Prospect Info: Sharks Prospect Info & Discussion Thread XIX

[Lebanezer]

Seems more like Sommer knows Blichfeld wont get anywhere if he doesnt play any defense but Blichfeld thinks he can outscore his problems

The Deboer effect.

 

[PacificOceanPotion]

As a kid Blichfeld picked all the carrots and peas out of his shepherds pie and only ate the mashed potatoes and meat. When asked why, he replied “Eating the carrots and peas feels-like playing defense..”

 

[Lebanezer]

As a kid Blichfeld picked all the carrots and peas out of his shepherds pie and only ate the mashed potatoes and meat. When asked why, he replied “Eating the carrots and peas feels-like playing defense..”

How very Turing of him.

 

[hohosaregood]

Sommer's kind of an interesting guy to me. We complain about him a lot and his turnaround rate on prospects but any time he's actually been given a team with some level of talent, he's managed to get them into the playoffs. I'm kind of inclined to say he's actually a solid AHL development guy that has brought up a decent amount of solid to good depth players.

 

[TheWayToRefJose]

Dang, Blich is only 23 years old. I felt like he was much older than that. Motivation is such a weird and fickle thing. -47 but 45 points... Tied with Kniazev for the worst on the team.

FWIW there's only 4 players with positive +/- 3 being the highest. All 4 players with positive... Noah Gregor with +2 in 8 games. Kane with +3 in 5 games. David Drake +3 in 5 games. Patrick McNally +1 in 2 games.

I know plus/minus isn't a great stat for evaluation purposes, but FFS that's terribad.

Motivation was an issue of his dating back to juniors. IIRC, a poster here familiar with the winter hawks said he heard about it from people in the organization. Some guys just don’t have the desire to put in the work.

Sommer's kind of an interesting guy to me. We complain about him a lot and his turnaround rate on prospects but any time he's actually been given a team with some level of talent, he's managed to get them into the playoffs. I'm kind of inclined to say he's actually a solid AHL development guy that has brought up a decent amount of solid to good depth players.

Think the main knock on him is he stifles creativity and wants skill players to play “north-south, good old school, safe plays only” brand of hockey. Works for developing the Goodrows, but less such the Merkleys.

 

[landshark]

Motivation was an issue of his dating back to juniors. IIRC, a poster here familiar with the winter hawks said he heard about it from people in the organization. Some guys just don’t have the desire to put in the work.

I vaguely remember reading that around here when he was coming up. Thanks for the reminder.

 

[themelkman]

Sommer's kind of an interesting guy to me. We complain about him a lot and his turnaround rate on prospects but any time he's actually been given a team with some level of talent, he's managed to get them into the playoffs. I'm kind of inclined to say he's actually a solid AHL development guy that has brought up a decent amount of solid to good depth players.

I think he used to be really great at his development, but that seems mostly a thing of the past around the sharks.

 

[hohosaregood]

Motivation was an issue of his dating back to juniors. IIRC, a poster here familiar with the winter hawks said he heard about it from people in the organization. Some guys just don’t have the desire to put in the work.


Think the main knock on him is he stifles creativity and wants skill players to play “north-south, good old school, safe plays only” brand of hockey. Works for developing the Goodrows, but less such the Merkleys.

We touched on this earlier in the season but it's pretty rare for skilled offensive players to actually spend time in the AHL and actually spend time developing. Like there's maybe a handful of players that spent 3+ years in the AHL and then become a prime time top half of the line up player.

Merkley would be the only legit offensive potential player that he's had in years and it's been 2 partial seasons. In that time, he hasn't really lost his offense and he's improved on aspects of his defensive game which is good but he's still a work in progress. Other than that, we were hopeful about a couple lottery picks becoming future top 6 guys like Chmelevski or Chekhovich or Blichfeld. They've run the gamut. Chekhovich leaving, Blichfeld busting, and Chmelevski adjusting and improving his game for the pro level. It's a pretty reasonable spread.

 

[Karl Prime]

Is anyone from the 2020 draft likely to be a star other than Eklund? No. But good young depth is good in a cap world. If Coe tops out as a 3rd line winger he can still be a valuable piece, ala a Nick Paul. If Bordeleau is a 55-65 point 2nd liner? Not bad. And maybe, just maybe, somebody develops better than expected and fills a role on the team nobody thought they would.

At the end of the day I'd rather see some of the 2020 draft class in the lineup in the next two seasons than Viel, Weatherby, and Gadjovich. If the goal is development it's good, and if the goal is winning, well, they are better players right now anyway.

 

[hohosaregood]

Is anyone from the 2020 draft likely to be a star other than Eklund? No. But good young depth is good in a cap world. If Coe tops out as a 3rd line winger he can still be a valuable piece, ala a Nick Paul. If Bordeleau is a 55-65 point 2nd liner? Not bad. And maybe, just maybe, somebody develops better than expected and fills a role on the team nobody thought they would.

At the end of the day I'd rather see some of the 2020 draft class in the lineup in the next two seasons than Viel, Weatherby, and Gadjovich. If the goal is development it's good, and if the goal is winning, well, they are better players right now anyway.

The greatest value of the 2020 draft is going to be as potential trade currency. Even if they don't become bonafide hits themselves, if they continue to show NHL potential, we should be able to use them as parts of packages for better players

 

[Stewie Griffin]

Is anyone from the 2020 draft likely to be a star other than Eklund? No. But good young depth is good in a cap world. If Coe tops out as a 3rd line winger he can still be a valuable piece, ala a Nick Paul. If Bordeleau is a 55-65 point 2nd liner? Not bad. And maybe, just maybe, somebody develops better than expected and fills a role on the team nobody thought they would.

At the end of the day I'd rather see some of the 2020 draft class in the lineup in the next two seasons than Viel, Weatherby, and Gadjovich. If the goal is development it's good, and if the goal is winning, well, they are better players right now anyway.

I doubt any become "stars" but Bordeleau has 2C potential down the road. Robins, Coe, and Guschin middle-6 wingers (not saying they all reach that) and Wiesblatt and Raska could be energy bottom-6ers. I'd imagine they all atleast make a debut this year, even if they only play 1 game. (Unless the team becomes good somehow)

 

[Karl Prime]

You are essentially using exceptions to the rule in an attempt to disprove the rule, which is bad policy. The statistics take into account the rate at which certain draft positions develop to a level which allows them to contribute at the NHL level, so the stats don't go out the window once the draft is completed as you suggest. The stats are based on the rate at which those draft picks ultimately translate to NHL contributors. Suggesting the odds vary dramatically from expected odds isn't correct. Otherwise, they wouldn't be drafted where they were. Actual performance may vary wildly, but it is too soon to come to firm conclusions for 2020 draftees.

Back to the discussion at hand: if you agree with the poster who thinks that it is likely that Robbins (56th), Gushchin (76th), and Coe (98th) all become top 9 NHL forwards, so be it. Based on work Scott Cullen did, those draft picks have a 32.8%, 22.8%, and 24.4% chance of playing 100 games in the NHL, respectively. That would result in a 1.8% chance that all 3 contribute in the NHL. The % chance they all become top 9 forward is even less.

I hope you are right, but on the flip side I don't play the lottery.

Statistically Speaking: NHL Draft Pick Values - TSN.ca

Scott Cullen breaks down historical pick value from the NHL Draft, looking at 25 drafts from 1990 through 2014.

stg.tsn.9c9media.ca

The Lightning have Cirelli, Colton, Killorn, Kucherov, Point, and Palat, as well as traded for Paul and Hagel who were 4th and 6th rounders. Now that's one (amazing) team and most teams don't have that level of success with top 9 forwards drafted later (and two superstars) but it can happen. Based on those odds you gave, what would the odds be that 8 of their top 9 was drafted outside the 1st round? What portion of that is great drafting and development versus luck?

Obviously if Bordeleau turns out as well as Cirelli or Coe as well as Killorn that would be swell, but it's certainly not unheard of if all of Robins, Gushchin, and Coe become capable third liners.

 

[hohosaregood]

Not a Sharks prospect...yet. But congrats to Owen Nolan's family. Is this the highest a Bay Area native has been drafted in the CHL drafts?

 

[Mattb124]

But those are the odds that the 56th, 76th, and 98th draft picks become NHL players, not the odds that players with the tools and performance that Robins, Coe, and Gushchin do. The former is the likelihood of the picks themselves being turned into quality players and is useful for evaluating the value of the pick itself (for example, in trades), rather than the value of a player once selected with that pick.

I'd say that the odds of all three of those players becoming top nine forwards is slim - probably below 1% (mostly I'm not sold on Robins), which is roughly where the draft pick odds indicate, but that's a result of their relative performances and the scouting reports I've read (basically they're all scoring like 30-40 point forwards eventually do, and all have obvious flaws, which says middle-six forwards to me, but with big odds of failure to reach that), but I don't think their being 2nd, 3rd, and 4th round picks is relevant anymore and so using draft pick success rates isn't a useful way to look at them (except insofar as to say that getting one NHL regular out of that group would be a success for those three picks, evaluating the value of those picks and the outcome in eventual hindsight).

You are talking in circles now, those are the draft positions where players with the skill sets of those 3 get drafted and the probabilities those picks make the NHL are what were quoted.

 

[Karl Prime]

You are talking in circles now, those are the draft positions where players with the skill sets of those 3 get drafted and the probabilities those picks make the NHL are what were quoted.

"Those are the draft positions where players with the skill sets of those 3?"

Come on now. There are numerous great players that were drafted where Robins, Coe, and Gushchin were. Or else the entire drafting community is bad for letting Kucherov go 58th or Point 79th, or Stone 178th, or Aho 35th, and on and on. Nobody in Tampa thought Point had a 6.4% chance of becoming good. Nobody in Ottawa thought Stone had a 2% chance of becoming the player he is. The numbers can only go so far when it comes to general percentages a player at a certain pick will become good. Heck, based on that chart, Eklund, being drafted 7th, only has less than a 50% chance he will be a top 6 forward.

 

[LadyStanley]

Wooooo

 

[Le Grand Quebecois]

Has anyone followed Kashnikov? I'm curious if his points this season were at forward or defense?

 

[Kcoyote3]

Has anyone followed Kashnikov? I'm curious if his points this season were at forward or defense?

Watched him a few times, and when I was watching him he was playing defense, normally 2nd or 3rd pair, but his team has a lot of top end defensemen. Sometimes he would play forward on the powerplay, and he potted some of his points that way.

 

[Gecklund]

Mark Gallant invited to SJ development camp.

Forward. 22 years old, 18 points in 28 games. 6 foot, 185 pounds.

 

[OrrNumber4]

Mark Gallant invited to SJ development camp.

Forward. 22 years old, 18 points in 28 games. 6 foot, 185 pounds.

Any relation to Gerard or Zach?

 

[Alaskanice]

Any relation to Gerard or Zach?

I wondered that as well. According to Elite, there’s no relation.

 

[Gecklund]

Sharks have until Tuesday to sign Linus Oberg or he goes back into the draft and is then a UFA if not taken.

 

[Cas]

Sharks have until Tuesday to sign Linus Oberg or he goes back into the draft and is then a UFA if not taken.

Given his production, I feel like he's worth signing. I have no idea if he's the sort of player whose game won't translate, though.

 

[Gecklund]

Given his production, I feel like he's worth signing. I have no idea if he's the sort of player whose game won't translate, though.

Yeah I mean at the very least he could be a good AHL scorer.

 

[OrrNumber4]

Yeah I mean at the very least he could be a good AHL scorer.

Sharks might fear that there's no space on the roster.