Patty Ice
Mighty Luca
Because of Celebrini, perhaps. But there have definitely been years with better lists.
I'm interested in when you think the Sharks had a better lists (plural) of prospects.
Because of Celebrini, perhaps. But there have definitely been years with better lists.
I went back through the Sharks draft history, and I'm not there ever was anything close to this. The best argument you could make is 1997 where you had Marleau, Sturm, Zyuzin and Hannan but the biggest part was the Sharks had Nabokov, Kiprusoff and Toskala in net. You could also make an argument for after the 2003 draft with Boyes, Michalek, Bernier, Carle, Pavelski, Goc, Clowe, Ehrhoff and Murray.Because of Celebrini, perhaps. But there have definitely been years with better lists.
Hmm, at the end of the 2003 draft:I'm interested in when you think the Sharks had a better lists (plural) of prospects.
It appears that you posted this as I was typing, so let me address it: I'm not looking at retroactive lists given how the players turned out; I'm looking at the hype/estimation/reputation at the time...which is why I put that hedge on Clowe and Davison (and Pavelski), who came out of nowhere.I went back through the Sharks draft history, and I'm not there ever was anything close to this. The best argument you could make is 1997 where you had Marleau, Sturm, Zyuzin and Hannan but the biggest part was the Sharks had Nabokov, Kiprusoff and Toskala in net. You could also make an argument for after the 2003 draft with Boyes, Michalek, Bernier, Carle, Pavelski, Goc, Clowe, Ehrhoff and Murray.
2024 | ||
Forwards | Defense | Goal |
Smith | Dickinson | Kirsch |
Musty | Mukhamadullin | Chrona |
Chernyshov | Sahlin-Wallenius | Romanov |
Bystedt | Pohlkamp | Krostelyov |
Edstrom | Cagnoni | |
Halttunen | Havelid | |
Graf | ||
Gushchin | ||
Cardwell | ||
2003 | ||
Forwards | Defense | Goal |
Michalek | Ehrhoff | Toskala |
Bernier | Carle | Kiprusoff |
Hennessy | Fahey | Patzold |
Boyes | Preissing | Schaefer |
Goc | Fibiger | |
Morris | Murray | |
Zalesak | Spang | |
Plihal | Maatta | |
Samuelsson | ||
Loyns | ||
Wiseman |
In 2003 Toskala was 26 and had been in the system for 8 years. I’m not sure he’s really still a prospect at that point.Hmm, at the end of the 2003 draft:
Michalek, Bernier, Carle, Hennessy (plus everyone else in that draft was more touted than usual because it was such a deep one), Zalesak, Dimitrakos, Fahey, Boyes, Fibiger, Morris, Spang, Goc, Ehrhoff, Plihal, Patzold, Toskala, Maatta, Schaefer, Preissing, Murray, Samuelsson, Loyns, Carkner, Kiprusoff...of course you also have Ryane Clowe and Rob Davison who came out of nowhere.
As I said, there's no Celebrini. But 2003's Michalek, Bernier, Boyes, and Carle compare very favorably in esteem to Smith, Musty, Mukhamadullin, and Dickinson. Not to mention that Toskala was seen as a shoo-in potential #1.
Because of Celebrini, perhaps. But there have definitely been years with better lists.
He's also a goaltender, though, in an era where young goalies were even rarer than they are today.In 2003 Toskala was 26 and had been in the system for 8 years. I’m not sure he’s really still a prospect at that point.
I’m not sure I’d give 2003 an edge in defense. Ehrhoff was a 4th round pick and Carle a 2nd. Carle did win the Hobey Baker but Dickinson has more hype than both already. Mukhamadullin was also a 1st round pick and what Cagnoni has done as a 4th round pick has been impressive. Fahey and Fibiger played some NHL games and Preissing was a good FA signing but there wasn’t much hype around any of the 2003 dmen except Carle and Ehrhoff. In net there’s no question 2003 was better.Hmm, at the end of the 2003 draft:
Michalek, Bernier, Carle, Hennessy (plus everyone else in that draft was more touted than usual because it was such a deep one), Zalesak, Dimitrakos, Fahey, Boyes, Fibiger, Morris, Spang, Goc, Ehrhoff, Plihal, Patzold, Toskala, Maatta, Schaefer, Preissing, Murray, Samuelsson, Loyns, Carkner, Kiprusoff...of course you also have Ryane Clowe and Rob Davison who came out of nowhere.
As I said, there's no Celebrini. But 2003's Michalek, Bernier, Boyes, and Carle compare very favorably in esteem to Smith, Musty, Mukhamadullin, and Dickinson. Not to mention that Toskala was seen as a shoo-in potential #1.
It appears that you posted this as I was typing, so let me address it: I'm not looking at retroactive lists given how the players turned out; I'm looking at the hype/estimation/reputation at the time...which is why I put that hedge on Clowe and Davison (and Pavelski), who came out of nowhere.
2024 Forwards Defense Goal Smith Dickinson Kirsch Musty Mukhamadullin Chrona Chernyshov Sahlin-Wallenius Romanov Bystedt Pohlkamp Krostelyov Edstrom Cagnoni Halttunen Havelid Graf Gushchin Cardwell 2003 Forwards Defense Goal Michalek Ehrhoff Toskala Bernier Carle Kiprusoff Hennessy Fahey Patzold Boyes Preissing Schaefer Goc Fibiger Morris Murray Zalesak Spang Plihal Maatta Samuelsson Loyns Wiseman
Again, looking at how they were at the time, 2003 has a clear edge in goal and on defense...more talent and more proven. I'd probably still take 2024's forward group, and even then 2003 has them beat on being a bit more proven (Goc and Boyes were NHL locks by that point).
Carle was seen as a first-round-talent drafted in the second round. I remember @X-SHARKIE saying that in any other draft he goes top-15 (and Pavelski and Hospelt in the second round). You forget how insane that class was.I’m not sure I’d give 2003 an edge in defense. Ehrhoff was a 4th round pick and Carle a 2nd. Carle did win the Hobey Baker but Dickinson has more hype than both already. Mukhamadullin was also a 1st round pick and what Cagnoni has done as a 4th round pick has been impressive. Fahey and Fibiger played some NHL games and Preissing was a good FA signing but there wasn’t much hype around any of the 2003 dmen except Carle and Ehrhoff. In net there’s no question 2003 was better.
Hmm, at the end of the 2003 draft
Hmm, at the end of the 2003 draft:
Michalek, Bernier, Carle, Hennessy (plus everyone else in that draft was more touted than usual because it was such a deep one), Zalesak, Dimitrakos, Fahey, Boyes, Fibiger, Morris, Spang, Goc, Ehrhoff, Plihal, Patzold, Toskala, Maatta, Schaefer, Preissing, Murray, Samuelsson, Loyns, Carkner, Kiprusoff...of course you also have Ryane Clowe and Rob Davison who came out of nowhere.
As I said, there's no Celebrini. But 2003's Michalek, Bernier, Boyes, and Carle compare very favorably in esteem to Smith, Musty, Mukhamadullin, and Dickinson. Not to mention that Toskala was seen as a shoo-in potential #1.
It appears that you posted this as I was typing, so let me address it: I'm not looking at retroactive lists given how the players turned out; I'm looking at the hype/estimation/reputation at the time...which is why I put that hedge on Clowe and Davison (and Pavelski), who came out of nowhere.
2024 Forwards Defense Goal Smith Dickinson Kirsch Musty Mukhamadullin Chrona Chernyshov Sahlin-Wallenius Romanov Bystedt Pohlkamp Krostelyov Edstrom Cagnoni Halttunen Havelid Graf Gushchin Cardwell 2003 Forwards Defense Goal Michalek Ehrhoff Toskala Bernier Carle Kiprusoff Hennessy Fahey Patzold Boyes Preissing Schaefer Goc Fibiger Morris Murray Zalesak Spang Plihal Maatta Samuelsson Loyns Wiseman
Again, looking at how they were at the time, 2003 has a clear edge in goal and on defense...more talent and more proven. I'd probably still take 2024's forward group, and even then 2003 has them beat on being a bit more proven (Goc and Boyes were NHL locks by that point).
wHaT ReBuILd?I’d be interested in hearing Pierre Mcguire’s thoughts on the team and if the rebuild is still in trouble…..okay, maybe not
In 1997 it is also comparable:I'll grant you could make an argument for 2003 but you said years, so what are other points that are comparable to now, let alone better as you argue?
Forwards | Defense | Goal |
Marleau | Zyuzin | Kiprusoff |
Colagiacomo | Rathje | Friesen |
Sturm | Hannan | Toskala |
Friesen | Heins | Nabokov |
Korolyuk | Sutton | |
Severson | ||
Guolla | ||
Smith |
That was the point of the exercise...Wait.. but you can’t just say, “without Celebrini 2003 was better.” Why are we not counting Celebrini? It’s like discussing the Marleau draft year and saying “but let’s not count Marleau.”
I think the sheer amount of talent we have… with a potential-if-not-entirely a generational guy on top of it makes this the best pool we’ve ever had.
Friesen was a top line speedy winger with a lot of potential but quickly everyone realized he didn't have the processing. He wasn't the sharpest tool in the shed. (Not a goalie).In 1997 it is also comparable:
Forwards Defense Goal Marleau Zyuzin Kiprusoff Colagiacomo Rathje Friesen Sturm Hannan Toskala Friesen Heins Nabokov Korolyuk Sutton Severson Guolla Smith
I probably still take the 2024 group since it was so deep. But Kiprusoff and Friesen were both seen as franchise-caliber goaltenders, Zyuzin and Marleau were seen like Will Smith and Celebrini today, and Colagiacomo was seen like Chernyshov.
That was the point of the exercise...
Friesen suffered from comparison; the year before the Sharks had Kozlov, Donovan, Kroupa, AND Peltonen.Friesen was a top line speedy winger with a lot of potential but quickly everyone realized he didn't have the processing. He wasn't the sharpest tool in the shed. (Not a goalie).
Marleau was seen as a potential franchise-caliber player. Zyuzin was seen as a potential Norris winner or just slightly below that.Zyuzin and Marleau were absolutely NOT Celebrini-Smith levels of talent. Marleau arguably was a slightly better prospect than Smith, but definitely not Celebrini caliber. Zyuzin was definitely not Smith caliber. Maybe in over-hyped circles.
Sturm and Hannan were seen as great prospects and obviously Rathje as well. It was a good year, but I don't think it was equal to what we've got now, and certainly not after 2025 draft.
If we're scaling for the era, then we have to acknowledge that while subjectively we might have *felt* that the prospect pool was as good as today, objectively it wasn't.You have to also scale for the era. In today's internet era, it is much easier to research/speculate/hypothesize about prospects.
Why would they trade Pronger/Kariya, both of whom had massive hype, for Zyuzin and a 50 year old Makarov then?Friesen was a top line speedy winger with a lot of potential but quickly everyone realized he didn't have the processing. He wasn't the sharpest tool in the shed. (Not a goalie).
Zyuzin and Marleau were absolutely NOT Celebrini-Smith levels of talent. Marleau arguably was a slightly better prospect than Smith, but definitely not Celebrini caliber. Zyuzin was definitely not Smith caliber. Maybe in over-hyped circles.
Sturm and Hannan were seen as great prospects and obviously Rathje as well. It was a good year, but I don't think it was equal to what we've got now, and certainly not after 2025 draft.
In 1997 it is also comparable:
Forwards Defense Goal Marleau Zyuzin Kiprusoff Colagiacomo Rathje Friesen Sturm Hannan Toskala Friesen Heins Nabokov Korolyuk Sutton Severson Guolla Smith
I probably still take the 2024 group since it was so deep. But Kiprusoff and Friesen were both seen as franchise-caliber goaltenders, Zyuzin and Marleau were seen like Will Smith and Celebrini today, and Colagiacomo was seen like Chernyshov.
That was the point of the exercise...
Friesen wasn’t a prospect in 1997. He’d played 3 seasons in the NHL already. If you’re including him then we should include Eklund, which puts 2024 further out in front.In 1997 it is also comparable:
Forwards Defense Goal Marleau Zyuzin Kiprusoff Colagiacomo Rathje Friesen Sturm Hannan Toskala Friesen Heins Nabokov Korolyuk Sutton Severson Guolla Smith
I probably still take the 2024 group since it was so deep. But Kiprusoff and Friesen were both seen as franchise-caliber goaltenders, Zyuzin and Marleau were seen like Will Smith and Celebrini today, and Colagiacomo was seen like Chernyshov.
Friesen was a top line speedy winger with a lot of potential but quickly everyone realized he didn't have the processing. He wasn't the sharpest tool in the shed. (Not a goalie).
Yeah, I don't remember Terry Friesen at all and we were season ticket holders and went to every home game. Not saying he wasn't seen by Strelow as a great prospect but it never was relevant to the fanbase as I experienced it. Kipper definitely agree with you.He's talking about Terry Friesen.
I disagree with his assessment though. He wasn't seen as a potential franchise goalie. Maybe to the faithful who were desperate for a guy after Belfour screwed team over and not seeing the potential in some what would be the 3 headed monster. But yea Kipper was starting to pick up buzz.
Why would they trade Pronger/Kariya, both of whom had massive hype, for Zyuzin and a 50 year old Makarov then?