Prospect Info: Sharks Prospect Info & Discussion Thread XX

[Lebanezer]

I would argue that Setoguchi, Michalek, Pavelski, and Clowe was pretty damn close. Of course they only lasted one season as Michalek was traded and Setoguchi couldn’t stay consistent, but there was one season where our top-6 was filled with homegrown quasi-prospects.

It’s less about me not wanting to have a top-6 filled with Sharks prospects (I would love that!) and more about how unlikely it is that all these non-Celebrini prospects hit their upsides.

Michalek and Setoguchi had the pedigree given their draft positions. Clowe and Pavs developing into top 6 forwards was kind of crazy given where they were drafted. Having 4 1st round picks(Celebrini, Smith, Eklund and Musty) and 2 second round picks (Halttunen and Chernyshov) developing into top 6 forwards would be less surprising but ridiculously cool and unlikely.

 

[Juxtaposer]

Michalek and Setoguchi had the pedigree given their draft positions. Clowe and Pavs developing into top 6 forwards was kind of crazy given where they were drafted. Having 4 1st round picks(Celebrini, Smith, Eklund and Musty) and 2 second round picks (Halttunen and Chernyshov) developing into top 6 forwards would be less surprising but ridiculously cool and unlikely.

Totally. Which is why I’m definitely having a good time pencilling in 2022-2025 draftees into our forward core, like Eklund-Celebrini-Martone, Musty-Smith-Halttunen, Chernyshov-Edstrom-Bystedt is in any way realistic.

I just always start thinking about how silly “project your roster in 3-5 years” threads always end up looking in hindsight.

 

[gaucholoco3]

Totally. Which is why I’m definitely having a good time pencilling in 2022-2025 draftees into our forward core, like Eklund-Celebrini-Martone, Musty-Smith-Halttunen, Chernyshov-Edstrom-Bystedt is in any way realistic.

I just always start thinking about how silly “project your roster in 3-5 years” threads always end up looking in hindsight.

That is a pretty sick top 9. It is nice to dream about it and I don’t think it is a big reach to place any of the prospects there.

 

[Grinner]

Joel Ward was a good one

The guy was slow. Even on a team that was slow overall.

 

[Juxtaposer]

That is a pretty sick top 9. It is nice to dream about it and I don’t think it is a big reach to place any of the prospects there.

Right, that’s a “everyone hits their potential” lineup. It won’t happen, but it’s technically not impossible.

 

[Star Platinum]

Michalek and Setoguchi had the pedigree given their draft positions. Clowe and Pavs developing into top 6 forwards was kind of crazy given where they were drafted. Having 4 1st round picks(Celebrini, Smith, Eklund and Musty) and 2 second round picks (Halttunen and Chernyshov) developing into top 6 forwards would be less surprising but ridiculously cool and unlikely.

This might not be a popular opinion, but I always considered Clowe a bottom six winger masquerading as a top six winger. A lot of guys that ended up as a winger on Joe Thornton's line that I felt that way about.

 

[Barrie22]

This might not be a popular opinion, but I always considered Clowe a bottom six winger masquerading as a top six winger. A lot of guys that ended up as a winger on Joe Thornton's line that I felt that way about.

But clowe never really ended up on thorntons wing, he was mainly used as a playmaking winger for couture.

 

[OrrNumber4]

This might not be a popular opinion, but I always considered Clowe a bottom six winger masquerading as a top six winger. A lot of guys that ended up as a winger on Joe Thornton's line that I felt that way about.

Clowe didn't spend much time with Thornton, though he did benefit from Thornton getting hard-matched against the other teams' first lines. While he had his defensive deficiencies (especially in comparison to guys like Marleau and Michalek who were very diligent defensively), offensively he was incredibly well-rounded. He could bulldoze his way to the net, had a very good shot, was a greatly underrated passer, and even had decent hands.

 

[DG93]

Right, that’s a “everyone hits their potential” lineup. It won’t happen, but it’s technically not impossible.

But even if you get a lineup of XXX-Celebrini-Martone, Musty-Smith-Eklund, Chernyshov-Bystedt/Edstrom-Zetterlund, XXX-Edstrom/Bystedt-Haltunnen, that's awesome

 

[Juxtaposer]

But even if you get a lineup of XXX-Celebrini-Martone, Musty-Smith-Eklund, Chernyshov-Bystedt/Edstrom-Zetterlund, XXX-Edstrom/Bystedt-Haltunnen, that's awesome

Exactly. That’s why I feel like the Sharks rebuild has a solid chance of panning out. We don’t need the best case scenario, but we also don’t have a lot of boom-bust types in our prospect pool. Bystedt and Edstrom will certainly be useful in some way. I feel like if Musty topped out at like 50 points I’d be pretty disappointed. Mukh is an NHL defenseman without doubt, Dick is a top-4 D no doubt. Celebrini is a 1C no doubt and Smith is a 2C no doubt. Even if we don’t get everyone hitting their ultimate upsides there’s still a path to contention via trade/FA.

 

[The Nemesis]

Exactly. That’s why I feel like the Sharks rebuild has a solid chance of panning out. We don’t need the best case scenario, but we also don’t have a lot of boom-bust types in our prospect pool. Bystedt and Edstrom will certainly be useful in some way. I feel like if Musty topped out at like 50 points I’d be pretty disappointed. Mukh is an NHL defenseman without doubt, Dick is a top-4 D no doubt. Celebrini is a 1C no doubt and Smith is a 2C no doubt. Even if we don’t get everyone hitting their ultimate upsides there’s still a path to contention via trade/FA.

I think the other thing that helps is that there are a lot of guys who can all help in lesser roles, enough that the law of averages says we should probably get something out of them.

Sure, the Sharks aren't going to have contributions from all of Bordelau, Cardwell, Chernyshov, Graf, Gushchin, Halttunen, Robins, and Wetsch. It's very likely they don't get anything of value from most of them. But collectively they represent a nice array of possible outcomes from top 6 support wings (Chernyshov, Halttunen) to middle 6 guys (Bordeleau, Gushchin, Graf) to bottom 6 energy types (Cardwell, Robins, Wetsch) and varying probabilities of getting there.

that's 8 prospects who are not in any way key to the team's future core or grand success. If they just hit on 25% of them that's 2 more forward spots filled on cheap ELCs. And if we've seen anything in the past it's that sometimes what can kill teams isn't having to go find a 2nd line complimentary winger, it's spending millions plugging holes on the 3rd and 4th line when you should be able to do that on the cheap.

Ditto on D. You've got Mukhamadullin and Dickinson in your top 4 probably/hopefully likely. Emberson isn't a prospect by some standards but probably has a decent future slotting in as an NHL regular. Maybe they've got something in Walman too, who knows. But then you look in the prospect pool and there's still Cagnoni, Furlong, Havelid, Misskey, Pohlkamp, Roberts, Sahilin Wallenius, and Thompson who are all interesting to some level with possible NHL viability. 8 defenders, most of whom wouldn't be destined for a top 4, but if you just get one or two of them to become something, even if it's a 3rd pairing or #7D guy that's some nice work shoring up the back end and it means that when the team has to go hunting to fill holes in free agency or via trades they only need to address one or two slots in the middle of the d corps instead of 4 or 5.

Quantity is a quality all its own, but it's nice to at least have respectable quality in that quantity. It's nice knowing that we don't need every prospect in the system to hit in order to have a lineup that just needs tweaking to be competitive. We basically just need the bare minimum of success outside of the core "can't miss" guys.

Oh, and goalies because goalies are voodoo and who can tell anything with them.

 

[OrrNumber4]

I think the other thing that helps is that there are a lot of guys who can all help in lesser roles, enough that the law of averages says we should probably get something out of them.

Sure, the Sharks aren't going to have contributions from all of Bordelau, Cardwell, Chernyshov, Graf, Gushchin, Halttunen, Robins, and Wetsch. It's very likely they don't get anything of value from most of them. But collectively they represent a nice array of possible outcomes from top 6 support wings (Chernyshov, Halttunen) to middle 6 guys (Bordeleau, Gushchin, Graf) to bottom 6 energy types (Cardwell, Robins, Wetsch) and varying probabilities of getting there.

that's 8 prospects who are not in any way key to the team's future core or grand success. If they just hit on 25% of them that's 2 more forward spots filled on cheap ELCs. And if we've seen anything in the past it's that sometimes what can kill teams isn't having to go find a 2nd line complimentary winger, it's spending millions plugging holes on the 3rd and 4th line when you should be able to do that on the cheap.

Even if everything goes exceptionally well, the Sharks will still be looking on the outside for help. Imagine it's the start of the 2027-2028 season. Celebrini and Smith are on their new contracts and have proven to be top-end players; the window is open.

The prospects developed excellently so the forward lineup looks like this:

Eklund - Celebrini - Toffoli
Chernyshov - Smith - Musty
Edstrom - Bystedt - Zetterlund
Graf - Bordeleau - Cardwell

There's not a GM that goes into the playoffs with that roster. Toffoli and Zetterlund would be the most experienced players; it's far too young. A smart GM will support them with experienced help. It'd be Boyes-for-Brown all over again. Something like:

Eklund - Celebrini - Premier TDL acquisition
Chernyshov - Smith - Toffoli
Musty - Granlund - Zetterlund
Graf- Veteran FA - TDL acquisition
Bordeleau

Now the great thing is that all those prospects that hit become excellent trade collateral. Just don't expect to ice a competitive team that averages 23 years of age.

Anyways, while we're getting our ducks in a row, time to pack for that vacation on Mars.

 

[Hangemhigh]

Sure, it would be awesome if he turned out, but the odds that he becomes anything close to Dany Heatley are really long. Like, really long.

And even then… was Dany Heatley actually even that good?

He's the all-star.

 

[hohosaregood]

I think the other thing that helps is that there are a lot of guys who can all help in lesser roles, enough that the law of averages says we should probably get something out of them.

Sure, the Sharks aren't going to have contributions from all of Bordelau, Cardwell, Chernyshov, Graf, Gushchin, Halttunen, Robins, and Wetsch. It's very likely they don't get anything of value from most of them. But collectively they represent a nice array of possible outcomes from top 6 support wings (Chernyshov, Halttunen) to middle 6 guys (Bordeleau, Gushchin, Graf) to bottom 6 energy types (Cardwell, Robins, Wetsch) and varying probabilities of getting there.

that's 8 prospects who are not in any way key to the team's future core or grand success. If they just hit on 25% of them that's 2 more forward spots filled on cheap ELCs. And if we've seen anything in the past it's that sometimes what can kill teams isn't having to go find a 2nd line complimentary winger, it's spending millions plugging holes on the 3rd and 4th line when you should be able to do that on the cheap.

Ditto on D. You've got Mukhamadullin and Dickinson in your top 4 probably/hopefully likely. Emberson isn't a prospect by some standards but probably has a decent future slotting in as an NHL regular. Maybe they've got something in Walman too, who knows. But then you look in the prospect pool and there's still Cagnoni, Furlong, Havelid, Misskey, Pohlkamp, Roberts, Sahilin Wallenius, and Thompson who are all interesting to some level with possible NHL viability. 8 defenders, most of whom wouldn't be destined for a top 4, but if you just get one or two of them to become something, even if it's a 3rd pairing or #7D guy that's some nice work shoring up the back end and it means that when the team has to go hunting to fill holes in free agency or via trades they only need to address one or two slots in the middle of the d corps instead of 4 or 5.

Quantity is a quality all its own, but it's nice to at least have respectable quality in that quantity. It's nice knowing that we don't need every prospect in the system to hit in order to have a lineup that just needs tweaking to be competitive. We basically just need the bare minimum of success outside of the core "can't miss" guys.

Oh, and goalies because goalies are voodoo and who can tell anything with them.

The big value of all these guys that are on track in their development is that you suddenly have a lot of trade value to upgrade in places we may need in the future. Like let's say Bordeleau and Cardwell track to be good middle 6 guys but are blocked because we have equivalent guys like Edstrom and Bystedt or vice versa, then you suddenly have a worthwhile package of players that can net you a bonafide top 4 defenseman like a Sean Walker or a starting goalie that's getting forced out of an aging team like a Saros or Hellebuyck.

 

[The Nemesis]

Even if everything goes exceptionally well, the Sharks will still be looking on the outside for help. Imagine it's the start of the 2027-2028 season. Celebrini and Smith are on their new contracts and have proven to be top-end players; the window is open.

The prospects developed excellently so the forward lineup looks like this:

Eklund - Celebrini - Toffoli
Chernyshov - Smith - Musty
Edstrom - Bystedt - Zetterlund
Graf - Bordeleau - Cardwell

There's not a GM that goes into the playoffs with that roster. Toffoli and Zetterlund would be the most experienced players; it's far too young. A smart GM will support them with experienced help. It'd be Boyes-for-Brown all over again. Something like:

Eklund - Celebrini - Premier TDL acquisition
Chernyshov - Smith - Toffoli
Musty - Granlund - Zetterlund
Graf- Veteran FA - TDL acquisition
Bordeleau

Now the great thing is that all those prospects that hit become excellent trade collateral. Just don't expect to ice a competitive team that averages 23 years of age.

Anyways, while we're getting our ducks in a row, time to pack for that vacation on Mars.

I didn't say they wouldn't need outside help. I said that having a big mass of prospects with at least a little bit of NHL potential and intrigue means that there are decent-ish odds that at least a couple of them pan out. And that everyone that does pan out is one less slot they need to fill from outside. Especially in the areas of the roster where it is painfully easy to overspend in free agency or via trade (4th liners/3rd pairings and "overqualified" depth guys)

Jux's hypothetical roster skeleton was 5 forwards (Celebrini 1C, Smith 2C, Edstrom and Bystedt in some capacity in the bottom 6, Musty as a top 6 W) and 2 d-men (Dickinson and Mukhamadullin in the top 4). The most optimistic version of what I suggested was that maybe the gaggle of intriguing lower-tier or higher-risk prospects the Sharks have could produce 2 forwards and maybe another d-man or two. I honestly wasn't even considering the other roster pieces on the team at that point because we're probably talking about something that's no less than 2 years away and probably closer to 3.

Your hypothetical representation of the forward prospects panning out includes 4 of the names I mentioned hitting (Chernyshov, Graf, Bordeleau, and Cardwell), and includes crafting an entire 4th line out of them.

At no point in my post did I ever come anywhere close to suggesting that they'd just build the whole lineup out of prospects and it's incredibly disingenuous to respond as if I did.

My point was and remains that if we figure the prospect pool has maybe a half-dozen-ish prospects as near-locks for NHL contribution then the value of the pool is that there are enough interesting names to be able to maybe plug in 2-4 depth spots with suitable prospects so that instead of spending $2m-$4m on gritty "intangiblz" bottom 6 free agents like Kunin or Goodrow*, they can save that money and put it towards shoring up the actual impact positions where maybe it's the difference between buying a $5m winger to ride shotgun with Celebrini and an $8m one. Or picking up a decent 4/5 d-man and a stronger #3 type.


*Before anyone suggests it, I am obviously aware that Goodrow was not a FA target by the Sharks and that he got himself a fat contract extension from the Rangers after they traded for him from Tampa. The point is that we live in a world where NHL GMs look at solid bottom 6 guys like Goodrow, get giddy over intangibles and maybe a GWG or two and throw 6x$3.6m with a NTC at them like they're actual impact players.

 

[The Nemesis]

The big value of all these guys that are on track in their development is that you suddenly have a lot of trade value to upgrade in places we may need in the future. Like let's say Bordeleau and Cardwell track to be good middle 6 guys but are blocked because we have equivalent guys like Edstrom and Bystedt or vice versa, then you suddenly have a worthwhile package of players that can net you a bonafide top 4 defenseman like a Sean Walker or a starting goalie that's getting forced out of an aging team like a Saros or Hellebuyck.

That's true. It's also true that being able to plug superior young players into lower spots on your roster is one way to get an advantage in overall talent. If Cardwell is on track to be a good middle 6 guy but you can slot him onto a capable 4th line then you've created a situation where your bottom 6 can outmatch many opponents and at the low, low cost of a standard mid/late round pick's ELC.

I'm not saying not to trade any surplus prospects, but that their value goes beyond just being bargaining chips if they are good enough for NHL duty. Because the real prospects to trade are the ones who are on track but haven't arrived yet, selling them before they reach the point where their value might collapse (see Ty Wishart. Or like 95% of baseball trades involving prospects)

 

[OrrNumber4]

I didn't say they wouldn't need outside help. I said that having a big mass of prospects with at least a little bit of NHL potential and intrigue means that there are decent-ish odds that at least a couple of them pan out. And that everyone that does pan out is one less slot they need to fill from outside. Especially in the areas of the roster where it is painfully easy to overspend in free agency or via trade (4th liners/3rd pairings and "overqualified" depth guys

Even if everyone pans out, there are going to be 4-6 spots the Sharks will want to fill with outside help because you need that veteran experience. The prospects can be excellent trade chips for that. As in no matter how many pan out, there will be a minimum level of outside help needed.

It will be interesting to see, because the timelines really are all over the place. If Celebrini takes some time, then there's less issues waiting for everyone to marinate together. But if Celebrini and Smith take off quickly, I think Grier should pivot so that the rest of the team is in the same timeline
.

 

[one2gamble]

im good with them going with 100% of our draft picks that all hits their ceilings to perfect expectations. I see no reason to assume otherwise.

 

[LadyStanley]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1813985198662672488

 

[timorous me]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1813985198662672488

"The best shot in junior hockey"--maybe a little bias there from his team, but...it seems like this might be an accurate statement, no?

I get why he sank lower than I thought he should in the prospect rankings, but I think this is the thing that's maybe being glossed over too much: yes, he may currently have just one positive tool and is working to get everything else up to the needed level, but that one tool? It's real, and it's spectacular.

 

[Kcoyote3]

Prior to Toffoli, who was the last top-6 forward the Sharks signed? Like, I’m not being flippant. Have they ever?

Edit: okay, some poking around and so far @Sheng Peng’s good work from a while back tells me our best forward signings are: Tony Granato, Mike Grier, and Scott Thornton

How dare you all disrespect the Hot Bød Mikkel

 

[OrrNumber4]

How dare you all disrespect the Hot Bød Mikkel

Yup, totally forgot about Boedkker.

 

[Barrie22]

"The best shot in junior hockey"--maybe a little bias there from his team, but...it seems like this might be an accurate statement, no?

I get why he sank lower than I thought he should in the prospect rankings, but I think this is the thing that's maybe being glossed over too much: yes, he may currently have just one positive tool and is working to get everything else up to the needed level, but that one tool? It's real, and it's spectacular.

It can work in the NHL, but to be as 1 dimensional as he is would need to be at ovechkins level for that dimension.

 

[timorous me]

It can work in the NHL, but to be as 1 dimensional as he is would need to be at ovechkins level for that dimension.

He did just turn 19 a month ago, so if he really is improving his strength and conditioning, and now entering his second year as part of a really good program in London, I'm definitely going to keep the hope alive that his overall game could yet round out. I feel like the potential is there for him to shoot up the prospect rankings this coming season--and I don't just mean the Sharks' list--especially considering how his season finished in the playoffs this year.

 

[Hodge]

He did just turn 19 a month ago, so if he really is improving his strength and conditioning, and now entering his second year as part of a really good program in London, I'm definitely going to keep the hope alive that his overall game could yet round out. I feel like the potential is there for him to shoot up the prospect rankings this coming season--and I don't just mean the Sharks' list--especially considering how his season finished in the playoffs this year.

Is he for sure going back to London? I think he needs to grab a spot on the Barracuda and learn how to be a pro. Honestly if he can't make this Cuda team and has to go back to juniors for his D+2 season I would lose all my remaining interest in him as a prospect.