Don't usually enjoy articles on Grantland, but I found this one to be pretty interesting. It looks at the average weight of teams In relation to playoff success and shows that ultimately there is no advantage to being a bigger team.
There was one paragraph though that particularly caught my attention.
Consider this to start: Of the 20 largest playoff teams in our study, 14 lost in the first round of the playoffs. The 2002-03 Ottawa Senators were the lone representative among those 20 teams to make it as far as the Conference finals, where they lost to the Devils in seven games. That group includes multiple editions of both the Senators (2002-03, 2003-04, 2005-06, 2007-08) and Sharks (2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2011-12), two teams renowned for their superb performance in the regular season and startlingly poor showings in the postseason.
Notice the 09-10 and 10-11 sharks are both missing from this.
It is, was, and has been all about speed, speed, puck possession, and more speed. The Sharks had the model and the formula in 03/04. Doug Wilson thought we were "too small" and that's why we lost to Calgary. I believe he said we got "beat up" so he abandoned that model and decided we needed to get bigger. We kept abandoning speed for size. 09/10 and 10/11 started to get back to speed but then DW went back to his stupid "bigger is better" mantra...
"I hate books; they only teach us to talk about things we know nothing about."
-Jean Jacques Rousseau