HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > San Jose Sharks
Notices

Clowe and/or Murray to the Caps

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-26-2012, 02:16 PM
  #26
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,305
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
I don't think the org had any problem with Brad Stuart, they simply wanted Joe Thornton and that was the cost.
Why was he being shopped? The original DW proposal was Stuart for Samsonov.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2012, 02:24 PM
  #27
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,586
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
Why was he being shopped? The original DW proposal was Stuart for Samsonov.
No offense Easy, I think you are reaching a bit.

I'm not saying it's a done deal, i'm saying it's likely at least a 50/50 chance. If Stuart specifically wants to come here, the Sharks are going to listen (for the right deal). If they make the deal, someone's on the way out as we simply don't have room for everyone. Murray is the safest bet, especially with his declining play.

hockeyball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2012, 02:29 PM
  #28
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,171
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
Why was he being shopped? The original DW proposal was Stuart for Samsonov.
To be fair he was 24 or 25 then. I don't know about you but I was a pretty different person when I was 25. I turn 30 this year. I also think he probably had a bit of an epiphany about how he sees himself and the game probably around the latter part of 2006/2007.

WantonAbandon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2012, 02:44 PM
  #29
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 31,933
vCash: 2283
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fistfullofbeer View Post
If I was offered anything less than a 1st or a top-6 Winger for Clowe, I would just walk.
Personally, I wouldn't mind moving Clowe for multiple futures rather than focusing on maxing out his value on one asset. If the team can get a 2nd, a prospect, and a 7th or something like that, this organization should definitely consider it. The Sharks will need to replenish their pool and it wouldn't hurt to move Clowe to get someone in that plays quicker.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tkachuk4MVP View Post
You're probably right about Murray, but I definitely think Clowe could bring back a 1st depending on the team. After one bad year everyone forgets that he's coming off off a 60+ point season, and that he was one of our most important players in the playoffs last year. When you look at the returns not only for Gaustad but for guys like Moore and AK47, and add in the fact that Clowe has a lot of those "intangible" qualities that teams love, it's not that crazy of an idea.
I'm sure Clowe could bring in a 1st in the 20's. The problem is that the Sharks have historically bitten the big one when it comes to drafting there so unless they plan to take that pick, package it with theirs, and move into the top ten, they should probably look into a package of futures rather than just the one. Clowe is still very valuable but I think the team needs to play faster in their top six and Clowe is the least versatile of the six. He's tough and can hang on to pucks with the best of them but he doesn't score goals, he doesn't play defense or kill penalties, and he hasn't done too much in the way of play-making this year. This isn't the first time he's had struggles in this way either. When he's good, he is good and generally for the year but when he's bad he is bad for a long time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by WantonAbandon View Post
Its either that or he is signed by the Sucks.
I don't think the Ducks will go after him either. They already have Visnovsky, Beauchemin, Sbisa, Lydman, and Fowler. They only really need a 3rd pairing guy and there's no need for them to spend 3 mil to get Stuart.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
Why was he being shopped? The original DW proposal was Stuart for Samsonov.
That was also seven years ago, Easy. Stuart isn't the same guy he was then. He's much more defensively focused and physical whereas with the Sharks, he was more offensively-inclined and inconsistent in his own zone. If Stuart comes at a similar rate to Murray, who is worse than Stuart, then you have to make that move. It's a chance to snag a useful player in free agent and gain a future asset or two by trading Murray. That's not something they can pass up based on minor issues from seven years ago.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2012, 02:58 PM
  #30
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,305
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post

That was also seven years ago, Easy. Stuart isn't the same guy he was then. He's much more defensively focused and physical whereas with the Sharks, he was more offensively-inclined and inconsistent in his own zone. If Stuart comes at a similar rate to Murray, who is worse than Stuart, then you have to make that move. It's a chance to snag a useful player in free agent and gain a future asset or two by trading Murray. That's not something they can pass up based on minor issues from seven years ago.
Last post on the issue. It wasn't minor. He may have changed, but very doubtful. IMO, the original departure was not entirely his play and the non-hockey issue wasn't minor in DW's eyes. IMO, TM would have to certify a sea change in Stuart to get DW's attention.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2012, 03:10 PM
  #31
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 31,933
vCash: 2283
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
Last post on the issue. It wasn't minor. He may have changed, but very doubtful. IMO, the original departure was not entirely his play and the non-hockey issue wasn't minor in DW's eyes. IMO, TM would have to certify a sea change in Stuart to get DW's attention.
Well, you'll have to inform me on what the issue was because I never heard of any. Besides that, I would doubt that McLellan has much information on whether this mystery issue is still around since he only coached him as a rental through the 2008 playoff run.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2012, 03:39 PM
  #32
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,171
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=



I don't think the Ducks will go after him either. They already have Visnovsky, Beauchemin, Sbisa, Lydman, and Fowler. They only really need a 3rd pairing guy and there's no need for them to spend 3 mil to get Stuart.



[/QUOTE]

They need some more forwards. Selane won't be able to go forever neither will Blake. So you sign Stuart and package_________. I think they pretty much have made their point with Fowler. Its time to sign him to an affordable extension and drop him in depth. Staurt would allow them to do this. Beauchamen needs a lot of help on that blue line.


Last edited by WantonAbandon: 03-26-2012 at 03:45 PM.
WantonAbandon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2012, 03:43 PM
  #33
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,171
vCash: 500
My final say on the subject of Staurt is: If McLellan is the coach next year and he wants Staurt. Staurt will be in teal.

WantonAbandon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2012, 03:46 PM
  #34
magic school bus
***********
 
magic school bus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: San Jose, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 14,682
vCash: 1965
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
I don't think the org had any problem with Brad Stuart, they simply wanted Joe Thornton and that was the cost.
This is also what I think.

magic school bus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2012, 04:00 PM
  #35
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 31,933
vCash: 2283
Quote:
Originally Posted by WantonAbandon View Post
They need some more forwards. Selane won't be able to go forever neither will Blake. So you sign Stuart and package_________. I think they pretty much have made their point with Fowler. Its time to sign him to an affordable extension and drop him in depth. Staurt would allow them to do this. Beauchamen needs a lot of help on that blue line.
Doesn't make much sense when you can just sign those replacement forwards without having to trade someone you don't need to. Plus, how does Stuart allow them to drop Fowler in depth? If Fowler drops, it's to the second pairing. Stuart is not a top pairing d-man in any way, shape, or form. Defensive ability on the blue line isn't really an issue they need to address. Beauchemin and Lydman do just fine. They'll need a top guy that is a two-way d-man and they're not likely to find that. They will have to develop it out of Fowler most likely.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2012, 04:11 PM
  #36
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,171
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Doesn't make much sense when you can just sign those replacement forwards without having to trade someone you don't need to. Plus, how does Stuart allow them to drop Fowler in depth? If Fowler drops, it's to the second pairing. Stuart is not a top pairing d-man in any way, shape, or form. Defensive ability on the blue line isn't really an issue they need to address. Beauchemin and Lydman do just fine. They'll need a top guy that is a two-way d-man and they're not likely to find that. They will have to develop it out of Fowler most likely.
Within the next three years they will likely need have acquired or developed in some fashion an entirely new second line or three top six forwards. They do have good forward prospects and maybe they will all be ready and playing to their potential but that would be pretty optimistic.

Plus their blue line straight up sucks. As unideal as you think Staurt is for top competition Fowler is much worse.

In short signing Stuart will help solidify their blue line or at least "harden" it and may give them an option to trade for a stop gap forward while they are waiting for some of their prospects to develop.

WantonAbandon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2012, 05:02 PM
  #37
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 26,324
vCash: 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by WantonAbandon View Post
Within the next three years they will likely need have acquired or developed in some fashion an entirely new second line or three top six forwards. They do have good forward prospects and maybe they will all be ready and playing to their potential but that would be pretty optimistic.

Plus their blue line straight up sucks. As unideal as you think Staurt is for top competition Fowler is much worse.

In short signing Stuart will help solidify their blue line or at least "harden" it and may give them an option to trade for a stop gap forward while they are waiting for some of their prospects to develop.
Actually, Fowler has come a long way defensively. He and Beauchemin have been quite good.

TheJuxtaposer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2012, 05:20 PM
  #38
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,171
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
Actually, Fowler has come a long way defensively. He and Beauchemin have been quite good.
Ummmm... Its best not to completely ignore regular stats... In the last two years he is what... negative 50. He -25 this year. He is currently facing the second toughest competition, although Boucheman is carrying quite the heavy load at number one.

Oh and his offensive numbers a way down this year too.

Give the kid a role he can actually succeed in.

WantonAbandon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2012, 07:05 PM
  #39
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 31,933
vCash: 2283
Quote:
Originally Posted by WantonAbandon View Post
Within the next three years they will likely need have acquired or developed in some fashion an entirely new second line or three top six forwards. They do have good forward prospects and maybe they will all be ready and playing to their potential but that would be pretty optimistic.

Plus their blue line straight up sucks. As unideal as you think Staurt is for top competition Fowler is much worse.

In short signing Stuart will help solidify their blue line or at least "harden" it and may give them an option to trade for a stop gap forward while they are waiting for some of their prospects to develop.
And like I said, about the forwards, they can go out and sign people for that. There will be plenty of second line level talent available in free agency.

As for Fowler, he's playing in top pairing minutes and top pairing situations. Brad Stuart is not going to alleviate that...at all. Lydman has done well in the second pairing role as a defensive d-man. There is really no need for the Ducks to trade him to bring in Stuart. Even if you wanted to make the swap, Lydman is not going to get a top six forward in return unless they take a leap on someone having a poor year or years.

Brad Stuart doesn't give the Ducks anything they don't already have in Lydman.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2012, 07:08 PM
  #40
Brent Burns
TROTZTROTZTROTZTROTZ
 
Brent Burns's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Coming in hot
Posts: 6,557
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
Why was he being shopped? The original DW proposal was Stuart for Samsonov.
Really? I thought it was Marleau for Samsonov

Brent Burns is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2012, 08:33 PM
  #41
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,171
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
And like I said, about the forwards, they can go out and sign people for that. There will be plenty of second line level talent available in free agency.

As for Fowler, he's playing in top pairing minutes and top pairing situations. Brad Stuart is not going to alleviate that...at all. Lydman has done well in the second pairing role as a defensive d-man. There is really no need for the Ducks to trade him to bring in Stuart. Even if you wanted to make the swap, Lydman is not going to get a top six forward in return unless they take a leap on someone having a poor year or years.

Brad Stuart doesn't give the Ducks anything they don't already have in Lydman.
Their blue line is awful and Fowler isn't suited for the competition he is being put up against. Staurt is much more suited. If Stuart can hold the line with a -10 it would be a vast improvement.

Fowler on the other had. Reduce his minutes a tad and make sure he has a minimum of 55 percent offensive zone starts and he should be ok.


Last edited by WantonAbandon: 03-26-2012 at 08:41 PM.
WantonAbandon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2012, 08:40 PM
  #42
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 31,933
vCash: 2283
Quote:
Originally Posted by WantonAbandon View Post
Their blue line is awful and Fowler isn't suited for the competition he is being put up against. Staurt is much more suited.
Brad Stuart is in no way suited for top pairing competition. Even if he was, Beauchemin is the one playing the defensive role of that particular situation. Stuart is not going to be a top pairing two-way d-man for the Ducks...no way, no how.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2012, 08:43 PM
  #43
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,171
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Brad Stuart is in no way suited for top pairing competition. Even if he was, Beauchemin is the one playing the defensive role of that particular situation. Stuart is not going to be a top pairing two-way d-man for the Ducks...no way, no how.
First of all he is more two way then anyone the Ducks have at the moment. And yes it would be a vast improvement. He would be put against the toughest comp.

WantonAbandon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2012, 09:55 PM
  #44
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 31,933
vCash: 2283
Quote:
Originally Posted by WantonAbandon View Post
First of all he is more two way then anyone the Ducks have at the moment. And yes it would be a vast improvement. He would be put against the toughest comp.
lol based on what? Stuart's 20 point seasons or less since 2007-08? The fact that Stuart hasn't played against top competition in any of that time since? Give me a break. Beauchemin is better in every way and Lydman is his equal.

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 07:37 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.