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

Does(Has) the core lack(ed) grit?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-23-2013, 04:15 PM
  #101
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnarkAttack View Post
Really the Sharks depth isn't terrible. It's not great, but other teams have worse. The top 6 and defense, both of which should be very good, are more worrisome to me. They just seem to be getting the least out of their players on all fronts.

edit: except the pk.
Statistically, the scoring on the lower lines is pathetic. It has been since JT arrived with the short term exception of Mitchell/Pavelski/Wellwood. That has been shown statistically on more than one site. Bottom ten or worse in the league. Their blueline has barely been better for goals. Sure Boyle scores, but the rest of the crew is subpar. The Sharks have been carried by their top 2 lines for a long time.

For a quick rule of thumb, average for the bottom two lines of any team over a season is 60 goals spread over 6 forwards. For good teams, there is usually one bottom 6er with 20 goals. The Sharks have not been close to this standard since Thornton/Ricci/Cheech. For this season, you can use a 1.6 multiplier for projected goal totals over a season and you can go to TSN for projected goals for all of the individual players.

The above is part of why I don't buy the noise about Sheppard, Galiardi, etc. being OK. A true third liner should be good for 30 pts over 82 games. A true fourth liner should be around 10 to 15.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-23-2013, 07:41 PM
  #102
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,491
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
Statistically, the scoring on the lower lines is pathetic. It has been since JT arrived with the short term exception of Mitchell/Pavelski/Wellwood. That has been shown statistically on more than one site. Bottom ten or worse in the league. Their blueline has barely been better for goals. Sure Boyle scores, but the rest of the crew is subpar. The Sharks have been carried by their top 2 lines for a long time.

For a quick rule of thumb, average for the bottom two lines of any team over a season is 60 goals spread over 6 forwards. For good teams, there is usually one bottom 6er with 20 goals. The Sharks have not been close to this standard since Thornton/Ricci/Cheech. For this season, you can use a 1.6 multiplier for projected goal totals over a season and you can go to TSN for projected goals for all of the individual players.

The above is part of why I don't buy the noise about Sheppard, Galiardi, etc. being OK. A true third liner should be good for 30 pts over 82 games. A true fourth liner should be around 10 to 15.
Though scoring is down league-wide...

OrrNumber4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-23-2013, 08:04 PM
  #103
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 36,555
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
Statistically, the scoring on the lower lines is pathetic. It has been since JT arrived with the short term exception of Mitchell/Pavelski/Wellwood. That has been shown statistically on more than one site. Bottom ten or worse in the league. Their blueline has barely been better for goals. Sure Boyle scores, but the rest of the crew is subpar. The Sharks have been carried by their top 2 lines for a long time.

For a quick rule of thumb, average for the bottom two lines of any team over a season is 60 goals spread over 6 forwards. For good teams, there is usually one bottom 6er with 20 goals. The Sharks have not been close to this standard since Thornton/Ricci/Cheech. For this season, you can use a 1.6 multiplier for projected goal totals over a season and you can go to TSN for projected goals for all of the individual players.

The above is part of why I don't buy the noise about Sheppard, Galiardi, etc. being OK. A true third liner should be good for 30 pts over 82 games. A true fourth liner should be around 10 to 15.
The problem with Sheppard and Galiardi have been they haven't been in the lineup and when they have, they don't get the minutes. Sheppard is among the bottom three of regular forwards in minutes per game. Galiardi gets significantly less time than Handzus and is 11th among forwards in ice time...12th if you include Burns.

The simple reality among the bottom six, especially this year, is that they simply don't get an opportunity to gel and become cohesive enough to anticipate what the linemates will do.

The depth players need the help from the coaches more than anyone on this team. And what helps from that angle is consistency especially if you're not going to put a top producer with them to help it out. You can't expect chemistry to be manufactured like lightning in a bottle. It takes time and they haven't given them that at all. How many times over the course of this season has the bottom six had set lines from one game to the next, let alone finish a week of games the same way? It never does.

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-24-2013, 02:58 PM
  #104
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OrrNumber4 View Post
Though scoring is down league-wide...
Yes, but not that much. The top teams are still on pace for last year's rate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
The problem with Sheppard and Galiardi have been they haven't been in the lineup and when they have, they don't get the minutes. Sheppard is among the bottom three of regular forwards in minutes per game. Galiardi gets significantly less time than Handzus and is 11th among forwards in ice time...12th if you include Burns.

The simple reality among the bottom six, especially this year, is that they simply don't get an opportunity to gel and become cohesive enough to anticipate what the linemates will do.

The depth players need the help from the coaches more than anyone on this team. And what helps from that angle is consistency especially if you're not going to put a top producer with them to help it out. You can't expect chemistry to be manufactured like lightning in a bottle. It takes time and they haven't given them that at all. How many times over the course of this season has the bottom six had set lines from one game to the next, let alone finish a week of games the same way? It never does.
The shuffle is partly at fault, but you can take the rate by minutes to find who rates out as 3rd and who as 4th. Gomez and Wingels are certainly 3rd. Burish and Sheppard 4th. I also agree that part of the problem is how these guys are played. The coach can tell them to freeze the puck in the ozone as a strategy. He can remove their ozone starts and lots of other things that reduce scoring opportunities. Things like very short shifts for the lower lines.

I will say that it looks like TM has pressed the panic button and the TOI for the top 2 lines is starting to rise.

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 12:19 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.