NEW: Time To Celebrini! Sharks' Draft Lottery Victory Mailbag

[Zarzh]

How is it stupid to objectively increase your odds of drafting a NHL player?

When it comes to the draft nobody has any clue what to do beyond the obvious lottery picks. The only way to beat the system is to accumulate as many picks as possible especially in the top ~40.

Well it's simple, hockey doesn't really have wins above replacement but you want to consolidate talent as much as possible, especially when rebuilding to give a longer window of contention and ensure everyone gets proper development time.

I'd disagree with taking Nazar, but the point stands. The odds of getting even an elite role player decrease drastically, let alone top 6 or top 4 players by trading down.

 

[Hodge]

Well it's simple, hockey doesn't really have wins above replacement but you want to consolidate talent as much as possible, especially when rebuilding to give a longer window of contention and ensure everyone gets proper development time.

I'd disagree with taking Nazar, but the point stands. The odds of getting even an elite role player decrease drastically, let alone top 6 or top 4 players by trading down.

According to The Athletic's pick value chart, which is based on the average WAR of all players taken with each pick, picks 27, 34 and 45 are worth 31% more than pick 11 i.e. we increased our odds of drafting a NHL player by nearly 1/3. That's basically like getting a free 2nd round pick. Anyone arguing against this trade is objectively wrong regardless of how any of the individual players who were actually picked turn out.

 

[OrrNumber4]

View attachment 804970
According to The Athletic's pick value chart, which is based on the average WAR of all players taken with each pick, picks 27, 34 and 45 are worth 31% more than pick 11 i.e. we increased our odds of drafting a NHL player by nearly 1/3. That's basically like getting a free 2nd round pick. Anyone arguing against this trade is objectively wrong regardless of how any of the individual players who were actually picked turn out.

You are ignoring that @Juxtaposer specifically liked Nazer at #11. She's not talking about generic #11 but a player she liked who was available at that time. To steelman her argument, she's saying that Nazer was worth more than the three picks the Sharks got even then.

Now, she may be wrong. Probabilistically, she would have been more likely to be wrong. But if you want to be a top team you have to beat the models and the average.

 

[gaucholoco3]

You are ignoring that @Juxtaposer specifically liked Nazer at #11. She's not talking about generic #11 but a player she liked who was available at that time. To steelman her argument, she's saying that Nazer was worth more than the three picks the Sharks got even then.

Now, she may be wrong. Probabilistically, she would have been more likely to be wrong. But if you want to be a top team you have to beat the models and the average.

There are actually two ways to be a top team.

To accumulate more high draft picks than the other teams.

To beat the models and draft better.

I would argue that with increased access to information and the use of advanced stats it is significantly harder to beat the models.

But, accumulating more high picks than other teams is easy to accomplish through tanking and selling players for picks. This is obviously more painful as a fan but it is a way to ensure greater likelihood of being a top team.

 

[OrrNumber4]

There are actually two ways to be a top team.

To accumulate more high draft picks than the other teams.

To beat the models and draft better.

I would argue that with increased access to information and the use of advanced stats it is significantly harder to beat the models.

But, accumulating more high picks than other teams is easy to accomplish through tanking and selling players for picks. This is obviously more painful as a fan but it is a way to ensure greater likelihood of being a top team.

Except there is only one draft per year and just a few high picks per year...and teams don't like trading them!

The answer is that it's always going to be hard, and that you have to do both: tank properly and draft very well

 

[coooldude]

You have to draft well, but as we have seen in the most scrutinized draft league in the world (NFL) and its derivative draft leagues (fantasy), the very top draft picks are, even with years of pro performance, incredibly noisy. Essentially you can lose the draft in the high picks but you can't win it without luck in outcomes.

I agree with I think Hodge who said that we have to wait 5-7 years to really evaluate the trade down. It's not objectively good or bad yet.

By a statistical analysis it was a good bet per draft value chart, by a player conviction analysis, missing out on Nazar might turn out to be a bad bet, and you need big hits in the high picks to rebuild, but until the actual results are in, we don't know yet.

 

[Hodge]

You are ignoring that @Juxtaposer specifically liked Nazer at #11. She's not talking about generic #11 but a player she liked who was available at that time. To steelman her argument, she's saying that Nazer was worth more than the three picks the Sharks got even then.

Now, she may be wrong. Probabilistically, she would have been more likely to be wrong. But if you want to be a top team you have to beat the models and the average.

It comes down to whether you're willing to bet the equivalent of an extra 2nd round pick (the 31% increased chance of drafting a NHL player with 27+34+45 vs. 11 based on historical success rates) that you're right about Nazar being significantly better than the average 11th overall pick. You would need to be confident that Nazar is a ~5th overall caliber prospect who has inexplicably fallen out of the top 10.

You could certainly be right. It's not like that scenario never happens but IIRC the last time I looked at players drafted 10th-15th overall in a 10 year span it was roughly a third first line/pairing guys, a third depth players or busts and a third somewhere in between. I don't like those odds.

 

[Zarzh]

View attachment 804970
According to The Athletic's pick value chart, which is based on the average WAR of all players taken with each pick, picks 27, 34 and 45 are worth 31% more than pick 11 i.e. we increased our odds of drafting a NHL player by nearly 1/3. That's basically like getting a free 2nd round pick. Anyone arguing against this trade is objectively wrong regardless of how any of the individual players who were actually picked turn out.

I liked Yurov.

I disagree with their analysis and the the use of it here as drafting is not additive, nor do I trust their values as drafting should be done in a qualitative way, not quantitative. There's limited roster and cap space so condensing assets is almost always better.

In trading down you have to beat the field through skill or luck because the higher value asset retains value far better as well whether they work out or not, particularly for the team drafting them.

 

[Shark in Hockeytown]

It comes down to whether you're willing to bet the equivalent of an extra 2nd round pick (the 31% increased chance of drafting a NHL player with 27+34+45 vs. 11 based on historical success rates) that you're right about Nazar being significantly better than the average 11th overall pick. You would need to be confident that Nazar is a ~5th overall caliber prospect who has inexplicably fallen out of the top 10.

You could certainly be right. It's not like that scenario never happens but IIRC the last time I looked at players drafted 10th-15th overall in a 10 year span it was roughly a third first line/pairing guys, a third depth players or busts and a third somewhere in between. I don't like those odds.

While the historical averages can help give a view of the general the value of draft picks, draft classes very greatly in their quality and depth. #15 in a strong draft class is worth more than #15 in a weak class. And you generally know the depth of the current draft class when you are trading picks. One of the Sharks issues in drafting over the years is that they had high picks in years with weak draft classes like 92 and 96. When they had two first round picks in a very strong class (03), they chose Michalek and Bernier.

Hodge, let's reverse the question: do you think Phoenix was wrong to make the trade for #11 in 2022? They had and still have a boatload of second round picks (10 in the next three drafts!). Should they keep them or use them to trade up for more first round picks?

 

[Hodge]

While the historical averages can help give a view of the general the value of draft picks, draft classes very greatly in their quality and depth. #15 in a strong draft class is worth more than #15 in a weak class. And you generally know the depth of the current draft class when you are trading picks. One of the Sharks issues in drafting over the years is that they had high picks in years with weak draft classes like 92 and 96. When they had two first round picks in a very strong class (03), they chose Michalek and Bernier.

Hodge, let's reverse the question: do you think Phoenix was wrong to make the trade for #11 in 2022? They had and still have a boatload of second round picks (10 in the next three drafts!). Should they keep them or use them to trade up for more first round picks?

The problem is you don't really know if a draft class is actually deep until years after the fact. You might think you do but you're really just guessing and could easily be wrong. How many times have the prospect pundits called a draft the best since 2015 or 2003 or whatever and been off the mark? And FWIW I don't remember any of them considering 2022 a particularly deep class at the time.

Arizona was/is in an extremely unique situation where they went EA Sports Franchise Mode scorched earth on their roster and accumulated an almost comical number of picks to the point that there literally is not enough space in terms of roster spots or contract slots for them to sign all of these players. In that nearly unprecedented situation I think it makes sense to consolidate picks. Nobody else is in that position except maybe the Blackhawks - certainly not the Sharks who have frankly had a dearth of picks relative to what you would ideally prefer in a rebuild.

 

[Shark in Hockeytown]

The problem is you don't really know if a draft class is actually deep until years after the fact. You might think you do but you're really just guessing and could easily be wrong. How many times have the prospect pundits called a draft the best since 2015 or 2003 or whatever and been off the mark? And FWIW I don't remember any of them considering 2022 a particularly deep class at the time.

This isn't true. Yes, comparisons of draft classes will be more precise five years afterwards because the players who boom and bust will be clearer than when they were drafted. But there are general views on the strength and depth of draft classes before they are selected and they distinguish stronger classes from weaker ones. I remember the 96 class was seen as unusually weak before that draft and proved to be. The 03 class was anticipated to be very strong and it was. You can't treat every draft pick as having the value of the average across many years because of that variation.

Arizona was/is in an extremely unique situation where they went EA Sports Franchise Mode scorched earth on their roster and accumulated an almost comical number of picks to the point that there literally is not enough space in terms of roster spots or contract slots for them to sign all of these players. In that nearly unprecedented situation I think it makes sense to consolidate picks. Nobody else is in that position except maybe the Blackhawks - certainly not the Sharks who have frankly had a dearth of picks relative to what you would ideally prefer in a rebuild.

I agree.

 

[jMoneyBrah]

Arizona was/is in an extremely unique situation where they went EA Sports Franchise Mode scorched earth on their roster and accumulated an almost comical number of picks to the point that there literally is not enough space in terms of roster spots or contract slots for them to sign all of these players. In that nearly unprecedented situation I think it makes sense to consolidate picks. Nobody else is in that position except maybe the Blackhawks - certainly not the Sharks who have frankly had a dearth of picks relative to what you would ideally prefer in a rebuild.

Not that it’s super meaningful, but I did a quick spreadsheet to compare total draft value between the Sharks and Coyotes for the upcoming draft:

• I used this value table (it’s old, but the only one I could find that was copy-pastable)
• Pick positions are based on current tankathon positioning
• I have the Sharks drafting #3 overall; because we don’t get nice things

• At least by overall value the draft boards are pretty similar, with roughly a mid 3rd rounder being the difference
• If the Sharks win the 1st or 2nd overall pick , or add any 2nd/3rd rounders at the deadline, the aggregate value shifts to favor of the Sharks
• I should probably use a different table for the pick values, because the table I used has the Coyotes 3 second rounders as pretty equivalent to the 3rd overall; which seems off to me
• It’d be nice if Jersey could make up their mind and either be really really good or just shit the bed already, because it’d be nice to get better value from that pick

 

[Kcoyote3]

Corey joins us to talk about his German adventure tracking down Hasso.

Also full disclosure I was basically sick as a dog this whole episode so I don’t really say too much haha.

 

[hohosaregood]

I miss having Corey cover the Sharks beat and felt sad to hear how the Bay Area was starting to become home for him.

 

[Kcoyote3]

We took a look at Grier's statements from the media availability and tried to make a competitive team in 2-3 years. There's a lot of ifs and hoping, but it's somewhat realistic.

 

[Juxtaposer]

Good stuff. Like that you and Sheng are super realistic about prospects hitting. The reality is that some of our prospects will be busts, and you have to plan around that.

I’ve kinda quietly been curious about the idea of signing Mitch Marner as a UFA. That would obviously really only make sense if the Sharks drafted their 1C and 1D in the next two drafts, but that would be interesting.

 

[Hodge]

Great episode guys. Glad to hear Sheng is a fellow Hanifin Head. If I'm Grier/Quinn I'm leveraging those Boston connections and offering him an ungodly sum of money if he somehow makes it to UFA. I can't remember the last time an established top pair dman with elite tools/pedigree became a free agent at 27. He might be one of those defensemen who peak in their late 20s with a larger role.

I'm definitely of the opinion that the Sharks will turn it around much faster than people expect. They don't even have to win a lottery to do it although obviously that would raise the ultimate ceiling of the team. Just look at Detroit, who basically only have Seider and Raymond to show for 7 top ten picks in a row but are back in the playoff hunt this year simply because Yzerman accumulated cap space and assets and then spent them relatively efficiently. No reason Grier can't follow a similar path regardless of who we end up drafting and how they develop.

 

[Zarzh]

I'd rather go the Devils or Ducks route than Detroit or Ottawa, or even LA's retool has been looking horrible lately, but that's more forgivable since they still had Kopitar and Doughty for a few seasons. You only have a few seasons to tank, and it's a mistake to just end up with a lot less talent than Chicago and Anaheim.

I'd prefer Hanafin next summer to this one, but he would be fine if he doesn't get absurd money to stabilize the defense and creates space for a true #1 to develop.

 

[Stewie Griffin]

I'd rather go the Devils or Ducks route than Detroit or Ottawa, or even LA's retool has been looking horrible lately, but that's more forgivable since they still had Kopitar and Doughty for a few seasons. You only have a few seasons to tank, and it's a mistake to just end up with a lot less talent than Chicago and Anaheim.

I'd prefer Hanafin next summer to this one, but he would be fine if he doesn't get absurd money to stabilize the defense and creates space for a true #1 to develop.

The Devils have won 3 lotteries, so we can't really plan on going their route.

 

[Zarzh]

The Devils have won 3 lotteries, so we can't really plan on going their route.

Well the Ducks didn't, and only the Jack Hughes lottery win was super impactful for the Devils unless you want to argue that Nolan Patrick would've gone 5 or the Devils doing something stupid. I like Nemec over Jiricek but he doesn't change the idea of the team and it's not impossible for them to still get Nemec at 5.

The Devils gave themselves a chance to get lucky, they're a potential dynasty because they got lucky but would've been a middling contender if they didn't. Detroit has put themselves into no-man's land with little hope of becoming anything beyond a speed bump 1st round exit.

 

[tiburon12]

Good stuff. Like that you and Sheng are super realistic about prospects hitting. The reality is that some of our prospects will be busts, and you have to plan around that.

I’ve kinda quietly been curious about the idea of signing Mitch Marner as a UFA. That would obviously really only make sense if the Sharks drafted their 1C and 1D in the next two drafts, but that would be interesting.

I think Marner goes to Chicago. I have this suspicion that Chicago will start snatching up all these good mid-20s FAs and try and maximize Bedard's value early, so much so that i've convinced myself EP40 will force a 1-year contract then sign as an FA with Chicago lol, and that they've do some maneuvering to get signed Tanev and Hanafin in exchange for taking part of Huberdeau's contract.

Dark times in my brain lolol

 

[coooldude]

I think/hope that Grier basically was giving the *best case* scenario that we're maybe competing for a playoff spot in 2027, which matches the timeline a lot of folks here have been talking about. If instead they are trying to rush back to playoff contention by summer of 2025, I think we'll be a middling, disappointing franchise for a while.

Giving them the benefit of the doubt for now, but I'm with @Kcoyote3 ... I want us to be Cup contenders, not just get back to the playoffs. And cup contention would really benefit from 2-3 more years of picking top 5, at least. Per comment above, we have to now think about how to beat future Anaheim, future Chicago, and Vancouver (current wagon) in the playoffs from 2029-2035.

 

[Skeksis25]

The Devils have won 3 lotteries, so we can't really plan on going their route.

I live in NJ and this will always be so irritating to me. Not part of this core, but they won the Adam Larsson lottery too a bunch of years ago. Meanwhile I am sitting here resigned to the fact that not only will we not win any lotteries, we are going to drop in our draft position because of it. Oh to have the luck NJ enjoys.

 

[DG93]

I think/hope that Grier basically was giving the *best case* scenario that we're maybe competing for a playoff spot in 2027, which matches the timeline a lot of folks here have been talking about. If instead they are trying to rush back to playoff contention by summer of 2025, I think we'll be a middling, disappointing franchise for a while.

Giving them the benefit of the doubt for now, but I'm with @Kcoyote3 ... I want us to be Cup contenders, not just get back to the playoffs. And cup contention would really benefit from 2-3 more years of picking top 5, at least. Per comment above, we have to now think about how to beat future Anaheim, future Chicago, and Vancouver (current wagon) in the playoffs from 2029-2035.

Yeah, I am thinking that the 2-3 year timeline comment Grier made was about being in the bottom-3 team basement...I can see them starting to crawl out of there in 2026-2027 when *hopefully* Celebrini, Eklund, Musty, Mukh, Pens 2024 1st rounder (Adam Jiricek?) and Will Smith have all been playing for at least 1 year and the 2025 top-3 pick is ready to contribute.

I think a team with a top-6 of Hertl (will be 33yo that year but maybe still a top-6 winger)-Celebrini-Eklund, Musty-Hagens-Smith and a top-4 of FA/Trade-Jiricek and Mukh-FA/trade could be interesting...assuming 2024 and 2025 drafts + subsequent prospect development go well of course.

 

[Kcoyote3]

Personally from what I've seen from Grier I trust his actions.

The Meier trade was great asset management, showed a clear direction, and he targeted good pieces from it. I like Zetts as a bottom six scoring winger, and he's got another year left and an RFA. Musty was a great pick, Muk has the potential to be a top 4 D, AND we get another pick. At the time I was a little upset at the return, but I think everyone including me have come around on that. Plus paying Meier 9 million sounds terrible.

The Karlsson trade was great because of the lack of retention. The hopefully mid-first rounder is an excellent cherry on top. Gave us a direction and a clear runway to get there.

I think his bargain hunting has been successful mostly. Emberson is good, Thrun was a good pickup at low cost, Addison is...fine? Take him or leave him really but he did add some offense. His signings haven't worked out but we'll see what he can get at the deadline for guys.

Overall I think he's done a really excellent job. I hope he continues this path and finds a star player or two or three because that's really the only chance this can be turned around quickly. He knows this too, he even mentioned that a lot changes with winning the lottery and getting Celebrini, or Bedard last year.

What I'm really really fearful of is that because of the nature of how he took over this job, some vague statements about possibly turning this around faster, sneaking into the playoffs like the Flyers this year, is that if he DOESN'T win the lottery, is he going to pull the ripcord solely because he feels like his job will be on the line in 2-3 years. That's my concern. If he wins the lottery, or the Sharks prospects start turning into actual stars, not just passable forwards and defenders, I don't really care. The pieces will be in place. It's the potential for ripcord pulling that worries me, but Grier has made the right moves (mostly) over and over so maybe I shouldn't worry too much.