Confirmed with Link: Tim Burke promoted to Assistant GM DWJR to Dir. of Scouting

[Mattb124]

I think it is too early to anoint Barzal as a franchise center or Meier as a 2nd/3rd liner.

While I do think there is a gap between Rantanen and Meier, I bet that closes substantially in the next 2 years. It is also a bit unfair to compare the 2 players given the relative quality of linemates and utilization.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Franchise might be pushing it but there's at least one star center drafted outside the top five in nearly every draft - Barzal in 2015, Larkin and Point in 2014, Horvat in 2013, Teravainen in 2012, Scheifele, Couturier and Trocheck in 2011, Kuznetsov in 2010, O'Reilly in 2009...I could keep going here but I think you get the point that it's a hell of a lot more common to draft a #1 center outside the top five than to find a #1 center via trade.

If those guys are star #1Cs then so is Hertl

 

[Maladroit]

If those guys are star #1Cs then so is Hertl

Which of those players is Hertl better than?

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Which of those players is Hertl better than?

Bo Horvat and Dylan Larkin and it’s really not close. Teravainen is also a winger who is inferior to Hertl.

Really, Kuznetsov, Barzal, and Schiefele are the only ones I’m comfortable calling Stanley Cup superstar #1Cs. Couturier is a maybe. The rest are definitely not.

 

[Used As A Shield]

Bo Horvat and Dylan Larkin and it’s really not close. Teravainen is also a winger who is inferior to Hertl.

Really, Kuznetsov, Barzal, and Schiefele are the only ones I’m comfortable calling Stanley Cup superstar #1Cs. Couturier is a maybe. The rest are definitely not.

This matches my evaluation.

 

[Maladroit]

Bo Horvat and Dylan Larkin and it’s really not close. Teravainen is also a winger who is inferior to Hertl.

Really, Kuznetsov, Barzal, and Schiefele are the only ones I’m comfortable calling Stanley Cup superstar #1Cs. Couturier is a maybe. The rest are definitely not.

You'd have to be a serious Hertl fanboy to not trade him straight up for Larkin or Horvat. Horvat is a player I was long skeptical of but he's averaged over 1.85 points per 60 minutes at even strength and solid possession numbers each of the last two seasons on the worst team in the NHL. Larkin had a big sophomore slump but he averaged over 2 points per 60 at even strength this season and his rookie year and was a possession monster this past season, again on one of the worst teams in the league. Hertl might be better defensively than these two (I'd say it's debatable with Larkin) but the offense isn't even close. Horvat and Larkin already score like first liners despite dogshit linemates, Hertl never has except when playing with Jumbo.

 

[Alaskanice]

Meier has been fine. Not my personal choice but he's been fine and it's a good pick. As for Barzal, yes he would. What evidence is there to suggest that he wouldn't? Him not taking the Islanders to the promised land isn't some indicator of that ability. That really has nothing to do with it. If we had selected Barzal, we would've already traded Tierney. Whether one finds that as good or bad is up to them but the team would have made room for him no different than they made room for Meier when it was convenient for them to do so. As for the star players comment, how does one look north at the Oilers? They're not a star-laden team. They have one star in McDavid and a lesser star in Draisaitl...that's it. The Sharks have done a fabulous job if your expectations are to just make the playoffs. If you have higher expectations and desires for your team than that then they haven't delivered.

I cannot speak to the certainty of what Matthew Barzal would do on this team. Nor can I speak to what the Sharks would do if they brought him up after drafting him.
I can say that they drafted Timo Meier. They did bring him up and he’s been a worthy addition to our lineup.
My point regarding the Oilers and Barzal is that high-end players, even when they make it to the NHL are no guarantee. The Oilers have been terrible though they’ve had the “best” players drafted year after year.
Yes, I accept getting into the playoffs. Once in, any team can win the Stanley Cup.
That is thrilling to me. Sports to me is about having that chance. Fighting when given said chance.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

I cannot speak to the certainty of what Matthew Barzal would do on this team. Nor can I speak to what the Sharks would do if they brought him up after drafting him.
I can say that they drafted Timo Meier. They did bring him up and he’s been a worthy addition to our lineup.
My point regarding the Oilers and Barzal is that high-end players, even when they make it to the NHL are no guarantee. The Oilers have been terrible though they’ve had the “best” players drafted year after year.
Yes, I accept getting into the playoffs. Once in, any team can win the Stanley Cup.
That is thrilling to me. Sports to me is about having that chance. Fighting when given said chance.

Your point regarding the Oilers is a nonsensical one. The Oilers being terrible isn't because of their stars. The Oilers being terrible is because of their management. They are a team run by a group that have very little idea on how to build around their stars. As for the playoffs, you keep dreaming that dream that any team in can win the Cup. Just because a last-seeded team won a Cup once or twice doesn't mean that the Sharks can do the same thing. They aren't built like that.

 

[Maladroit]

This idea that prospects develop radically differently just based on which team drafts them is nonsense. What exactly did the Islanders do to "develop" Barzal? He played zero games in the AHL. He basically had zero exposure to the Islanders training/development staff before making the NHL this year then lit the league on fire. The importance of development, and in particular the differences in development capabilities between NHL organizations, is vastly overstated. A prospect is gonna develop however he's going to develop regardless of which team calls his name during draft weekend, especially these days when good prospects rarely spend time in the AHL.

That's also why I completely reject the notion that the Sharks somehow "ruined" Mueller by rushing him. Mueller was always incapable of playing NHL level hockey. That was never going to change no matter what they did with him.

 

[Alaskanice]

Then I accept being nonsensical. At least I don’t claim that my speculation is fact.
Yes, the Oilers have bad management. Some on here claim the Sharks do as well.
I believe that the Sharks know more than me , a great deal more than me. That is why they drafted Meier. He was going to fit the team we had and have. He was/is learning from some of the best players to learn from.
This is why the Oilers fail. The management thinks having all the best scorers makes championship teams.

They haven’t proved that. The posters on here who moan and complain that we didn’t draft Barzal haven’t proven anything either.

It’s pure speculation. I don’t bank on such things.

 

[Maladroit]

This is why the Oilers fail. The management thinks having all the best scorers makes championship teams.

What are you talking about? Their idiot management literally traded one of the best scorers in the NHL for a second pairing defenseman.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

You'd have to be a serious Hertl fanboy to not trade him straight up for Larkin or Horvat. Horvat is a player I was long skeptical of but he's averaged over 1.85 points per 60 minutes at even strength and solid possession numbers each of the last two seasons on the worst team in the NHL. Larkin had a big sophomore slump but he averaged over 2 points per 60 at even strength this season and his rookie year and was a possession monster this past season, again on one of the worst teams in the league. Hertl might be better defensively than these two (I'd say it's debatable with Larkin) but the offense isn't even close. Horvat and Larkin already score like first liners despite dog**** linemates, Hertl never has except when playing with Jumbo.

How on earth do Horvat or Larkin score like first liners?

Points from first line centers on Cup teams over the past 10 years:

83
89
85
66
70
48 (in 47 games, 83 point pace)
76
57
68
103

Bolded are players who had been or have been Selke finalists year after year and won at some point in their career.

Stanley Cup winning #1 centers who are not Selke winners and consistent finalists average exactly 90 points per season.

Stanley Cup winning #1 centers who are Selke winners and consistent finalists average exactly 70 points per season. (I’m saying Toews scores 83 in 2013 because that was his pace. Saying he scored 48 would be disingenious)

How on earth are Dylan Larkin or Bo Horvat 1st line centers? Hell, I would argue those guys are below average 2nd line centers.

 

[Maladroit]

How on earth do Horvat or Larkin score like first liners?

Points from first line centers on Cup teams over the past 10 years:

83
89
85
66
70
48 (in 47 games, 83 point pace)
76
57
68
103

Bolded are players who had been or have been Selke finalists year after year and won at some point in their career.

Stanley Cup winning #1 centers who are not Selke winners and consistent finalists average exactly 90 points per season.

Stanley Cup winning #1 centers who are Selke winners and consistent finalists average exactly 70 points per season. (I’m saying Toews scores 83 in 2013 because that was his pace. Saying he scored 48 would be disingenious)

How on earth are Dylan Larkin or Bo Horvat 1st line centers? Hell, I would argue those guys are below average 2nd line centers.

You're shifting the goalposts here. Horvat and Larkin don't need to be Stanley Cup champion caliber 1st line centers to be better than Tomas Hertl, which they both are by a significant margin. You're also looking at raw point totals devoid of context for some reason I can't explain. At even strength, Larkin and Horvat absolutely score like first liners. Larkin was 39th in the NHL in even strength scoring rate this season, ahead of Kopitar, Scheifele, Bergeron and many other high-end #1 centers. I'm not saying he's better than those guys but he does produce more offense at even strength playing with far crappier linemates on a horrible team.

Horvat isn't quite as good but he still scored at a higher rate at even strength than literally every single member of the San Jose Sharks. He is absolutely better than Hertl and I'd say he's clearly trending towards being a #1 center or at the very least a high-end 2C like Couture.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Then I accept being nonsensical. At least I don’t claim that my speculation is fact.
Yes, the Oilers have bad management. Some on here claim the Sharks do as well.
I believe that the Sharks know more than me , a great deal more than me. That is why they drafted Meier. He was going to fit the team we had and have. He was/is learning from some of the best players to learn from.
This is why the Oilers fail. The management thinks having all the best scorers makes championship teams.

They haven’t proved that. The posters on here who moan and complain that we didn’t draft Barzal haven’t proven anything either.

It’s pure speculation. I don’t bank on such things.

You actually do claim your speculation as fact. Your take on the Oilers is no different than anything I have ever said in the same light. With that out of the way, we can move to the team issues. I'm not all about bashing the front office for drafting Meier over Barzal or the like. Meier wasn't my personal choice but I don't give them the amount of business over it that others do. Meier is still a good pick even if it wasn't my pick. I have much lower expectations than others when it comes to the Sharks selecting anybody through the draft. I'll just be happy if they get to the NHL and succeed but I will criticize their philosophy as it is really the heart of the issue and not the specific players or who they should have picked. They have been going safe early on for a long time and they go for a certain type of player late in the draft. Both are understandable to a certain extent but the Sharks take it too far and they haven't been keeping up with the times and the trends of drafting. Yeah, it's still a crap shoot to some extent but it should be based on player types and how they're evolving for the game where it is today and where it will be moving forward. The team should no longer be looking to draft Tommy Wingels or Joe Pavelski type players because we like their heart and work ethic. Those are certainly characteristics that you can't discard altogether but it should not be as high a priority as it once was especially when the team is in a position where it is going to need elite playmaking talent very soon and don't really have anything in their system except now for Ryan Merkley. It's why they went out and signed guys like they had lately because they know Thornton's time is drawing to a close because they need guys like Balcers or Chmelevski or Chekhovich.

While I very much disagree with DWJr getting the position for ethical reasons, I can at least respect his outlook on the scouting and drafting and agree that he's probably correct at it being the way to go.

But at the end of the day, if you're going to use the criticism of the Oilers thinking management thinks having the best scorers making championship teams and not proving that then what do you think DW has proved in that same light?

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

You're shifting the goalposts here. Horvat and Larkin don't need to be Stanley Cup champion caliber 1st line centers to be better than Tomas Hertl, which they both are by a significant margin. You're also looking at raw point totals devoid of context for some reason I can't explain. At even strength, Larkin and Horvat absolutely score like first liners. Larkin was 39th in the NHL in even strength scoring rate this season, ahead of Kopitar, Scheifele, Bergeron and many other high-end #1 centers. I'm not saying he's better than those guys but he does produce more offense at even strength playing with far crappier linemates on a horrible team.

Horvat isn't quite as good but he still scored at a higher rate at even strength than literally every single member of the San Jose Sharks. He is absolutely better than Hertl and I'd say he's clearly trending towards being a #1 center or at the very least a high-end 2C like Couture.

You don’t need context when these players are a whole standard deviation or two away from legitimate Stanley Cup Caliber #1Cs based on numbers alone.

P/60 is not the be all end all whatsoever. Hertl is a significantly better player right now than he was as a rookie and his P/60 was highest then. Horvat and Larkin don’t play the kind of minutes that Hertl does at all. Hertl is our top shut-down player, faces the toughest deployment on the team, and plays with linemates who suck defensively. In the 2nd half of the 2015-2016 season, Hertl averaged 2.22 points per 60 minutes at 5V5. His 2nd, 3rd, and 4th most common forward linemates at 5V5 were Kevin LaBanc, Melker Karlsson, and Mikkel Boedker.

At any rate, even if those guys are better than Hertl, it does not change that they absolutely are not number one centers.

 

[Maladroit]

You don’t need context when these players are a whole standard deviation or two away from legitimate Stanley Cup Caliber #1Cs based on numbers alone.

P/60 is not the be all end all whatsoever. Hertl is a significantly better player right now than he was as a rookie and his P/60 was highest then. Horvat and Larkin don’t play the kind of minutes that Hertl does at all. Hertl is our top shut-down player, faces the toughest deployment on the team, and plays with linemates who suck defensively. In the 2nd half of the 2015-2016 season, Hertl averaged 2.22 points per 60 minutes at 5V5. His 2nd, 3rd, and 4th most common forward linemates at 5V5 were Kevin LaBanc, Melker Karlsson, and Mikkel Boedker.

At any rate, even if those guys are better than Hertl, it does not change that they absolutely are not number one centers.

Huh? The 2015-16 season was before Labanc and Boedker were even on the Sharks. Also I completely disagree with the notion that Hertl is a better player now than he was as a rookie before the Dustin Brown hit. He looked like a superstar in the making for those first few months and has never approached that level since. P/60 is not the be all end all but neither is points and P/60 is a much better indication of a player's offensive contribution than raw point totals.

 

[Alaskanice]

It’s impossible to say. Doug Wilson hasn’t been given the top picks in the draft for 4 or so years.
He has had to build this team through trades mostly and some free agent signings that have been better in the last couple of years. I think that he’s had a much more difficult time getting free agents to sign here but I’m not positive about that. His trades have been at the spectacular level in my eyes. He traded for a player that I hope makes the Hall of Fame. He traded for a defenseman that won the Norris trophy. He also brought a goalie in that helped lead us to the Stanley Cup final.
Yes, I’m focused on the great trades because I don’t care about the ones that didn’t work. Nor do I care about players we didn’t draft or trades that didn’t happen. None of that matters to me. I only care about my team. I support them blindly.
I’m pleased that they’re a team that makes the playoffs every year. Yes, not EVERY year but it’s implied that you understand what I mean.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Huh? The 2015-16 season was before Labanc and Boedker were even on the Sharks. Also I completely disagree with the notion that Hertl is a better player now than he was as a rookie before the Dustin Brown hit. He looked like a superstar in the making for those first few months and has never approached that level since. P/60 is not the be all end all but neither is points and P/60 is a much better indication of a player's offensive contribution than raw point totals.

In 2013-2014, Hertl had 18 5V5 points in 381 minutes with Joe Thornton and 2 5V5 points in 90 minutes without Thornton. Hertl has always looked good and produced a lot when he has played with Joe Thornton and he has always looked good and struggled to produce without Thornton. His possession numbers without Thornton in 2013-2014 were very poor and now they are very strong. He has become elite defensively. His top performance was in the 2015-2016 playoffs and this year’s playoffs and he is at his best right now.

Aggregate points at all situations are much more effective, as a whole, than P/60 or 5V5 points or anything else. Context is always important and putting things together to paint a more clear picture of what is happening is always the best way to go, but if you spend 5-10 minutes scrolling through top 5V5 P/60 contributors over the years and compare them to top all-situations aggregate points contributors over the years, there will be a lot more stars with a lot more longevity on the top aggregate points contributors list.

 

[Juxtaposer]

That is a good point. Over the last decade, they are even on first-round picks (7 each) outside of the top-10. But Tampa Bay still had 4 more 2nd-round picks.

Let us try and empiricize this. Using the calculated draft pick values, and omitting the value of top-5 draft picks (in order to capture Meier on SJ's side), Tampa Bay has an aggregate value of 13,106 between 2009 and 2018, compared to 10,253 for the Sharks. If you limit the numbers to 2009-2015, you get 9,509 for Tampa Bay and 7,871 for the Sharks.

So using the above thought experiment of swapping the drafted players, there is about a 20% chance that you don't get the selected player.

Seems significantly closer than 40%, even if the “random chance you don’t get the player picked” seems like a ridiculous way to compensate for the difference.

Johnson was not drafted by TBL. IIRC, he was undrafted.

My bad!

What would the defense be?

After all, with no Coyle, no Burns in this situation.

Let us posit something like this, where the Sharks signed some UFA defenseman:

Kucherov-Thornton-Pavelski
Palat-Couture-Point
Kane-Namestnikov-Donskoi
Sorensen-Karlsson-Goodrow
Radil-Suomela

Vlasic-Braun
De Haan-Heed
Dillon-Wood
Simek

Vasilevskiy
Dell

I think that is a less competitive roster than the one the Sharks currently have. It is undoubtedly stronger up front but lacks any superstars at the major positions. I'd say you have about 6 million in cap space to play with (but the current Sharks's roster has about that much). Moreover, assuming that the Sharks would have 8 million in space for 2020, they would have to fit in new raises to Kucherov and Point, not to mention Vasilevskiy in another year.

A couple of things.

Firstly, we’re talking in a vacuum. One of them players I swapped Coyle for could have easily been in a hypothetical Burns trade. If you’re fussed about the timing of it, then you’re really not getting the point of this.

It’s like saying “if the Sharks drafted Kopitar over Setoguchi, we wouldn’t have Burns”. Is it really impossible that they wouldn’t have traded for Burns anyway? Like, stick Pavelski in that deal in stead of Seto and you probably don’t give up Coyle or the 2011 1st and the team is miles better anyway.

Secondly, if we didn’t acquire Burns, then I think it’s more likely that Demers is still a Shark. Sticking him in that lineup makes it eons better.

Thirdly, saying “the Sharks wouldn’t have the cap to keep all the great players they’ve drafted so it’s a good thing they drafted worse players”, in a nutshell, seems wrong to me.

 

[OrrNumber4]

Seems significantly closer than 40%, even if the “random chance you don’t get the player picked” seems like a ridiculous way to compensate for the difference.

How would you do it?

I guess we could lower everyone's scoring by 20%.

Firstly, we’re talking in a vacuum. One of them players I swapped Coyle for could have easily been in a hypothetical Burns trade. If you’re fussed about the timing of it, then you’re really not getting the point of this.

That is fair, but really there are too many variables. I've tried to account for the difference in pick quality, but there is also a team's developmental ability, roster space, etc.

 

[OrrNumber4]

Franchise might be pushing it but there's at least one star center drafted outside the top five in nearly every draft - Barzal in 2015, Larkin and Point in 2014, Horvat in 2013, Teravainen in 2012, Scheifele, Couturier and Trocheck in 2011, Kuznetsov in 2010, O'Reilly in 2009...I could keep going here but I think you get the point that it's a hell of a lot more common to draft a #1 center outside the top five than to find a #1 center via trade.

Most of those players aren't even close to franchise-caliber. Even Couturier is just breaking out; could be an aberrant season.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Most of those players aren't even close to franchise-caliber. Even Couturier is just breaking out; could be an aberrant season.

Schiefele, Barzal, and Kuznetsov are the only Stanley Cup Star #1Cs I’m looking at. The rest of them are not there and Couturier is the debatable one. And the Sharks only had an opportunity to draft one of those players.

 

[OrrNumber4]

Schiefele, Barzal, and Kuznetsov are the only Stanley Cup Star #1Cs I’m looking at. The rest of them are not there and Couturier is the debatable one. And the Sharks only had an opportunity to draft one of those players.

Even with Barzal, I would like to see him do it for more than one year.

 

[Juxtaposer]

That is fair, but really there are too many variables. I've tried to account for the difference in pick quality, but there is also a team's developmental ability, roster space, etc.

Right, and the Sharks being a sub-par developmental team definitely hasn’t helped their draft results.

 

[Sysreq]

Right, and the Sharks being a sub-par developmental team definitely hasn’t helped their draft results.

To be fair, I think the Cuda coming to San Jose has helped substantially.