HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > San Jose Sharks
Notices

Who would you be ok with DW moving

View Poll Results: Who would you be ok with DW dealing
Thornton 11 8.66%
Marleau 80 62.99%
Pavelski 27 21.26%
Havlat 20 15.75%
Clowe 91 71.65%
Vlasic 12 9.45%
Boyle 71 55.91%
Burns 5 3.94%
Murray 108 85.04%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 127. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-07-2012, 05:48 PM
  #26
wtfisthis
Registered User
 
wtfisthis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 2,777
vCash: 500
I would be ok with anybody on the list except Burns.

wtfisthis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2012, 05:59 PM
  #27
Winky
Registered User
 
Winky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 3,268
vCash: 500
What I'd really like to know is what contributed to our early exit?

Was it a matter of poor execution by the players of the style implemented by the coaching staff? Or did the players execute the strategy exactly as the staff wanted, and the coaching/strategy was the issue?

If the former, then DW and TM need to decide whether they want to continue with the same approach (and trade any players that don't fit the system and failed to execute), or change the system (and possibly still make personnel changes).

If it was the latter, then it becomes obvious that the system failed, and a number of major changes need to be made. Though, I'm against trading players who fulfilled the roles required of them in a failed system.

Either way, I seriously doubt we'll know for certain until the decisions are made in the coming weeks/months.

Winky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2012, 06:02 PM
  #28
bigwillie
Registered User
 
bigwillie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Country: United States
Posts: 5,736
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to bigwillie
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
Everyone should be mentioning the purpose of their moves. Is it a rebuild? Is it a tweak believing that the window is still open?

My take is that the keepers on a rebuild are guys who have the character to work with young players on improving their games. The guys who won't give up/let up if the team results tank for 2-4 years. They may very well be giving up their chance at a cup.

If it is a tweak, it needs to be a precise move or a couple of moves with no more if you really think the Sharks are close. Massive moves tend to take time to yield a cup result.
I'd be fine with DW "tweaking" the roster to try to reload for next year, but it's for the bolded reason I think we should move forward with the same roster relatively intact. All this team needs is a change of strategy, so I'd be fine with new ACs but nothing more. DW makes a huge splash every offseason and for once I think we should move forward with the same group and see if they can't improve without any big changes.

The only thing I want to see gone is the passive PK and puck possession strategies that obviously fell flat on their face this season.

bigwillie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2012, 06:45 PM
  #29
magic school bus
***********
 
magic school bus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: San Jose, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 14,483
vCash: 1965
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tkachuk4MVP View Post
Couture? Vlasic? Burns? You're ok with dealing any one of them?
Couture isn't on the poll list...

And yes, I'd trade Vlasic or Burns. I'd rather trade Vlasic though. Both are flawed players

magic school bus is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2012, 06:46 PM
  #30
Iron Chef
Registered User
 
Iron Chef's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,907
vCash: 500
Matthew Taylor ‏ @FTFsTCY
Have a feeling that #SJSharks offseason is going to be alot like a Walking Dead episode. As in, don't get too attached to anyone.

Iron Chef is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2012, 06:48 PM
  #31
TheJuxtaposer
Lost a bet
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 26,096
vCash: 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by magic school bus View Post
Couture isn't on the poll list...

And yes, I'd trade Vlasic or Burns. I'd rather trade Vlasic though. Both are flawed players
Pavelski, Marleau, and Couture are also flawed players. You aren't going to get far if you only let flawless players on your team.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron Chef View Post
Matthew Taylor ‏ @FTFsTCY
Have a feeling that #SJSharks offseason is going to be alot like a Walking Dead episode. As in, don't get too attached to anyone.
I've learned not to take Taylor too seriously.

TheJuxtaposer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2012, 06:50 PM
  #32
Led Zappa
Oy vey...
 
Led Zappa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Country: Scotland
Posts: 32,482
vCash: 500
As I've said before, the only players that are untouchable to me are JT, Couture, Burns and Havlat. Pav's and Vlasic close behind. That said, I don't want high turnover, and of course any deal needs to be a good/exceptional one, especially with Pav's or Marleau types involved. Or, if they blow it up, blow it the **** up.

__________________

"This is not a nick or a scratch, this is an open wound" - Doug Wilson.
Led Zappa is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2012, 06:53 PM
  #33
Iron Chef
Registered User
 
Iron Chef's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,907
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
I've learned not to take Taylor too seriously.
True, I just thought that tweet was hilarious. I know he doesn't have any insider knowledge, but I think hes right in assuming that at least 1 fan favorite isnt going to be playing on this team next season.

Iron Chef is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2012, 06:55 PM
  #34
Phu
Registered User
 
Phu's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 6,706
vCash: 500
I would not be OK with moving any of the major pieces. That's loserish. We have to recognize what is happening and trust in our plans.
(Note I do not consider niemi a major piece ... at least not without a couple words tacked onto the end)


Last edited by Phu: 05-07-2012 at 07:59 PM.
Phu is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2012, 07:18 PM
  #35
magic school bus
***********
 
magic school bus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: San Jose, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 14,483
vCash: 1965
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
Pavelski, Marleau, and Couture are also flawed players. You aren't going to get far if you only let flawless players on your team.
Sure, but people are at least willing to trade them. For whatever reason, Burns and Vlasic (and Couture/Thornton) are treated like untouchable, untradable players. We have to look at every part of the team if we really want to fix it.

Honestly, I'm having a hard time thinking of a pure defensive defenseman that's "untouchable" on any team.

magic school bus is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2012, 07:18 PM
  #36
VP and GM
Havlat Sucks!
 
VP and GM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: at home
Country: United States
Posts: 5,335
vCash: 500
Murray and Nemo if we can get a decent replacement for Murray, read as better/quicker shut down D

VP and GM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2012, 07:19 PM
  #37
chris39bong
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Brea, CA
Country: Samoa
Posts: 735
vCash: 500
Marleau needs to be dealt. I like much of Marleau's game, but the Sharks just aren't going to get it done in the playoffs with his $6.9M cap hit and soft play. If he was 5 years younger i'd say keep him, but he's only going to go downhill from here. Same with Boyle and Murray. I like the last two players even more and trust them to step up in the playoffs more than Marleau, but neither are getting any younger.

Wilson should follow the Flyers game plan and try to trade a vet (Marleau or Boyle) for a young NHLer along with a top pick or prospect. The Sharks could really use the cap space and youth or else they risk becoming irrelevant in another year or two. The Flyers trading the one dimensional Carter for Voracek and the #6 pick, and trading Richards for Simmonds, Schenn, and a 2nd are exactly the type of deals I think this team needs to make with Marleau and Boyle. Granted, DW won't be able to get as much in return since Marleau/Boyle are older with higher cap hits, but I'd rather get a couple solid young assets rather than hope that this same Sharks team that was outskated and outskilled by a younger Blues squad can somehow turn it around next season despite many core players being in the latter half of their prime.

If Boyle isn't traded, I'd turn to Murray. He's one of my favorite Sharks but I'd rather get a decent pick/prospect for him. I think Vandy offers good value at $1M, and there's always the off chance Stuart could return.

Trading Marleau and/or Boyle also would give DW the flexibility to get in the running for an impact player in the UFA market. THAT is the one area DW is lacking as a GM in my opinion. He's made solid trades for Thornton, Boyle, and Burns... but those trades always require dealing assets. Even if Marleau or Boyle can only fetch a top pick or prospect, I'd still prefer for DW to consider pulling the trigger and try to plug that roster hole with a UFA.

chris39bong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2012, 07:26 PM
  #38
Eighth Fret
Registered User
 
Eighth Fret's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,140
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
The emphasis on possession this year virtually eliminated individual speed as a factor in scoring for the Sharks. In that sense I understand the rhetorical question. Marleau is substantially less useful given the Sharks play of the last season. Unfortunately, part of the correction to their issues is in utilizing the individual speed more.
I've been meaning to ask you about how much speed we need vs. what we have. I know we don't have elite speed on the team, but we do have some quick guys. Do we have enough to try and succeed at playing faster (assuming that JT buys in and commits to the new direction)?

The other question I've been meaning to ask you is how much speed we really need to bring in. We still match up fairly well with quite a few of the good teams in the western conference (exceptions being Blues, Nucks, and to a lesser extent the Preds). My concern is going too far to address the deficiencies that cost us against the Blues and Nucks and in the process losing our edge on the teams we can beat now. I wouldn't be happy with a team that has the Blues' or Nuck's number but can't beat Detroit or LA.

Eighth Fret is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2012, 07:37 PM
  #39
Trl3789
Registered User
 
Trl3789's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 765
vCash: 219
Whats TMacs value right now? Decent return for a TMac and Clowe package?

Trl3789 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2012, 07:41 PM
  #40
TheJuxtaposer
Lost a bet
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 26,096
vCash: 567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron Chef View Post
True, I just thought that tweet was hilarious. I know he doesn't have any insider knowledge, but I think hes right in assuming that at least 1 fan favorite isnt going to be playing on this team next season.
Only if Murray is still considered a fan-favorite.

Quote:
Originally Posted by magic school bus View Post
Sure, but people are at least willing to trade them. For whatever reason, Burns and Vlasic (and Couture/Thornton) are treated like untouchable, untradable players. We have to look at every part of the team if we really want to fix it.

Honestly, I'm having a hard time thinking of a pure defensive defenseman that's "untouchable" on any team.
Of course, anyone can be traded. But let's look at it piece by piece. We just traded for Burns by sending out Seto, Coyle, and our first. Unless we get that type of value that fits our system more than those pieces did (which was very well), he's not going to be going anywhere. He just signed the longest contract he have on this team, very cap friendly, and he's only improving. He had a great playoffs, and is the type of player we need more of.

Vlasic, for me, is just because he's an elite complimentary piece. He's a #2 defenseman. Actually, but EVTOI, he was our #1 defenseman. He's a minute eater, he's almost flawless defensively, he's a home-grown Shark, he's young, he's cheap, and especially, he has shown himself to have a degree of offensive potential when he's not playing with the puck hog known as Dan Boyle. He put up good numbers when playing with Burns the first half of the season, he put up good numbers with Demers the second half of last season, and he put up good numbers when he played with Blake (the first year when Blake was actually good). The only people he hasn't done well with recently are Boyle, Wallin, and Huskins. We've learned our lesson enough never to pair Vlasic with a Huskins or Wallin type, and as long as the coaching staff takes him away from Boyle, he should be good for 25-30 points. And I'm not just saying that because it's easy to go with the potential argument. Put in any situation that's not Boyle or a #7 defensive defenseman, and he's fine offensively. Obviously I would move him if the Flyers were interested in dealing us Claude Giroux, but unless it's an upgrade on himself or a top-line forward, I'm not moving him. He has more value to us than he does in a trade.

With Couture, the easiest argument is that he's young. He's adaptable, he's creative. He's a home-grown Shark, on a great contract, and he fits with any player in our top-6 (except maybe Pavelski). I just don't see a situation, unless someone is interested in trading us Giroux or Tavares, aka a young superstar on a great contract, it just doesn't make any sense to trade that much talent and production on such a great contract.

Thornton, I'm not opposed to trading personally, but I think that one is an emotional attachment thing. It's like all the Marleau-haters gravitate toward Joe as the messiah because he's the Anti-Patty; consistent, amiable, outgoing, perceived as a better captain, etc.

TheJuxtaposer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2012, 07:45 PM
  #41
rideaucrusher21
Registered User
 
rideaucrusher21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: CA
Country: United States
Posts: 680
vCash: 500
Thornton, Marleau, Havlat, Couture, Burns, Vlasic, Braun are the ones who I would keep barring an absolutely MASSIVE overpayment. The rest of the team I would trade for fair value with the goal of getting younger and faster.

rideaucrusher21 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2012, 07:53 PM
  #42
Gene Parmesan
Ball-So-Hard-U
 
Gene Parmesan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 29,281
vCash: 500
I don't care anymore. They will move who they feel they can move or add and tweak or however you want to word it.

Gene Parmesan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2012, 08:49 PM
  #43
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,526
vCash: 500
The folks saying "leave the team intact" are the ones I have a really tough time understanding. If you wait, and you're wrong, you are going to have less to work with next year, and basically nothing the year after that. You are talking TOTAL rebuild two seasons from now. All the big boys will be worth less next season (as their contracts are expiring) and Clowe and Murray will walk via FA and we will get nothing back.

I obviously agree strategy is a serious issue, but regardless this team is behind the times. The NHL is getting faster and faster, and slow teams are not going to be successful. Look at the slow teams this season (Detroit, Dallas, Vancouver, San Jose). Look at the teams left in contention, none of them are what you could call 'slow' teams.

There has to be a balance, the right moves that will give the best net speed improvement while also helping to avert a total rebuild. This is the best opportunity to do that, if you wait till next season, it's going to be UGLY.

hockeyball is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2012, 08:54 PM
  #44
ChompChomp
SACK T-MAC
 
ChompChomp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Dallas, TX (Ugh)
Country: United States
Posts: 8,917
vCash: 500
Who am I ok with DW moving?

TMac and the assistants. NOW.

ChompChomp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2012, 08:55 PM
  #45
Gene Parmesan
Ball-So-Hard-U
 
Gene Parmesan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 29,281
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
The folks saying "leave the team intact" are the ones I have a really tough time understanding. If you wait, and you're wrong, you are going to have less to work with next year, and basically nothing the year after that. You are talking TOTAL rebuild two seasons from now. All the big boys will be worth less next season (as their contracts are expiring) and Clowe and Murray will walk via FA and we will get nothing back.

I obviously agree strategy is a serious issue, but regardless this team is behind the times. The NHL is getting faster and faster, and slow teams are not going to be successful. Look at the slow teams this season (Detroit, Dallas, Vancouver, San Jose). Look at the teams left in contention, none of them are what you could call 'slow' teams.

There has to be a balance, the right moves that will give the best net speed improvement while also helping to avert a total rebuild. This is the best opportunity to do that, if you wait till next season, it's going to be UGLY.
Just like those folks are having a hard time understanding the "blow it up crowd!". I am somewhere in the middle, they need to make some obvious changes in strategy and culture but I also realize that we aren't Edmonton or Toronto...if attendance dips and the team flounders for a few years while waiting for kids to break through we could be looking at a NYI or CBJ situation, which would suck. I agree that they need to change a lot of things but to just blow it up isn't easy as it sounds.

Gene Parmesan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2012, 09:05 PM
  #46
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,526
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gene Parmesan View Post
Just like those folks are having a hard time understanding the "blow it up crowd!". I am somewhere in the middle, they need to make some obvious changes in strategy and culture but I also realize that we aren't Edmonton or Toronto...if attendance dips and the team flounders for a few years while waiting for kids to break through we could be looking at a NYI or CBJ situation, which would suck. I agree that they need to change a lot of things but to just blow it up isn't easy as it sounds.
I don't think we should blow it up, i'm saying make key changes where they need to be made. Clowe and Murray and Niemi, and if you have the opportunity to move one of the bigger fish for a significant return, consider it, that's all. Not a total rebuild.

Though, if you were going to blow it up and rebuild, this would be the off-season to do it, not next year or 2014 where you simply won't get significant returns and will have to build from scratch.

hockeyball is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2012, 09:13 PM
  #47
Gilligans Island
Registered User
 
Gilligans Island's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: SF/Bay Area
Posts: 7,879
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
The folks saying "leave the team intact" are the ones I have a really tough time understanding. If you wait, and you're wrong, you are going to have less to work with next year, and basically nothing the year after that. You are talking TOTAL rebuild two seasons from now. All the big boys will be worth less next season (as their contracts are expiring) and Clowe and Murray will walk via FA and we will get nothing back.

I obviously agree strategy is a serious issue, but regardless this team is behind the times. The NHL is getting faster and faster, and slow teams are not going to be successful. Look at the slow teams this season (Detroit, Dallas, Vancouver, San Jose). Look at the teams left in contention, none of them are what you could call 'slow' teams.

There has to be a balance, the right moves that will give the best net speed improvement while also helping to avert a total rebuild. This is the best opportunity to do that, if you wait till next season, it's going to be UGLY.
This has been my view all offseason. I don't see how this team in its current incarnation (or with minor tweaks) will ever win the Cup and they're just getting older.

Blow it now rather than wallow in mediocrity come 2014-15.

BTW, are you serious in saying the Canucks are slow?

Gilligans Island is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2012, 09:13 PM
  #48
Gene Parmesan
Ball-So-Hard-U
 
Gene Parmesan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 29,281
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
I don't think we should blow it up, i'm saying make key changes where they need to be made. Clowe and Murray and Niemi, and if you have the opportunity to move one of the bigger fish for a significant return, consider it, that's all. Not a total rebuild.

Though, if you were going to blow it up and rebuild, this would be the off-season to do it, not next year or 2014 where you simply won't get significant returns and will have to build from scratch.
I think with what ownership said there will be no rebuild but unlike other offseasons I don't think its so cut and dry on who stays and go's if it comes to that. Clowe could be moved and Murray and Niemi if they can find a taker but I wouldn't be suprised if Pavs is moved or Boyle. The season was a failure in the eyes of the owners and I think they expect changes. Whatever happens, happens is how I look at it this year. The team has issues, coaching and personnel and its up to DW to try and fix it.

Gene Parmesan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2012, 09:24 PM
  #49
sjshrky27
Registered User
 
sjshrky27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: CA
Country: United States
Posts: 3,638
vCash: 500
Well whatever happens, its gonna be a interesting off-season for the Sharks. I wouldnt be suprised to see a few big moves by DW.

sjshrky27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2012, 09:33 PM
  #50
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 31,335
vCash: 2283
There is not one player I wouldn't be okay with moving if the return is right.

Pinkfloyd 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 12:58 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.