Speculation: The Sharks are rebuilding, how do they proceed? Part II

[Kcoyote3]

Yeah because every prospect turns into an actual NHL player. Your stance is pure HF ageism at its finest. Picking 1st overall guarantees absolutely nothing.

Picking 1st overall basically gives you a franchise player. That's been proven. After first overall? Who knows.

 

[magic school bus]

I don't think you can marginalize the emotions of a playoff loss to suit your narrative and expect to be taken seriously. And if you were the GM to my team, I'd have reservations about things you wantonly brush aside.

Players are allowed to take the loss harder, because they don't have to go to work the next day. GM's do. I don't want my gm to be overemotional and neither should you. Level-headed, calm gm's get taken advantage of all the time. I can't imagine the type of dumb mistakes that are made when one isn't at 100%

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Yeah because every prospect turns into an actual NHL player. Your stance is pure HF ageism at its finest. Picking 1st overall guarantees absolutely nothing.

From 2002-2012

1 - Yakupov, RNH, Hall, Tavares, Stamkos, Kane, E. Johnson, Crosby, Ovechkin, Fleury, Nash
2 - R. Murray, Landeskog, Seguin, Hedman, Doughty, JVR, J. Staal, Ryan, Malkin, Staal, Lehtonen
3 - Galchenyuk, Huberdeau, Gudbranson, Duchene, Bogosian, Turris, Toews, J. Johnson, Barker, Horton, Bouwmeester

Under the assumption that Gudbranson is a complete bust, which isn't fair at all to say just yet, you're looking at only 2 true busts there in Barker/Gudbranson and both of them had a top-6/top-4 player drafted right after them in Ladd and Johansen, respectively. That's a 92% success rate of making the NHL and being a top-6/top-4 player of the 30 guys drafted in the top-3 from 2002 to 2012 (I chose not to include after 2012 because those players are too young to say)

Drafting in the top-3 absolutely does guarantee you something when only 2 out of 30 players in the top-3 are busts and the rest are top-6/top-4/#1G.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

Picking 1st overall basically gives you a franchise player. That's been proven. After first overall? Who knows.

Depends on your definition of a franchise player.

 

[Irbes Mask]

Players are allowed to take the loss harder, because they don't have to go to work the next day. GM's do. I don't want my gm to be overemotional and neither should you. Level-headed, calm gm's get taken advantage of all the time. I can't imagine the type of dumb mistakes that are made when one isn't at 100%

Both are allowed, how long they allow it to have an effect on them is where they differ. A GM doesn't become more susceptible to falling victim to a poor deal because he took a playoff loss hard. GMs get taken advantage of regardless of their emotional state. But this isn't what we're discussing.

What I'd like to know is what makes you think you'd be successful at separating the emotions of the job. What beyond your personnel ideas makes you qualified for it?

 

[do0glas]

In 2004, Wilson was named to the Positive Coaching Alliance's National Advisory Board. PCA, established at Stanford University in 1998, tries to create a positive character-building experience by using sports to teach life lessons. The "win-at-all-costs" mentality is de-emphasized in PCA.

I'm just sayin...:p

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Depends on your definition of a franchise player.

The 4 best players in the NHL as recently voted by HF were all drafted 1st overall. Look to Tavares, E.Staal, Hall, Kane as other franchise players drafted 1st overall.

Yakupov and RNH are not franchise players but they may blossom into ones. The main reason they are performing so badly is because of how awful Edmonton is right now and that isn't an issue we would have if we did tank. Most of the top players in the NHL right now were drafted in the top-5.

 

[Barrie22]

The 4 best players in the NHL as recently voted by HF were all drafted 1st overall. Look to Tavares, E.Staal, Hall, Kane as other franchise players drafted 1st overall.

Yakupov and RNH are not franchise players but they may blossom into ones. The main reason they are performing so badly is because of how awful Edmonton is right now and that isn't an issue we would have if we did tank. Most of the top players in the NHL right now were drafted in the top-5.

You use edmonton as an excuse as why 2 players aren't franchise players yet. But one of your franchise players you used is from that same edmonton team. So what seperates hall from yakupov? Rnh? Could not be the talent level difference right?

 

[WantonAbandon]

Yeah because every prospect turns into an actual NHL player. Your stance is pure HF ageism at its finest. Picking 1st overall guarantees absolutely nothing.

The odds of getting a player that will play in the NHL for ten season is fairly high, but certainly not guaranteed.

Getting a superstar is far far less guaranteed. Chris Phillips is probably the more likely result especially if you go for a non forward.

 

[SJeasy]

For starters, I wouldn't overreact to a playoff series loss like McPhee, Gillis or Wilson. I wouldn't avoid European players (and subsequently overrate NA skaters). I wouldn't have pylons (veteran defensive defenseman) on my team. I wouldn't care if Seguin or Jeff Carter enjoyed partying! I would sign players to super long, cap circumventing deals because they are good. I would stress skating ability and not put as much stock into toughness, grit or intangibles.

And if we lost, it wouldn't be because of "leadership," it would be because I didn't do my job well enough. A gm has his hands on every part of the team, and i'd accept a level of responsibility that reflects that.

Hope I covered everything.

You could fine tune the party thing. When it gets in the way of playing optimally, it is an issue. Instead of Seto, we might look at Carter/Richards for the Kings. Richards has taken it too far and Sutter has specifically told him that he needs to go harder in off seasons or face the consequences. OTOH, Carter is going along fine. Doughty was another that got a stiff warning regarding TOI from Sutter some time ago.

From 2002-2012

1 - Yakupov, RNH, Hall, Tavares, Stamkos, Kane, E. Johnson, Crosby, Ovechkin, Fleury, Nash
2 - R. Murray, Landeskog, Seguin, Hedman, Doughty, JVR, J. Staal, Ryan, Malkin, Staal, Lehtonen
3 - Galchenyuk, Huberdeau, Gudbranson, Duchene, Bogosian, Turris, Toews, J. Johnson, Barker, Horton, Bouwmeester

Under the assumption that Gudbranson is a complete bust, which isn't fair at all to say just yet, you're looking at only 2 true busts there in Barker/Gudbranson and both of them had a top-6/top-4 player drafted right after them in Ladd and Johansen, respectively. That's a 92% success rate of making the NHL and being a top-6/top-4 player of the 30 guys drafted in the top-3 from 2002 to 2012 (I chose not to include after 2012 because those players are too young to say)

Drafting in the top-3 absolutely does guarantee you something when only 2 out of 30 players in the top-3 are busts and the rest are top-6/top-4/#1G.

You need to be aware of definitions. Any player who makes it to a certain number of NHL games is not a bust. I use 80 games, TSN (Cullen) uses 50 and there are other benchmarks that fall at 80 games or under. They may fall short of expectations but they aren't busts.

When I did the draft review from 91-03, there were 3 top 5's that did no hit the 80 game mark. That's a 95% conversion rate for top 5's. The average skill level of top 5's who weren't busts was just a nudge below first line/first pair. I divided skill levels into franchise, first line/first pairing, second line/second pairing, third line/third pairing, fourth line, and reserve.

Top 3's don't guarantee franchise. Your list is helpful. I find the HF definition of franchise to be helpful because it is pretty much a consensus on who is and who isn't a franchise player. The definition is what amounts to an HF 9 rating and means perennial All-Star. I bolded the guys on your list who fit the definition and I red highlighted the guys who may fit the definition in the future. The purpose was to make the point that not all top picks, top 3's or even top 5's are franchise players. The average skill level of top 5's is just below first line on my aforementioned scale.

In terms of guys in the NHL, the league has roughly 900 different players who play each year. The average career is 5 years. Getting to the micro level, the average career is 15 years for first line and franchise players. 12-13 years for 2nd line/2nd pairing. About 8 or so years on 3rd liners and a lot less for 4th line and reserve. In 15 years, there are only 75 top 5 guys drafted so it is pretty obvious that there are about 825 non-top 5 guys playing in any given year assuming all of the 75 have been converted to players.

The critical point that you should argue is that it is A LOT harder to find franchise players outside of the top 3 to 5 picks. My suspicion is that it would benefit teams to pre-scout draft years and choose the years specifically when they should tank. Most of the franchise guys in the top 5 are identified well over 12 months before they are drafted.

 

[Led Zappa]

You could fine tune the party thing. When it gets in the way of playing optimally, it is an issue. Instead of Seto, we might look at Carter/Richards for the Kings. Richards has taken it too far and Sutter has specifically told him that he needs to go harder in off seasons or face the consequences. OTOH, Carter is going along fine. Doughty was another that got a stiff warning regarding TOI from Sutter some time ago.

Where did you get the info on Carter and Doughty getting talked to?

When I did the draft review from 91-03, there were 3 top 5's that did no hit the 80 game mark. That's a 95% conversion rate for top 5's. The average skill level of top 5's who weren't busts was just a nudge below first line/first pair. I divided skill levels into franchise, first line/first pairing, second line/second pairing, third line/third pairing, fourth line, and reserve.

When I did mine a couple years ago for 00-10 there were only 3 meh's (Not Busts yet) in the top 5 on the list until 2010 when it was too early to tell. The rest made the 80 game threshold.

 

[WantonAbandon]

I personally think 80 games is too generous for a top five pick. In reality, less than 400 games would be a serious bust for a top five pick. Sure there are worse examples, but that top five pick better provide more value than 80 games.

Less then 600 would be a big disappointment.

 

[magic school bus]

You could fine tune the party thing. When it gets in the way of playing optimally, it is an issue. Instead of Seto, we might look at Carter/Richards for the Kings. Richards has taken it too far and Sutter has specifically told him that he needs to go harder in off seasons or face the consequences. OTOH, Carter is going along fine. Doughty was another that got a stiff warning regarding TOI from Sutter some time ago.

Absolutely, but at the end of the day it's about how good the player is on the ice and not necessarily off of it. The goal is to win games, not win games and be in bed by midnight.

 

[Led Zappa]

I personally think 80 games is too generous for a top five pick. In reality, less than 400 games would be a serious bust for a top five pick. Sure there are worse examples, but that top five pick better provide more value than 80 games.

Less then 600 would be a big disappointment.

Pass your own judgement:

2000 01 Rick DiPietro
2000 02 Dany Heatley
2000 03 Marian Gaborik
2000 04 Rostislav Klesla
2000 05 Raffi Torres

2001 01 Ilya Kovalchuk
2001 02 Jason Spezza
2001 03 Alexandr Svitov
2001 04 Stephen Weiss
2001 05 Stanislav Chistov

2002 01 Rick Nash
2002 02 Kari Lehtonen
2002 03 Jay Bouwmeester
2002 04 Joni Pitkanen
2002 05 Ryan Whitney

2003 01 Marc-Andre Fleury
2003 02 Eric Staal
2003 03 Nathan Horton
2003 04 Nikolai Zherdev
2003 05 Thomas Vanek

2004 01 Alexander Ovechkin
2004 02 Evgeni Malkin
2004 03 Cam Barker
2004 04 Andrew Ladd
2004 05 Blake Wheeler

2005 01 Sidney Crosby
2005 02 Bobby Ryan
2005 03 Jack Johnson
2005 04 Benoit Pouliot
2005 05 Carey Price

2006 01 Erik Johnson
2006 02 Jordan Staal
2006 03 Jonathan Toews
2006 04 Nicklas Backstrom
2006 05 Phil Kessel

2007 01 Patrick Kane
2007 02 James van Riemsdyk
2007 03 Kyle Turris
2007 04 Thomas Hickey
2007 05 Karl Alzner

2008 01 Steven Stamkos
2008 02 Drew Doughty
2008 03 Zach Bogosian
2008 04 Alex Pietrangelo
2008 05 Luke Schenn

2009 01 John Tavares
2009 02 Victor Hedman
2009 03 Matt Duchene
2009 04 Evander Kane
2009 05 Brayden Schenn

2010 01 Taylor Hall
2010 02 Tyler Seguin
2010 03 Erik Gudbranson
2010 04 Ryan Johansen
2010 05 Nino Niederreiter

 

[magic school bus]

Yeah... I'm not tanking unless I'm putting out the worst team in the league (and guaranteeing a top-2 pick).

 

[SJeasy]

Where did you get the info on Carter and Doughty getting talked to?



When I did mine a couple years ago for 00-10 there were only 3 meh's (Not Busts yet) in the top 5 on the list until 2010 when it was too early to tell. The rest made the 80 game threshold.

Multiple articles in the LA media. I don't have the links, but the links were posted on this forum. It wasn't Carter, it was Richards on those. The Philly media had a thing on both around the time of their being traded, but the quote from Richards was by far the most vehement in rejecting Lavi's no alcohol pledge. The Richards work out thing was right around the playoffs this year, Doughty was a couple of years ago. I have seen very little published about Carter that was extremely negative outside of his displeasure in CBJ. In the Philly articles, it looked like he was more or less along for the ride with Richards.

Thanks for the update on top 5's. I am not surprised. Completely blowing a top 5 should be beyond reprehensible for any scout. IIRC, the biggest blown pick in that 91-03 window was Bonsignore by Edmonton. I suspect Gudbranson is going to end up rated as 3rd pairing with a relatively short career a la Barker. Schenn is another one who is a cut above both of them but is still a weak pick. If you look at the list MA did and count franchise guys, you can see why I adamantly recommend going for forwards with top picks. Unlike the way the Sharks spent their high picks in the early years.

My sense is that guys who are picked high have to be really bad not to be given enough rope to get their 80 games in. Just outside of the top 5, take a look at Skille's career; more chances than a guy who bought 100 lottery tickets.

 

[Kitten Mittons]

Doughty has a diet coke problem, not an alcohol problem.

 

[Le Rosbeef]

Agreed, they aren't infallible BUT there are some on here that degrade every single move as if it's the apocalypse brought on by stupid monkeys.
If any of us thinks we know more than them, that's just plain silliness.
I know that I couldn't run a team. It is not just about what we see and complain over.
The San Jose Sharks are NOT an NHL 14 team.

I think that's a great post, and sums up my opinion perfectly.

Nobody is against reasonable, rational debate. It's good. The problem is there's a quite a lot who simply prefer venting at the team because they don't do things the way they would like rather than objectively criticising. Of course, there are lots of people in the latter too, but it's the former that gets frustrating.

I have an opinion but don't believe for one second I know better than the guys in the organisation. Yes, as a fan we can 'judge' based on results but the only real power the fan has is to vote with their feet.

Mind you, this is the problem with the world as whole these days - a lot of people seem to expect perfection in the way they interact with others and are, for all intents and purposes, an 'expert' about anything now if they so much as tweet about it... "Yeah. I went to school so I definitively know everything there is about running schools..."etc

 

[Pinkfloyd]

I think that's a great post, and sums up my opinion perfectly.

Nobody is against reasonable, rational debate. It's good. The problem is there's a quite a lot who simply prefer venting at the team because they don't do things the way they would like rather than objectively criticising. Of course, there are lots of people in the latter too, but it's the former that gets frustrating.

I have an opinion but don't believe for one second I know better than the guys in the organisation. Yes, as a fan we can 'judge' based on results but the only real power the fan has is to vote with their feet.

Mind you, this is the problem with the world as whole these days - a lot of people seem to expect perfection in the way they interact with others and are, for all intents and purposes, an 'expert' about anything now if they so much as tweet about it... "Yeah. I went to school so I definitively know everything there is about running schools..."etc

I believe this is an appropriate response. lol

 

[Coy]

We should just trade for Myers. Then we can have two 6' 8" guys on our team.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

We should just trade for Myers. Then we can have two 6' 8" guys on our team.

It worked out well for Buffalo.

 

[one2gamble]

It worked out well for Buffalo.

well...we are trying to get into the top 5 on draft day

 

[Nolan11]

OK, so if we are rebuilding, and Jumbo/Patty refuse to waive, I would explore our modified NTC clauses to look for windows. If couture has one, I would explore the following two trades:

Couture + Demers for Jones + Aberg + 2nd
and
Nemo + Braun + Irwin + Hamilton for Reimer + Gardiner + Ashton

Leaving us the following:

CAPGEEK.COM ARMCHAIR GM ROSTER
CapGeek Armchair GM Roster
FORWARDS
Patrick Marleau ($6.667m) / Joe Pavelski ($6.000m) / Matt Nieto ($0.759m)
Raffi Torres ($2.000m) / Tomas Hertl ($0.925m) / Tommy Wingels ($2.475m)
Pontus Aberg ($0.781m) / Joe Thornton ($6.750m) / Carter Ashton ($0.851m)
James Sheppard ($1.300m) / Andrew Desjardins ($0.750m) / Mike Brown ($1.200m)
John Scott ($0.700m) / Tyler Kennedy ($2.350m) /
DEFENSEMEN
Marc-Edouard Vlasic ($4.250m) / Brent Burns ($5.760m)
Jake Gardiner ($3.750m) / Seth Jones ($0.925m)
Konrad Abeltshauser ($0.633m) / Taylor Fedun ($0.575m)
Scott Hannan ($1.000m) /
GOALTENDERS
Alex Stalock ($1.600m)
James Reimer ($2.000m)
BUYOUTS
Martin Havlat ($0.000m)
BURIED
Adam Burish ($0.925m)
BONUS OVERAGE
$175,000
------
CAPGEEK.COM TOTALS (follow @capgeek on Twitter)
(estimations for 2014-15)
SALARY CAP: $69,000,000; CAP PAYROLL: $55,100,500; BONUSES: $3,151,667
CAP SPACE (23-man roster): $13,899,500

That adds a lot of youth and likely misses the play-offs. It also should be enough damage to our immediate chances to convince Jumbo Patty to consider waiving the following year.