Sharks scouts overrated?

Status
Not open for further replies.

sharkyz15

Registered User
Jul 13, 2003
2,330
0
The Dirty Dirty SC
Visit site
sharkyz15 said:


Look it's simple

No matter what anyone thinks about Devin Setoguchi here, including my self, he was "the sharks guy"

We are not professional scouts so it's not our job to tell them he was picked in the wrong spot

DW said this and i quote about Kopitar "He was hype"

Listen

No GM is stupid to trade everything the sharks did to get Devin unles they truly have that much faith in him and really believe that another team picking ahead of them is going to select him. Most everyone is saying DW did this FOR NO ABSOLUTE REASON AT ALL, JUST BECAUSE WE ARE ALL EXPERTS ALL A SUDDEN AND WE KNOW EXACTLY WHO THE TEAMS BEFORE WERE GOING TO PICK BECAUSE WE HAVE A SIXTH SENSE.

As Mel Kiper always says

when you identify a player as your guy, it's your job to go get him and Doug Wilson has done as good a job in dooing that in his first 3 drafts as sharks GM
 

turnbuckle*

Guest
When you compare SJ's top prospects from the past six drafts to two of the better drafting teams during that period, LA and Mtl, there's not much debate over which list is lacking.

Here is Los Angeles' top 20 prospects from the past six drafts.

Alexander Frolov
Mike Cammalleri
Dustin Brown
Lubomir Visnovsky
Jeff Tambellini
Brian Boyle
Laurie Tukonen
Anze Kopitar
Denis Grebeshkov
Andreas Lilja
Cristobol Huet
Yannick Lehoux
Jens Karlsson
Dave Steckel
Jaroslav Bednar
Sergie Anshakov
Peter Kanko
Aaron Rome
Brady Murray
Dany Roussin


Not a single top ten pick among those selections, but I would certainly take it over san Jose's last six drafts. In fact, if every team were to make a list of it's top 20 prospects form the past six drafts, I would hazard to guess that San Jose's list would rank in the bottom five. That may change through time, but at this point it doesn't look overly impressive.

Montreal's top 20 from the past six drafts:

Komisarek
Kostitsyn
Price
Chipchura
Perezhogin
Higgins
Lapierre
Hainsey
Hossa
Balej
Plekanec
Latendresse
O'Byrne
Streit
Grabovsky
Mikus
Locke
Yemelin
Halak
Milroy

San Jose's top 20

Michalek
Bernier
Setoguchi
Ehrhoff
Goc
Kaspar
Morris
Hennessy
Patzold
Ehelechner
Carle
vlasic
Plihal
DiSalvatore
Greiss


I can't do the rest. The rest are, to be kind, not top rated players, I can't rank them without making a guess. Why exactly have they drafted about a dozen goalies in the past six years? Has anyone ever told them that you can only dress two at a time?
They may have a history of devloping goalies, but teams like Buffalo are finding out that there is not a huge demand for third-string goalies any more. There are enough good goalies in the professional ranks that most teams have at least two good goalies each in their system. I'd be looking to beef up their less than imposing defensive and forward prospects rather than trying to become six-deep in the nets.

Anyway; enough ranting. If I'm a SJ fan, I have some concern over the club's drafting in the past six seasons. It hasn't been showing up on the ice yet, because the team is presently reaping the benefits of strong drafting in the previous decade. I don't know your team's scouting history as far as who always called the shots, but I get the feling that Dean Lombardi didn't get enough credit for putting together a solid scouting team in the 90's, and he is missed. The drafting of Hannan, Sturm, Marleau, Stuart, Cheechoo, Rathje, Kipper, Nabby and Toskala are a big reason why the team has been a player in the western conference for at least three of thenew millennium's NHL seasons.

Poor drafting IMO over the past six seasons, however, is why San Jose is not going to get over the hump and win the Stanley Cup any time soon. If the Sharks were entering this season with Cammaleri, Frolov, Grebeshkov, Brown, Vishnovsky and Tambellini instead of Michalek, Goc and Ehrhoff I'd be picking them as western favourites. Their lack of depth, particularly on the prospect front, however, leads me to believe that they will be closer to fifth or sixth than first in the west.
 

sharkyz15

Registered User
Jul 13, 2003
2,330
0
The Dirty Dirty SC
Visit site
My response to all the questioning of the sharks drafting is such

What kind of team are they putting out there every night???

BTW here is a fact

Sharks had 14 players home grown on their playoff roster last season
 

Patty Ice

Straight to the Banc
Feb 27, 2002
13,854
3,339
Not California
turnbuckle said:
Poor drafting IMO over the past six seasons, however, is why San Jose is not going to get over the hump and win the Stanley Cup any time soon. If the Sharks were entering this season with Cammaleri, Frolov, Grebeshkov, Brown, Vishnovsky and Tambellini instead of Michalek, Goc and Ehrhoff I'd be picking them as western favourites. Their lack of depth, particularly on the prospect front, however, leads me to believe that they will be closer to fifth or sixth than first in the west.

For every Frolov, Brown, and Visnovsky...I can give you a Karlsson, Steckel, or Lehoux (won't be too effective for the Kings in Russia). How do the Sharks draft Frolov with no first rounder? Should have the Sharks taken David Steckel over Marcel Goc? How do they take Grebs when they draft at 28? Who would take Brown over Michalek back in 2003 (as much as i love Brown I still take Michalek)? Why not praise the scouting staff for taking 2000 pick Chad Wiseman and turning him into 53 point scorer Nils Ekman? Has Petr Kanko done more for the Kings than Spang has done for the Sharks?

It's like I mention, the Sharks take NCAA bound kids. Do you slam the Kings for taking Brian Boyle, who like Mike Morris, has quietly boost his stock in college? They take advantage of four years of free development. College kids are rarely hyped on this board but I could care less as long as they produce on NHL ice (be it points or effort)...which the Sharks picks have done.
 

ZombieMatt

Registered User
May 20, 2002
5,242
1
Steve Bernier was a bad pick on draft day. You're right, they could have waited to take him later in the first round, but they didn't. And they're lucky because at this point, it no longer looks like such a bad move. Say what you want about who was picked later or whatever, the fact remains that Bernier's development has basically went as good as it could have since that Combine. The fitness is absolutely no longer a concern. His skills have progressed and he's very strong. He is now a two-way player, he understands the defensive side of the game and can play it just as good as your average CHLer graduating to the professional ranks. Furthermore he's become an above average skater. I don't understand this questionning about his work ethic. When all that happened, he was a 17 year old who had just scored a very high number of points for a kid his age. He was very young and probably just thought things were going to be easy. The problem was identified and magnified, and by September the ensuing year his weight and conditioning were forever no longer an issue. Having had the opportunity to interview Bernier and speak to him a few times, it's very apparent he is committed to fitness, and more important, to playing a style of hockey which will make him successful.

Is he a sure thing? Absolutely not. He still needs time in the AHL before he's ready. But his steady and consistent progression since 2003 make his selection, at this point, far more bearable.
 

ukyo

Registered User
Mar 2, 2003
1,794
0
Silicon Valley
Visit site
I've been frustrated with the Sharks drafts for years, but I quietly turn a blind eye because they continue to win even as they bring up young role players.

I disliked the Setoguchi/Bernier/Sturm picks simply because I believed that they all could have been had later in the draft. However, I do feel that they are quality prospects (and in Sturm's case, a quality forward), and I have to give Wilson and Lombardi the benefit of the doubt since it's not like I knew for certain that those players would have been available later.

Now, if they were trading up simply due to paranoia, then there is no way to spin it. Those picks used to trade up were wasted. Doesn't matter that Sturm turned out to be a productive player for the Sharks, what if the Sharks would have used the pick they traded away to select Zdeno Chara or Colin White?

BTW, Scott Hannan is NOT a #1 shutdown defenseman and I don't remember talk about him being a #4 at best on draft day (he was considered more of a puck-moving offensive defenseman). He may be the Sharks' #1 defenseman, but boy is he a frustrating player to watch. He will go maybe 20 minutes of a game playing flawlessly, and then fork the puck over on a completely boneheaded play like going for a home run pass that gets picked off by a forechecker at the Sharks' blueline. Until he stops doing that sort of thing on a regular basis (and becomes more physical), he will never be on the same echelon as a Foote or Hatcher.
 

Gwyddbwyll

Registered User
Dec 24, 2002
11,252
469
X-SHARKIE said:
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.

Sorry, but werent you about 9 or 10 years old in 1996/7? You're talking like you were deep into the draft analysis and reading newspapers. I'm not sure about that :) Probably you are into your draft history maybe? Overall I agree with your points that you were making such as San Jose does suffer from lack of hype/coverage on their prospects.
 

Dr Quincy

Registered User
Jun 19, 2005
28,684
10,516
I think Mike Morris is really underrated here. As a JR he put up career highs in goals and points and tied his career best in assists. He played on the 6th best scoring team (out of 9) in Hockey East, yet still put up 39 pts in 34 games. I think he's going to have a real big year for Northeastern this year too.
 

X-SHARKIE

Registered User
ukyo said:
BTW, Scott Hannan is NOT a #1 shutdown defenseman and I don't remember talk about him being a #4 at best on draft day (he was considered more of a puck-moving offensive defenseman).

A 4th defenseman can be a puck moving defenseman, just because I said 4th doesn't mean I ment he had no offensive upside coming out of the Dub.... I never said that the scouts didn't like his ability to move the puck offensively. Although point taken right there, Sharks draft a kid who the media says is a puck moving defenseman, but they draft him and develope him for the role of a shutdown defenseman. Years later they look pretty smart for doing it right? 2003, Sharks draft a flabby kid with a nack for scoring, they develope him and groom him for the role of a two way powerforward with offensive ability.... ask Matt, the pick is working so far... Now with Bernier, I expected a Cheech like development schedule and we would see him 3 years in the AHL... he might be in the NHL sooner, we''ll see.

Yeah I was about 9 or 10...Doesn't mean I didn't watch the drafts on T.V.

My dad had me watch my first draft in 93, when they were calling Kozlov the Russian Rocket, Russian Mario ect.....Now that didn't work out to well.

I wouldn't jump on the Sharks for drafting yet, because you have to give a guy like Bernier possibly 3 years of development in the AHL before he's ready to be an impact player in the NHL. Plus we draft kids out of high school, and USHL, EJHL so frequently that these kids often need 4/5 years after being drafted to have pro impact.

Then we don't rush the other guys into the NHL, we put them in the AHL and groom them.

What's so bad about that? It's worked wonders for guys like Dimitrakos.
 

Patty Ice

Straight to the Banc
Feb 27, 2002
13,854
3,339
Not California
ukyo said:
t remember talk about him being a #4 at best on draft day (he was considered more of a puck-moving offensive defenseman).

The book on him during his draft year was that he did everything well but nothing great. He was considered to be a top 4 kinda of guy but more of the lower pairing rather than top pairing.
 

X-SHARKIE

Registered User
Patty Ice said:
The book on him during his draft year was that he did everything well but nothing great. He was considered to be a top 4 kinda of guy but more of the lower pairing rather than top pairing.

Bingo, he moved the puck out of the zone well, but wasn't great offensively, he was solid positionally but wasn't a shut down guy, and he was solid physically but wasn't "mean"

He developed very well.
 

Old Hickory

Guest
Patty Ice said:
Care to explain why? Wilson even said he traded up only because of a gutfeeling that either LA or Vancouver would take him. .
I speak to LA's head scout on a semi regular basis. LA had no interest in him in the first round. He was shocked he went that high.
 

Pepper

Registered User
Aug 30, 2004
14,693
269
Don't write off Määttä completely just yet, he has improved every season in the FEL and is a reliable top4 d-man at the moment.

I wouldn't be suprised to see him play in the NHL as 5th-7th d-man someday and that's not too bad for a 2nd round pick.
 

ukyo

Registered User
Mar 2, 2003
1,794
0
Silicon Valley
Visit site
X-SHARKIE said:
Bingo, he moved the puck out of the zone well, but wasn't great offensively, he was solid positionally but wasn't a shut down guy, and he was solid physically but wasn't "mean"

He developed very well.

Not saying he didn't develop well. Just saying that he certainly didn't turn out the way most Sharks fans at the time expected. And most of the Sharks fans that I know were excited about his offensive abilities, especially after lamenting Ozolinsh's departure. Maybe we were a bit too optimistic on what to expect from him, but until last year (in which he was solid for the most part) we all felt like he was a less than decent pick.

Anyways, my point was that no matter how well the picks turn out, a lot of fans will always scratch their heads over whether or not it was really necessary to deal away other picks to get them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->