GDT: 2016 NHL Draft

[themelkman]

dug up some info on Wiederer guy. his DEL team is extending his contract but loaning him out to the QMJHL for another year (more or less,google translate isn't great) http://www.straubing-tigers.de/aktuelles/article/neun-auf-einen-streich.html

 

[themelkman]

Blitchfeld was drafted to the Moose heads in the Import last year but stayed with his Swedish teams u20(because of Meier remaining with the team). Could stay there or could head over to the Q(probably not on the moose heads as they have Sompii and a top 10 import pick this year)

 

[Limekiller]

Hmmm, you both seem to be highlighting the fact that drafting is an inexact science. Interesting concept.

Yes, of course it is. Was just making the point that hey, sometimes we ARE right when we are upset about a pick.

 

[The Nemesis]

To be fair, people (including me) were pissed as **** when we took Mueller, and so far we've mostly been right about it being a bad pick. We were also annoyed at Boudreau in the 2nd, and considering we never signed him from the pick, and we kept him as an unsigned FA, we were pretty right there too.

Yes, of course it is. Was just making the point that hey, sometimes we ARE right when we are upset about a pick.

2 things:

1) Generally, railing against a 1st rounder is far more common than not, so it's not surprising that somewhere in the mix there would be a 1st that people ended up rightfully disliking given hindsight.

2) It's still outweighed by the fact that, as far as I can remember, the fans hated Couture, hated Hertl, hated Coyle, disliked Vlasic (2nd rounder, but 1st pick made), and liked Wishart, Petrecki, and Kaspar. It's too soon to judge Meier or Goldobin. The record of the fanbase reacting in a way that ends up being invalidated by how the pick turns out is far more prevalent than its record of successfully liking a player that pans out or hating a player that busts.

I never said the crowd was never right. Merely that on balance they've/we've been wrong more often than right by a big enough margin that I'd never feel comfortable using HF knee-jerk consensus reaction as any sort of draft success yardstick. It's not enough to claim a strong inverse relationship either, as has been suggested (that picks the board hates will succeed, ones they love will fail), but it's enough to invalidate the idea that the collective whole of this board is knowledgeable and on-point WRT draft pick usage and prospect evaluation to the point of being useful for judging the Sharks' draft class immediately after it's been selected.

As was said, drafting is an inexact science. and as I said this morning, the general certainty of armchair GMs sitting here and speaking in borderline absolutes as if they know better than people who have done more than just read a few freely available scouting reports or crunched some numbers in a spreadsheet is offputting. I don't intend to say that SJ brass is infallible when it comes to the draft (far from it), but if there was an easy magic bullet to drafting the "right" way, more teams would've found it by now. And as much as I'm a stat nerd when it comes to things like baseball and as much as I believe in the predictability of data over subjective analysis, gut feel, and intangible mystical nonsense opinions, I feel like it's equally dangerous and shortsighted to look at a draft and say that doing or not doing any one thing, or drafting players that fit into this box instead of that box will automatically make them a success or failure.

The magic number, as I remember from the study I read, was .5 PPG in the CHL in your draft+1 season at minimum to become an impact NHLer.

.5 PPG to be an "impact" NHLer (whatever qualifies under that fairly loose and malleable definition) is a far cry from saying that nobody who isn't around 1PPG will pan out.

 

[Limekiller]

Hmmm, you both seem to be highlighting the fact that drafting is an inexact science. Interesting concept.

Yes, of course it is. Was just making the point that hey, sometimes we ARE right when we are upset about a pick.

 

[Juxtaposer]

.5 PPG to be an "impact" NHLer (whatever qualifies under that fairly loose and malleable definition) is a far cry from saying that nobody who isn't around 1PPG will pan out.

If I said anything about nobody who isn't around 1 PPG will pan out, please point it out, because if so I must have misspoken.

"Impact NHLer" can be taken to mean scoring forward or top-4 defenseman, aka the types of players that you can't sign for $2M every single summer, aka the kinds of players it's much more worthwhile to draft and develop.

And now that I think about it, I think it might actually be .6 PPG for a CHL defenseman.

 

[Munchkin10]

dug up some info on Wiederer guy. his DEL team is extending his contract but loaning him out to the QMJHL for another year (more or less,google translate isn't great) http://www.straubing-tigers.de/aktuelles/article/neun-auf-einen-streich.html

Hey guys I would like to say some of my thoughts on Wiederer. BTW I'm not a professional scout, I track the few german players out there. These are just my thoughts/opinions when I watch him. I have been tracking him all season, watched some games online, highlights etc. Last season 14-15 he played in the DEL the german top pro league, he didn't get much playing time but he played a responsible role. Not a lot interest from scouts because he couldn't show much of what he had.

In the Q he worked along side Coyotes prospect Connor Garland. He recorded a point a game pace for the season along side him. Wiederer has great positioning, and vision, and is excellent defensively. He also has a very sneaky fast shot release. I believe Redline report called him one of the best 2-way forwards in the Q. His skating is good imo, and he tries to be physical even though not being the most built. I would like to see how he does next year without Garland, and see if he could a bit bigger. If he develops I can see him as a 3rd line center, someone like Marcus Kruger.


Here is a link to some of his highlights from CKM sports.

 

[Fistfullofbeer]

Just got home after golf and am fairly satisfied with the way our draft went. Only pick that I don't get is Mark Shoemaker. Why are we still trying to go after purely defensive D-men. It makes no sense to me.

 

[bigwillie]

On the flip side I remember quiet endorsement of Ty Wishart and Nick Petrecki causing a minor celebration to break out.

I will fully admit I loved both of those picks and hated Hertl.

Since then I've resigned myself to the fact that I don't know anything and neither does HFBoards.

 

[The Nemesis]

Just got home after golf and am fairly satisfied with the way our draft went. Only pick that I don't get is Mark Shoemaker. Why are we still trying to go after purely defensive D-men. It makes no sense to me.

I read a scouting report that says he might have some untapped offensive potential, and had some 2nd unit PP time.

Shoemaker was selected in the 11th round of the 2013 OHL Priority Selection Draft by the North Bay Battalion out of the Mississauga Reps Minor Midget program. Shoemaker spent his 16 year old season with the Brampton Jr. B Battalion of the GOJHL posting decent numbers for a first year player. Shoemaker surprised and made the Battalion despite being a late round flyer and earned his place on the roster. He moved up into second pairing duties and played second unit power play and penalty kill for the Battalion. While Dineen has been getting all the attention in regards to NHL Draft eligible prospects on the Battalion, Shoemaker has quietly but effectively proven himself to be a very interesting prospect. Shoemaker has good size and provides a reliable, consistent effort at both ends. Defensively he has good size and a good stick making him difficult to get around. He finishes his checks, but isn't overly physical. He has good positional awareness where he sets himself up to intercept passes and take away potential scoring chances. He completes his first passes on a consistent basis and has even made some impressive breakout passes at times when the opportunity presents itself. He is a consistent puck mover who makes the smart play in relation to his options. On the powerplay he likes to shoot the puck. He has excellent accuracy with his shot and hits the net on a regular basis. He has decent power and his shot is deflectable. Shoemaker has quietly developed into a solid two-way defender. He isn't flashy but he doesn't make a lot of mistakes. He doesn't have huge upside but has all the size and tools to become an NHL defender one day.

Quotable: "In my viewings of the Battalion I think Shoemaker has proven he deserves a look in the later rounds of this draft. He's not flashy but he's very consistent and does his job well at both ends of the ice.""

 

[Alwalys]

What happened to Scott Stevens? He looks like a newspaper editor now

What is an editor?

What is a newspaper?

 

[The Nemesis]

If I said anything about nobody who isn't around 1 PPG will pan out, please point it out, because if so I must have misspoken.

It was in here:

With few exceptions, if a prospect is not a big-time scorer by the time they are 19, they will not be a scoring NHLer. Although it seems antithetical, you must include "defensive defensemen" in that definition. There are no defensemen who do not score in juniors and still become NHLers. None, not even defensive defensemen (in this day and age). Even Vlasic hit a PPG in his draft+1 season.

you indicated that you had to include defensive d-men in your analysis of jr point production correlating to NHL success. And you noted that Vlasic hit a PPG, which combined with the fact that you previously said the player needed to be a "big-time scorer", made it seem like you were setting the jr scoring threshold of acceptability at a point-per-game. Because I wouldn't call anyone less than around a PPG a "big-time scorer" by any stretch.

"Impact NHLer" can be taken to mean scoring forward or top-4 defenseman, aka the types of players that you can't sign for $2M every single summer, aka the kinds of players it's much more worthwhile to draft and develop.

But teams still need bottom 6 Fs and bottom pairing D. And if it was easy as just plucking them off the FA market any time you need to fill the need, nobody would ever be scrambling for more defensive depth or depth forwards during hte season. The Sharks wouldn't have traded for Polak (or Spaling). If you think you can develop someone who holds NHL potential even in a limited role, it makes sense to draft them. I don't see it as any kind of egregious move for them to spend a 6th rounder on a guy who looks like he has a decent chance of being a 5-7 NHL d-man in the future instead of taking someone who could be a 2nd pairing guy or who could flame out well beforehand. If they had taken Shoemaker with the 2nd or with a 3rd, then maybe it's cause for alarm. But I'm not going to hold it against them in the 6th.

 

[The Nemesis]

What is an editor?

What is a newspaper?

that only reinforces my point.

 

[Alwalys]

that only reinforces my point.

Lol (I was a newspaper editor)

 

[Juxtaposer]

It was in here:



you indicated that you had to include defensive d-men in your analysis of jr point production correlating to NHL success. And you noted that Vlasic hit a PPG, which combined with the fact that you previously said the player needed to be a "big-time scorer", made it seem like you were setting the jr scoring threshold of acceptability at a point-per-game. Because I wouldn't call anyone less than around a PPG a "big-time scorer" by any stretch.

My apologies, I didn't mean to imply that. What I was trying to say is that if even someone like Vlasic, who showed like negative offensive ability for several years, can put up points in the CHL, any defenseman with any hope at all of being an NHLer should be able to score too. That's my fault for misleading you, sorry.

But yeah, that's sorta the point. The bar is not that high. .6 PPG is very attainable for a good CHL defenseman. But the numbers don't lie. Here's the article I was referring to, written back in 2013 before (ironically) the Mueller draft: http://thats-offside.blogspot.com/2013/06/defense-defensemen-and-draft.html

But teams still need bottom 6 Fs and bottom pairing D. And if it was easy as just plucking them off the FA market any time you need to fill the need, nobody would ever be scrambling for more defensive depth or depth forwards during hte season. The Sharks wouldn't have traded for Polak (or Spaling). If you think you can develop someone who holds NHL potential even in a limited role, it makes sense to draft them. I don't see it as any kind of egregious move for them to spend a 6th rounder on a guy who looks like he has a decent chance of being a 5-7 NHL d-man in the future instead of taking someone who could be a 2nd pairing guy or who could flame out well beforehand. If they had taken Shoemaker with the 2nd or with a 3rd, then maybe it's cause for alarm. But I'm not going to hold it against them in the 6th.

Yeah, and a lot of the players you took hoping they'd be impact players will probably turn out to be depth players. Matt Nieto is a perfect example of that.

We went out and got Polak and Spaling because Doug Wilson had a brainfart. We were a better team without them. DeMelo and Zubrus/Wingels were better.

I wasn't trying to target any particular pick that the Sharks made today, so if that was implied that's my bad again. Just trying to back up my general philosophy on drafting defensemen. I don't love the Shoemaker pick when there were other guys (cough cough Ty Ronning) on the board that were clearly better picks, but anyone you take in the 6th round is a long shot so that's not that big of a deal.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

The Sharks have a knack for digging out diamonds with late round picks/UFAs. Let us see if they find another. I actually liked the first two picks. Both seem like decent prospects with top 9 ability.

 

[Alaskanice]

My apologies, I didn't mean to imply that. What I was trying to say is that if even someone like Vlasic, who showed like negative offensive ability for several years, can put up points in the CHL, any defenseman with any hope at all of being an NHLer should be able to score too. That's my fault for misleading you, sorry.

But yeah, that's sorta the point. The bar is not that high. .6 PPG is very attainable for a good CHL defenseman. But the numbers don't lie. Here's the article I was referring to, written back in 2013 before (ironically) the Mueller draft: http://thats-offside.blogspot.com/2013/06/defense-defensemen-and-draft.html




Yeah, and a lot of the players you took hoping they'd be impact players will probably turn out to be depth players. Matt Nieto is a perfect example of that.

We went out and got Polak and Spaling because Doug Wilson had a brainfart. We were a better team without them. DeMelo and Zubrus/Wingels were better.

I wasn't trying to target any particular pick that the Sharks made today, so if that was implied that's my bad again. Just trying to back up my general philosophy on drafting defensemen. I don't love the Shoemaker pick when there were other guys (cough cough Ty Ronning) on the board that were clearly better picks, but anyone you take in the 6th round is a long shot so that's not that big of a deal.

Jux,
Doug Wilson had a brainfart?? Last I looked, the team made it to the Stanley Cup Finals. Better team??? Only one and that's a fact. You have absolutely no facts to support your derogatory statement. Is it necessary to make such statements??

 

[Juxtaposer]

Jux,
Doug Wilson had a brainfart?? Last I looked, the team made it to the Stanley Cup Finals. Better team??? Only one and that's a fact. You have absolutely no facts to support your derogatory statement. Is it necessary to make such statements??

Are you suggesting that we wouldn't have made the Stanley Cup Finals if we'd used DeMelo instead of Polak and Wingels instead of Spaling? Yeah, Polak's zero points and -5 really helped us out a lot. Spaling's single assist (second worst point total on the team after Polak) totally was the breaking point between making the finals and losing to St. Louis.

 

[WTFetus]

Are you suggesting that we wouldn't have made the Stanley Cup Finals if we'd used DeMelo instead of Polak and Wingels instead of Spaling? Yeah, Polak's zero points and -5 really helped us out a lot. Spaling's single assist (second worst point total on the team after Polak) totally was the breaking point between making the finals and losing to St. Louis.

Don't agree that it was the breaking point, but to be fair, it's not like Wingels scored a ton either. I actually thought Spaling played better than him. Not a huge difference, but my opinion of Wingels was pretty low.
I also would've liked to see Demelo, but thought it was Dillon who deserved to sit more.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

Wingels played better than Spaling. Most here don't like Wingels because he doesn't make peanuts. He does a lot of things that other bottom 6ers (Tierney, Nieto) should start doing.

 

[Juxtaposer]

Don't agree that it was the breaking point, but to be fair, it's not like Wingels scored a ton either. I actually thought Spaling played better than him. Not a huge difference, but my opinion of Wingels was pretty low.
I also would've liked to see Demelo, but thought it was Dillon who deserved to sit more.

I'm not saying Wingels would have been a big upgrade on Spaling or anything, but he could have been at least as good without costing us a 2nd round pick.

I don't want to get into it with the Polak>Dillon crowd but that's not really the point. The point is that Dillon was playing well for months when he was with DeMelo, and it's not a coincidence that his play cratered when he was saddled with Polak. And despite being a young puck-moving defenseman, which most people takes as code for "turnover machine", DeMelo is less likely to turn over the puck in the neutral zone via awful breakout passes, which burned Polak multiple times in the Finals.

 

[Alaskanice]

Are you suggesting that we wouldn't have made the Stanley Cup Finals if we'd used DeMelo instead of Polak and Wingels instead of Spaling? Yeah, Polak's zero points and -5 really helped us out a lot. Spaling's single assist (second worst point total on the team after Polak) totally was the breaking point between making the finals and losing to St. Louis.

I am not suggesting anything. I know that we reached game six of the Stanley Cup Final and to take a shot at the GM for not doing what you think should be done is bordering on pompous. You will never know what WOULD have happened. NEVER. You can't argue that. It is pointless. Except here, where baseless claims are said as fact. It's ridiculous.

 

[WTFetus]

Wingels played better than Spaling. Most here don't like Wingels because he doesn't make peanuts. He does a lot of things that other bottom 6ers (Tierney, Nieto) should start doing.

I could just as easily flip those cliches around. People like Wingels because he's gritty, but he needs to do more than that. I honestly think he has one of the worst offensive hockey IQs among all our forwards.

 

[Led Zappa]

I am not suggesting anything. I know that we reached game six of the Stanley Cup Final and to take a shot at the GM for not doing what you think should be done is bordering on pompou7s. You will never know what WOULD have happened. NEVER. You can't argue that. It is pointless. Except here, where baseless claims are said as fact. It's ridiculous.

We could have won the Cup and still some would say we could have been better than ourselves.

 

[LadyStanley]

http://www.nhl.com/ice/draftsearch.htm?year=2016&team=SJS&position=&round=

NHL draft picks tracker (Sharks only)

Oh I now I just noticed that he is double overager. Well that explains his good points at NCAA. Still he could be a great pick and we have his rights next four years.

http://www.denverpioneers.com/sports/m-hockey/mtt/dylan_gambrell_972960.html

19. Class of '19. Sounds like he'll be able to step right into AHL (as a minimum) when he leaves school.

We'll only have rights until 8/15/19 (or June 1, 2018 if he leaves school early).

Doug was interviewed. I did get impression that Doug try to be active with free agents and there will be some significant FA signing. Loui Eriksson would be awesome addition. Or Ladd. Or Staal. Or Okposo

There's no way they sign any of those guys. They'll want too much money.

Might be. Well not sure about Staal. Also we would have capspace if DW trades for example Wingels.

https://twitter.com/KKurzCSN/status/746785814600777728

That tweet would indicate that DW will try to be active on UFA market.

https://twitter.com/KKurzCSN/status/746786144629645312

And oh boy Kurz likes Mike Richards

And I took Gackle's take that he'll be listening, looking.

But based on NHLN interview he'll be giving first chance to the kids, and maybe bringing in additional pieces (read: NHL back up goalie and more) either during the summer, in season or at deadline.

DW did mention he has cap space. So, they could be looking at teams "up against the cap" and perhaps getting a good player from there as well.