HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > San Jose Sharks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Nick Petrecki on waivers (Cleared)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-11-2013, 12:20 PM
  #201
stalockrox
Registered User
 
stalockrox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,867
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpinTheBlackCircle View Post
FWIW, here is a thread of a HF fan voted mock draft. (again, FWIW)

Had Kopitar at 10th and Seto at 14th

http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...hlight=hensick
Not mock drafts but...
TSN rankings:
http://www.tsn.ca/draftcentre/feature/?id=7006

ISS rankings (NA and European separate)
http://www.nhl.com/ice/page.htm?id=26400

So yes, in the 2005 draft they missed on taking Seto over Kopitar, as did at least 5 other teams. But it could have gone a whole LOT worse...they could've taken Brule, O'Marra, Skille, Lee, Parent (I could keep going).


Last edited by stalockrox: 02-11-2013 at 12:31 PM.
stalockrox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2013, 01:44 PM
  #202
SnarkAttack
Registered Loser
 
SnarkAttack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: N/A
Posts: 819
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stalockrox View Post
Not mock drafts but...
TSN rankings:
http://www.tsn.ca/draftcentre/feature/?id=7006

ISS rankings (NA and European separate)
http://www.nhl.com/ice/page.htm?id=26400

So yes, in the 2005 draft they missed on taking Seto over Kopitar, as did at least 5 other teams. But it could have gone a whole LOT worse...they could've taken Brule, O'Marra, Skille, Lee, Parent (I could keep going).
Also (my quick glance of tsnrankings) the only 4 people the Sharks drafted above projections were Setoguchi, Coyle, Couture, Hertl. These 4 are probably the best ones since 2004. The ones that they drafted at or after their projected positions have all failed so far. Weird.

Edit: I still think Setoguchi was a solid pick. Who knew he would Bernier his way out of favor. He could have been really good.

SnarkAttack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2013, 01:47 PM
  #203
Barrie22
Shark fan in hiding
 
Barrie22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,398
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnarkAttack View Post
Also (my quick glance of tsnrankings) the only 4 people the Sharks drafted above projections were Setoguchi, Coyle, Couture, Hertl. These 4 are probably the best ones since 2004. The ones that they drafted at or after their projected positions have all failed so far. Weird.

Edit: I still think Setoguchi was a solid pick. Who knew he would Bernier his way out of favor. He could have been really good.
couture was actually lower then his placings suggest. before that year in jr's he was projected to go somewhere in the top 3, but fell because of injuries/illness

Barrie22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2013, 01:49 PM
  #204
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Murray, Clowe, and Ehrhoff were 8th, 6th, and 4th round selections respectively. They had no expectations. The thought process should be if the team is able to pull out solid players consistently enough to not call it luck in the later rounds, the formula should be able to work in the first round and make the pick better on the whole of it. They are whiffing every time in the mid-to-late first area. If you call the late round picks something other than pure luck, there has to be some accountability for the first round failures and Burke has one success in the last fifteen years of drafting and that was Scott Hannan out of ten tries from mid-to-late first rounders.
I can understand a longer time to develop for some players. I can't understand the entirety of how the organization handles these selections. The organization obviously doesn't care about their results from this to do anything about it. I don't see any desire to improve this aspect nor hold anyone accountable for it. And that is exactly the attitude that the players take on in one form or another and for the most part, the organization enables that.
Initial response : really not ten tries. After all, discounting Hertl and Coyle is only fair since it is too early to tell.

Hannan in 97 - hit
Cheechoo (would be a first round pick today) in 98 - hit
Jillson (kind of) - bust
Goc - middling-to-hit; certainly his performance outside of SJ would suggest this
Morris - Injury problems; I give Burke a pass here
Bernier - middling
Kaspar - bust
Wishart - bust
Petrecki - bust
Coyle - too early to tell
Hertl - too early to tell

So of the 9 selections (as I have included Cheechoo), he has Hannan and Cheechoo as strong hits, Bernier and Goc as moderate hits, and Jillson, Kaspar, Wishart, and Petrecki as the busts.

Actually, that isn't a very encouraging record. Mostly, because the majority of busts have come in the most recent picks. This points to an organizational ideolgical mistake. I can point out Kaspar (size) and Wishart/Petrecki (defensive defensemen with size are never ideal first-round-picks). Even Bernier is not that great considering he was picked in a very strong draft class...

OrrNumber4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2013, 01:54 PM
  #205
Saskatoon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Saskatoon
Country: Canada
Posts: 678
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mafoofoo View Post
To be fair PF no one could have known Seto wouldve turned into such a woman crazy machine fueled by alcohol and fun.
Ask the people that he went to highschool with....

Mind you not all the uncommon for CHL kids in Canada at the time. Seto was at the tail end of the generation that could party as much as they wanted and still be good hockey players (in the CHL). Pretty quickly afterwards the youth leagues filled more with hard working guys who train harder than the party. Its much harder to be good at the sport without 100% dedication these days than 10 years ago. There are some who don't put the effort in and still succeed. But these guys often flame out at some point (ala Seto).

Saskatoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2013, 02:02 PM
  #206
SnarkAttack
Registered Loser
 
SnarkAttack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: N/A
Posts: 819
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barrie22 View Post
couture was actually lower then his placings suggest. before that year in jr's he was projected to go somewhere in the top 3, but fell because of injuries/illness
The previous year, but they drafted in the year after that where his stock had fallen. Was the fall justified? Obviously not, but he was still considered a bit of a reach by some.

SnarkAttack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2013, 02:07 PM
  #207
WTFetus
Moderator
Most popular combo
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 12,141
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by superroyain10 View Post
Hannan in 97 - hit
Cheechoo (would be a first round pick today) in 98 - hit
Not getting involved in the overall argument, but as much as I love Cheechoo, he would not be a first round pick today. He wasn't a first-round pick back then, and speed is much more important now.

WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2013, 02:13 PM
  #208
ChubbChubby
My life is a gym
 
ChubbChubby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 3,077
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
Not getting involved in the overall argument, but as much as I love Cheechoo, he would not be a first round pick today. He wasn't a first-round pick back then, and speed is much more important now.
I agree. His speed was a huge issue when he was drafted, and it would be even more concerning in today's NHL. He might be drafted in a later round as a project, but no way does he get picked in the first round.

ChubbChubby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2013, 02:19 PM
  #209
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
Not getting involved in the overall argument, but as much as I love Cheechoo, he would not be a first round pick today. He wasn't a first-round pick back then, and speed is much more important now.
Not the point I was making.

Cheechoo was drafted 29th overall, a 2nd round pick in his day, but a first-round pick today. Wasn't that clear from the overall point of the post?

OrrNumber4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2013, 02:23 PM
  #210
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,934
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by superroyain10 View Post
Not the point I was making.

Cheechoo was drafted 29th overall, a 2nd round pick in his day, but a first-round pick today. Wasn't that clear from the overall point of the post?
But again, you are looking historically, which in my mind is fairly irrelevant. The Sharks made mistakes in the past, there is no debating that, the point is they have learned from them and have gotten better and better since. At this point they are one of the best drafting teams in the league, they have to be because they never have high picks.

hockeyball is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2013, 02:26 PM
  #211
one2gamble
Registered User
 
one2gamble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 5,972
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
But again, you are looking historically, which in my mind is fairly irrelevant. The Sharks made mistakes in the past, there is no debating that, the point is they have learned from them and have gotten better and better since. At this point they are one of the best drafting teams in the league, they have to be because they never have high picks.
what are yo claiming to be recent? Their only success in the first round is couture and he was a top 10 pick.

I dont expect superstars in the second round but they should have some better forwards than they do.

one2gamble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2013, 02:40 PM
  #212
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,934
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by one2gamble View Post
what are yo claiming to be recent? Their only success in the first round is couture and he was a top 10 pick.

I dont expect superstars in the second round but they should have some better forwards than they do.
Coyle for one is looking like a good pick, though it is early to tell. Hertl looks to be pretty similar. Either way with our limited knowledge they seem like good picks.

I only consider the last 5 years to be relevant, and even then as long as they show improvement over that time it is a good sign. I'd love to see someone put together a list of teams icing players picked below the 2nd round or not at all, I would be the Sharks are pretty high on that list. Right now we are icing:

Clowe
Pavelski
Wingels
Desjardins
Murray
Demers
Braun
Greiss

that is 8 players out of 23 that are 'home grown' AND picked beyond the 2nd round. To me that says the Sharks are pretty good at finding talent where others have failed.

Also, of our top prospects:
Sateri
Stalock
Stalberg
Hamilton
Oleksuk
Kuraly
Tennyson
Abeltshauser

are all 2nd round or undrafted players. There are quite a few more. Plus you could include Nieto in this general discussion as well. Not NHl ready of course but looks like a solid 2nd round pick so far.

hockeyball is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2013, 02:45 PM
  #213
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by superroyain10 View Post
Initial response : really not ten tries. After all, discounting Hertl and Coyle is only fair since it is too early to tell.

Hannan in 97 - hit
Cheechoo (would be a first round pick today) in 98 - hit
Jillson (kind of) - bust
Goc - middling-to-hit; certainly his performance outside of SJ would suggest this
Morris - Injury problems; I give Burke a pass here
Bernier - middling
Kaspar - bust
Wishart - bust
Petrecki - bust
Coyle - too early to tell
Hertl - too early to tell

So of the 9 selections (as I have included Cheechoo), he has Hannan and Cheechoo as strong hits, Bernier and Goc as moderate hits, and Jillson, Kaspar, Wishart, and Petrecki as the busts.

Actually, that isn't a very encouraging record. Mostly, because the majority of busts have come in the most recent picks. This points to an organizational ideolgical mistake. I can point out Kaspar (size) and Wishart/Petrecki (defensive defensemen with size are never ideal first-round-picks). Even Bernier is not that great considering he was picked in a very strong draft class...
Quibble on Bernier. He would rate out as a 4th liner (not a reserve) which is below the average on a converted pick for that part of the draft. Jillson rates out as a reserve, a bust. Goc is almost exactly average for that part of the draft for a converted pick. Hannan would rate out as a #3 although he had a short stint as a #2 dman, #4 is average for a converted dman. So Hannan was an absolute win. Pickles is sitting on the #2/#3 fence also. Cheech rates out as a second liner, another win. I used 3 years of best production to get the ratings to eliminate one-year wonders.

I agree on it being way too soon on Hertl and Coyle. Coyle is a good chance to get a shoulda/coulda because Etem was the very next pick. A couple more years for that shoulda/coulda. Mitera was a good shoulda/coulda for Wishart, second pick after. In both cases, similar players and good for org comparisions. On Wishart/Mitera, it is double bust.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
But again, you are looking historically, which in my mind is fairly irrelevant. The Sharks made mistakes in the past, there is no debating that, the point is they have learned from them and have gotten better and better since. At this point they are one of the best drafting teams in the league, they have to be because they never have high picks.
Not even close to the best. They may lack picks, but they are losing ground in quantity. In the study I did from 91-03, they made out on quantity as nearly top rated (top 3) but were a bit behind on
quality (Detroit #1 by a mile). When I say quality, that is level of skill per converted pick. Quantity was just the total number of picks converted. I also analyzed by weighting pick position and number of picks and total skill selected. The Sharks were between 5 and 10, but that included 3 guys who became starting goalies. See above about evaluating. I agree with Sry10 that it is way too soon on Hertl and Coyle.


Last edited by SJeasy: 02-11-2013 at 02:53 PM.
SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2013, 02:54 PM
  #214
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,537
vCash: 500
A final issue. I don't have the link but someone did a draft study using CSB rankings. A team picked from pure CSB rankings with the actual picks that the team had would fail.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2013, 02:59 PM
  #215
WTFetus
Moderator
Most popular combo
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 12,141
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by superroyain10 View Post
Wasn't that clear from the overall point of the post?
Not at all.

WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2013, 03:04 PM
  #216
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
Not at all.
So I am clearly talking about Burke's effectiveness in drafting players in the mid-to-late first round.

If I brought up Cheechoo as an example of a player who would be a first-round-pick in hindsight, why wouldn't I bring up players like Carle, Vlasic, etc; all these players would probably be top-15 picks in hindsight.

No, I instead brought up Cheechoo because he was drafted 29th overall; that would be a late-first today.

OrrNumber4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2013, 03:06 PM
  #217
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by one2gamble View Post
what are yo claiming to be recent? Their only success in the first round is couture and he was a top 10 pick.

I dont expect superstars in the second round but they should have some better forwards than they do.
They haven't had a Clowe/Cheechoo/Pavelski pick in quite a while. That is the problem along with their inability to find or develop speed.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2013, 03:08 PM
  #218
210
Registered User
 
210's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Worcester, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 9,790
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
A final issue. I don't have the link but someone did a draft study using CSB rankings. A team picked from pure CSB rankings with the actual picks that the team had would fail.
I'd love to see that.

210 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2013, 03:20 PM
  #219
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 210 View Post
I'd love to see that.
It was way back around 05 that I found it. No longer on my computer.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2013, 05:22 PM
  #220
Patty Ice
Best in the World
 
Patty Ice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: OxNard
Country: Northern Ireland
Posts: 10,281
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Patty Ice Send a message via MSN to Patty Ice
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
Not at all.
Maybe not for someone looking for something to nitpick and disagree with.

It seemed abundantly clear to me.

__________________
Patty Ice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2013, 10:55 PM
  #221
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 34,140
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by superroyain10 View Post
Initial response : really not ten tries. After all, discounting Hertl and Coyle is only fair since it is too early to tell.

Hannan in 97 - hit
Cheechoo (would be a first round pick today) in 98 - hit
Jillson (kind of) - bust
Goc - middling-to-hit; certainly his performance outside of SJ would suggest this
Morris - Injury problems; I give Burke a pass here
Bernier - middling
Kaspar - bust
Wishart - bust
Petrecki - bust
Coyle - too early to tell
Hertl - too early to tell

So of the 9 selections (as I have included Cheechoo), he has Hannan and Cheechoo as strong hits, Bernier and Goc as moderate hits, and Jillson, Kaspar, Wishart, and Petrecki as the busts.

Actually, that isn't a very encouraging record. Mostly, because the majority of busts have come in the most recent picks. This points to an organizational ideolgical mistake. I can point out Kaspar (size) and Wishart/Petrecki (defensive defensemen with size are never ideal first-round-picks). Even Bernier is not that great considering he was picked in a very strong draft class...
Cheechoo does not count as a hit for a mid-to-late first because he was a 2nd round pick. The reason why you can't make the argument that he would be a first round pick and a hit for the Sharks is because if he was a 1st round pick, it wasn't going to be the Sharks picking him. He simply doesn't count.

Goc is a miss for the expectations of this particular area. First round picks that convert should be top six forwards or top four d-men. Otherwise, your expectation levels of these picks are too low. Goc is a bust in this regard but he had a lot more promise than most gave him credit for and the Joe Thornton trade essentially killed that hope.

Morris was an injury-riddled player even before the Sharks picked him but they took that chance and it burned them. There's no pass for that to me.

Bernier is a 4th liner. A failure for his expectations which was a top line power forward at his best and more realistically a 2nd line power forward like Clowe but that was a bust.

As for Coyle, it is too early to tell on the whole of it but from the Sharks' perspective, it's a waste as he is gone now. His bust or boom status is not one you can credit the Sharks for anymore because they aren't developing him.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2013, 11:20 PM
  #222
WTFetus
Moderator
Most popular combo
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 12,141
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
As for Coyle, it is too early to tell on the whole of it but from the Sharks' perspective, it's a waste as he is gone now. His bust or boom status is not one you can credit the Sharks for anymore because they aren't developing him.
Doesn't that destroy Vaasa's points? Say the Sharks drafted Suter instead of Michalek, we can't say Suter would end up the exact same player that he is today since the Sharks would be developing him. Nashville is great at developing defensemen, the Sharks at the time, not so much.

WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2013, 11:26 PM
  #223
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,934
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
Quibble on Bernier. He would rate out as a 4th liner (not a reserve) which is below the average on a converted pick for that part of the draft. Jillson rates out as a reserve, a bust. Goc is almost exactly average for that part of the draft for a converted pick. Hannan would rate out as a #3 although he had a short stint as a #2 dman, #4 is average for a converted dman. So Hannan was an absolute win. Pickles is sitting on the #2/#3 fence also. Cheech rates out as a second liner, another win. I used 3 years of best production to get the ratings to eliminate one-year wonders.

I agree on it being way too soon on Hertl and Coyle. Coyle is a good chance to get a shoulda/coulda because Etem was the very next pick. A couple more years for that shoulda/coulda. Mitera was a good shoulda/coulda for Wishart, second pick after. In both cases, similar players and good for org comparisions. On Wishart/Mitera, it is double bust.


Not even close to the best. They may lack picks, but they are losing ground in quantity. In the study I did from 91-03, they made out on quantity as nearly top rated (top 3) but were a bit behind on
quality (Detroit #1 by a mile). When I say quality, that is level of skill per converted pick. Quantity was just the total number of picks converted. I also analyzed by weighting pick position and number of picks and total skill selected. The Sharks were between 5 and 10, but that included 3 guys who became starting goalies. See above about evaluating. I agree with Sry10 that it is way too soon on Hertl and Coyle.
91-03 is meaingless in the context of my posts, which I have repeated and repeated. They are getting better, and that is all that matters to me, where they are now, not in 03.

hockeyball is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2013, 11:28 PM
  #224
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 34,140
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
Doesn't that destroy Vaasa's points? Say the Sharks drafted Suter instead of Michalek, we can't say Suter would end up the exact same player that he is today since the Sharks would be developing him. Nashville is great at developing defensemen, the Sharks at the time, not so much.
Well, I have agreed with Vaasa in terms of philosophy with draft selections but I don't necessarily agree with the logic of using other team's picks later as a point of evidence of poor drafting. Either your pick pans out or it doesn't and some combination of picking poorly or developing poorly is the reason why. Suter doesn't become the same player with us as he was Nashville. There are an infinite number of variables that change by changing teams that it's just silly, to me at least, to assume a guy is the same regardless of who drafts him.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-11-2013, 11:29 PM
  #225
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 34,140
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
91-03 is meaingless in the context of my posts, which I have repeated and repeated. They are getting better, and that is all that matters to me, where they are now, not in 03.
How are they getting better?

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:17 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.