Prospect Info: San Jose Sharks #7 Prospect

[Lebanezer]

1. Will Smith 82.1%
2. William Eklund 95.7%
3. Quentin Musty 32.1%
4. Shakir Mukhamadullin 54.2%
5. Filip Bystedt 76.5%
6. Henry Thrun 55.3%

Click to read more...

 

[seroes]

Bordeleau.

 

[Hodge]

Still Lund for me. Halttunen is close too.

I just don’t see Bordeleau or Gushchin having meaningful NHL careers. It’s so hard to make it at that size unless you have elite speed and/or skill which neither of them does. Still rooting for them though, especially Goose.

 

[hohosaregood]

I liked Gushchin's improvement over the last year more than Bordeleau's. But I think Bordeleau's too smart of a player to be stuck where he is right now.

 

[Sendhelplease]

I went with Bordealeau. I'd say he still has 2C upside (though it is unlikely he reaches it) and he is close to the NHL at this stage. Hopefully he can refine his defensive game enough to be passable at the NHL level and can serve as a 3rd line center. I thought about going for Havelid because I'd give him a 50/50 chance of being a top 4 D but he is too far away from the NHL right now.

 

[gaucholoco3]

Still Lund for me. Halttunen is close too.

I just don’t see Bordeleau or Gushchin having meaningful NHL careers. It’s so hard to make it at that size unless you have elite speed and/or skill which neither of them does. Still rooting for them though, especially Goose.

I agree on bords, but I do think Gushchin has a high end NHL shot and can fit as a 2nd or 3rd line sniper.

 

[landshark]

Bordeleau.

Bordeleau, I was defeated, you won the war
Bordeleau, promise to play you forevermore
Bordeleau, couldn't escape if you wanted to
Bordeleau, knowing Sharks' fate is to be with you
Bo-bo-bo-Bordeleau, finally facing our Bordeleau...

 

[Pavelski2112]

Gotta be Gushchin for me. Looked great in his time up. Unbelievable shot.

Would've been Bordeleau but he took a huge step back last season, in terms of his NHL readiness.

 

[jMoneyBrah]

I wanted to go with Lund, but ultimately chose Guschin because he’s closer to the NHL and because he showed a plus shot at the NHL level, and a promising ability to get it off. I think that might give him a leg up over Bordeleau in the intermediate future.

 

[hotcabbagesoup]

The Goose is loose!!!

 

[landshark]

The Goose is loose!!!

 

[DG93]

Lund

 

[Patty Ice]

Still Lund for me. Halttunen is close too.

I just don’t see Bordeleau or Gushchin having meaningful NHL careers. It’s so hard to make it at that size unless you have elite speed and/or skill which neither of them does. Still rooting for them though, especially Goose.

I think this time next year, Lund will be around this range if not a bit higher but I still want to give Gushchin and Bords another chance to turn potential into production before I lower them any further.

 

[Sendhelplease]

I understand that Lund looks good with his shot but I am still skeptical of him. He didn't score at the rate I would hope for in the NCAA to place him this high.

 

[Juxtaposer]

Havelid for me. Debated Lund.

 

[Levie]

voted Havelid, think Lund is very close though. To me Bordeleau shouldn't make it in the top 10 Sharks prospects and I don't believe he has any NHL future.

 

[PacificOceanPotion]

Lund

 

[gaucholoco3]

voted Havelid, think Lund is very close though. To me Bordeleau shouldn't make it in the top 10 Sharks prospects and I don't believe he has any NHL future.

For those so high on Thurn, let me remind them that this time last year many thought after 4 NHL games that Bords should be automatically in the NHL and was too good to play with the Cuda. It is not as easy as a jump from NCAA as people think.

 

[timorous me]

For those so high on Thurn, let me remind them that this time last year many thought after 4 NHL games that Bords should be automatically in the NHL and was too good to play with the Cuda. It is not as easy as a jump from NCAA as people think.

I know what you mean, but I think Thrun basically stepped in as a (mostly) fully formed player in terms of what he is and what he will be. I was happy to vote him 6th because of this--and because players of his ilk often get underrated--but there's also likely a ceiling to his level as an NHL player (I feel like a responsible, fairly low-scoring 2nd pairing and PK guy is about right).

Someone like Bordeleau will have his flashes and probably has a higher upside, but that upside is harder to reach than Thrun's, and then the question is, if he doesn't reach it, can he be a good bottom six player? Whereas Thrun has the safer floor to go with the lower ceiling. It really speaks to why even when trying to be fair and logical, ranking prospects is inherently difficult and subjective.

 

[gaucholoco3]

I know what you mean, but I think Thrun basically stepped in as a (mostly) fully formed player in terms of what he is and what he will be. I was happy to vote him 6th because of this--and because players of his ilk often get underrated--but there's also likely a ceiling to his level as an NHL player (I feel like a responsible, fairly low-scoring 2nd pairing and PK guy is about right).

Someone like Bordeleau will have his flashes and probably has a higher upside, but that upside is harder to reach than Thrun's, and then the question is, if he doesn't reach it, can he be a good bottom six player? Whereas Thrun has the safer floor to go with the lower ceiling. It really speaks to why even when trying to be fair and logical, ranking prospects is inherently difficult and subjective.

That’s fair. It’s easy to forget that Thurn is older than most of the other prospects.

 

[Hodge]

I understand that Lund looks good with his shot but I am still skeptical of him. He didn't score at the rate I would hope for in the NCAA to place him this high.

I don't follow NCAA hockey very closely but isn't Hockey East generally considered the toughest conference by a fair margin? Lund's scoring should be taken in that context IMO. For example Cale Makar only scored 21 points in 34 games for UMass his freshman year. Lund will probably need to make the NHL as a scorer though so if the numbers aren't there next season it's fair to bump his down or off this list.

 

[jMoneyBrah]

I know what you mean, but I think Thrun basically stepped in as a (mostly) fully formed player in terms of what he is and what he will be. I was happy to vote him 6th because of this--and because players of his ilk often get underrated--but there's also likely a ceiling to his level as an NHL player (I feel like a responsible, fairly low-scoring 2nd pairing and PK guy is about right).

Someone like Bordeleau will have his flashes and probably has a higher upside, but that upside is harder to reach than Thrun's, and then the question is, if he doesn't reach it, can he be a good bottom six player? Whereas Thrun has the safer floor to go with the lower ceiling. It really speaks to why even when trying to be fair and logical, ranking prospects is inherently difficult and subjective.

I voted Thrun in the earlier poll because from his sample last year it was pretty evident he has a game that is compatible, as is, with the NHL. He was effective defending his zone, he has an effective first pass, solid poise on the puck, and plays a pretty no frills game in all zones. If he never progresses from what we saw last season I’d be happy with that on the third pairing of a contending team. If he’s able to add elements or improve aspects of his game, all the merrier.

A player like Bordeleau, in his first callup, had some positive results point wise, showed some of the offensive deceptiveness and flair he possesses, but also demonstrated weaknesses in the areas that are simply table stakes for an NHL forward unless they bring elite offensive production (which it doesn’t look like he will do) - basically all off puck aspects of his game did not look NHL ready.

 

[Levie]

For those so high on Thurn, let me remind them that this time last year many thought after 4 NHL games that Bords should be automatically in the NHL and was too good to play with the Cuda. It is not as easy as a jump from NCAA as people think.

It's not a matter of how many games a prospect played. Just watch Bordeleau play. not only in the NHL but watch his games. He doesn't do anything. He sit around and waits for the game to come to him. I'll be shocked if he amounts to anything.

Thrun at least played smart hockey.

 

[hotcabbagesoup]

I don't follow NCAA hockey very closely but isn't Hockey East generally considered the toughest conference by a fair margin? Lund's scoring should be taken in that context IMO. For example Cale Makar only scored 21 points in 34 games for UMass his freshman year. Lund will probably need to make the NHL as a scorer though so if the numbers aren't there next season it's fair to bump his down or off this list.

that's what the announcers of the prospects scrimmage said when they introduced Lund, they said he played in perhaps the toughest conference in college hockey. he played two games against Harvard where he was completely shut down to the tune of zero points by my man Henry Thurn while Thurn himself had an assists in those games.

i love you Henry Thurn that's why im so high on you man!

 

[Hodge]

It's not a matter of how many games a prospect played. Just watch Bordeleau play. not only in the NHL but watch his games. He doesn't do anything. He sit around and waits for the game to come to him. I'll be shocked if he amounts to anything.

Thrun at least played smart hockey.

People were fawning over Bordeleau this time last year. It was sacrilege to suggest he shouldn't start the season in the NHL.

Nobody should be drawing any conclusions based on games at the end of a lost season. They're about as meaningful and intense as preseason games.