HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   San Jose Sharks (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=43)
-   -   Rumor: Sharks in on Marc-Andre Bergeron sweepstakes (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=846261)

LadyStanley 11-26-2010 10:52 AM

Sharks in on Marc-Andre Bergeron sweepstakes
 
http://spectorshockey.net/2010/11/nh...ember-26-2010/

Spectors Hockey has a number of stories that five teams, including the Sharks, are interested in the services of Bergeron, who's been cleared to play after concussion.

Graveland 11-26-2010 11:01 AM

Hmm, who would sit for him can't imagine a forward with the way the 4th lines playing.

sjshark91 11-26-2010 11:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ulrich Liechtenstein (Post 29181780)
Hmm, who would sit for him can't imagine a forward with the way the 4th lines playing.

He plays defense it's not Patrice it's Marc Andre.

Graveland 11-26-2010 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fire Doug Wilson (Post 29181854)
He plays defense it's not Patrice it's Marc Andre.

That's a stretch

rangerssharks414 11-26-2010 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fire Doug Wilson (Post 29181854)
He plays defense it's not Patrice it's Marc Andre.

He played forward on the 4th line for Montreal last year. He only played "defenseman" on the power play.

Lee Van Cleef* 11-26-2010 11:30 AM

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_dWKvVJhgeB...prised-guy.jpg

Jesus Toews* 11-26-2010 11:56 AM

He's absolutely atrocious defensively. Not worth the power play points. Let some other team gamble on him.

rangerssharks414 11-26-2010 11:57 AM

And don't the Sharks need a defenseman? Bergeron may be listed as a defenseman, but he's nowhere near one.

The Nemesis 11-26-2010 12:14 PM

MA Bergeron is a blueliner, not a defenceman. In his case, the distinction needs to be made.

I know people talk about needing to upgrade the back end, but this really isn't an upgrade, more of a lateral move (any improvements in puck movement are offset by deficiencies in actual defensive play.)

Minicoop831 11-26-2010 12:41 PM

He sure can rip shoots from the point, and we could use someone like him on the pp

We really don't have anyone with a booming shoot from the point

SJeasy 11-26-2010 12:48 PM

In the words of Nancy Reagan, "Just say no".

He did not do well in Montreal or Minnesota despite impressive backchecking from the forward corps. What do we think will happen absent that impressive backcheck? He is not really a PMD either, he is a trigger.

DW shouldn't always be looking for homeruns. He isn't. He has to look for guys who will be incrementally better than those they replace. In this case, he is cutting off the offensive defenders on the farm (Braun, Schaus and even Joslin) who would likely more than make up for their offensive deficiencies relative to Bergeron with better defense relative to Bergeron. This is not an incremental improvement over the alternatives.

ChompChomp 11-26-2010 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rangerssharks414 (Post 29182027)
He played forward on the 4th line for Montreal last year. He only played "defenseman" on the power play.

And he could do the same here. Send McCarthy (who hasn't been all that impressive) and sign MA Bergeron to league minimum. He'll provide offense to the bottom 6 at forward and also play the point on the PP.

Give MA Bergeron 10-12 minutes of ice time at forward per game and of course the top PP unit with Boyle. Of course MA Bergeron would get NO even strength time except in a pinch (a defenseman gets hurt during the game).

That allows Pavelski to either center the second PP unit or play the point for the 2nd PP unit I like the idea of Pavs playing the point on the second PP unit. That adds Pavs shot to the 2nd PP unit which I think could really help considering who mans the blueline now for the 2nd PP unit (Vlasic + Demers [but he's hurt], so Joslin? I'd rather it be Pavelski out there).

Assuming he comes at league minimum (Why would he command much more, if at all anything more?) and we send McCarthy down, why not?

12 forwards: Marleau, Thornton, Heatley, Pavs, Clowe, Couture, Seto, MA Bergeron, Mitchell, McGinn, Mayers, Nichol

6 Defensemen (for now with Demers hurt): Boyle, Murray, Vlasic, Braun, Huskins, Wallin 7: Joslin

PP #1
Marleau-Thornton-Heatley
Boyle-MA Bergeron

PP#2
Seto-Couture-Clowe
Braun/Vlasic-Pavelski

TheNeutral 11-26-2010 01:19 PM

anyone else think this is a sign that demers' injury is significant? the org hasn't said much about it, and csn never showed any replays of it.

rangerssharks414 11-26-2010 01:20 PM

If they do sign Bergeron (which I'm not opposed to), here's what I have assuming everyone is healthy:

F1: Marleau-Thornton-Heatley
F2: Clowe-Couture-Pavelski
F3: McGinn-Mitchell-Setoguchi
F4: Bergeron-Nichol-Mayers

D1: Murray-Boyle
D2: Vlasic-Wallin
D3: Huskins-Demers

PP1: Marleau-Thornton-Heatley-Bergeron-Boyle
PP2: Clowe-Couture-Setoguchi-Pavelski-Demers

If this happened, I'd love to see them finally waive Wallin and keep Joslin up, but that is very unlikely. Even if it doesn't happen, I still want them to waive Wallin once Demers is back.

rangerssharks414 11-26-2010 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by embrace (Post 29184508)
anyone else think this is a sign that demers' injury is significant? the org hasn't said much about it, and csn never showed any replays of it.

Yup, I think it is. I just posted something like this in another thread.

ChompChomp 11-26-2010 01:28 PM

I would personally be intrigued by the possibility of a third line consisting of Bergeron-Mitchell-Seto. Right now McGinn has been unimpressive and is worthy of fourth line ice time.

sjshark91 11-26-2010 01:38 PM

I don't care if he sucks at D or player on the 4th line somewhere. He is a defense men. That's what he plays, if Montreal wants to play him at forward whoopie, I guess Burns isn't a Dman either since he played forward in 04 in the WJC.

SJeasy 11-26-2010 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChompChomp (Post 29184137)
And he could do the same here. Send McCarthy (who hasn't been all that impressive) and sign MA Bergeron to league minimum. He'll provide offense to the bottom 6 at forward and also play the point on the PP.

McCarthy is scoring a lot for limited minutes and IS NOT a defensive liability. You need to recheck your assessment. He was never projected above 4th liner and he did enough to earn promotion to the the third line for a game or two. His offensive instincts are better than Mitchell's and McGinn's.

A lot of us have watched Bergeron and do think his defense is that bad. By going to the 5 dman rotation, you would only be overloading Boyle and Murray even more. Not a recipe for success.

ChompChomp 11-26-2010 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SJeasy (Post 29185029)
McCarthy is scoring a lot for limited minutes and IS NOT a defensive liability. You need to recheck your assessment. He was never projected above 4th liner and he did enough to earn promotion to the the third line for a game or two. His offensive instincts are better than Mitchell's and McGinn's.

A lot of us have watched Bergeron and do think his defense is that bad. By going to the 5 dman rotation, you would only be overloading Boyle and Murray even more. Not a recipe for success.

I'm merely suggesting that you could simultaneously add scoring depth to the bottom 6 forwards and more offense to the PP by adding MA Bergeron to this team.

As to the second paragraph, I agree hence he wouldn't play "defense" here except while on the point for the PP. I never suggested going to a 5 dman rotation, I suggested he'd play forward here except for powerplay time when he'd play the point.

Your comments seem directed to adding him to the top 6 for defense and not to the suggestion that he be a bottom 6 forward and only play D on the point for the PP.

Are you suggesting that Bergeron as a forward cannot crack our top 12 forwards? The media has caught on to the lack of scoring for this team this year, and Bergeron could help both as a bottom 6 forward and on the point for PP.

LadyStanley 11-26-2010 02:22 PM

IMHO the only reason the Sharks are on the list is that they've said they're looking for a D man. Ergo, pundit includes them in list of five.

SJeasy 11-26-2010 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChompChomp (Post 29185896)
I'm merely suggesting that you could simultaneously add scoring depth to the bottom 6 forwards and more offense to the PP by adding MA Bergeron to this team.

As to the second paragraph, I agree hence he wouldn't play "defense" here except while on the point for the PP. I never suggested going to a 5 dman rotation, I suggested he'd play forward here except for powerplay time when he'd play the point.

Your comments seem directed to adding him to the top 6 for defense and not to the suggestion that he be a bottom 6 forward and only play D on the point for the PP.

Are you suggesting that Bergeron as a forward cannot crack our top 12 forwards? The media has caught on to the lack of scoring for this team this year, and Bergeron could help both as a bottom 6 forward and on the point for PP.

By putting him in as a 12th forward and PP specialist you are creating a 5 man rotation by default. Unless you go 7 dmen and make Bergeron the 11th forward. You are not allowed to dress 7 dmen and 12 forwards; the limit is 18 skaters. Going 11/7 means no enforcer (Mayers or McLaren) in the lineup because they certainly aren't dropping Nichol. Besides all that, he wasn't a very effective scorer as a forward.

The issue isn't PP scoring for the Sharks, it is 5on5 which means a PMD. They are in a mini-slump on the PP but their overall PP numbers are very good and probably the only reason that they aren't in the league cellar.

Their are some logical holes in your analysis.

rangerssharks414 11-26-2010 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SJeasy (Post 29186234)
By putting him in as a 12th forward and PP specialist you are creating a 5 man rotation by default. Unless you go 7 dmen and make Bergeron the 11th forward. You are not allowed to dress 7 dmen and 12 forwards; the limit is 18 skaters. Going 11/7 means no enforcer (Mayers or McLaren) in the lineup because they certainly aren't dropping Nichol. Besides all that, he wasn't a very effective scorer as a forward.

The issue isn't PP scoring for the Sharks, it is 5on5 which means a PMD. They are in a mini-slump on the PP but their overall PP numbers are very good and probably the only reason that they aren't in the league cellar.

Their are some logical holes in your analysis.

Bergeron would be the 12th forward, but there could still be six defensemen. He'll just play "defenseman" on the power play.

TheBrokenRib 11-26-2010 02:37 PM

MAB is a simple waste of space. All he would be used for is his shot on the point for our PP. If that's the case, we might as well put Heatley on the point for our PP.

The Nemesis 11-26-2010 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rangerssharks414 (Post 29186605)
Bergeron would be the 12th forward, but there could still be six defensemen. He'll just play "defenseman" on the power play.

Bergeron is not suited for what a normal bottom 6 role requires. Whether you put him into that 3rd/4th line spot or not, you're still essentially sacrificing a useful forward for a guy who may play 3-5 useful minutes a game in specialized situations only. calling him a forward for those purposes is only a cover to be able to say that the team isn't dressing a positionally imbalanced lineup.

SJeasy 11-26-2010 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rangerssharks414 (Post 29186605)
Bergeron would be the 12th forward, but there could still be six defensemen. He'll just play "defenseman" on the power play.

A PP-only specialist isn't a dman. The 6th dman normally gets 14-16min TOI even if he is a specialist. The rest of the dmen spread the minutes. A PP-only specialist will get 4min TOI as a dman max. That will add another 10min TOI to the other 5 dmen. Most teams that have a 6th dman getting under 10min TOI dress 7 dmen.

The hole in logic remains.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:08 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.