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

Should Thornton be traded?

View Poll Results: Should Joe Thornton be traded?
Yes 27 20.77%
No 86 66.15%
Not sure 17 13.08%
Voters: 130. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-26-2013, 12:49 AM
  #126
Phu
Registered User
 
Phu's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 7,206
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
It's not that he can't adjust his style of play or type of role on the team, it's that he won't take a lesser role on the team, I would be willing to be. He's a superstar, what do you think would happen if the coaches came up to him and said, 'Joe, we're going to cut your ice time to help develop this kid we just drafted first overall'?
What in the history of Joe Thornton leads you to believe he is unwilling to reduce his role for what is seen as a benefit to the team?

Phu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 12:53 AM
  #127
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 26,967
vCash: 1379
Quote:
Originally Posted by juantimer View Post
What in the history of Joe Thornton leads you to believe he is unwilling to reduce his role for what is seen as a benefit to the team?
It wouldn't be to benefit the team, that's what I'm telling you. He's a 33 year old superstar without a Cup. Do you think he wants to 1) sit through a rebuild here and hope he can win a Cup on the other side, assuming it works out and 2) relinquish his role, minutes, importance, etc. to a bunch of rookies?

You keep telling me that I have no evidence that he wouldn't be okay with that, but I can't imagine anyone in his scenario, who's used to being the big man on top, sitting through that.

Players don't like when you cut their minutes. Superstars like it less.

TheJuxtaposer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 12:55 AM
  #128
SnarkAttack
Registered Loser
 
SnarkAttack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: N/A
Posts: 819
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
It's not that he can't adjust his style of play or type of role on the team, it's that he won't take a lesser role on the team, I would be willing to be. He's a superstar, what do you think would happen if the coaches came up to him and said, 'Joe, we're going to cut your ice time to help develop this kid we just drafted first overall'?
Maybe not, but that would only happen if he was older and would have to learn to understand that he's slowing down. 1st line minutes to second line minutes are very similar, so enough time would be made to accommodate both players. Anyway, who better to shelter a budding superstar than a great player ahead of him? He turned from a Sedin type to a great 2-way player when it was asked of him, so what reason do we have to believe that he's not flexible.

I'd think his only problem would be being saddled with a noncompetitive team during a rebuild. If they decided to rebuild I'd keep Joe around unless DW (or whoever) asked him, "Joe, do want to join us in a rebuild, or go to a contender?" and he replies negatively. If that happens, his time as a Shark is over.

Until then I'd put him with Couture and any RW with a good one timer, trade away Boyle, Clowe, Murray, Handzus,and Burish (if anyone is willing) for whatever we can get and maybe Pavelski, Havlat, and Niemi. Only Niemi because he's at peak value right now, and if we're rebuilding I don't think he's necessary long term. Marleau, I'm on the fence about, and I think we could get a great return for him, but I wouldn't trade Thornton without getting something AMAZING in return.

And sorry, tired and didn't proofread, so this may make no sense.

SnarkAttack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 12:59 AM
  #129
Mafoofoo
:facepalm:
 
Mafoofoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 13,250
vCash: 500
Clearly Thornton wouldn't like reduced minutes but Patty M for some reason would have no problem. lol

Mafoofoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 01:05 AM
  #130
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 26,967
vCash: 1379
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mafoofoo View Post
Clearly Thornton wouldn't like reduced minutes but Patty M for some reason would have no problem. lol
Thornton's "The Guy", he's always been "The Guy". Marleau's never been "The Guy" and doesn't want to be.

TheJuxtaposer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 01:05 AM
  #131
Phu
Registered User
 
Phu's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 7,206
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
It wouldn't be to benefit the team, that's what I'm telling you. He's a 33 year old superstar without a Cup. Do you think he wants to 1) sit through a rebuild here and hope he can win a Cup on the other side, assuming it works out and 2) relinquish his role, minutes, importance, etc. to a bunch of rookies?

You keep telling me that I have no evidence that he wouldn't be okay with that, but I can't imagine anyone in his scenario, who's used to being the big man on top, sitting through that.

Players don't like when you cut their minutes. Superstars like it less.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding this. You think the team should at some point deliberately make poor roster decisions to ensure poor performance for some reason? Maybe I don't really understand what the idea of a rebuild is. Given the young talent on our roster now, we would have to deliberately shoot ourselves in the foot to make a terrible team incapable of competing for a long period of time.

Phu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 01:09 AM
  #132
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 34,141
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by juantimer View Post
Maybe I'm misunderstanding this. You think the team should at some point deliberately make poor roster decisions to ensure poor performance for some reason? Maybe I don't really understand what the idea of a rebuild is. Given the young talent on our roster now, we would have to deliberately shoot ourselves in the foot to make a terrible team incapable of competing for a long period of time.
It's a hypothetical of how Thornton would react to a rebuild both in terms of whether he'd want to move on and how he'd be an influence to the team if he tried to stick it out.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 01:11 AM
  #133
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 26,967
vCash: 1379
Quote:
Originally Posted by juantimer View Post
Maybe I'm misunderstanding this. You think the team should at some point deliberately make poor roster decisions to ensure poor performance for some reason? Maybe I don't really understand what the idea of a rebuild is. Given the young talent on our roster now, we would have to deliberately shoot ourselves in the foot to make a terrible team incapable of competing for a long period of time.
The young talent? Couture, Burns (who can't stay healthy), and Vlasic (who can't make an outlet pass to save his life) is the extent of the young talent.

I think that when you're in a rebuild, you make certain decisions. You go for the moral victories instead of the points. You go for learning situations instead of winning situations. The first year of the tanks is maximizing the value of your tradable assets. From then on, it's developing the young kids, but giving them butter soft minutes, slowing transitioning them to harder minutes, sitting them, riding them, doing whatever it takes to turn them into the most productive players they can be. And you have to be dedicated to them, or you've messed up your team for nothing.

It's an incredibly different style of management and coaching than we're used to, because we've constantly been contenders, doing everything in our power to win.

But you have to go young player-first, Joe Thornton-second, in order for a rebuild to work, and I don't think that would end well. Mostly because the coaches have too much respect for Joe, and a decent amount of fear of him, to do that.

TheJuxtaposer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 01:13 AM
  #134
Mafoofoo
:facepalm:
 
Mafoofoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 13,250
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
Thornton's "The Guy", he's always been "The Guy". Marleau's never been "The Guy" and doesn't want to be.

Exactly. So I say we trade the gutless loser whos too scurrd to try to carry the team and would rather "let Joe save me". Makes sense to me. Maybe that'd help change the culture of the team too. More guys like Joe less guys like PM. I mean I sure wouldn't want my high 1rst rounders learning it's ok to not wanna be the guy from Patty.

Mafoofoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 01:15 AM
  #135
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 26,967
vCash: 1379
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mafoofoo View Post
Exactly. So I say we trade the gutless loser whos too scurrd to try to carry the team and would rather "let Joe save me". Makes sense to me. Maybe that'd help change the culture of the team too. More guys like Joe less guys like PM. I mean I sure wouldn't want my high 1rst rounders learning it's ok to not wanna be the guy from Patty.
I'm going to put you on my ignore list some day, I swear.

TheJuxtaposer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 01:16 AM
  #136
Mafoofoo
:facepalm:
 
Mafoofoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 13,250
vCash: 500
You love me too much to do such a thing.

Mafoofoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 01:17 AM
  #137
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 TheJuxtaposer View Post
Thornton's "The Guy", he's always been "The Guy". Marleau's never been "The Guy" and doesn't want to be.
Thornton's "The Guy" because he's the best player on the team. Even if the Sharks drafted a guy like Taylor Hall, Thornton would still be the best player on the team for the first few seasons. Not to mention it'd be a bad idea to rush a guy into tough minutes right away (should mold him like Couture, sheltering him for the first few seasons).
When that "Taylor Hall" gets better, he could take over then and be the new "The Guy". By that time, Thornton would have declined enough and I doubt he'd mind not being the top-gun. No player in the league would think they are the best when they obviously aren't.

WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 01:19 AM
  #138
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 34,141
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
Thornton's "The Guy" because he's the best player on the team. Even if the Sharks drafted a guy like Taylor Hall, Thornton would still be the best player on the team for the first few seasons. Not to mention it'd be a bad idea to rush a guy into tough minutes right away (should mold him like Couture, sheltering him for the first few seasons).
When that "Taylor Hall" gets better, he could take over then and be the new "The Guy". By that time, Thornton would have declined enough and I doubt he'd mind not being the top-gun. No player in the league would think they are the best when they obviously aren't.
The problem is that it's not always obvious to everyone...especially athletes.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 01:19 AM
  #139
Phu
Registered User
 
Phu's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 7,206
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
The young talent? Couture, Burns (who can't stay healthy), and Vlasic (who can't make an outlet pass to save his life) is the extent of the young talent.

I think that when you're in a rebuild, you make certain decisions. You go for the moral victories instead of the points. You go for learning situations instead of winning situations. The first year of the tanks is maximizing the value of your tradable assets. From then on, it's developing the young kids, but giving them butter soft minutes, slowing transitioning them to harder minutes, sitting them, riding them, doing whatever it takes to turn them into the most productive players they can be. And you have to be dedicated to them, or you've messed up your team for nothing.

It's an incredibly different style of management and coaching than we're used to, because we've constantly been contenders, doing everything in our power to win.

But you have to go young player-first, Joe Thornton-second, in order for a rebuild to work, and I don't think that would end well. Mostly because the coaches have too much respect for Joe, and a decent amount of fear of him, to do that.
But then this team would have a functional Joe Thornton on it? I'm sorry but this just sounds like managerial incompetence, if someone even considered squandering an asset like the San Jose Sharks like this they should not find themselves anywhere near the reins of a business this large.

No team has done this that I know of, taken a previously strong team and intentionally screwed it up. Rebuilds usually follow the leavings or retirements of significant portions of talent, or following years of poor results, followed by management turnover. But even then some of the most valuable assets are kept.

In other words, the reasons we are a strong team right now are the same reasons why we are a poor candidate for a blow-it-up style rebuild. The other side of the coin is that Thornton could be a very important part of a partial rebuild/reload. Maybe he can't clobber the best in the league anymore, but he can clobber most anyone else.


Last edited by Phu: 02-26-2013 at 01:28 AM.
Phu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 01:32 AM
  #140
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
Thornton's "The Guy" because he's the best player on the team. Even if the Sharks drafted a guy like Taylor Hall, Thornton would still be the best player on the team for the first few seasons. Not to mention it'd be a bad idea to rush a guy into tough minutes right away (should mold him like Couture, sheltering him for the first few seasons).
When that "Taylor Hall" gets better, he could take over then and be the new "The Guy". By that time, Thornton would have declined enough and I doubt he'd mind not being the top-gun. No player in the league would think they are the best when they obviously aren't.
Understand that the odds are slim that a Taylor Hall-like player (which we would have to t-aaaaaank to get) can even have the impact that Thornton has.

OrrNumber4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 01:40 AM
  #141
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
Understand that the odds are slim that a Taylor Hall-like player (which we would have to t-aaaaaank to get) can even have the impact that Thornton has.
Yeah. Unless the Sharks super-tank and get someone like McDavid, but that's 3 drafts away and the point still stands.

WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 01:40 AM
  #142
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 26,967
vCash: 1379
Easy has been over it with you all time after time. Championship teams win with home-grown high-end forwards.

Kopitar and Brown led the Kings in scoring.

Krejci and Bergeron led the Bruins in scoring.

Toews and Kane led the Hawks in scoring.

Malkin and Crosby led the Penguins in scoring.

Zetterberg and Datsyk led the Wings in scoring.

Getzlaf and Perry led the Ducks in scoring.

Eric Staal and Cory Stillman led the Hurricanes in scoring.

Literally every team that has won the Cup between the last two lockouts, their top two scorers (and more than often top-3) have been home-grown, the only exception being Stillman, and that Canes team was a weird team.

We have Marleau/Couture/Pavelski/Clowe as our top home-grown Sharks forwards. Are any of them in the league of any of those duos, with exception to the Bruins who one because of Thomas, and of course Stillman? The answer is no, and another trend? They're all young, with the exception of Datsyuk and Zetterberg. Marleau isn't Datsyuk or '08 Zetterberg, and Couture isn't Malkin/Crosby/Kopitar/Getzlaf/Staal/Toews/even Bergeron.

Suffice to say, this group isn't working.

And how do you get these young elite home-grown forwards? Draft them. With exception to the Detroit (special exception) and Boston (won because of Thomas) examples and this ****ing Stillman character, all of those forwards were drafted in the first round. Toews, Kane, Malkin, Crosby, Kopitar, Brown, Getzlaf, Perry, Staal.

Moreover, all those forwards were either great scouting, or top-3 picks. Since we aren't a great first-round scouting organization, there's one solution remaining. As long as those forwards don't have to go through Sommer, we're good.

We need to do that, since our current group isn't doing it.

TheJuxtaposer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 01:45 AM
  #143
Phu
Registered User
 
Phu's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 7,206
vCash: 500
Kopitar and Brown would not have even been on a Cup team if not for some rather important free-agent acquisitions.

And I'll put Marleau and Couture up there with any homegrown duo for scoring, regular season OR playoffs. If we win the Cup with this group one or both of those guys will be among the top scorers for the team.

Man I know we're down on our team but to not put Marleau, Couture and Pavelski among those players you've listed is delusional.

And Crosby and Malkin aren't exactly your typical "homegrown talent".

Phu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 01:47 AM
  #144
SnarkAttack
Registered Loser
 
SnarkAttack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: N/A
Posts: 819
vCash: 500
Why does this even matter? You know that if the Sharks tanked they would draft a big defenseman or a safe 2 way center from the 67s with flaws in his skating

Besides top 5 draft pick history recap:
Fat Balloon, Mike Rathje, Andrei Zyuzin, Patrick Marleau, Brad Stuart

Tanking does not ensure you get a future great. Marleau is far and away the best player on that list. As good as Marleau is, he never was, and never will be that top player to build around for a successful team. Scouting is better these days, but it's still far from a sure thing.

SnarkAttack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 01:54 AM
  #145
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 26,967
vCash: 1379
Quote:
Originally Posted by juantimer View Post
Kopitar and Brown would not have even been on a Cup team if not for some rather important free-agent acquisitions.
I assume you mean Carter and Richards, who were not free agents? They were decent, but not nearly on Kopitar and Brown's level.

Quote:
Originally Posted by juantimer View Post
And I'll put Marleau and Couture up there with any homegrown duo for scoring, regular season OR playoffs. If we win the Cup with this group one or both of those guys will be among the top scorers for the team.

Man I know we're down on our team but to not put Marleau, Couture and Pavelski among those players you've listed is delusional.
Not among the top scorers, far and away the leading scorers. That's what Krejci and Bergeron were, Kopitar and Brown were, Malkin and Crosby were, Toews and Kane were, Datsyuk and Zetterberg were, Staal was. I would not put Marleau and Couture on the level of any of those duos save the Bruins one, and like I said, Chara and Thomas were more important. The one their closest to besides those two is Kopitar and Brown, although Kopitar is on another level than Marleau, Couture, and Brown, an Quick was giving Vezina goaltending.

None of you listen to Easy, do you? He gives you trends, you continue to insist on going at it another way. Strength down the middle (as in three good centers who actually play center), Norris caliber defenseman (top-3), Vezina goaltending (top-3). We have none of those right now.

TheJuxtaposer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 01:56 AM
  #146
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 26,967
vCash: 1379
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnarkAttack View Post
Why does this even matter? You know that if the Sharks tanked they would draft a big defenseman or a safe 2 way center from the 67s with flaws in his skating

Besides top 5 draft pick history recap:
Fat Balloon, Mike Rathje, Andrei Zyuzin, Patrick Marleau, Brad Stuart

Tanking does not ensure you get a future great. Marleau is far and away the best player on that list. As good as Marleau is, he never was, and never will be that top player to build around for a successful team. Scouting is better these days, but it's still far from a sure thing.
Drafting has improved a LOT since those days. Besides, we should have had Lindros and Lecavalier too, ****ing league, ****ing org.

Reminds me, add Richards/Lecavalier/St. Louis to my list of home-grown scoring leaders.

And also, the more we kid about the safe two-way center from the 67's with skating issues, the more I laugh because Sean Monahan is that player to a T.

TheJuxtaposer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 02:04 AM
  #147
SnarkAttack
Registered Loser
 
SnarkAttack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: N/A
Posts: 819
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
Easy has been over it with you all time after time. Championship teams win with home-grown high-end forwards.

Kopitar and Brown led the Kings in scoring. Right place, right time team

Krejci and Bergeron led the Bruins in scoring. Chara/Thomas

Toews and Kane led the Hawks in scoring. Take those 2 away and they still were a REALLY good team, not championship, but good

Malkin and Crosby led the Penguins in scoring. If we could tank and be assured to get these 2 I'd have no problem, but...

Zetterberg and Datsyk led the Wings in scoring. Great team, these players don't support tanking theory based on draft position

Getzlaf and Perry led the Ducks in scoring. Pronger, Selanne, Nieds, and that 3rd line was crazy good

Eric Staal and Cory Stillman led the Hurricanes in scoring. Still wondering how they won, and how Cam Ward was so good for a month

Literally every team that has won the Cup between the last two lockouts, their top two scorers (and more than often top-3) have been home-grown, the only exception being Stillman, and that Canes team was a weird team.

We have Marleau/Couture/Pavelski/Clowe as our top home-grown Sharks forwards. Are any of them in the league of any of those duos, with exception to the Bruins who one because of Thomas, and of course Stillman? The answer is no, and another trend? They're all young, with the exception of Datsyuk and Zetterberg. Marleau isn't Datsyuk or '08 Zetterberg, and Couture isn't Malkin/Crosby/Kopitar/Getzlaf/Staal/Toews/even Bergeron.

Suffice to say, this group isn't working.

And how do you get these young elite home-grown forwards? Draft them. With exception to the Detroit (special exception) and Boston (won because of Thomas) examples and this ****ing Stillman character, all of those forwards were drafted in the first round. Toews, Kane, Malkin, Crosby, Kopitar, Brown, Getzlaf, Perry, Staal.

Moreover, all those forwards were either great scouting, or top-3 picks. Since we aren't a great first-round scouting organization, there's one solution remaining. As long as those forwards don't have to go through Sommer, we're good.

We need to do that, since our current group isn't doing it.
All true, but I'm not going to waste the time going over every team with multiple good homegrown players and/or lots of top 5 picks that doesn't work for. In addition I can name great non-homegrown players on every one of those teams as well.

Obviously getting great young forwards is a must, but I'm not sure I'm willing to trade Thornton for only the chance of that happening. If he's ok with it I'd rather build around him, and send our other vets packing for picks and prospects.

SnarkAttack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 02:05 AM
  #148
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 TheJuxtaposer View Post
None of you listen to Easy, do you? He gives you trends, you continue to insist on going at it another way. Strength down the middle (as in three good centers who actually play center), Norris caliber defenseman (top-3), Vezina goaltending (top-3). We have none of those right now.
Easy is also fine with keeping Thornton if he takes a lesser role in the future (3rd line C and PP specialist).

I think this was a great post by another poster that some people missed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by joseph_kerr View Post
As much as I complain about Joe I think I'd actually still be against it unless he requests himself. I don't care for that atmosphere of looking at these guys as nothing more than assets and wanting to pimp them out on the corner for a couple of picks and a shiny new prospect.

As far as I know Joe was blindsided by Boston being sent here but he didn't whine about it, didn't sulk, didn't use it as an excuse to have a bad year. He put his head down and became the first player in the NHL to lead the league in points in a season where he was traded. Always respected that. He brought in some nice hardware on his own as well as bringing in a Rocket for Cheech.

I admire the loyalty of Detroit, they've had some bad moments but they are pretty isolated and for the most part they seem to be pretty good at letting their guys that made an impact go out on their own terms no matter how much people complain and scream about what a waste of a roster spot Draper is or Maltby or Holmstrom.

I'd much rather have that kind of reputation for the Sharks than a leaf like attitude of hating a guy like Sundin for having the nerve of wanting to finish his career in the same sweater instead of not only being whored out but then expected to come limping back in in the morning for another go around so they can trade him out for even more picks the next year.

WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 02:05 AM
  #149
Phu
Registered User
 
Phu's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 7,206
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
I assume you mean Carter and Richards, who were not free agents? They were decent, but not nearly on Kopitar and Brown's level.
You are right, that should just be "acquisitions." Point remains. It's like you haven't been watching us play these guys for years and years. They are good players, but no better than what we have. You take Thornton over Kopitar 10/10 times.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
Not among the top scorers, far and away the leading scorers. That's what Krejci and Bergeron were, Kopitar and Brown were, Malkin and Crosby were, Toews and Kane were, Datsyuk and Zetterberg were, Staal was. I would not put Marleau and Couture on the level of any of those duos save the Bruins one, and like I said, Chara and Thomas were more important. The one their closest to besides those two is Kopitar and Brown, although Kopitar is on another level than Marleau, Couture, and Brown, an Quick was giving Vezina goaltending.
With the exception of Malkin and Crosby, these guys just happened to catch fire for their runs. Year to year and even in other runs they have not been any more special than our guys. Our guys are as capable of catching fire as anyone else, but have arguably better baseline talent levels than many of those guys. We are not lacking in talent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
None of you listen to Easy, do you? He gives you trends, you continue to insist on going at it another way. Strength down the middle (as in three good centers who actually play center), Norris caliber defenseman (top-3), Vezina goaltending (top-3). We have none of those right now.
There weren't any norris caliber defensemen on the Kings. Who was the good 3rd line center on the kings?

Phu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2013, 02:08 AM
  #150
SnarkAttack
Registered Loser
 
SnarkAttack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: N/A
Posts: 819
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
Drafting has improved a LOT since those days. Besides, we should have had Lindros and Lecavalier too, ****ing league, ****ing org.

Reminds me, add Richards/Lecavalier/St. Louis to my list of home-grown scoring leaders.

And also, the more we kid about the safe two-way center from the 67's with skating issues, the more I laugh because Sean Monahan is that player to a T.
True If we do tank, I'd stay away from the 2nd line safe picks and just go high upside.

SnarkAttack 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 03:38 PM.

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.