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

5/2: Ownership gives DW vote of confidence

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-03-2012, 05:47 PM
  #76
USF Shark
Zôion politikòn
 
USF Shark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: DC Area
Country: United States
Posts: 20,559
vCash: 500
keep it about hockey...not baseball...

__________________
"I hate books; they only teach us to talk about things we know nothing about."
-Jean Jacques Rousseau
USF Shark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 05:48 PM
  #77
TealTownUSA
Registered User
 
TealTownUSA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: 415
Country: United States
Posts: 1,106
vCash: 500
relax, we're comparing ownership groups and GMs

TealTownUSA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2012, 09:31 AM
  #78
Stickmata
Registered User
 
Stickmata's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,489
vCash: 500
Coaches are staying, some players are going. One more try. Then, no Cup, the front office and coaching staff is swept out. And if the Sharks start out slow, the changes will come during the season. DW/TMac will be given about 30 games to prove they can still put a competitive team on the ice.

The only way I see the coaches going now is if the 'emotion' that's being referred to is largely finger pointing at the coaching staff and it's pervasive across the player group. If that's the case, TM's gone now. We'll know soon enough.

Stickmata is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2012, 10:12 AM
  #79
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,743
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stickmata View Post
Coaches are staying, some players are going. One more try. Then, no Cup, the front office and coaching staff is swept out. And if the Sharks start out slow, the changes will come during the season. DW/TMac will be given about 30 games to prove they can still put a competitive team on the ice.

The only way I see the coaches going now is if the 'emotion' that's being referred to is largely finger pointing at the coaching staff and it's pervasive across the player group. If that's the case, TM's gone now. We'll know soon enough.
If the entire coaching staff is staying the Sharks should trade anyone they can for picks because this team is absolutely DOOMED.

hockeyball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2012, 10:45 AM
  #80
Fistfullofbeer
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Fistfullofbeer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Whidbey Island, WA
Country: India
Posts: 8,051
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
If the entire coaching staff is staying the Sharks should trade anyone they can for picks because this team is absolutely DOOMED.
This.

Might as well get a year head start on the 'rebuild'.

__________________
What?! Look, he thinks he's people!
Fistfullofbeer is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2012, 10:49 AM
  #81
8oh5shark
Registered User
 
8oh5shark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Ventura,CA
Posts: 21
vCash: 500
DW's priorities shifted from getting this franchise over the hump, to trying to keep it afloat with the "elite".

8oh5shark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2012, 11:24 AM
  #82
sjshrky27
Registered User
 
sjshrky27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: CA
Country: United States
Posts: 3,640
vCash: 500
Wow. Whats up with the "were doomed" BS???

Blowing up this team is completly irrelevant now.

There is simply no reason to do such a thing when the Sharks are 3-5 trades/FA's from being serious SC contenders again

Sometimes people on these boards amaze me...

sjshrky27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2012, 11:38 AM
  #83
Led Zappa
Tomorrow Today!
 
Led Zappa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Country: Scotland
Posts: 33,339
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjshrky27 View Post
Wow. Whats up with the "were doomed" BS???

Blowing up this team is completly irrelevant now.

There is simply no reason to do such a thing when the Sharks are 3-5 trades/FA's from being serious SC contenders again

Sometimes people on these boards amaze me...
I remember this board laughing at LA when Sutter was hired. LA would never be able to score now they chuckled and snorted.

__________________

Youth Movement! Tally Ho...
Led Zappa is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2012, 11:52 AM
  #84
justinboo*
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 298
vCash: 500
in all honesty. the team could use a break from the playoffs. id rather trade away JT and marleau n start off new like the LA kings. at least the future would look promising and exciting. the window with this core is gone and its goin to be sad if it takes the organization another 1-2 years to realize it.

justinboo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2012, 11:53 AM
  #85
one2gamble
Registered User
 
one2gamble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 5,951
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by justinboo View Post
in all honesty. the team could use a break from the playoffs. id rather trade away JT and marleau n start off new like the LA kings. at least the future would look promising and exciting. the window with this core is gone and its goin to be sad if it takes the organization another 1-2 years to realize it.
They got a break this year......

one2gamble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2012, 12:05 PM
  #86
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,743
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjshrky27 View Post
Wow. Whats up with the "were doomed" BS???

Blowing up this team is completly irrelevant now.

There is simply no reason to do such a thing when the Sharks are 3-5 trades/FA's from being serious SC contenders again

Sometimes people on these boards amaze me...
The best roster in hockey is not going to win you a cup with poor coaching. Even if you want McLellan to stay, you can't possibly think the assistants should, or this team has any hope of success with the current coaching staff as is. They won ONE game in the playoffs, ONE, that is completely inexcuseable. Even if you think we don't have a cup worthy roster you are going to have a pretty tough time convincing me we have a 'can only win 1 game in the playoffs' roster.

This is a better team than we saw this season, and in the playoffs. They tried to play a terrible system, with terrible strategy, and if you don't fix that you might as well start a rebuild.

hockeyball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2012, 01:14 PM
  #87
19sharks19
Registered User
 
19sharks19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: T.O. to S.J. & back
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,876
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by one2gamble View Post
They got a break this year......
So true. Added, a couple big trades, added size and strength and most importantly, Quick simply getting better and better.

19sharks19 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2012, 01:15 PM
  #88
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 26,469
vCash: 1004
Quote:
Originally Posted by justinboo View Post
in all honesty. the team could use a break from the playoffs. id rather trade away JT and marleau n start off new like the LA kings. at least the future would look promising and exciting. the window with this core is gone and its goin to be sad if it takes the organization another 1-2 years to realize it.
Yeah, tank 'til you get to pick a Drew Doughty 2nd overall. That's gonna happen.

TheJuxtaposer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2012, 01:26 PM
  #89
Stickmata
Registered User
 
Stickmata's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,489
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjshrky27 View Post
Wow. Whats up with the "were doomed" BS???

Blowing up this team is completly irrelevant now.

There is simply no reason to do such a thing when the Sharks are 3-5 trades/FA's from being serious SC contenders again

Sometimes people on these boards amaze me...
If by 3-5trades/FA's you mean if we added Nash, Malkin, Stamkos, Weber and Quick, we'd be serious SC contenders again, I'm with you. If you mean 3-5 trades/FA's that we can realistically make given our assets/salary cap issues, I'd like some of whatever you're smoking. This team is nowhere close to being a SC contender with just some tweaking, even if Jesus floated down from heaven to coach the team.

Stickmata is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2012, 01:28 PM
  #90
HOOCH2173
That HOOCH is Crazy!
 
HOOCH2173's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Fullerton
Country: United States
Posts: 4,437
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stickmata View Post
If by 3-5trades/FA's you mean if we added Nash, Malkin, Stamkos, Weber and Quick, we'd be serious SC contenders again, I'm with you. If you mean 3-5 trades/FA's that we can realistically make given our assets/salary cap issues, I'd like some of whatever you're smoking. This team is nowhere close to being a SC contender with just some tweaking, even if Jesus floated down from heaven to coach the team.
wholy crap! now there's a pipe dream that would never happen.

HOOCH2173 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2012, 01:32 PM
  #91
Stickmata
Registered User
 
Stickmata's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,489
vCash: 500
The situation we're in right now in relation to the coaching/GM is eerily familiar to what went on at the end of the Sutter/Lombardi era. I really think if TMac is back, he'll have no more than 30 games to prove that he can return the Sharks to the top in the West.

Stickmata is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2012, 01:33 PM
  #92
Stickmata
Registered User
 
Stickmata's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,489
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HOOCH2173 View Post
wholy crap! now there's a pipe dream that would never happen.
So you got my sarcasm or no?

Stickmata is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2012, 01:56 PM
  #93
HOOCH2173
That HOOCH is Crazy!
 
HOOCH2173's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Fullerton
Country: United States
Posts: 4,437
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stickmata View Post
So you got my sarcasm or no?
of course i did! hence my pipe dream comment.

HOOCH2173 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2012, 02:09 PM
  #94
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stickmata View Post
If by 3-5trades/FA's you mean if we added Nash, Malkin, Stamkos, Weber and Quick, we'd be serious SC contenders again, I'm with you. If you mean 3-5 trades/FA's that we can realistically make given our assets/salary cap issues, I'd like some of whatever you're smoking. This team is nowhere close to being a SC contender with just some tweaking, even if Jesus floated down from heaven to coach the team.
And it wouldn't happen the first year, too much turnover. Adapt system to players, etc. I agree with your general principle as turnarounds such as suggested are very rare. The largest odds for the Sharks next year are a very marginal bubble team, barring a miracle or catastrophe. The team assuredly lost ground this year vs a number of opponents.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2012, 02:30 PM
  #95
lsx
Registered User
 
lsx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 2,972
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
The best roster in hockey is not going to win you a cup with poor coaching. Even if you want McLellan to stay, you can't possibly think the assistants should, or this team has any hope of success with the current coaching staff as is. They won ONE game in the playoffs, ONE, that is completely inexcuseable. Even if you think we don't have a cup worthy roster you are going to have a pretty tough time convincing me we have a 'can only win 1 game in the playoffs' roster.

This is a better team than we saw this season, and in the playoffs. They tried to play a terrible system, with terrible strategy, and if you don't fix that you might as well start a rebuild.

This.

lsx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2012, 03:47 PM
  #96
210
Registered User
 
210's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Worcester, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 9,591
vCash: 500
I'm laughing at the "fire the assistants" idea...it's kind of silly to think that's the answer.

210 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2012, 04:01 PM
  #97
sjshrky27
Registered User
 
sjshrky27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: CA
Country: United States
Posts: 3,640
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
The best roster in hockey is not going to win you a cup with poor coaching. Even if you want McLellan to stay, you can't possibly think the assistants should, or this team has any hope of success with the current coaching staff as is. They won ONE game in the playoffs, ONE, that is completely inexcuseable. Even if you think we don't have a cup worthy roster you are going to have a pretty tough time convincing me we have a 'can only win 1 game in the playoffs' roster.

This is a better team than we saw this season, and in the playoffs. They tried to play a terrible system, with terrible strategy, and if you don't fix that you might as well start a rebuild.
I agree with you, but it brings up this question:

Does enyone remember TMacs first season with the Sharks? And how awesome the Sharks looked?? Did they (the coaching staff) change the "system" this season, or do the current/newer players just not adopt to it?

sjshrky27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2012, 04:15 PM
  #98
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,448
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stickmata View Post
The situation we're in right now in relation to the coaching/GM is eerily familiar to what went on at the end of the Sutter/Lombardi era. I really think if TMac is back, he'll have no more than 30 games to prove that he can return the Sharks to the top in the West.
There are some similarities. Freaky.

Thornton = Damphousse
Marleau = Nolan
Pavelski = Ricci
Couture = Marleau
Heatley/Havlat = Selanne
Clowe = Thornton
Mcginn/Galliardi = Sturm (Mcginn would have been better)
Winnik = Sundstrom
Handzus = Graves (though Graves was more acceptable)

Boyle = Suter (though Suter retired)
Burns = Stuart (age difference, but same "new to the team feeling")
Murray = Marchment
Vlasic = Hannan
White = Rathje (despite tenure difference)
Ragnarsson = Demers (can't repeat what he did years ago)
Jillson = Braun

Heck, even Nabby - Kipper -Toskala is like Niemi -Niitty-Greiss

This year's team is clearly more talented, especially in D....but otherwise...

OrrNumber4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2012, 04:17 PM
  #99
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,448
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjshrky27 View Post
I agree with you, but it brings up this question:

Does enyone remember TMacs first season with the Sharks? And how awesome the Sharks looked?? Did they (the coaching staff) change the "system" this season, or do the current/newer players just not adopt to it?
They started off incredibly strong, and then finished very weakly with the first-round exit.

Perhaps those pointing at the motivation of the team have a point. The Sharks used to be a very, very disciplined team in the strictest sense; that seems to have gotten away from them.

OrrNumber4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-04-2012, 04:18 PM
  #100
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sjshrky27 View Post
I agree with you, but it brings up this question:

Does enyone remember TMacs first season with the Sharks? And how awesome the Sharks looked?? Did they (the coaching staff) change the "system" this season, or do the current/newer players just not adopt to it?
Pretty obvious that they had a PK that was basically run by the players in the first year.

They put the PP on steroids in the first year. PPs are a little mercurial, but it was a definite uptick. The other uptick was third period adjustments. I assumed it was Woodcroft and his video work.

Changes were made after the early exit to the Ducks (IMO, premature adjustment to shortcomings as it was a bad team and coaching matchup).

It was pretty obvious they would get a general uptick no matter the new coach as anyone could see that they had tuned out RW in the previous year.

There are a lot of coaches who wear out their welcome. Contrary to the perceptions of many, a lot of coaches tread lightly when new to a team. Just a heads up, both Hitch and Sutter started their new jobs by emphasizing a bit more offense and encouraging players despite their reputations. Then they start instituting their systems. A large number become more conservative as their tenure extends and holes in the system or play manifest themselves. Even though it is a system or a matchup issue, they take it out on the players and begin to wear out their welcome.

SJeasy 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 10:53 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.