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

All-purpose trade rumors and speculation thread #2

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-23-2012, 06:36 PM
  #76
ThorntonFan19
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 3,803
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inub0i View Post
Pavelski on the 3rd line is a waste of his talents though.

I honestly think McGinn-Wellwood-Mitchell would be dangerous because Wellwood is one of the only players I see that can make Torrey ****ing Mitchell look like a scoring threat.

The thing I like about the Handzus signing (bad contract aside) is that he and McGinn have chemistry (I think). McGinn is stepping it up. Makes me wonder though, can he reach a Top 6 role anytime soon?
Mcginn and Handzus dont have enough consistent chemistry for him to be worth keeping imo. There have been too many games where the 3rd line has been invisible.

Mcginn has been relying on his size and scoring touch around the net to get him goals, but how many of his goals have come on the rush? For such a speedster, he should have more goals on the rush. I think Handzus could be a main reason for this.

ThorntonFan19 is offline  
Old
01-23-2012, 06:40 PM
  #77
WTFetus
Moderator
Most popular
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 11,859
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThorntonFan19 View Post
I think Handzus could be a main reason for this.
I think the system is more to blame for that. How many times did anyone score on the rush this season?

WTFetus is offline  
Old
01-23-2012, 06:41 PM
  #78
magic school bus
***********
 
magic school bus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: San Jose, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 14,703
vCash: 1965
Honestly, I think McGinn and Handzus are getting lucky. Every time they score it's on a cheap wraparound or some other shot the goalie should've saved. I love McGinn's hits, but he's not good enough with the puck to get the most out of his speed. If a team is willing to overpay, I'd have no problem trading him this season. We can bring in a different forward or two through a trade.

magic school bus is offline  
Old
01-23-2012, 06:59 PM
  #79
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,429
vCash: 500
Quote:
His goaltenders have posted a ridiculously awful 0.911 SV% at even-strength when he's been on the ice so his +/- (while still positive) is a lot lower than it deserves to be.
Maybe he is prone to giving up high-risk chances?

Quote:
Wellwood has averaged just 40 more seconds of even strength ice time per game than Handzus. He wouldn't get anywhere near the PP opportunity or quality of linemates in San Jose that he's received in Winnipeg but he'd undoubtedly still be productive; he's averaged 2.04 points per 60 minutes of even strength time this season while Handzus has averaged just 1.4.
That is very tough to say with any certainty, because of the above statement. Especially since this isn't a star talent; it is a marginal NHL talent who can swing based on the situation.

Quote:
He was also one of the best possession players in the NHL last year playing in the Sharks' bottom six and has once again been excellent in that category this season while Handzus has been beyond terrible.
What metric are you using for possession?

Team possession is often a very important thing. But individual posession can get overblown a lot. You have some players who get the puck on and off really quickly; others stick to the perimeter, holding the puck, and doing nothing.

Quote:
Replacing Handzus with Wellwood in the bottom six would have made the Sharks a much more territorially dominant team.
Doug Wilson, I think, was concerned at how Wellwood's size and grit became on issue against Vancouver. Handzus was the big, strong, defensively-skilled center who could chip in the odd goal or two; the exact thing we were looking for.

Mcginn-Wellwood-Mitchell looks great on the surface, but that leaves Mitchell as the defensive expert on the line. Wellwood brought more scoring touch, but no question he isn't as good defensively as Handzus is.

Overall, I like the fact that Handzus came for free; no assets. For sure, he's played on a bad-to-so-so LA for years, thrust into a position where he's been given the #1-PK slot, the #2-PP slot, and the #2C spot and had poor teamates. But I think DW thought he was getting the guy who was a stud on Philly for years; a guy who would bounce back given a more proper role (#3 center with no PP time).

OrrNumber4 is offline  
Old
01-23-2012, 07:08 PM
  #80
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 superroyain10 View Post
Doug Wilson, I think, was concerned at how Wellwood's size and grit became on issue against Vancouver. Handzus was the big, strong, defensively-skilled center who could chip in the odd goal or two; the exact thing we were looking for.

Mcginn-Wellwood-Mitchell looks great on the surface, but that leaves Mitchell as the defensive expert on the line. Wellwood brought more scoring touch, but no question he isn't as good defensively as Handzus is.

Overall, I like the fact that Handzus came for free; no assets. For sure, he's played on a bad-to-so-so LA for years, thrust into a position where he's been given the #1-PK slot, the #2-PP slot, and the #2C spot and had poor teamates. But I think DW thought he was getting the guy who was a stud on Philly for years; a guy who would bounce back given a more proper role (#3 center with no PP time).
I think that the Vancouver series really sealed the deal on Welly not being re-signed. He was completely ineffective in that series and I think DW knew that we'd have to go through Vancouver against this season.

Also, it's not like Handzus is used for top defensive matchups anyway. He still gets third tier competition, which Welly was able to dominate. Welly was above average defensively and with Zeus' poor skating he just can't be very effective in any faucet of the game anymore.

I don't mind Zeus, but I was vehemently in the camp that wanted to keep him.





Okay, and on a completely different note, what about trading for Kyle Brodziak?

TheJuxtaposer is offline  
Old
01-23-2012, 07:33 PM
  #81
CommanderShepard15
Eberle=Clutch
 
CommanderShepard15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 4,258
vCash: 500
Parise anyone? Main boards thread says money issues in jersey, may be forcing jersey to deal him.

Doug Wilson type guy. has to be moved. Jersey wont wanna face him 4x a year in the east, so they'll move him west.

Thats a 1/15 shot we have at him

CommanderShepard15 is offline  
Old
01-23-2012, 07:41 PM
  #82
Les Wynan*
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,745
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by superroyain10 View Post
Maybe he is prone to giving up high-risk chances?
Niemi posted an equally ridiculous (but in the opposite direction) 0.972 SV% when Wellwood was on the ice at even strength last season, so I don't think so unless you want to make the argument that he forgot how to prevent high risk chances over the summer. No player has shown the ability to drive their goaltenders' save percentage on a consistent basis over the past four seasons. Your goaltender's performance when you're on the ice (with regards to save rate, obviously you can prevent goals against as a skater by suppressing shots) is almost entirely luck.

Quote:
Originally Posted by superroyain10 View Post
What metric are you using for possession?

Team possession is often a very important thing. But individual posession can get overblown a lot. You have some players who get the puck on and off really quickly; others stick to the perimeter, holding the puck, and doing nothing.
Corsi, as always. The Sharks outshot their opponents when Wellwood was on the ice at even strength last season to a greater degree, prorated to 60 minutes, than any other player's team outshot the opposition last season.

Define "better defensively" for Handzus. He has the worst possession numbers on the Sharks this season. He spends the vast majority of his shifts in the defensive zone. Wellwood is the complete opposite and has been for years. The goal of the game, at even strength, is to outscore the opposition. Wellwood contributes to that goal to a much higher degree than Handzus despite what value Handzus provides on the PK (not a whole lot, but something).

The bottom line is Doug Wilson woefully miscalculated his team's needs at the third line center position. With the way McLellan runs his bench, the Sharks absolutely did not need a traditional checking line center. Thornton's line has drawn the toughest defensive assignments for two years running now and that clearly wasn't going to change. They needed a player who could take advantage of soft ice time to generate offense and Wellwood is infinitely better than Handzus in that regard.

Les Wynan* is offline  
Old
01-23-2012, 07:45 PM
  #83
bleedteal12
Registered User
 
bleedteal12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Denver
Country: United States
Posts: 2,065
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CloweForbidzYou View Post
Parise anyone? Main boards thread says money issues in jersey, may be forcing jersey to deal him.

Doug Wilson type guy. has to be moved. Jersey wont wanna face him 4x a year in the east, so they'll move him west.

Thats a 1/15 shot we have at him
Parise on the Sharks? Hello wet dream.

bleedteal12 is offline  
Old
01-23-2012, 07:46 PM
  #84
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 26,388
vCash: 567
Unfortunately, I bet Parise goes to Detroit.

TheJuxtaposer is offline  
Old
01-23-2012, 07:49 PM
  #85
Franchise13
Registered User
 
Franchise13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: San Francisco, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 1,651
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TehJuxtaposer View Post
Unfortunately, I bet Parise goes to Detroit.
Chicago has the cap space and horses to acquire him too.

Franchise13 is offline  
Old
01-23-2012, 07:56 PM
  #86
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 superroyain10 View Post
Overall, I like the fact that Handzus came for free; no assets. For sure, he's played on a bad-to-so-so LA for years, thrust into a position where he's been given the #1-PK slot, the #2-PP slot, and the #2C spot and had poor teamates. But I think DW thought he was getting the guy who was a stud on Philly for years; a guy who would bounce back given a more proper role (#3 center with no PP time).
I understand the differences between the two. Although Handzus had the #1 PK minutes in LA, he was facing second tier competition. That wasn't a ringing endorsement for his PK.

Wellwood got his defensive prowess by keeping it out of the SJ zone. Very good on creating NZ turnovers and very good at setting offensive zone picks, maintaining possession. And yes, physicality was a weakness for him. But for Zeus, he is subject to being pickpocketed and is frequently too slow on the cycle to maintain possession. His speed is also affecting his dzone coverage which is important because he doesn't maintain o-zone possession as well. He is strong on physicality and likely won't get outmuscled. The question is balance. Maybe the Nucks won't outmuscle him, but it is entirely likely that they will outhustle him. And in the meantime, Wellwood holds out better against lesser defenses. At this point, I would have to give the definite edge to Wellwood.

SJeasy is offline  
Old
01-23-2012, 08:02 PM
  #87
Les Wynan*
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,745
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
I understand the differences between the two. Although Handzus had the #1 PK minutes in LA, he was facing second tier competition. That wasn't a ringing endorsement for his PK.

Wellwood got his defensive prowess by keeping it out of the SJ zone. Very good on creating NZ turnovers and very good at setting offensive zone picks, maintaining possession. And yes, physicality was a weakness for him. But for Zeus, he is subject to being pickpocketed and is frequently too slow on the cycle to maintain possession. His speed is also affecting his dzone coverage which is important because he doesn't maintain o-zone possession as well. He is strong on physicality and likely won't get outmuscled. The question is balance. Maybe the Nucks won't outmuscle him, but it is entirely likely that they will outhustle him. And in the meantime, Wellwood holds out better against lesser defenses. At this point, I would have to give the definite edge to Wellwood.
This was on full display versus the Canucks. He lost that faceoff to Hodgson and then lost the race against Hodgson (who isn't exactly fleet of foot himself, to say the least) to the rebound that Niemi kicked out. He's singlehandedly dragging down that third line.

Les Wynan* is offline  
Old
01-23-2012, 08:08 PM
  #88
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 Les Wynan View Post
This was on full display versus the Canucks. He lost that faceoff to Hodgson and then lost the race against Hodgson (who isn't exactly fleet of foot himself, to say the least) to the rebound that Niemi kicked out. He's singlehandedly dragging down that third line.
I have watched him lose coverage at least once per game over the last half dozen games on speed alone. He lost the guy who sent the pass off Iginla's skate which could have tilted the Calgary game to the Flames. It doesn't always end up in goals.

SJeasy is offline  
Old
01-24-2012, 10:39 AM
  #89
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,609
vCash: 500
So Drew last night said pretty definitively that Wilson isdone with rental players. I assume he knows what he's talking about because I doubt Wilson would allow Drew to say something like that on TV if it wasn't true.

That takes some major players off the list. Ruutu, Parise, etc.

Also take into account the Sharks cap space, and the fact that Doug Wilson won't bring in an overpaid player, who does that leave? He also said he expects it to be a top-6 player (not a 3rd liner) thought I didn't get the impression he knew that as definitively.

Sticking to teams that are likely to sell: (Mostly avoiding NTC's, and totally unavailable players)

Purcell
Downie
Moore (not top-6)
Bailey
Okposo
Grabner
Moulson
Stafford
Leino (overpaid so unlikely)
Carter (long contract, unlikely)
Umberger
Vermette
Gagner (Sam)
Ryan
Vrbata (already tried to sign him)
Korpikoski
Max Pac
Ladd
Wheeler

Those are the likely candidates I see. Also keep in mind for any of those players we are likely sending a roster player back. Since the Sharks won't trade for a bad contract, want a top-6 player that isn't a rental, the cost is going to be more then picks/prospects.

I think that puts:
Murray
Braun
Demers

on the block likely. I think there is a very small chance with Clowe, but that would mean two top-6 guys coming back and that's going to be a tough sell, and probably counter productive (unless someone is overpaying majorly).

With Niitty likely moved, and whatever roster player is the odd man out, we should be able to afford anyone in the 5m range.

hockeyball is offline  
Old
01-24-2012, 10:40 AM
  #90
SharksAddict
Registered User
 
SharksAddict's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,524
vCash: 500
Sharks will need both Braun and Demers if Burns is out for any significant time which it definitely looks like.

SharksAddict is offline  
Old
01-24-2012, 10:42 AM
  #91
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,609
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SharksAddict View Post
Sharks will need both Braun and Demers if Burns is out for any significant time which it definitely looks like.
From the comments so far it doesn't sound like its that big of a deal. Regardless, I'm just connecting the dots. If the Sharks are going to acquire a top-6 that is going to be the cost. No team is going to trade a top-6 player signed long term for the non-roster assets we have to offer. If he doesn't make a trade, we might as well start talking about next season, cause this team has NO chance as it stands.

hockeyball is offline  
Old
01-24-2012, 10:49 AM
  #92
stalockrox
Registered User
 
stalockrox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,407
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
So Drew last night said pretty definitively that Wilson isdone with rental players. I assume he knows what he's talking about because I doubt Wilson would allow Drew to say something like that on TV if it wasn't true.

That takes some major players off the list. Ruutu, Parise, etc.

Also take into account the Sharks cap space, and the fact that Doug Wilson won't bring in an overpaid player, who does that leave? He also said he expects it to be a top-6 player (not a 3rd liner) thought I didn't get the impression he knew that as definitively.

Sticking to teams that are likely to sell: (Mostly avoiding NTC's, and totally unavailable players)

Purcell
Downie
Moore (not top-6)
Bailey
Okposo
Grabner
Moulson
Stafford
Leino (overpaid so unlikely)
Carter (long contract, unlikely)
Umberger
Vermette
Gagner (Sam)
Ryan
Vrbata (already tried to sign him)
Korpikoski
Max Pac
Ladd
Wheeler

Those are the likely candidates I see. Also keep in mind for any of those players we are likely sending a roster player back. Since the Sharks won't trade for a bad contract, want a top-6 player that isn't a rental, the cost is going to be more then picks/prospects.

I think that puts:
Murray
Braun
Demers

on the block likely. I think there is a very small chance with Clowe, but that would mean two top-6 guys coming back and that's going to be a tough sell, and probably counter productive (unless someone is overpaying majorly).

With Niitty likely moved, and whatever roster player is the odd man out, we should be able to afford anyone in the 5m range.
First - I'm not going to take Drew's word as gospel on what Wilson may or may not do, he may have a way better pulse on the team than people on HF but I guarantee you Wilson hasn't shared his plans with Drew Remeda.

Second - that list of players, while they may be of interest to Wilson - I'd say about 1/2 of them have less than a 5% chance of being moved.

Third - I just don't see this team messing with their defensive depth. If they move Braun or Demers or Murray they're going to have to pick up another depth d-man since there's no one in Worcester that McLellan would (or should) trust in a playoff series.

stalockrox is offline  
Old
01-24-2012, 11:11 AM
  #93
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,609
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by stalockrox View Post
First - I'm not going to take Drew's word as gospel on what Wilson may or may not do, he may have a way better pulse on the team than people on HF but I guarantee you Wilson hasn't shared his plans with Drew Remeda.

Second - that list of players, while they may be of interest to Wilson - I'd say about 1/2 of them have less than a 5% chance of being moved.

Third - I just don't see this team messing with their defensive depth. If they move Braun or Demers or Murray they're going to have to pick up another depth d-man since there's no one in Worcester that McLellan would (or should) trust in a playoff series.
I doubt he'd share his plans specifically, but I think it's pretty likely he told Drew "I will tell you one thing, i'm not renting anymore players". It's not like Drew to make definitive statements like that on tv, attributed directly to his boss, who will likely see it.

He didn't say "I think Doug Wilson will avoid rentals" he said "Doug Wilson said he will not be renting a player" (paraphrased).

Even if Drew is full of **** (which I don't think is the case), I still wanted to see what a list of players would look like if he is in fact telling the truth. Determine availability all you like, I didn't want to start making judgements like that. Just put all the possibilities on a list. I think it's pretty safe to say anyone in the playoff hunt is not going to trade a top-6 guy, and guys with NTC's are not likely to be moved mid-season (I kept Ladd on there just cause I think if one is moved it might be him).

hockeyball is offline  
Old
01-24-2012, 11:44 AM
  #94
Barrie22
Shark fan in hiding
 
Barrie22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,144
vCash: 302
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
I doubt he'd share his plans specifically, but I think it's pretty likely he told Drew "I will tell you one thing, i'm not renting anymore players". It's not like Drew to make definitive statements like that on tv, attributed directly to his boss, who will likely see it.

He didn't say "I think Doug Wilson will avoid rentals" he said "Doug Wilson said he will not be renting a player" (paraphrased).

Even if Drew is full of **** (which I don't think is the case), I still wanted to see what a list of players would look like if he is in fact telling the truth. Determine availability all you like, I didn't want to start making judgements like that. Just put all the possibilities on a list. I think it's pretty safe to say anyone in the playoff hunt is not going to trade a top-6 guy, and guys with NTC's are not likely to be moved mid-season (I kept Ladd on there just cause I think if one is moved it might be him).
there is no way winnipeg trades ladd in a season, that they have a chance to make the playoffs for the 1st time in like 5 years. especially considering, in a canadian city the playoffs are a gold mine waiting to be found.

Barrie22 is offline  
Old
01-24-2012, 11:46 AM
  #95
Lazyking
Never Forget
 
Lazyking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 3,591
vCash: 500
Jets are still in the hunt, doubt they'd move Ladd or Wheeler.... and if they did, not sure the Sharks could give them what they'd want back.

Lazyking is offline  
Old
01-24-2012, 11:49 AM
  #96
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,429
vCash: 500
I would not discount Parise.

1) He's youngish
2) He is an incredible talent, a franchise player. The kind of kind DW targets.
3) The Sharks were looking at him during the draft all those years ago
4) DW and LR have a good relationship. It doesn't hurt that they are in opposite conferences.

OrrNumber4 is offline  
Old
01-24-2012, 11:49 AM
  #97
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,609
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lazyking View Post
Jets are still in the hunt, doubt they'd move Ladd or Wheeler.... and if they did, not sure the Sharks could give them what they'd want back.
I agree, but like I said I was not making judgement calls on that stuff, just listing everyone basically that was within the right salary range basically. Probably should have left Ladd off really.

hockeyball is offline  
Old
01-24-2012, 11:51 AM
  #98
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,609
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by superroyain10 View Post
I would not discount Parise.

1) He's youngish
2) He is an incredible talent, a franchise player. The kind of kind DW targets.
3) The Sharks were looking at him during the draft all those years ago
4) DW and LR have a good relationship. It doesn't hurt that they are in opposite conferences.
But he's a massive rental, and that wasn't the point of that post. We definitely can't afford him next season unless we move a NTC (unlikely) or Boyle (unlikely). We already have lists of the rentals, i was pontificating on non-rental players based on what Drew said.

hockeyball is offline  
Old
01-24-2012, 11:52 AM
  #99
Franchise13
Registered User
 
Franchise13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: San Francisco, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 1,651
vCash: 500
Parise on the Sharks would make me gasm. Add Ryan while we are at it too! lol...

Franchise13 is offline  
Old
01-24-2012, 12:17 PM
  #100
magic school bus
***********
 
magic school bus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: San Jose, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 14,703
vCash: 1965
Ok, then what would we trade for Parise?

magic school bus is offline  
Closed Thread

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 09:43 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.