Prospect Info: Sharks Prospect Info & Discussion Thread XX

Sharksrule04

Registered User
Jul 23, 2010
3,704
1,253
New York, NY
At Michalek's first camp people were drooling over his skills and talent. "He can stickhandle in a phone-booth!" People were thinking this was a future elite 80-point (in the DPE) winger.


I think you are not properly remembering the hype surrounding Colagiacomo. The draft guide labeled him the steal of the draft. The pre-season guide had him #2 on the Sharks's prospect rankings, ahead of guys like Sturm and Kiprusoff.

It's comparable to how Cagnoni was seen when the Sharks nabbed him in the 4th, except that Cagnoni had size concerns and Coagiacomo had attitude concerns (which, lets be fair, fans paper over far more readily).

The current group is obviously excellent and league-leading, but I still think that expectations are much too high.

Part of this was because Kevin Wey was a very realistic (if not conservative) writer who thought about pick values and reasonable expectations before that was even a thing. Of course, he was frequently attacked for that on here (and that might have been what drove him away!). I'll always remember his snappy comeback to another poster whining about his pessimism; he pointed out how if you went to the Washington Capitals's prospect page, every single prospect was at a 6.0 or higher, which he pointed out was absolutely ludicrous.
I don't have an issue with the concept that expectations are a bit high, that's always going to happen with prospects within a fanbase. I'm strictly debating the concept that this group of prospects isn't the best the franchise has ever had at any given time. I really don't think there is a single year close to this.

In terms of Colagiacomo, I'll just agree to disagree. I was actually a person who probably hyped him a bit following his 100 point season in the CHL but in reality that was relative to what the Sharks had in the pool at the time, I don't think he was ever expected to have top 6 upside.

RE: Cagnoni comparison, I think that is a fine comparison since they were both mid-round picks but I don't even have Cagnoni in our top 10 prospects despite the amazing season he just had.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan

Jargon

Registered User
Apr 12, 2011
6,041
10,597
Venice, California
At Michalek's first camp people were drooling over his skills and talent. "He can stickhandle in a phone-booth!" People were thinking this was a future elite 80-point (in the DPE) winger.


I think you are not properly remembering the hype surrounding Colagiacomo. The draft guide labeled him the steal of the draft. The pre-season guide had him #2 on the Sharks's prospect rankings, ahead of guys like Sturm and Kiprusoff.

It's comparable to how Cagnoni was seen when the Sharks nabbed him in the 4th, except that Cagnoni had size concerns and Coagiacomo had attitude concerns (which, lets be fair, fans paper over far more readily).

The current group is obviously excellent and league-leading, but I still think that expectations are much too high.

Part of this was because Kevin Wey was a very realistic (if not conservative) writer who thought about pick values and reasonable expectations before that was even a thing. Of course, he was frequently attacked for that on here (and that might have been what drove him away!). I'll always remember his snappy comeback to another poster whining about his pessimism; he pointed out how if you went to the Washington Capitals's prospect page, every single prospect was at a 6.0 or higher, which he pointed out was absolutely ludicrous.

I totally hear you and I think if there’s one thing I’ve learned in recent years is just how rare it is for a prospect to make it.
At Michalek's first camp people were drooling over his skills and talent. "He can stickhandle in a phone-booth!" People were thinking this was a future elite 80-point (in the DPE) winger.


I think you are not properly remembering the hype surrounding Colagiacomo. The draft guide labeled him the steal of the draft. The pre-season guide had him #2 on the Sharks's prospect rankings, ahead of guys like Sturm and Kiprusoff.

It's comparable to how Cagnoni was seen when the Sharks nabbed him in the 4th, except that Cagnoni had size concerns and Coagiacomo had attitude concerns (which, lets be fair, fans paper over far more readily).

The current group is obviously excellent and league-leading, but I still think that expectations are much too high.

Part of this was because Kevin Wey was a very realistic (if not conservative) writer who thought about pick values and reasonable expectations before that was even a thing. Of course, he was frequently attacked for that on here (and that might have been what drove him away!). I'll always remember his snappy comeback to another poster whining about his pessimism; he pointed out how if you went to the Washington Capitals's prospect page, every single prospect was at a 6.0 or higher, which he pointed out was absolutely ludicrous.

I totally hear what you’re saying, and if there’s one lesson I’ve learned over the last few years of being a Shark’s fan it’s that prospects fail *often.*

But I maintain that our current prospect list — and I’m including Celebrini in this because I don’t know that I’d necessarily think it if we had gotten Levshunov or something — is our best ever. But that’s based off of what I know now… they can all run into each other at camp and break their legs and never play again. I have no idea what the future holds, but currently, it’s exciting to look at our top 10 and see this caliber of potential talent.

We can revisit in 2-3 years and see if I was right or wrong.
 

OrrNumber4

Registered User
Jul 25, 2002
16,182
5,487
But I maintain that our current prospect list — and I’m including Celebrini in this because I don’t know that I’d necessarily think it if we had gotten Levshunov or something — is our best ever. But that’s based off of what I know now… they can all run into each other at camp and break their legs and never play again. I have no idea what the future holds, but currently, it’s exciting to look at our top 10 and see this caliber of potential talent.

We can revisit in 2-3 years and see if I was right or wrong.
No doubt; optimism is warranted. I just want to get ahead of the inevitable posts with 2027-2028 lineups where the biggest disappointment is Havelid only being a #5 defenseman...
 

coooldude

Registered User
Sponsor
Jul 25, 2007
3,798
3,799
No doubt; optimism is warranted. I just want to get ahead of the inevitable posts with 2027-2028 lineups where the biggest disappointment is Havelid only being a #5 defenseman...
This is why I don't like making lineups beyond the next season. Most of the prospects will not stick, that's a guarantee.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Munnyro

The Nemesis

Semper Tyrannus
Apr 11, 2005
88,971
33,206
Langley, BC
Let’s set this place on fire, shall we:


Lol, the hell are the Blackhawks doing ahead of us on that?

Top 5 stars: 2 Sharks vs 1 Blackhawk (Celebrini/Smith vs Levshunov I imagine)
top 5 NHLers: 2 Sharks vs 1 Blackhawk
depth stars: 6 Sharks vs 3 Blackhawks
depth NHLers: 6 Blackhawks vs 2 Sharks
goalie rank: Sharks 25th, Blackhawks 26th.


I guess Bader really loves how many low-end depth NHLers Chicago has over San Jose. Screw them stars, bring on the 4th liners and 3rd pairing d-men!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sandisfan

OrrNumber4

Registered User
Jul 25, 2002
16,182
5,487
Lol, the hell are the Blackhawks doing ahead of us on that?

Top 5 stars: 2 Sharks vs 1 Blackhawk (Celebrini/Smith vs Levshunov I imagine)
top 5 NHLers: 2 Sharks vs 1 Blackhawk
depth stars: 6 Sharks vs 3 Blackhawks
depth NHLers: 6 Blackhawks vs 2 Sharks
goalie rank: Sharks 25th, Blackhawks 26th.


I guess Bader really loves how many low-end depth NHLers Chicago has over San Jose. Screw them stars, bring on the 4th liners and 3rd pairing d-men!
Without even looking, I'm assuming that Bedard still counts as a prospect per his model. Obviously...
 

CaptainShark

Registered User
Sep 25, 2004
4,305
2,560
Fulda, Germany
Very painful list for Sharks if your put a lot of trust in Wheeler. Not only is Eklund dropping a decent amount, the Sharks could have had a bunch of players on this list at 11 or even multiple players with the trade down from 11. If you include the honorable mentions the Sharks have 1 prospect in the top 80.

From page one of this very thread.

What a difference a Grier makes….
 

Lebanezer

I'unno? Coast Guard?
Jul 24, 2006
15,149
11,304
San Jose
Lol, the hell are the Blackhawks doing ahead of us on that?

Top 5 stars: 2 Sharks vs 1 Blackhawk (Celebrini/Smith vs Levshunov I imagine)
top 5 NHLers: 2 Sharks vs 1 Blackhawk
depth stars: 6 Sharks vs 3 Blackhawks
depth NHLers: 6 Blackhawks vs 2 Sharks
goalie rank: Sharks 25th, Blackhawks 26th.


I guess Bader really loves how many low-end depth NHLers Chicago has over San Jose. Screw them stars, bring on the 4th liners and 3rd pairing d-men!
Bedard is still included with the Blackhawks and Eklund is still included with the Sharks.



 

The Nemesis

Semper Tyrannus
Apr 11, 2005
88,971
33,206
Langley, BC
Bedard is still included with the Blackhawks and Eklund is still included with the Sharks.





That's just...

iir5x5xsc2j8dtxh7ysv


He's not a freaking prospect anymore!
 

The Nemesis

Semper Tyrannus
Apr 11, 2005
88,971
33,206
Langley, BC

The Nemesis

Semper Tyrannus
Apr 11, 2005
88,971
33,206
Langley, BC
Since it's been like a week since I promised to reboot this thread and nothing has happened I figured I'd better show proof that progress is being made.

ProspectSampleSwatch.png


There you go. There's proof. It's definitely part of what I'm doing. No, I won't show you more. No, I won't explain it. This is enough. :P

I'm hoping it'll be ready in another week but that depends on how smoothly things come together.
 

Hodge

Registered User
Apr 27, 2021
5,925
7,088
It still hasn't sunk in for me yet that we also have Sam Dickinson now. If it wasn't for Celebrini and Smith, this kid would be far and away the most exciting prospect we've drafted in at least 20 years. And yet because of those guys it almost feels like he's an afterthought.

Just an embarrassment of riches in the prospect pool right now. Literally unbelievable what Grier has accomplished in under two years.
 

Jargon

Registered User
Apr 12, 2011
6,041
10,597
Venice, California
It still hasn't sunk in for me yet that we also have Sam Dickinson now. If it wasn't for Celebrini and Smith, this kid would be far and away the most exciting prospect we've drafted in at least 20 years. And yet because of those guys it almost feels like he's an afterthought.

Just an embarrassment of riches in the prospect pool right now. Literally unbelievable what Grier has accomplished in under two years.

I know. And then you add Chernyshov and Wallenius as cherries on top, it’s just wild. We’ll see how everyone ends up (prospects flop all the time and all) but Grier and his team had an amazing draft.
 

tiburon12

Registered User
Jul 18, 2009
4,840
4,774
It still hasn't sunk in for me yet that we also have Sam Dickinson now. If it wasn't for Celebrini and Smith, this kid would be far and away the most exciting prospect we've drafted in at least 20 years. And yet because of those guys it almost feels like he's an afterthought.

Just an embarrassment of riches in the prospect pool right now. Literally unbelievable what Grier has accomplished in under two years.
We're also lucky that Pitt and NJD missed the playoffs this year. I hope that luck continues with Vegas' pick
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad