Bordeleau, and co all struggle with the cuda and none really establishes themselves as clear nhlers. That seems a bit unlikely that no cream rises to the top, but the NHL is a hard league and most rookies don’t hit their projected ceilings.

So much to watch at all levels this year. Smith and Celly as well as Eklund and Zetterlund, Thrun and Mukhamadullin in the NHL. Cardwell, gush, Halttunen (maybe), Bystedt, Cagnoni (maybe), Bordeleau, jack thmpson in the AHL. Musty in nhl or juniors. Chernyshov and weastch in juniors (along with Roberts and Misskey). Pohlkamp,Lund, and Svoboda in college. And of course Edstrom and LSW in Sweden along with Landen.

So much to watch for!!!