YUPPY
Registered User
- Oct 5, 2020
- 929
- 997
2024 NHL Draft: Play Like a Sieve So We Can Draft Zeev
- Thread starter StanleyCup2035
- Start date
spintops
Registered User
- Sep 13, 2013
- 1,635
- 810
I get that and understand that it's not fun to watch the team lose this much. But I'm honestly way more interested in the team then I was two years ago. Three years ago we were bad without a direction. Maybe we won a few more games but I never thought we were making the playoffs and we knew we weren't even bottomed out yet. Basically waiting for a rebuild that we refused to start. No real prospects to check in on. I'm back to checking the forum daily for the first time in years.
Same with me. I haven't posted so much in years. 2019-2023 was rough. This is exciting time to be a Sharks fan. The future is clear and bright, not that middle-of-the-pack non-contenders and not rebuilding hopelessness. And I get called a bandwagon fan for it.
I say take what he wants on a 5 year deal and give it to him for 3 years.
If he wants 5x8 then go 3x13.3
You know both can now be true? The team has a direction and they can get better next year. It’s not gonna derail the plan unless Grier starts trading picks and prospects for win-now players.
It blows my mind that after the sacrifice we all made this year that so many would be perfectly content, no, downright elated, it seems, if Grier just keeps everyone away from the team and signs 12 Givanni Smiths just so we can hopefully get a top 4 defenseman in 2029.
Because it isn't more fun winning 30 games a year and missing the playoffs vs winning 20 games in a year and missing the playoffs?
Every asset and additional spot in the draft could be the difference between a successful rebuild or not.
Was it more fun missing out on a potential #1D in the 2022 draft in Mintyukov because they got an extra couple wins?
weastern bias
worst team in the league
Celebrini nearly kept pace with Smith's P/G in the NCAA while being 15 months younger, I don't think they're totally comparable prospects
They're probably both NHL ready players next year but Celebrini is a much better bet to be a reliable impact force out the gate than Smith is, if we don't win the lottery I'm not saying you force Smith to stay in school, but of he choses to stay it doesn't break my heart
Stamkos is bad contract waiting to happen, I want to keep that one far away from our cap ledger, I think he'll somehow be in Vegas anyway
Juxtaposer
Outro: Divina Comedia
My predictions if they end up in the NHL next year would be 30 points for Smith (10-20, PP2, some healthy scratches) and 50 points for Celebrini. So not going to change the outcomes of that many games, but not meaningless contributions.
You are greatly underestimating how bad the Sharks are right now. We could improve our lineup a ton and still be a lock for a bottom-3 pick.
I mean they were behind the Blackhawks until like 2 weeks ago, and it's still possible to finish behind them (albeit unlikely).
Don't really get what your point is.
You also think Smith would have fewer points in the NHL than Owen Powers did his rookie year?
hohosaregood
Banned
- Sep 1, 2011
- 32,400
- 12,606
Juxtaposer
Outro: Divina Comedia
My point is that even with Celebrini, Smith, and Musty on the team, we’d still be the worst team in the league.
The ONLY way to be a lock for a top-3 draft pick is by being dead last in the standing. The Sharks are bad, but there's no guarantee they'll be dead last in any given year.
Definitely, but they'd still put up more points than your estimate.
No reason why if Smith signs he wouldn't take Bordeleau's spot on the PP1, even at the end of this season.
Juxtaposer
Outro: Divina Comedia
On one hand, I’d like to say so. On the other hand, Kent Johnson.
jMoneyBrah
Registered User
Personally, the most important thing for me was GMMG confronting reality and pivoting to a proper rebuild.
With the benefit of hindsight, 2019 may have done more harm to the franchise than good, as it painted a picture that the team was in pretty good shape to continue competing (easy chief, I said hindsight, and may have. I was there glued to my seat on an emotional rollercoaster for the entire playoff run too, bruh) and then all at once the mirage melted away and the true cost of the blockbuster trades, under-performing development pipeline, insular front office, and high risk cap structure manifested. And despite how obviously f***ed the franchise was DW continued to posture as if the team was just a move or two away from contention; digging the hole deeper still.
Having enjoyed the very extended period of the Sharks, from season to season, being somewhere abouts a true contender, a playoff lock, or at the very least playoff bound armed with an outlier shot to win it all; I’m perfectly comfortable living through some intermediate period transitioning from one contention era to the next provided there is a tangible strategy to get there. The last years of the Wilsonses’ tenure was not that.
Personally, I’m perfectly content for the immediate future if the team continues to suck ass as long as we have a new toy prospect to follow every year and the team is otherwise planting the seeds that leads to a future with the org back hunting for a championship. A handful of wins or slightly fewer blowout games is of no value to me, because as of yet we don’t have the pieces to be truly competitive in any sustained way, and we still have significant cap drag. The focus should be to do the things that ensure future exponential growth over short-term incremental improvements.
All that said, I totally get it if people hate losing 10-2 and flirting with all time loss records. And in so much as insulating the young players and not allowing the locker room to turn into a scene from the first half of Major League; bringing in some outside help or making some moves around the edges to bolster the roster may be a sensible thing to do.
With the benefit of hindsight, 2019 may have done more harm to the franchise than good, as it painted a picture that the team was in pretty good shape to continue competing (easy chief, I said hindsight, and may have. I was there glued to my seat on an emotional rollercoaster for the entire playoff run too, bruh) and then all at once the mirage melted away and the true cost of the blockbuster trades, under-performing development pipeline, insular front office, and high risk cap structure manifested. And despite how obviously f***ed the franchise was DW continued to posture as if the team was just a move or two away from contention; digging the hole deeper still.
Having enjoyed the very extended period of the Sharks, from season to season, being somewhere abouts a true contender, a playoff lock, or at the very least playoff bound armed with an outlier shot to win it all; I’m perfectly comfortable living through some intermediate period transitioning from one contention era to the next provided there is a tangible strategy to get there. The last years of the Wilsonses’ tenure was not that.
Personally, I’m perfectly content for the immediate future if the team continues to suck ass as long as we have a new toy prospect to follow every year and the team is otherwise planting the seeds that leads to a future with the org back hunting for a championship. A handful of wins or slightly fewer blowout games is of no value to me, because as of yet we don’t have the pieces to be truly competitive in any sustained way, and we still have significant cap drag. The focus should be to do the things that ensure future exponential growth over short-term incremental improvements.
All that said, I totally get it if people hate losing 10-2 and flirting with all time loss records. And in so much as insulating the young players and not allowing the locker room to turn into a scene from the first half of Major League; bringing in some outside help or making some moves around the edges to bolster the roster may be a sensible thing to do.
Last edited:
I have paid more attention to the Sharks and reading everything posted here including the GD threads. Something I have not done since 2019.
As excited as I am about the future and how well GMMG is rebuilding, I also just can’t watch the games. It’s not even that I want them to lose. It’s the multiple periods with 5 or less SOGs. They just don’t create any chances. Hopefully next year they can increase their shot totals and be watchable again.
As excited as I am about the future and how well GMMG is rebuilding, I also just can’t watch the games. It’s not even that I want them to lose. It’s the multiple periods with 5 or less SOGs. They just don’t create any chances. Hopefully next year they can increase their shot totals and be watchable again.
knu
Registered User
jMoneyBrah
Registered User
It is pretty widely held that there is generally a material difference between players who are old for their draft year versus young for their draft year, which is de facto less than 12 months, so…Only on HF is a 15 month gap considered a lot older
tiburon12
Registered User
- Jul 18, 2009
- 4,651
- 4,463
well another way to think of it is that 15 months is 7% of Celebrini's life.Only on HF is a 15 month gap considered a lot older
jMoneyBrah
Registered User
Look, I’m not an expert here and I could be way off base (so correct me if I’m wrong), but my understanding is the young/old distinction relative to a players draft year is worthwhile to broadly understand how they may have been granted (older), or overcome headwinds to attain (younger), additional playing time and choice deployments during their development due to youth hockey’s institutional bias towards older, more developed, kids.
Essentially, an older draft may have been granted extra ice time and opportunity compounded across their youth hockey experience simply by virtue of being slightly more physically capable relative to their cohort; and an otherwise equal younger draft eligible will have had to demonstrate greater capability to have earned equal playing time.
It is not my understanding that the draft age delta of, in this case, three months between Celebrini and Smith is expected to significantly impact expectations on how they may physically mature as they enter prime playing years.
It seems ridiculous to note that Smith will have been 86 days older than Celebrini at their respective drafts when comparing and forecasting their physical development, so… (unless I’ve got this all wrong, in which case my I retroactively withdraw my snark)
Last edited:
Juxtaposer
Outro: Divina Comedia
Interestingly, there is both an extremely statistically significant correlation of birth months vs. NHL success and a meaningful boost in production the older you are for your draft year.
Ad
Latest posts
-
Other Sports: Philadelphia Eagles (NFL): Super Bowl LVIII (Barf!) and Beyond!- Latest: BringBackHakstol
-
