Prospect Info: San Jose Sharks #5 Prospect

[Hodge]

Here's my criteria: Who remaining would I least like to trade?

Really the only sensible criteria IMO. At the end of the day prospects are just assets. Most won’t play for the Sharks but can potentially be traded for players who will.

 

[OrrNumber4]

Really the only sensible criteria IMO. At the end of the day prospects are just assets. Most won’t play for the Sharks but can potentially be traded for players who will.

But also, it depends on the team. If this is the 2010 or 2016 Sharks, Smith and Eklund might switch places and safe bets like Thrun would be ahead of longshots like Musty.

 

[Lebanezer]

Probably should define the objectives on how we want them ranked in the future. If everyone is using different criteria the voting is kind ofnmeh

I’d prefer not to guide people’s opinions by specifying how they analyze each player.

 

[Hodge]

But also, it depends on the team. If this is the 2010 or 2016 Sharks, Smith and Eklund might switch places and safe bets like Thrun would be ahead of longshots like Musty.

I disagree. Smith is a more valuable prospect than Eklund and Musty is more valuable than Thrun regardless of what situation a team is in. The only difference is that a contending team would be more inclined to trade a Smith, Eklund or Musty for an established impact player.

 

[OrrNumber4]

I disagree. Smith is a more valuable prospect than Eklund and Musty is more valuable than Thrun regardless of what situation a team is in. The only difference is that a contending team would be more inclined to trade a Smith, Eklund or Musty for an established impact player.

In a game theoretical sense I suppose. But say I'm a contending team, and am looking to acquire some depth. Would I rather trade Musty, a guy with solid potential who's years away from making an impact, or Thrun, a player who can contribute right now?

 

[Hodge]

In a game theoretical sense I suppose. But say I'm a contending team, and am looking to acquire some depth. Would I rather trade Musty, a guy with solid potential who's years away from making an impact, or Thrun, a player who can contribute right now?

You probably shouldn't be trading either just for depth. But if you're trying to acquire a top half of the lineup player you would have better options if you include Musty in the package than Thrun.

 

[Barrie22]

Probably should define the objectives on how we want them ranked in the future. If everyone is using different criteria the voting is kind ofnmeh

It is how prospects are drafted, each scout, each GM, each coach, each player development person has a different idea of what will make a kid excell at the NHL level when they are drafting a player.

And that will especially be the case on a board like this, where under estimating this 90% of the posters probably have not even seen highlights of the players they are selecting.

You can't really put any kind of criteria down that limits people's opinion of what they want or see from players though. As doing so would and could actually sway votes towards a certain outcome.

 

[one2gamble]

You can't really put any kind of criteria down that limits people's opinion of what they want or see from players though. As doing so would and could actually sway votes towards a certain outcome.

Some people vote on NHL readiness
Some people vote on potential
Some people vote on raw skill
Some people vote on how great the flow is

Would defining that sway votes, of course. Because it should.

 

[Barrie22]

Some people vote on NHL readiness
Some people vote on potential
Some people vote on raw skill
Some people vote on how great the flow is

Would defining that sway votes, of course. Because it should.

But top prospects need all 3 of the actual hockey ones to be a top prospect.

Crosby had all 3, McDavid had all 3, Bedard has all 3.

Most though only have 1 or 2 of them. Setoguchi had the NHL readiness, Kopitar had the potential and raw skill.

So you can't really just pick one and say thats the criteria for what is the top prospect for the team. It would not be accurate.

 

[jMoneyBrah]

…And that will especially be the case on a board like this, where under estimating this 90% of the posters probably have not even seen highlights of the players they are selecting…

I feel seen.

 

[The Nemesis]

I’d prefer not to guide people’s opinions by specifying how they analyze each player.

"You will rank the players by how entertaining their headshots are. This is the only viable criteria."

 

[CaptainShark]

"You will rank the players by how entertaining their headshots are. This is the only viable criteria."

Brent Burns, first ballot hall of famer

 

[Barrie22]

Voted Thrun, never going to believe the hype from any prospect coming out of Sweden again.

 

[OrrNumber4]

Voted Thrun, never going to believe the hype from any prospect coming out of Sweden again.

Is this a Dahlen reference?

 

[Barrie22]

Is this a Dahlen reference?

Yup. Everyone was so excited for Dahlen because the so called conversion from his League in Sweden to the NHL was to be a 40-50 point center. And Dahlen's newest season in the same league as bystedt smashed his season.

And then as i found out a few weeks ago, Eklund's draft year in Sweden also translated into the same kind of numbers that McDavid/Bedard were/are expected to be. Eklund even though i like him as a player, has shown he is no where near that level of player.

Until one of these Sweden players actually shows that it can be translated to the NHL i will not rate them as high as someone that has shown they can play good in the NHL/AHL like Thrun and Muk has.

 

[Sanz4]

Yup. Everyone was so excited for Dahlen because the so called conversion from his League in Sweden to the NHL was to be a 40-50 point center. And Dahlen's newest season in the same league as bystedt smashed his season.

And then as i found out a few weeks ago, Eklund's draft year in Sweden also translated into the same kind of numbers that McDavid/Bedard were/are expected to be. Eklund even though i like him as a player, has shown he is no where near that level of player.

Until one of these Sweden players actually shows that it can be translated to the NHL i will not rate them as high as someone that has shown they can play good in the NHL/AHL like Thrun and Muk has.

Their careers havent even started tbh

 

[Cas]

Voted Thrun, never going to believe the hype from any prospect coming out of Sweden again.

Yup. Everyone was so excited for Dahlen because the so called conversion from his League in Sweden to the NHL was to be a 40-50 point center. And Dahlen's newest season in the same league as bystedt smashed his season.

And then as i found out a few weeks ago, Eklund's draft year in Sweden also translated into the same kind of numbers that McDavid/Bedard were/are expected to be. Eklund even though i like him as a player, has shown he is no where near that level of player.

Until one of these Sweden players actually shows that it can be translated to the NHL i will not rate them as high as someone that has shown they can play good in the NHL/AHL like Thrun and Muk has.

Dahlen is 25 years old, with extensive pro experience. Bystedt is 19. There's a bit of a gap there in context, which is important to consider because NHLe is not a predictive system - it is a way to compare player's scoring rates across different leagues. You have to consider other factors than pure scoring rates, for obvious reasons.

I am not aware of any NHLe conversions, including age-adjusted ones, that put Eklund on the same level as McDavid.

 

[Barrie22]

Dahlen is 25 years old, with extensive pro experience. Bystedt is 19. There's a bit of a gap there in context, which is important to consider because NHLe is not a predictive system - it is a way to compare player's scoring rates across different leagues. You have to consider other factors than pure scoring rates, for obvious reasons.

I am not aware of any NHLe conversions, including age-adjusted ones, that put Eklund on the same level as McDavid.

Nhle did.

 

[Hodge]

Nhle did.

No it didn't. One NHLe model pegged Eklund's draft year as "only" 10-15% worse than McDavid's when adjusting for the difference in strength between the SHL and OHL. Which makes sense when you consider Eklund was more productive in his draft year than Mats Sundin, Nick Backstrom, Zibanejad and other Swedish superstars.