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

Things you've asked for that you were wrong about?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-05-2014, 02:47 PM
  #51
ThorNton Apologist
Jumbo needs a cup
 
ThorNton Apologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Cali
Posts: 1,144
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
The only way the Chara thing would've been true is if his demand to be the captain of the team were accurate and I don't remember that ever being confirmed. That aside, the only person that wouldn't have been signed for Boston if Thornton was still there would have been Marc Savard, imo. I think they would've won when they did with Thornton, Chara, and Thomas but we'll never know obviously.
That's why the argument that Boston wouldn't have won with Thornton is invalid. Most Bruins fans I talk to say they wouldn't have had the $ and room with Joe but like you said the casualty could have been Savard or anyone for that matter not neccissarily Chara. Things would have been totally different for both teams. But like I said I still think Thornton can lead this team to the cup. He has been our best player in the playoffs over the last 3-5 years.

ThorNton Apologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-05-2014, 02:54 PM
  #52
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 32,157
vCash: 2283
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThorNton Apologist View Post
That's why the argument that Boston wouldn't have won with Thornton is invalid. Most Bruins fans I talk to say they wouldn't have had the $ and room with Joe but like you said the casualty could have been Savard or anyone for that matter not neccissarily Chara. Things would have been totally different for both teams. But like I said I still think Thornton can lead this team to the cup. He has been our best player in the playoffs over the last 3-5 years.
The cap dollars argument has always been bogus. Thornton was making 6.6. Savard made 5. There were many different ways for them to make up the 1.6 million dollar difference that would've had a negligible impact on the quality of the team.

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2014, 12:49 AM
  #53
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,346
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThorNton Apologist View Post
That's why the argument that Boston wouldn't have won with Thornton is invalid. Most Bruins fans I talk to say they wouldn't have had the $ and room with Joe but like you said the casualty could have been Savard or anyone for that matter not neccissarily Chara. Things would have been totally different for both teams. But like I said I still think Thornton can lead this team to the cup. He has been our best player in the playoffs over the last 3-5 years.
He is the worst +/- player of the top 50 scorers in the playoffs in the last decade. I don't buy the playoff performer argument. He also has the biggest playoff scoring dropoff of the Sharks top scorers. That is NOT clutch. The dropoff in scoring puts him among the lowest 10% of top guys for scoring dropoff. That's not good. Part of the problem is the perception of his skills and their meaning for the team. Changing that perception might have done wonders for his results. Don't look at him as THE guy and go contruct a team with that in mind; it probably would have had a significant impact on his playoff history.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2014, 05:08 AM
  #54
Bizz06
#FireDougWilson
 
Bizz06's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: San Jose
Posts: 2,688
vCash: 50
>using plus/minus in any argument ever

Bizz06 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2014, 11:38 AM
  #55
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,429
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
He is the worst +/- player of the top 50 scorers in the playoffs in the last decade. I don't buy the playoff performer argument. He also has the biggest playoff scoring dropoff of the Sharks top scorers. That is NOT clutch. The dropoff in scoring puts him among the lowest 10% of top guys for scoring dropoff. That's not good. Part of the problem is the perception of his skills and their meaning for the team. Changing that perception might have done wonders for his results. Don't look at him as THE guy and go contruct a team with that in mind; it probably would have had a significant impact on his playoff history.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bizz06 View Post
>using plus/minus in any argument ever
Let us not ignore what our eyes tell us...Thornton is a different player come playoff time, especially against the better teams.

Bizz06...Thornton literally has one of the worst +/-s of any player in the playoffs. If you take a list of 300 active NHL players with the most NHL playoff games to their names, JT has the worst +/- out of them all. Literally. He is literally all by himself at position 300.

OrrNumber4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-07-2014, 09:55 PM
  #56
Bizz06
#FireDougWilson
 
Bizz06's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: San Jose
Posts: 2,688
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by OrrNumber4 View Post
Let us not ignore what our eyes tell us...Thornton is a different player come playoff time, especially against the better teams.

Bizz06...Thornton literally has one of the worst +/-s of any player in the playoffs. If you take a list of 300 active NHL players with the most NHL playoff games to their names, JT has the worst +/- out of them all. Literally. He is literally all by himself at position 300.
http://www.arcticicehockey.com/2014/...stic-in-hockey

Bizz06 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2014, 12:11 AM
  #57
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 32,157
vCash: 2283
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bizz06 View Post
+/- can have its uses if it is put in its proper context which doesn't happen often when talking hockey. In Thornton's case, he's either getting dominated in the head-to-head setup or one of the unluckiest players ever.

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2014, 12:47 AM
  #58
Bleedred
BLOW JETS BLOW!
 
Bleedred's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Seminole Florida
Country: United States
Posts: 33,413
vCash: 500
I thought Steve Bernier was a good first round pick in 2003.

Fast forward to 2014 where he continuously tortures me with his presence on the Devils. Not even every team in the league has a player as bad as him. I ****ing hate the waste of space junk!

Wish to trade him to Florida for an autographed Luongo jersey and Dave Bolland's future seat in the press box.

Bleedred is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2014, 12:00 PM
  #59
ThorNton Apologist
Jumbo needs a cup
 
ThorNton Apologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Cali
Posts: 1,144
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bizz06 View Post
>using plus/minus in any argument ever
Yeah, I don't put any thought into Thornton's playoff +/-

The point % drop off from regular season is known but that doesn't mean that he hasn't been the best shark in the playoffs over the past 3-5 seasons. Does it mean he is better in the regular season? Sure it does. But that's because he has been arguably the best regular season player since entering the league.
Obviously his playoffs point total will not compare to his regular seasons because very few players match the regular season performance of Thornton.

ThorNton Apologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2014, 12:09 PM
  #60
bigwillie
Registered User
 
bigwillie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Country: United States
Posts: 5,900
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to bigwillie
So I am currently bored at work and was perusing some old threads, when I found this gem, where I said I would happily trade Hertl and a conditional first for Vanek: http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...php?p=70122119

I stated that everyone was high on Hertl not because he was good, but because the rest of our prospect pool was that bad.

That is the most wrong I've ever been about anything ever. Everyone please make fun of me.

bigwillie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2014, 02:21 PM
  #61
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 26,388
vCash: 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigwillie View Post
So I am currently bored at work and was perusing some old threads, when I found this gem, where I said I would happily trade Hertl and a conditional first for Vanek: http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...php?p=70122119

I stated that everyone was high on Hertl not because he was good, but because the rest of our prospect pool was that bad.

That is the most wrong I've ever been about anything ever. Everyone please make fun of me.
That whole thread is pretty golden.

TheJuxtaposer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2014, 02:54 PM
  #62
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,346
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThorNton Apologist View Post
Yeah, I don't put any thought into Thornton's playoff +/-

The point % drop off from regular season is known but that doesn't mean that he hasn't been the best shark in the playoffs over the past 3-5 seasons. Does it mean he is better in the regular season? Sure it does. But that's because he has been arguably the best regular season player since entering the league.
Obviously his playoffs point total will not compare to his regular seasons because very few players match the regular season performance of Thornton.
You have to look at the details in the dropoff. Overall, playoff scoring drops 5%, top line players hover around 10%. Mostly it is about a 25% drop in PP's awarded. Some of the dropoff is mitigated by lower line players stepping up. However, the teams that win have players in JT's class that don't drop production.

Also, there was the year that Pavs dwarfed JT's production with an outstanding series versus Colorado and easily beat him for the entire playoffs. And Pavs is on JT's team, just wasn't on his line.

Scoring:
JT .99 points/game reg season, .76 points/game playoffs
Marleau .75 points/game reg season, .70 points/game playoffs
Pavelski .74 points/game reg season, .69 points/game playoffs
Couture .74 points/game reg season, .64 points/game playoffs

If you don't find a problem with JT in the above, I don't know what to say. That isn't an aberration that is a career full of playoffs. JT performance would be acceptable at a production rate of .91 or .90.

Leading playoff scorers for the Sharks
13-14
Marleau
12-13
Pavelski
11-12
JT
10-11
JT
09-10
Pavelski

JT has the led the Sharks in playoff scoring 2 out of the last 5 years. So has Joe Pavelski. And when JT led, it was by a point or two. Pavelski was dominant in 09-10. JT is not leading the team in the playoffs in the same way he has dominated reg season scoring and even the foundation of reg season has become shaky as Pavelski won that as well this past year. Marleau even took the reg season leadership for points one year.

The numbers say that your hyperbole is just that and not backed by facts. JT is a very good hockey player with some very large holes in his game. I am not on the bandwagon to get rid of him for his play, but I am sick of the way unsurpassed leadership and superiority is attributed to his act. No one has the same praise for Martin St. Louis, yet he has more hardware for reg season performance than JT as well as a cup ring.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2014, 03:15 PM
  #63
Led Zappa
Tomorrow Today!
 
Led Zappa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Country: Scotland
Posts: 32,988
vCash: 500
Of course, once again you use no context. Only numbers. What if JT's wings are broken during the PO's. Or maybe one of those years he's severely injured. Does that have any meaning. Of course it does. It just doesn't support you argument, so you leave it out.

__________________

Youth Movement Tally Ho...
Led Zappa is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2014, 03:33 PM
  #64
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 32,157
vCash: 2283
It's too bad things aren't simple when it comes to building a team for the Cup. There are some glaring issues with Thornton as an individual. I think we can all see that to some extent. He's not the only reason nor the biggest reason why they haven't won a Cup. It is my feeling that other than one season, they've never had a good enough blue line to win it all. There are years, especially the first three, where the forward depth wasn't there either. The goaltending they've had has never been great. They've had average to good goaltending but never great. There have been a lot of little things that have been missing over the years with these teams that get overlooked because they're not viewed as critical areas. But the fact of the matter is that if you want to win a Cup, you have to have all your ducks in a row to take your best shots because even if you do have them, you ain't guaranteed **** because injuries will screw you over like it did in 2009.

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2014, 03:57 PM
  #65
hohosaregood
Drunken Snacking
 
hohosaregood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,069
vCash: 500
I still think Thornton's been this team's best playoff performer since around 2010, except for this last playoff. So nuts to you guys.

hohosaregood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2014, 05:51 PM
  #66
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,346
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Led Zappa View Post
Of course, once again you use no context. Only numbers. What if JT's wings are broken during the PO's. Or maybe one of those years he's severely injured. Does that have any meaning. Of course it does. It just doesn't support you argument, so you leave it out.
The sample size is too large for pathetic excuses and exemptions. Everyone has injuries. Marleau has played with significant issues during two playoffs. Pavelski has played with hurts as has Couture, yet it is only an excuse for JT. It's always someone else who is broken and not JT according to the apologists. After this long, that argument has long lost its luster.

He plays a slow down game. The competition is tighter, smarter and faster in the playoffs by natural selection. And, the slowdown game is far less effective.

Several possible reasons for the issue come to mind. People are too afraid of offending him to make him push his game. People can't see past what he does well to push him to improve. He is too stubborn to put in the work to broaden his skills. He is too oblivious to see that his game has shortcomings (buys the reasons of the apologists.) The above are all very good reasons why NO player should be put on a pedestal such as JT has been.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2014, 09:30 PM
  #67
Evincar
Your Final Judgement
 
Evincar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,327
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
+/- can have its uses if it is put in its proper context which doesn't happen often when talking hockey. In Thornton's case, he's either getting dominated in the head-to-head setup or one of the unluckiest players ever.
Exactly. You would to be a big Thornton homer to argue that he's just unlucky.

Evincar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2014, 09:39 PM
  #68
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,429
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
+/- can have its uses if it is put in its proper context which doesn't happen often when talking hockey. In Thornton's case, he's either getting dominated in the head-to-head setup or one of the unluckiest players ever.
Now fair is fair....Marleau is also really low on that list. I think around 275th.

One of the fears some scouts have over uber-talented players, and one that was bandied around in regards to Marleau and Thornton (especially Thornton), was that some players are a little "too talented". A player gets so used to just dominating off his sheer talent, that when someone manages to figure him out, he doesn't know how to work around it.

The initial description and end result, at least, describes Thornton perfectly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
It's too bad things aren't simple when it comes to building a team for the Cup. There are some glaring issues with Thornton as an individual. I think we can all see that to some extent. He's not the only reason nor the biggest reason why they haven't won a Cup.
Have we really established this? He's the team's clear-cut franchise player and hasn't delivered close to the desired result.

You can always roll it back and say "well, Thornton is a huge problem but DW picked him" Or blame the scouting staff for not tabbing a better player, or someone in the organization for not recognizing JT's failings and jettisoning him. But that is just taking away from JT's failed deliverances.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
It is my feeling that other than one season, they've never had a good enough blue line to win it all. There are years, especially the first three, where the forward depth wasn't there either. The goaltending they've had has never been great. They've had average to good goaltending but never great.
So, a lot of this is generally true. However, look at the context. In the context of the many SJ teams having their multiple issues, Joe Thornton, and to an extent, Marleau and maybe some other top players, have not played up-to-par. JT and Marleau have frequently been the issue themselves, instead of being players/assets the team could count on.

Put another way, and I don't like doing these kinds of things because we will never know for certain, but think about an experiment where we swap playoff!Joe Thornton and playoff!Patrick Marleau with playoff!Kopitar/Carter or playoff!Toews/Kane. While I don't think SJ wins a cup with those players, I would bet that LA and Chicago don't win any cups with the Sharks's duo.


Last edited by OrrNumber4: 08-08-2014 at 09:49 PM.
OrrNumber4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2014, 10:13 PM
  #69
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 26,388
vCash: 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by OrrNumber4 View Post
Put another way, and I don't like doing these kinds of things because we will never know for certain, but think about an experiment where we swap playoff!Joe Thornton and playoff!Patrick Marleau with playoff!Kopitar/Carter or playoff!Toews/Kane. While I don't think SJ wins a cup with those players, I would bet that LA and Chicago don't win any cups with the Sharks's duo.
Okay, so why is this even an argument then? If even swapping chokers like Marleau and Thornton for Kopitar/Carter or Toews/Kane wouldn't get the Sharks a Cup, then why are we blaming them? What you're saying is that even if they did play like superstars, it still wouldn't have resulted in a Cup. So what's the point of blaming Marleau and Thornton for not doing that if it wouldn't make a difference? Why not blame the GM, Scouts, and bottom-end of the roster?

And lastly, it's amusing to me that you don't post in this "things you were wrong about" thread until it goes off topic.

TheJuxtaposer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2014, 10:24 PM
  #70
Bizz06
#FireDougWilson
 
Bizz06's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: San Jose
Posts: 2,688
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
So what's the point of blaming Marleau and Thornton for not doing that if it wouldn't make a difference? Why not blame the GM, Scouts, and bottom-end of the roster?
Because the easiest thing to do for a casual fan that lacks hockey knowledge is to blame the superstars when your team is not winning.

Bizz06 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2014, 10:31 PM
  #71
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,429
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
Okay, so why is this even an argument then? If even swapping chokers like Marleau and Thornton for Kopitar/Carter or Toews/Kane wouldn't get the Sharks a Cup, then why are we blaming them? What you're saying is that even if they did play like superstars, it still wouldn't have resulted in a Cup. So what's the point of blaming Marleau and Thornton for not doing that if it wouldn't make a difference? Why not blame the GM, Scouts, and bottom-end of the roster?
So for an on-the-spot analogy, let us say you hire some construction workers to do some work on your house. They do a bad job, making a lot of mistakes, being generally lazy, and gave you bad advice on options. When you complain, they point to the fact that you weren't paying them that much, you didn't have the latest and greatest tools, and your plans are complicated. All of these true.

That doesn't change the fact that the workers did a bad job, made mistakes, were lazy, and tried to cheat you out your money.

To get your construction done properly, you need to resolve the bad workers, and the bad supporting elements.

And, if anything (from my experiences with construction workers), great tools and realistic expectations aren't going to salvage an incompetent construction crew, while a capable crew can make a whole lot with subpar support.

I like how that analogy worked out.

Quote:
And lastly, it's amusing to me that you don't post in this "things you were wrong about" thread until it goes off topic.
Had I posted before, you'd have lambasted me for writing another essay. I've outlined my critical mistake, trusting in JT and Marleau, plenty of times in other threads.

OrrNumber4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-08-2014, 10:43 PM
  #72
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 26,388
vCash: 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by OrrNumber4 View Post
So for an on-the-spot analogy, let us say you hire some construction workers to do some work on your house. They do a bad job, making a lot of mistakes, being generally lazy, and gave you bad advice on options. When you complain, they point to the fact that you weren't paying them that much, you didn't have the latest and greatest tools, and your plans are complicated. All of these true.

That doesn't change the fact that the workers did a bad job, made mistakes, were lazy, and tried to cheat you out your money.

To get your construction done properly, you need to resolve the bad workers, and the bad supporting elements.

And, if anything (from my experiences with construction workers), great tools and realistic expectations aren't going to salvage an incompetent construction crew, while a capable crew can make a whole lot with subpar support.

I like how that analogy worked out.
I'm glad you're so thrilled with your metaphor. Except you suggest that Toews/Kane and Kopitar/Carter are also "an incompetent crew", since they wouldn't be able to do the job right with the Sharks' "support".

Quote:
Originally Posted by OrrNumber4 View Post
Had I posted before, you'd have lambasted me for writing another essay. I've outlined my critical mistake, trusting in JT and Marleau, plenty of times in other threads.
That's sooooooo not what I was getting at. Look at the name of the thread.

TheJuxtaposer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2014, 01:24 AM
  #73
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,429
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
I'm glad you're so thrilled with your metaphor. Except you suggest that Toews/Kane and Kopitar/Carter are also "an incompetent crew", since they wouldn't be able to do the job right with the Sharks' "support".
I don't think you've understood what I posted. In this case, I'm not defining incompetence by the end result, I am defining it by their play on the ice.

To put it another way, I think that Toews/Kane and/or Kopitar/Carter would have achieved more with the Sharks than Marleau/Thornton have. Perhaps not a cup (though if you put those players in their prime on the '06, '09, '13, and maybe even the '10 teams....especially if you take away Toews/Kane from Chicago), but more.

Quote:
That's sooooooo not what I was getting at. Look at the name of the thread.
Feel free to complain to the mods, block, or maturely just ignore my posts.

OrrNumber4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2014, 01:53 AM
  #74
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 32,157
vCash: 2283
Quote:
Originally Posted by OrrNumber4 View Post
Now fair is fair....Marleau is also really low on that list. I think around 275th.

One of the fears some scouts have over uber-talented players, and one that was bandied around in regards to Marleau and Thornton (especially Thornton), was that some players are a little "too talented". A player gets so used to just dominating off his sheer talent, that when someone manages to figure him out, he doesn't know how to work around it.

The initial description and end result, at least, describes Thornton perfectly.



Have we really established this? He's the team's clear-cut franchise player and hasn't delivered close to the desired result.

You can always roll it back and say "well, Thornton is a huge problem but DW picked him" Or blame the scouting staff for not tabbing a better player, or someone in the organization for not recognizing JT's failings and jettisoning him. But that is just taking away from JT's failed deliverances.



So, a lot of this is generally true. However, look at the context. In the context of the many SJ teams having their multiple issues, Joe Thornton, and to an extent, Marleau and maybe some other top players, have not played up-to-par. JT and Marleau have frequently been the issue themselves, instead of being players/assets the team could count on.

Put another way, and I don't like doing these kinds of things because we will never know for certain, but think about an experiment where we swap playoff!Joe Thornton and playoff!Patrick Marleau with playoff!Kopitar/Carter or playoff!Toews/Kane. While I don't think SJ wins a cup with those players, I would bet that LA and Chicago don't win any cups with the Sharks's duo.
To your first part, you ignore the fact that Marleau's production doesn't drop like Thornton's in the playoffs so that's where you lose the context about fair being fair regarding +/-. As for your fear, it's not something I really share...especially with Marleau. It's actually quite ridiculous.

As for trying to pin it on Thornton because he's the franchise, that's great but individuals don't win championships in hockey. Teams do. You want to keep up with your tunnel vision like you have all off-season and I'm not interested in arguing with you again over it. I don't care to scapegoat individuals like you do. Every single person on this team was to blame. Every single person that is a coach or manager of the team has blame attached to them as well.

The reality of it is that you're never...never...going to go through a two month playoff run where Marleau and/or Thornton are going to succeed in whatever matchup they get along the way. It's just not going to happen. Believing you will is only setting yourself up for disappointment by setting an unrealistic expectation. This is why teams have depth and why you need an entire team to get anywhere against the good teams in this league. You can't honestly look at this team up and down the lineup and say they've matched up well with the better teams...and they certainly don't get the goaltending to make up for that.

I would disagree vehemently that the Sharks duo wouldn't win with those other teams in that hypothetical. Both teams in those Cup runs have had significantly better depth on the blue line and possibly up front as well.

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2014, 11:26 AM
  #75
Sleepy
Registered User
 
Sleepy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,834
vCash: 500
  • Easy, I agree JT's offensive game isn't built for the playoffs and frankly might never be.
  • Zappa, I agree he's been our best player in the playoffs most years considering his match ups, health issues, and 2-way performance. (Exception: He's awful matched up against Getzlaf. Absolutely horrid.)

I also think that he's not alone in struggling in the playoffs, just take a look at our bottom 6 previous years and our top 6 this last year. Powerplay is consistently awful too. When it's an entire team that stinks come playoff time, I am forced to consider that the entire system and/or team makeup is broken.

It is kinda funny we put all this on Thornton. Think the Kings would be where they are with Williams/Gaborik going bonkers?

Sleepy 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 10:24 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.