Sharks scouts overrated?

[turnbuckle*]

This will likely draw the ire of X-Sharkie and other Shark fans, but I haven't been impressed with the Sharks drafting in the 2000's. I realize it's too early to judge the players in the last three drafts, but Carle is the only one that has come to the fore so far IMO. As for the first three drafts of the 2000's, it has produced two- part-time NHLers at this point, not exactly a recipe for success.

2000
41 D Tero Maatta
104 R Jon DiSalvatore
142 C Michal Pinc
166 G Nolan Schaefer
183 R Michal Macho
246 R Chad Wiseman
256 D Pasi Saarinen

2001
20 C Marcel Goc
106 D Christian Ehrhoff
107 G Dmitri Patzold
140 L Tomas Plihal
175 W Ryan Clowe
182 C Tom Cavanagh

2002
27 Mike Morris
52 D Dan Spang
86 R Jonas Fiedler
139 W Kris Newbury
163 D Tom Walsh
217 D Tim Conboy
288 Michael Hutchins

2003
6 W Milan Michalek
16 R Steve Bernier
43 C Josh Hennessy
47 D Matt Carle
139 G Patrick Ehelechner
201 R Jonathan Tremblay
205 F Joe Pavelski
216 F Kai Hospelt
236 C Alexander Hult
267 Brian O'Hanley
276 Carter Lee

2004
22 L Lukas Kaspar
94 G Thomas Greiss
126 C Torrey Mitchell
129 G Jason Churchill
153 C Steven Zalewski
201 D Michael Vernace
225 D David MacDonald
234 G Derek MacIntyre
288 G Brian Mahoney-Wilson
289 D Christian Jensen

2005
8 R Devin Setoguchi
35 D Marc-Edouard Vlasic
112 G Alex Stalock
140 G Taylor Dakers
149 D Derek Joslin
162 P.J. Fenton
183 D Will Colbert
193 Tony Lucia


San Jose's high picks in the 2000's: Maata, Morris, Goc, Kaspar, Michalek, Bernier and Setoguchi.

A relatively fair way to judge how the picks stack up is to compare them to the next pick in each draft. That being the case, the Sharks could have drafted Usturnul, Johansson, Armstrong, Suter, Parise, Meszaros,and Lee. I like that second group quite a bit more than San Jose's. Even worse, later picks in each round that the Sharks could have drafted included: Vermette, Toivunen, Perezhogin, Meszaros, Bourdon, Carter and Parise.

I realize that every team looks great at the draft board when you do it that way, but when the difference in the quality of players is that noticeable, you have to wonder just how successful the Sharks have been at the draft table, particularly when they continuously make bold moves. San Jose is gaining a reputation for choosing players ranked lower by the consensus (Morris, Spang, Bernier, Kaspar and now Setoguchi), and I'm not so sure they made the right choices. One can't help but wonder if the Sharks haven't squandered draft picks by either moving up in the first round to pick players they didn't have to move up to select, or drafted players they could have still grabbed by moving down and picking up extra draft picks.

I will admit the 2003 draft looks like a good one for San Jose, but they're not alone. It was an exceptional draft year. Will Michalek ever be better than Carter, Suter and Phaneuf? He isn't at this point due to his injury woes; he's got a long way to go to be at their present level. It's not like he had never been injured before he was drafted either, so, again, San Jose gambled, and so far has lost. Bernier attended the 2003 NHL scouting combine at least 20 pounds overweight - many NHL scouts were disgusted at his physical appearance, (one told me he was "soft as a grape"), and I am fairly confident in saying most teams were not considering him with a top 20 pick. Will he be as good as Parise? He isn't at this point. Nor is he as good as Getzlaf, Kesler, Bergeron, etc. Maybe he'll surprise me and end up being better than a lot of the players taken after him, but at this point he's behind several of them.

As for the second round in 2003, Hennessy has a long way to go before he's an NHLer (I'm not sure he has the goods), but Carle was a great pick. That's one "great pick" in the last 6 years until someone else proves me wrong. Actually; I'll say Ehrhoff was a "solid" pick at 106th overall; make it two high value picks thus far from the past six drafts. That's not good enough.

As for Kaspar, being an Ottawa 67s fan living near Canada's capital, I saw them play several times last season, and did not come away overly impressed with the "Ghost". A good nickname for him, because he has a tendency of disappearing for long stretches in games. I saw him as a second round pick in his draft year; after seeing him loaf last season I'm not sure I'd have picked him before the third round.

Morris and Spang? Time will tell; they're certainly not hyped very much, same with Maata. One thing's for sure, none of the three are anywhere near HF's top 50 list, nor it's Top 100 list.

I must say the biggest surprise of the first round this year was SJ moving UP to take Setoguchi - a totally unnecessary move given that none of the teams, unless I'm way out in left field here, were remotely considering selecting Setoguchi with a top 12 pick. Not Atlanta, not Ottawa, not Vancouver, and not LA. Why waste a second round pick then? Was there another list on this earth that had Setoguchi as a top six player? You'd have to figure that he must have been a top six player on SJ's list to have moved up from 12th to 8th; hell - they may have even had him second on their list. One thing's for sure - SJ has no connections with hockey Canada; Setoguchi wasn't even invited to the summer WJC camp after playing in the program last spring. Obviously Hockey Canada was not overly impressed with some aspects of his play, time will tell if everybody but the Sharks were correct in their reservations.

Okay Shark fans - tell me I'm way off base here. Are there Shark fans out there that have been disappointed with the Sharks drafting this millennium?

I know I wasn't too impressed with the Habs drafting tendencies from 1994-2000 (a lot of first round busts); the problem wasn't solved until there were some changes at the top of the scouting chain. Are there San Jose scouts still living off the glory of drafting Marleau, Hannan and Stuart? Marleau and Stuart were pretty much "gimme" top three picks that were highly rated on everyone's lists (not even SJ could pass on them); Hannan was the best first round pick the Sharks ever made value wise, but that was a decade ago now.

Barry Fraser lived off his early success at the draft for much too long in Edmonton - he didn't leave until he finally decided to retire (about 10 first round busts later). Here's hoping the Sharks don't have a "Fraser" in thier midst.

Thoughts?

Click to read more...

 

[sharkyz15]

I must say the biggest surprise of the first round this year was SJ moving UP to take Setoguchi - a totally unnecessary move given that none of the teams, unless I'm way out in left field here,

you are

 

[MrMastodonFarm*]

It is just silly to pick the best or worst scouting team if you are going by the last 5 years as a sample size. It takes atleast 5 years to figure out how the draft looks. The Sharks have a good track record, especially with some of their later round picks. I'd lay off judging a team until the 5 year mark has passed on any draft.

 

[Patty Ice]

you are

Care to explain why? Wilson even said he traded up only because of a gutfeeling that either LA or Vancouver would take him. Fact is, it was unnecessary to trade away a 2nd round pick to move in the top 10 to take a "Marcel Goc" pick. It's not bad to have a safe guy like that but it is bad when you have a chance at a home run but opt for a double.

 

[The Nemesis]

2000
41 D Tero Maatta
104 R Jon DiSalvatore
142 C Michal Pinc
166 G Nolan Schaefer
183 R Michal Macho
246 R Chad Wiseman
256 D Pasi Saarinen

2001
20 C Marcel Goc
106 D Christian Ehrhoff
107 G Dmitri Patzold
140 L Tomas Plihal
175 W Ryan Clowe
182 C Tom Cavanagh

2002
27 Mike Morris
52 D Dan Spang
86 R Jonas Fiedler
139 W Kris Newbury
163 D Tom Walsh
217 D Tim Conboy
288 Michael Hutchins

2003
6 W Milan Michalek
16 R Steve Bernier
43 C Josh Hennessy
47 D Matt Carle
139 G Patrick Ehelechner
201 R Jonathan Tremblay
205 F Joe Pavelski
216 F Kai Hospelt
236 C Alexander Hult
267 Brian O'Hanley
276 Carter Lee

2004
22 L Lukas Kaspar
94 G Thomas Greiss
126 C Torrey Mitchell
129 G Jason Churchill
153 C Steven Zalewski
201 D Michael Vernace
225 D David MacDonald
234 G Derek MacIntyre
288 G Brian Mahoney-Wilson
289 D Christian Jensen

2005
8 R Devin Setoguchi
35 D Marc-Edouard Vlasic
112 G Alex Stalock
140 G Taylor Dakers
149 D Derek Joslin
162 P.J. Fenton
183 D Will Colbert
193 Tony Lucia

Realistically, we can take 04 and 05 out of the discussion because they're just far too recent.

03 isn't going to blow people away, but it is still a solid draft. Michalek's knee problems are after the fact, and no one doubted that he has talent. From what I've heard, Bernier isn't so out of shape anymore, and it will take time for him to develop anyway (given the track record of other more power-oriented guys in the league). Carle is a great pick and coming on strong, and Hennessy has a shot. Sure 03 was a spectacular year for talent like phaneuf, Carter, etc, but hindsight is always 20/20.

02 might not be so great. I honestly haven't heard much from Morris, but that's partially because I can't follow NCAA as much as everything else. I also haven't heard a lot from Spang either.

01 is a good draft as well. Goc will likely be SJ's 2nd or 3rd line center (depending on whether or not they want the McCauley line to be 3rd and in more of a checking role) and Ehrhoff should probably see time on the 3rd pairing and power play this year. Both guys also still have room to improve too. Then you add in Patzold, who has been pretty good (I believe it's X-Sharkie that keeps saying he looks like a young Nabokov) and there have been rumblings about Clowe making a serious bid for a roster spot this year.

2000. Uhh yeah, can we pass on this one? Maatta was a failure, DiSalvatore's gone, but might not even pan out anyway, and Wiseman is in New York.

That means that you have 2 good drafts (01, 03), a bad draft (00), one I can't rate for lack of info (02), and 2 that are too recent to pass judgement on (04, 05). I'd say that's not bad, and I defy you to find a team that had the consistent success in the 90s and stayed just as high in the last 5 years

I guess if you want to look at 04 and 05, you could say that 04 had San Jose take a gamble based on need (there wasn't a need for defensive prospects like Meszaros, so Kaspar looked like a justifiable risk), and there's something about Greiss that really, really intrigues me. 05 maybe San Jose sees something in Setoguchi that others don't. After all, he reminds people a lot of Jonathan Cheechoo, and nobody will say Cheech wasn't a steal as an early 2nd round pick that year. 05 was a draft all about a lot of niche players after the top 5ish, so San Jose felt justified picking Devin based on the fact that anyone else would've probably filled a narrow need that wasn't a pressing issue. Besides, we're now in an age where Blake ****ing Wheeler goes 5th to Phoenix, and Brian Lee moves up to 9th for Ottawa. If it was so easy to rank people exactly where they "should" go before the draft happens, what would be the point of actually holding the draft at all?

Besides, you can always pick the good players out of older drafts, but having all those good players could seriously unbalance the prospect pool.

 

[X-SHARKIE]

I dont know.. Hype is very overated in the prospect circles here on HF, just because the Sharks don't draft highly hyped kids doesn't mean they don't draft good players.

The results speek for them selves though, Marleau, Hannnan, Nabakov, Cheechoo, Stuart, Korky, Sturm, Goc, Toskala... Not to mention guys like The Kipper......

What's overated about that?

2000 wasn't a good draft. I'll admit, very ugly draft in fact.

2001 was an very good draft IMO, Goc, Ehrhoff, Patzold, Clowe all will be in the NHL..and Cavanaugh and Plihal were good value. Not a bad pick in the whole draft.

2002 they went for way to many home runs and the only one that looks like he'll play in the NHL is Mike Morris who is a third liner. Spang also could suprise, I've seen him in Boston and really makes some nice plays, but he usually plays it too safe for an offensive defenseman...we'll see.

2003..too early to say but looks to be a very good draft, if Michalek is healthy, he is a 6-2 200 skilled horse and could be a 1st line winger, Bernier is very underated IMO and is going to be a scoring powerforward in the NHL, but he like CHeech will likely take 3-4 years to develope into that player... Hennessey reminds me of ALyn McCauley, a 2nd line center with marginal upside.... Matt Carle has top pairing offensive upside... Pavelski was a steal and could be a good depth player who can provide offense, and Ehelechner isn't a bad goaltender for a 5th round pick.

2004 Vernace was a steal, Mitchell and Zalewski can fill 3rd line wholes, They love Greiss, and Kaspar has all the tools to be special, lets just waite and see how this one pans out.

2005.... Lets waite and see before we jump.


We had a solid 5 years, but it's way to early. The highlights though are definitley 2003 and 2001 at the moment.

 

[Blind Gardien]

I generally agree with turnbuckle's assessment, and when they picked Setoguchi this year, many of the same thoughts were running through my head too.

I know San Jose built a reputation as a team which put together a good young lineup of players from within, all those Marleau, Stuart, Hannan, etc, core players, and they did a great job at that, and the reputation has kind of stuck with them. But in the last 5 years... I have no idea of their scouting personnel or organisational hierarchy, but I also get the impression that something has changed. Either that or the law of averages is just catching up to them. (Is that the true Barry Fraser syndrome?)

Every team can be expected to be hit or miss over time. It's the nature of drafting. Perhaps it's just that San Jose's misses (or what I perceive to be misses) were ones that I felt I saw coming, whereas other teams' misses maybe surprised me more. Obviously, since we're only talking about the last 5 years, it's not even legitimate to be talking about "misses" so it really is all in the perception. I perceive Kaspar to be a serious miss, and, although I like Setoguchi well enough as a player, I don't see much to separate him from a fair number of players drafted in the 2nd round this year.

So I think it's too early to draw any conclusions at all. Let's say instead that I'm personally "uneasy" with the way the Sharks have been picking lately, and I'm glad I'm not a Sharks fan in that sense... but I'm completely ready to be proven wrong over time. (Tho' not by anybody's opinion today which is no more valid than mine). That's also the nature of the game. Highly subjective and volatile in the short term anyway.

 

[Patty Ice]

I agree with what Mastodon just said. The Sharks track record speaks for itself. Tim Burke is known for going for kids ranked low but make signifcant leaps in later ratings with the hopes that the trend continues. The fact that these kids usually come from untapped areas in recent years also hurts their hype.

The problem I know some people have with the Sharks is that they go for those safe, character players. With the exception of Michalek (and to a lesser extent Bernier), these guys just don't have top line skills.

Bernier is a contrary pick, actually, when it comes to the Sharks. Here is this, in his draft year, high scoring boom or bust type of guy that the Sharks trade up for (it was rumored Edmonton was interested). Side note: the previously mentioned weight issue was a non-issue the following year and the years after. They tell him his offense is fine and they want him to concentrate more on his intangibles and defensive side. While maintaining good, albeit lower, numbers he improves leaps and bounds in his conditioning, leadership, and two-way skills. However, the hype machine doesn't care about those things. It cares about numbers and his numbers where lower than his first year. So what the casual fan saw as a wasted pick, the Sharks scouting department saw as a success.

For better or for worse, the Sharks have been using the same strategy under Tim Burke since '96. So this includes the Marco Sturms, Scott Hannans, Patrick Marleaus, and Jonathon Cheechoos. He likes character guys and thats how the Sharks have been built. While a guy like Mike Morris might not get the hype, he has continued to rise in his development and looks to be a solid third line right winger for the future. Not bad for the 28th overall pick, not a homerun you'd like in the first but a safe pick.

 

[turnbuckle*]

you are

Well thought out; glad you could join the discussion.

As for the five-year comment by Mastodon, that is a valid point (although I wasn't necessarily 'rating' the Sharks scouting, merely questioning it), and I did mention that it's too early to properly judge the past three drafts in particular. I think it's a little easier to look at first round picks and their progression, however, and none of the Sharks top picks since 2000 could be classified as being overachievers.

Does it not alarm ANY Sharks fans that none of your picks from the past six years have yet to become NHL regulars? There are not very many teams that can make that "claim". Michalek and Carle are the only one at this point even adjudged to be above average prospects, and even Michalek was a top six pick in a great draft year.

Which players other than Michalek, Goc and Ehrhoff stand a chance of cracking the Sharks lineup this season? That's not a very lengthy list if you ask me.

From the past six drafts, Montreal will have Hossa, Hainsey, Higgins, Streit, Perezhogin, Komisarek and Plekanec all battling hard for NHL positions. At least five are expected to make the team, and at least five, if not all, are considered to be ready for the NHL.

Look at Philly, Detroit, Ottawa...teams that normally draft after San Jose - all have players from the previous five drafts contributing solidly at the NHL level (Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Volchenkov, Spezza, Cechmanek, Pitkanen, Seidenberg) and with more on the way ready to contribute like Carter, Richards, Meszaros, Kronwall, etc.

Anyway - I think we'll look back in five year's time and say SJ had a bad run of drafting. We shall see.

 

[OrrNumber4]

One thing about the Sharks had been the always draft good goaltenders. Their goaltending development system is the best in the NHL, much in thanks to Warren Strelow, who has coached Brodeur, Nabakov, Hedberg, Kipprusoff, and Toskala. Its the reason why Greiss, Patzold, Mahoney-Wilson, and the other goaltending prospects will all look like steals. Also, the Sharks signed Preissing, Gorges, and Murray, all undrafted players that now look like steals.

2000- The sharks had a bad draft year, but they had no first round pick. Maatta has proved to be a terrible player. However, Disalvatore, as a fourth round pick, has more than panned out, as he has third/fourth line potential. Schaefer in the fifth round was also a good pick, as he has managed to become a starter in Cleveland. Wiseman in the eight round has proved to be a great pick, as he has the abilit to play in the NHL level. Overall, this was a bad draft

2001- This isn't as bad a draft as you make it to be. A potential 3/4 defensman at 106 is a great pick, and Patzold, who will at the least become an NHL backup, was a ok pick at 107. Goc has proven to be a great pick; if I remember correctly, other GMs remarked that Goc would have been picked much higher if San Jose's Tim Burke hadn't spread rumors about Goc's terrible skating. He's a potential second line player, and is an extremely safe bet to play on the third line. Clowe at 175 might be a decent third line player, and that is not a bad pick in the sixth round. Cavanagh probably won't make the NHL, but he will be a solid AHLer, and what more can you expect from that kind of pick? Plihal was a terrible pick, but he was a project at the time.

2002- This wasn't a very good draft year for the sharks. Dan Spang was a terrible pick by the sharks, although X-Sharkie may disagree. I haven't heard much about Morris, but he looks like he could be a second-line center for the Sharks, and once can't expect to find a first-liner at 27. Conboy, and Hutchins are not terribly bad picks. Conboy is a very physical defensman, who at 217 could become a 6th defenseman. Hutchins has a chance to be a defenseman on the AHL level.

2003- This was a very good draft year. Michalek at 6 was taken because he was the most NHL ready prospect (other than, MAF, arguably). His injury was not something Wilson could have predicted. Bernier has justified his position at number 16, he has improved his fitness tremendously, and has become defensively aware. Many people on this boards seem to forget his improvement. But Hennessy can really fly, and has first-line potential. He was no waste at 43. Ehelechner I do not know too much about, and I have never seen him play. He probably will become an AHler, but with the Shark's coaching, he could become better. Tremblay, taken so late at 201, has already contributed in the AHL, and is an enforcer like defenseman. I have never seen the other prospects pay, but both Pavelski and O'Hanley have proved they might play in the NHL, at taken so late, they have justified their positions. Both of them would probably have been taken in the fourth-fifth rounds if the draft was redone. Even with such a good draft-class, the Sharks made good picks.

2004- There hasn't been much time to evaluate this draft class. Vernace appears to be a steal, and he has NHL potential. Ottawa wanted to draft Kaspar, I believe, so the sharks did have a reason for taking him so high. As aforementioned, Greiss could become a superstar in the NHL, considering the Sharks' success with goaltenders. Chrisitna Jensen is a personal favorite of mine. I believe he coudl become an NHL defensman, and the risk is defintely worth a late-rounder. I don't know much about the rest, but we should give them 2-3 years to let them prove themselves.

2005- This was a questionable draft for the sharks. But we should give the Sharks time to see if the picks pan out. Ottawa and LA were both rumored to take Setoguchi. If the Sharks though Setoguchi was special, they should do what they can to get him. P.J. Fenton and Derek Joslin IMO were taken at great places. The rest of the picks are questionable, but wait 3-4 years, and then we will judge it.
8 R Devin Setoguchi
35 D Marc-Edouard Vlasic
112 G Alex Stalock
140 G Taylor Dakers
149 D Derek Joslin
162 P.J. Fenton
183 D Will Colbert
193 Tony Lucia

 

[turnbuckle*]

I think people are too quick to dismiss the weight issue; the main reason I brought it up was because San Jose almost assuredly could have picked Bernier later in the first round because of it. Anoterh exampole of the Sharks rating a player higher than everybody else for whatever reason, and once again giving up a couple draft picks to select him. I talked to more than a couple of scouts about his weight problems, and their point was this - if the kid, in the most important year of his young life, can show up at the combine grossly out of shape, juist how much of a work ethic will he EVER have? Nobody had him in their top 20 that I spoke to, not with players like Fehr, Parise, Richards, Stewart and Getzlaf still available.

Yet San Jose decides that they just have to move from the 21st spot to the 16th in order to select Porky. The cost? the 21st, 66th and 107th picks in the draft. Now they just went through the same thing with Setoguchi. Why needlessly surrender draft picks for gambles? Anyway......

 

[turnbuckle*]

I don't recall saying that 2001 was a poor draft year - in fact I didn't. Patzold, Goc and Ehrhoff are all decent prospects, but it's not a draft that I would brag about for years to come. You might get two or three NHLers from it, but none of the star variety I don't think.

As for Hennessy being a future NHLer; we'll see; I don't think he has the right physical package, but it's certainly too early to say one way or another. I admit to being kind about Carle; I figured I better say SOMETHING nice about at least one of your recent picks, LOL.

As for being good at drafting goalies; it sure seems that way. Too bad they are dealt for second round picks that are needlessly dumped so that the Sharks can move up in the first round to pick a player no one else was going to pick anyway, but I digress...

 

[Patty Ice]

Well thought out; glad you could join the discussion.

As for the five-year comment by Mastodon, that is a valid point (although I wasn't necessarily 'rating' the Sharks scouting, merely questioning it), and I did mention that it's too early to properly judge the past three drafts in particular. I think it's a little easier to look at first round picks and their progression, however, and none of the Sharks top picks since 2000 could be classified as being overachievers.

Does it not alarm ANY Sharks fans that none of your picks from the past six years have yet to become NHL regulars? There are not very many teams that can make that "claim". Michalek and Carle are the only one at this point even adjudged to be above average prospects, and even Michalek was a top six pick in a great draft year.

Which players other than Michalek, Goc and Ehrhoff stand a chance of cracking the Sharks lineup this season? That's not a very lengthy list if you ask me.

From the past six drafts, Montreal will have Hossa, Hainsey, Higgins, Streit, Perezhogin, Komisarek and Plekanec all battling hard for NHL positions. At least five are expected to make the team, and at least five, if not all, are considered to be ready for the NHL.

Look at Philly, Detroit, Ottawa...teams that normally draft after San Jose - all have players from the previous five drafts contributing solidly at the NHL level (Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Volchenkov, Spezza, Cechmanek, Pitkanen, Seidenberg) and with more on the way ready to contribute like Carter, Richards, Meszaros, Kronwall, etc.

Anyway - I think we'll look back in five year's time and say SJ had a bad run of drafting. We shall see.

Are you really questioning if its a bad thing that the Sharks are letting their players develop rather than rush them into NHL action?

None of these kids are regulars YET because they aren't NHL ready and the Sharks don't need them to be ready. They have taken these guys that need time to develop and are being patient with them. Is that really such a bad thing? Are the Sharks in dire need of youth on their team?

 

[Patty Ice]

Yet San Jose decides that they just have to move from the 21st spot to the 16th in order to select Porky. The cost? the 21st, 66th and 107th picks in the draft. Now they just went through the same thing with Setoguchi. Why needlessly surrender draft picks for gambles? Anyway......

Sharks have never been shy to trade up or down to get the players they want. That's the only explanation for that. Not something I always agree with but they have done well to build up a team.

 

[Canucks-R-best]

I know this is off-topic but i want to ask x-sharkie (who i believes knows alot about teams prospects) what he thinks of Luc Bourdon. Thanks

Anyways I believe sharks a good...no great drafters...they draft under-rated players with good speed and hard work ethics. Marleau, Chee-choo (one of my fav players), Goc, hannan are all an example of this....Michalek as well. They draft well and thats what makes them such a good team

 

[The Nemesis]

I just wanted to add to my earlier comments, with regards to the idea that the Sharks make mistakes in jumping up to grab guys. Drafting is an inexact science at best, and the biggest wild card in the whole process (yes, even bigger than the potential of the players) is the behaviour of the other teams. If DW and company felt that there was a legitimate chance someone was interested in their guy, is it not in their best interest to sacrifice a pick or two and move up? We can all say that Setoguchi would've been there at 12, or that Bernier or Kaspar could've been there later, but who knows for certain? For all we know Vancouver really wanted Setoguchi, or Ottawa really wanted Kaspar, or someone else really was eyeing Bernier. We can all say that we don't agree with those picks at those spots, but you have to be willing to take the risks.

What if San Jose passes on Kaspar, thinking he'll be there later, Ottawa drafts him, and 5 years down the road he looks like a steal?

 

[SuperUnknown]

I think people are too quick to dismiss the weight issue; the main reason I brought it up was because San Jose almost assuredly could have picked Bernier later in the first round because of it. Anoterh exampole of the Sharks rating a player higher than everybody else for whatever reason, and once again giving up a couple draft picks to select him. I talked to more than a couple of scouts about his weight problems, and their point was this - if the kid, in the most important year of his young life, can show up at the combine grossly out of shape, juist how much of a work ethic will he EVER have? Nobody had him in their top 20 that I spoke to, not with players like Fehr, Parise, Richards, Stewart and Getzlaf still available.

Yet San Jose decides that they just have to move from the 21st spot to the 16th in order to select Porky. The cost? the 21st, 66th and 107th picks in the draft. Now they just went through the same thing with Setoguchi. Why needlessly surrender draft picks for gambles? Anyway......

To be fair, there are players like Marian Hossa who weren't particularly known for their work ethic that slipped but still became good NHLers.

Imo, Steve Bernier will be a good NHLer in the future.

 

[turnbuckle*]

Are you really questioning if its a bad thing that the Sharks are letting their players develop rather than rush them into NHL action?

None of these kids are regulars YET because they aren't NHL ready and the Sharks don't need them to be ready. They have taken these guys that need time to develop and are being patient with them. Is that really such a bad thing? Are the Sharks in dire need of youth on their team?

I'm questioning whether their top picks were really very good, not whether they're being developed too slowly. I don't see Morris, Spang and Maata, for starters, making the NHL any time soon. San Jose doesn't have that much depth that they couldn't afford to have more rookies battling for positions. Hell; even Toronto will have several youngsters vying for jobs this training camp.

Is Dimitrakos that good that he couldn't be replaced by a Chris Higgins or an Alex Perezhogin? I don't think so.

 

[Blind Gardien]

I just wanted to add to my earlier comments, with regards to the idea that the Sharks make mistakes in jumping up to grab guys. Drafting is an inexact science at best, and the biggest wild card in the whole process (yes, even bigger than the potential of the players) is the behaviour of the other teams. If DW and company felt that there was a legitimate chance someone was interested in their guy, is it not in their best interest to sacrifice a pick or two and move up? We can all say that Setoguchi would've been there at 12, or that Bernier or Kaspar could've been there later, but who knows for certain? For all we know Vancouver really wanted Setoguchi, or Ottawa really wanted Kaspar, or someone else really was eyeing Bernier. We can all say that we don't agree with those picks at those spots, but you have to be willing to take the risks.

What if San Jose passes on Kaspar, thinking he'll be there later, Ottawa drafts him, and 5 years down the road he looks like a steal?

Basically, I think that underlines why I'm down on their recent drafts... just by chance, the guys they targeted to trade up for are all guys I wasn't all that high on, so it seemed all the more bizarre to me. They could have taken the same guys with their original picks, and it would have seemed bad enough, but not as noteworthy.

That kind of top-end discrepancy is really what makes them stand out, and if they end up picking guys you're not personally high on, it makes the drafts seem worse. Nothing wrong with their work in the late rounds, though, IMO. (I picked Joslin too!)

 

[Baron Von Shark]

Well, count me in as one of the Sharks fans that are skeptical about our prospects. In short, I am worried about our drafting in the past 5 years or so, but like everyone has said 1) it is too early to make a solid judgement, and 2) Tim Burke has come through in the past with what is our core team today.

As a Sharks board regular, I can tell you many fans were not happy about the Bernier move, and the vast majority was even more unsettled about the Setoguchi move. With the exception of a handful of diehard Sharks homers here at HF and abroad, I'd say the sentiments of most Sharks fans--from reading other boards and attending games and other events (prospect tournament, traning camp, practices, etc.)--are just as critical (and nervous) about Burke's moves in recent years as any skeptic out there.

 

[X-SHARKIE]

For the record, I would give a draft 3-4 years before I start complaining about NHL Impact from a draft.

2000 Has had pretty much 0 impact. Schaefer might be a back up, Disalvatore might find a spot in St.Louis, and Wisemann has played sparingly.

but 2001 already has Goc, Ehrhoff, Clowe in the NHL this year, Patzold following closely.

So you can't say the Sharks aren't getting impact, because this year they will.

 

[Baron Von Shark]

I'm questioning whether their top picks were really very good, not whether they're being developed too slowly. I don't see Morris, Spang and Maata, for starters, making the NHL any time soon. San Jose doesn't have that much depth that they couldn't afford to have more rookies battling for positions. Hell; even Toronto will have several youngsters vying for jobs this training camp.

Is Dimitrakos that good that he couldn't be replaced by a Chris Higgins or an Alex Perezhogin? I don't think so.

And I don't think any Sharks fan (in their right mind) will argue that. But as far as youngsters vying for roster spots, every year we have kids coming out of our development system that end up playing well for the team. Guys like Nabokov and Hannan didn't come into the league with any buzz, but shoot I'd consider them solid NHLers.

 

[Patty Ice]

I'm questioning whether their top picks were really very good, not whether they're being developed too slowly. I don't see Morris, Spang and Maata, for starters, making the NHL any time soon. San Jose doesn't have that much depth that they couldn't afford to have more rookies battling for positions. Hell; even Toronto will have several youngsters vying for jobs this training camp.

Is Dimitrakos that good that he couldn't be replaced by a Chris Higgins or an Alex Perezhogin? I don't think so.

With regards to Morris and Spang, the Sharks like to keep their kids in college for the full 4 years. It's a good developer and moneysaver for them. The only real notable was Jillson and look at how he turned out. Maatta isn't expected anytime soon and by all accounts is a bust.

As far as rookies vying for spots, the Sharks will have Marcel Goc, Milan Michalek, Steve Bernier, Christian Ehrhoff, Ryane Clowe, Doug Murray, Rob Davison, Garrett Stafford, Josh Gorge, and Josh Hennessy battling for potential spots. Goc, Michalek, Clowe, Davison, and Ehrhoff have the best shots at earning spots if you ask me. If anything, I think they might have too many rookies making the roster.

And when a guy can score 9 points in 15 playoff games then they can take Dimis roster spot.

 

[OrrNumber4]

It looks like when Doug Wilson has a player in mind, he will do everything in his power to get that player. Right now, it seems bad, but you never know. Maybe in 2000, Dean Lombardi was praying that Jason Williams would fall to spot 41. He didn't, and the Sharks got Maata. Yet Wilson would have had no problem trading two or three picks to get a higher pick and draft Williams.

The Sharks will probably make more of these "boneheaded" moves in the future. Dean Lombardi and Doug Wilson are very different. Lombardi's was willing to cross his fingers and gamble. The 1998 fiasco with Brad Stuart and Legwand was an example of Lombardi's shrewdness. Lombardi was always willing to wait, hoping the pick that he wanted would be at San Jose's spot. Wilson is a more active, but even though he gets the player he wants, the cost is very large

 

[X-SHARKIE]

And I don't think any Sharks fan (in their right mind) will argue that. But as far as youngsters vying for roster spots, every year we have kids coming out of our development system that end up playing well for the team. Guys like Nabokov and Hannan didn't come into the league with any buzz, but shoot I'd consider them solid NHLers.

Thank you Von.

When the Sharks drafted Marco Sturm in 1996, Sharks fans that I spoke with and the media was confused, and pretty much bashing the Sharks for trading Chicago two 2nd round picks to move up and grab that pick to take a German forward. Although everyone is saying why trade up for a guy you could've had in the 2nd round?

That pick looks pretty darn good now.

Scott Hannan in 1997, Now he's a #1 shutdown defenseman, but when he was drafted I was only hearing 4th defenseman upside if he developes fully, and media and fans weren't to happy about the selection.

1998, we didn't trade up for him but when we took Cheechoo 28th overall, alot of fans and media were also pissing about the pick, and for a few of the following years, saying he only has solid size, he's out of shape, and he looks like he's skating threw mud.

I think that pick worked out very well

Hell, on draft day Matt Carle in the mid 2nd round was made out to be our worst selection of the draft.... only a few years later it's looking like one our best.


Sharks don't draft by hype and some fans/media get down on them about it....but in the end, they draft and develope impact players that are the nucleaus of our team... So I don't think the Sharks are over rated because the results speek for them selves.

Some of our recent selections also don't bode well for Pre-draft hype.

Bernier: Stewart & Parise were much more hyped.
Kaspar: Schremp and Meszaro had more hype.
Setoguchi: Insert most 05 prospects here, especially Kopitar & Staal.

Now will these picks work out as well as the past? Who knows...but I would put my money on the Sharks developmental system and say yes.

Here are the players under question and my thoughts...

I see Bernier's selection already working, we need another powerforward and Bernier has amazing hands and is excellent at scoring in close...... Anyone who watches him this year will say how far he has come along since draft day, and although his numbers haven't been up, it's all about development in junior, and that's what he has done. SO I think this pick will work out. Plus i've talked to people who watch the Q whom I respect, and some talk to NHL scouts, think his game will translate to the pro-level better then most of the players scoring more points then him in the Q.

And depending on what night you watch Kaspar, you could either be seeing a kid that looks like top 10 ( like when I saw him play vs Peterbrough, Missasauga, & Toronto) ability or a guy that shouldn't be drafted on the 1st day (Game 3 vs London )...He's an enigma... we'll see how he turns it around consistantly... He's been working out with Michalek in Montreal and I coudl see him really tearing it up this year...but we'll see if his heart is in the game every night.

Setoguchi, I've only seen him on good nights, U-18 and Top Prospects game but he looks like Cheech with Skating ability. Solid 2nd line scorer. I love how he hits on top of his offense, flashy kid, we'll see if he can be consistant...Remember this is a kid who put up 9 points in 2 games in the Dub, but also only scored 2-3 points in a month... So he's obviosly skilled, just needs to bring it nightly.


Now i'm not saying I always agree with Sharks selections, in fact I would've loved Kopitar or Staal, and Latendresse in the 2nd round... but I can't argue the results and there is no reason to say that the recent prospects they've drafted can't develope into good ones.

2001-2003 look like very good drafts, 2000 & 2002 look like very poor drafts, and 2004-2005 undecided...we'll see.

Luc Bourdon - I can't add much that hasn't already been said by the Canucks management and others.... I love the combonation of size, skating ability, powerfull physical game including a mean streak, a hard accurate low slap shot. He does need to work on consistantly being in the right position defensively and not try to do to much...THose were mostly wholes you saw in the Q, and at the top prospects game...He showed that he could make the right decisions and play a sound stay at home game when needed at the U-18's. He might turn out to be a Phaneuf like prospect, although Dione was more consistant game in game out his draft year, he was underapreciated.... Bourdon has all the tools, he just needs to keep maturing mentally and physically... with that he could be a very imposing defenseman and a force for the Canucks and Team Canada on the blue line.

I like Johnson and Staal more, but I think Bourdon is the 3rd best defenseman in the 05 draft.