Speculation: What needs to happen to consider this season a success?

[Pinkfloyd]

For me, the primary thing is if any kid shows they’re a legitimate NHL’er this’ll be a successful season. They need someone like Eklund or Zadina or Bordeleau or Thrun or Mukhamadullin to solidify themselves as someone that belongs in their future plans.

 

[jMoneyBrah]

More than anything, we need to know the quality of the team's scouting and development. Even if it costs the Sharks a higher pick, seeing the prospects make great strides, the reclamation projects working out, and the bargain bins paying off will be proof of managerial success.

I mostly disagree. Other than seeing some of the heralded prospects demonstrating appropriate development I, personally, don’t need reclamation projects or bargain bin pickups (are these the same thing?) working out over the course of this season to garner positive sentiment of management or the direction they are taking the org.

Reclamation projects and bargain acquisitions are largely a numbers game. If there was certainty about these players they wouldn’t be available cheaply or at all. Yes, it would be great if the org can find some success out of this wave of cheap additions; but should they not hit pay dirt, in totality, I still like the additions and moves made. I like that some interesting players have been added for minimal commitment and money.

I’d call this season a success if all of the following conditions are met by the end of the season:
- The majority of Eklund, Bordeleau, Thrun, Knyzhov, and Gushchin demonstrate bonafide NHL futures (want to see a top 6 future for Eklund)
- Additional draft capital is added in the top 2 rounds. Barring the moving out any recent picks, I don’t really care how this happens. Obviously I’d love this to be multiple early 1st round picks; but if the org ends up with only an additional 2nd rounder or two, I’m still happy.
- No draft capital is moved to bolster any short term results; I do want GMMG to continue picking through the waiver wire and scrap heap looking for free value - but nothing with an eye towards chasing immediate on ice results.
- By the end of this season / beginning of next season I’d like to have some clarity on what the org aims to do with the Cuda, and namely the coaching staff. McCarthy wasn’t a Grier hire - I want either confirmation McCarthy is meeting Grier’s expectations or I want Grier to bring in a staff of his choosing.

 

[OrrNumber4]

I don't know about that. First of all, it's not like management intentionally went after Granlund, Hoffman and Rutta. Those guys were forced on us to offset Karlsson's cap hit. On the flipside if Zadina or Thrun succeeds management doesn't deserve much credit for that either since those guys specifically chose the Sharks because our lack of talent provided them the best opportunity.

That's fair enough. Grier still chose to expend draft capital on Thrun, and a roster spot on Zadina.

I mostly disagree. Other than seeing some of the heralded prospects demonstrating appropriate development I, personally, don’t need reclamation projects or bargain bin pickups (are these the same thing?) working out over the course of this season to garner positive sentiment of management or the direction they are taking the org.

Reclamation projects and bargain acquisitions are largely a numbers game. If there was certainty about these players they wouldn’t be available cheaply or at all. Yes, it would be great if the org can find some success out of this wave of cheap additions; but should they not hit pay dirt, in totality, I still like the additions and moves made. I like that some interesting players have been added for minimal commitment and money.

Of course, there's never going to be 100% certainty. But can this management team be better than average (if not better than most) at finding arbitrage opportunities? That kind of skill; the ability to find top-end talent at a slightly better rate than everyone else in the late first, or find NHL talent late in the draft, can be a big difference maker. It'll be very interesting to see how Zetterlund and Mukhamadullin pan out, since it seems clear that Grier targeted those players in the Meier trade.

- Additional draft capital is added in the top 2 rounds. Barring the moving out any recent picks, I don’t really care how this happens. Obviously I’d love this to be multiple early 1st round picks; but if the org ends up with only an additional 2nd rounder or two, I’m still happy.

Like with talent evaluation and management, I'd like to get a better picture of how good they are at asset management. Can they maximize the return for anyone they trade out? Can they properly weaponize cap space?

 

[jMoneyBrah]

Of course, there's never going to be 100% certainty. But can this management team be better than average (if not better than most) at finding arbitrage opportunities? That kind of skill; the ability to find top-end talent at a slightly better rate than everyone else in the late first, or find NHL talent late in the draft, can be a big difference maker. It'll be very interesting to see how Zetterlund and Mukhamadullin pan out, since it seems clear that Grier targeted those players in the Meier trade.

While I’m also very interested to see how the front office and scouting department perform with their draft capital - that is fundamentally different than the results of waiver wire pickups and reclamation projects. I feel like you moved the goal posts here, initially saying you need to see these past minor moves payoff this season for it to be a success, then when challenged on the point, are now saying it’s how the well the org squeezes value out of the late first and later rounds that is how the org should be judged.

I largely agree that doing more with with those picks will separate any org from their peers, but that is very different than sifting through waivers and reclamations for free value. Additionally, picks outside of the top couple can’t fairly be judged within a season or two from a GM taking the reins; and really shouldn’t be part of success criteria for the front office for this season. But if we are to make a judgement at this point it seems like Bystedt, Havelid, Musty, and Halttunen seem to show the promise one would want to see.

I feel like for a short term measure of success (this season) what the org is adding via waivers, shrewd trades ala Duclair, or by moving expendable peices at the deadline is much more measurable than the foreseeable NHL viability of 22/23 late round picks.

 

[Le Rosbeef]

Attendances stay above 12,000 average...

Nothing kills the momentum in a rebuild like flocking fans.

 

[spintops]

A high draft pick + prospect(s) looking like future solid core pieces. Don't need Eklund to win the Calder or Smith to be the best college player, but positive strides that make you think they will be impact players on the next good sharks team

 

[Red Light Lover]

All I want to see this year is consistent play up and down the roster. I'd consider this season a success if they pulled that off

 

[Jargon]

I don't know about that. First of all, it's not like management intentionally went after Granlund, Hoffman and Rutta. Those guys were forced on us to offset Karlsson's cap hit. On the flipside if Zadina or Thrun succeeds management doesn't deserve much credit for that either since those guys specifically chose the Sharks because our lack of talent provided them the best opportunity.

Well, I mean, management went after Thrun and Zadina, gotta give them some credit.