Prospect Info: Sharks Prospect Info & Discussion Thread XX

[Patty Ice]

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.

 

[Lebanezer]

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.

 

[OrrNumber4]

I'm interested in when you think the Sharks had a better lists (plural) of prospects.

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.

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.

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).

 

[Lebanezer]

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.

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.

 

[Jargon]

Because of Celebrini, perhaps. But there have definitely been years with better lists.

EDIT: answered my question

 

[OrrNumber4]

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.

He's also a goaltender, though, in an era where young goalies were even rarer than they are today.

To buttress my point a little more, if you don't just look at prospects but also "youth" in general, 2003 looks much better. You get to add Marleau, Hannan, Stuart, Cheechoo, and Sturm (maybe even Mark Smith). 2024 adds on Zetterlund, Eklund, Bordeleau and I suppose Emberson...

 

[Lebanezer]

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).

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.

 

[OrrNumber4]

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.

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.

Ehrhoff had dominated camps, tore up the DEL playoffs, and was a darling of the scouts. Fahey had just led all rookies in assists.

With Cagnoni, there's certainly some excitement over his numbers, but his stature is a red flag.

 

[Patty Ice]

Hmm, at the end of the 2003 draft

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?

 

[Jargon]

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).

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.

 

[Tw1ster]

I’d be interested in hearing Pierre Mcguire’s thoughts on the team and if the rebuild is still in trouble…..okay, maybe not

 

[Kcoyote3]

I’d be interested in hearing Pierre Mcguire’s thoughts on the team and if the rebuild is still in trouble…..okay, maybe not

wHaT ReBuILd?

 

[OrrNumber4]

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?

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.

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.

That was the point of the exercise...

 

[coooldude]

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 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.

 

[OrrNumber4]

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).

Friesen suffered from comparison; the year before the Sharks had Kozlov, Donovan, Kroupa, AND Peltonen.

Also, the Sharks had two Friesens; Jeff the winger and Terry the goaltender, with Terry being a player who Warren Strelow said had the most potential of any player he ever saw.

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.

Marleau was seen as a potential franchise-caliber player. Zyuzin was seen as a potential Norris winner or just slightly below that.

You have to also scale for the era. In today's internet era, it is much easier to research/speculate/hypothesize about prospects.

 

[coooldude]

You have to also scale for the era. In today's internet era, it is much easier to research/speculate/hypothesize about prospects.

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.

 

[LilLeeroy]

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.

Why would they trade Pronger/Kariya, both of whom had massive hype, for Zyuzin and a 50 year old Makarov then?

 

[Xirik]

Keep up with the Muk content guys! me and a lot of other Devils fans are still cheering for him. Any news you have in the coming weeks and months would be great.

 

[Patty Ice]

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...

Colagiacomo was a 4th round pick. Sure at one point, he was considered to be a potential first rounder but he fell hard (and it turned out rightfully so). I wouldn't say he's comparable at all aside from an injury that may have hurt his draft stock but Chernyshov was still was seen as a first round guy leading up to the draft. Cola not so much.

Plus you forgot Korky who might be your best case to go with. He was seen as a super creative player but there was concerns he wouldn't come over and was too small.

 

[LadyStanley]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1808573417333157941

https://x.com/i/web/status/1808574336795848780

 

[Lebanezer]

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 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.

 

[Friday]

No rush for Edstrom but was hoping he'd go to the Cuda this year

 

[Patty Ice]

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).

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.

 

[coooldude]

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.

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.

 

[RussianShark]

Why would they trade Pronger/Kariya, both of whom had massive hype, for Zyuzin and a 50 year old Makarov then?

Pronger/Kariya were passed on for Viktor Kozlov 3 years prior. One of our scouts had a massive hard-on for him.

Zyuzin was 2nd overall in one of the weakest drafts ever.