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

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, 10:37 PM
  #51
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 Eighth Fret View Post
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.
I would feel a lot better with 4 of 6 fast. That means JT, Pavs, Couture and Clowe lose 2. I could live with losing Clowe and telling JT that he needs to play fast. More flip passes, quick decisions on exit and hard skating on exit. Move Pavs to 3rd line. Insert two fast wingers.

The other part is getting the defense faster. No more declining vets who would be challenged to beat Murray. Murray needs to be a 6/7 and no more Wallins, Whites, et al. I am OK with Vandermeer.

Anyone who doesn't commit to aggressive defense, forward or dman is on the table. Guys like Vlasic have to play closer gaps. Same for forwards.

My general take is that the vets have to commit to mentoring youngsters. I know a lot have families. But they really need to get down to it. Stuff like the post-season celebration needs to not see the light of day. We need stuff like Marleau keeping Bernier in his house, etc. I don't know that any vets are doing this. I am not fond of Boyle's track record for mentoring in play. His value is for his own play and nothing else; that is only of value if they are really going for the silver thingy. Otherwise, it is a boat anchor by keeping the record up when they need a high pick or someone to create a carbon copy of himself. If someone is short on the weight room, he needs to go as well. Whatever emerges next year, it needs to be a whole lot more committed.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2012, 10:55 PM
  #52
SFtoBoston
Left-Heart-In-SF
 
SFtoBoston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: San Francisco/Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 1,678
vCash: 500
Whoever is calling for Marleau's head is nuts. The dude has been a goal scoring machine for 4 seasons. Keep.

SFtoBoston is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2012, 11:45 PM
  #53
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,296
vCash: 500
Whatever happens regaining the ability to go on the rush is priority numero uno. This actually is where Marleau is the strongest. I actually thought that while in desperation mode JT actually rushed the puck pretty well. McLellan really should show him videos.

Heck getting faster may even improve the PK.... well maybe I'm stretching a bit but a bit more speed may allow the forwards to collapse faster...

WantonAbandon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-07-2012, 11:48 PM
  #54
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 WantonAbandon View Post
Whatever happens regaining the ability to go on the rush is priority numero uno. This actually is where Marleau is the strongest. I actually thought that while in desperation mode JT actually rushed the puck pretty well. McLellan really should show him videos.

Heck getting faster may even improve the PK.... well maybe I'm stretching a bit but a bit more speed may allow the forwards to collapse faster...
The LA forwards were all over the Blues pointmen when LA was on the PK. Collapse was OK, but the aggression really made life miserable for Hitch. The same Blues PP that took the Sharks apart.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 12:31 AM
  #55
magic school bus
***********
 
magic school bus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: San Jose, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,669
vCash: 141
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
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.
I wouldn't call 2 pts in 5 games "great." I'd listen if a team makes a good offer, but he would be one of the last players I'd trade.

Quote:
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.
I don't think we're the only team that values him. Montreal will always overvalue French Canadians, and he's young so someone will pay for the upside that might not be there. I don't see him becoming even a 30 pts scorer.

Quote:
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.
Couture almost has to stay just because he's so young (and the cupboard is so bare). I wouldn't trade him. (He wasn't even an option in the poll - my apologies if I missed him in it) The other trades will return some other high end prospects, so we can build around Couture and the new guys. With Pavelski, Burns and Marleau still on the team. That's what I would like to see.

Quote:
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.
I like Joe too, but seeing him constantly slow down the pace is making our already slow team slower and setting a bad example for the rest of the team.*

My reasons to keep Marleau are like your reasons to keep Thornton. Part of it's emotional, other part is Marleau is faster.

magic school bus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 12:41 AM
  #56
Mhoogasian94123
Registered User
 
Mhoogasian94123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 1,001
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris39bong View Post
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.
I agree with this, but my concern is he would do an Error trade in order to make it possible. I know we probably couldn't afford to get either of them but I would love Parise and Sutter/Weber on our team. I think if we could move Havlat, Clowe, Boyle, and Murray/Niemi we could ger Weber and MAYBE go after Parise.
Does anyone think if we moved the players I mentioned we could make a serious move at the UFA's I discussed? (Suter is an RFA and Weber is a UFA, right?)

Mhoogasian94123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 12:43 AM
  #57
sjshrky27
Registered User
 
sjshrky27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: CA
Country: United States
Posts: 3,645
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by magic school bus View Post
My reasons to keep Marleau are like your reasons to keep Thornton. Part of it's emotional, other part is Marleau is faster.
At least Joe shows up in the playoffs...

sjshrky27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 12:49 AM
  #58
sjshrky27
Registered User
 
sjshrky27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: CA
Country: United States
Posts: 3,645
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SFtoBoston View Post
Whoever is calling for Marleau's head is nuts. The dude has been a goal scoring machine for 4 seasons. Keep.
apparently this guy didnt watch the Sharks in the playoffs...

sjshrky27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 12:49 AM
  #59
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 27,014
vCash: 1379
Quote:
Originally Posted by magic school bus View Post
I wouldn't call 2 pts in 5 games "great." I'd listen if a team makes a good offer, but he would be one of the last players I'd trade.
It was beyond the points. He definitely gets more points if any of his forwards are able to finish, but it was his defensive game and constant offensive pressure that really impressed me. He's as close to untouchable on this team as I'm willing to label anyone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by magic school bus View Post
I don't think we're the only team that values him. Montreal will always overvalue French Canadians, and he's young so someone will pay for the upside that might not be there. I don't see him becoming even a 30 pts scorer.
We can agree to disagree on his offense. From my perspective, he was on a 30+ point pace while he was paired with Burns, and then his offense went to hell when he was paired with Vlasic. Also, he was on a 30 point pace from when he was paired with Demers and onward last season. And he's had a 30 point season with Blake. Personally, I think he's capable. He just needs to be utilized more correctly.

If Montreal wants to send us Pacioretty for him, then I'm all for it. But unless we're getting a young top-3 forward, I just don't see us dealing Vlasic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by magic school bus View Post
Couture almost has to stay just because he's so young (and the cupboard is so bare). I wouldn't trade him. (He wasn't even an option in the poll - my apologies if I missed him in it) The other trades will return some other high end prospects, so we can build around Couture and the new guys. With Pavelski, Burns and Marleau still on the team. That's what I would like to see.
I can agree on those 4, although I'd include Vlasic because of the reasons I've said.

Quote:
Originally Posted by magic school bus View Post
I like Joe too, but seeing him constantly slow down the pace is making our already slow team slower and setting a bad example for the rest of the team.

My reasons to keep Marleau are like your reasons to keep Thornton. Part of it's emotional, other part is Marleau is faster.
I agree. Personally, I'd keep Marleau over Thornton. Part of that would be due to the fact that we can get a much better return for Joe, and the other part is just that Patty fits our needs better. But what management will do, that's a different story.

TheJuxtaposer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 12:55 AM
  #60
lsx
Registered User
 
lsx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 3,032
vCash: 500
Vlasic isn't going anywhere, he's younger than people realize and still not at prime for defensemen, he's relatively cheap, and is our best defensive guy, his positioning and stick work is second to none.

lsx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 12:56 AM
  #61
lsx
Registered User
 
lsx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Sonoma County, CA
Posts: 3,032
vCash: 500
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
Who isn't flawed in some way or another?

Burns contract is cheap for what he is, and this was his first year with the org - huge mistake to trade either of them.

lsx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 12:57 AM
  #62
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,940
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gilligans Island View Post
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?
They play a 'slow' style, somewhat similar to ours (but not AS slow). Plus the Sedins are not particularly quick.

They certainly are faster than us, but they don't play a speed system is all. You can be slow of foot, and you can play slowly, Sharks do both.

hockeyball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 01:08 AM
  #63
Eighth Fret
Registered User
 
Eighth Fret's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
I would feel a lot better with 4 of 6 fast. That means JT, Pavs, Couture and Clowe lose 2. I could live with losing Clowe and telling JT that he needs to play fast. More flip passes, quick decisions on exit and hard skating on exit. Move Pavs to 3rd line. Insert two fast wingers.

The other part is getting the defense faster. No more declining vets who would be challenged to beat Murray. Murray needs to be a 6/7 and no more Wallins, Whites, et al. I am OK with Vandermeer.

Anyone who doesn't commit to aggressive defense, forward or dman is on the table. Guys like Vlasic have to play closer gaps. Same for forwards.

My general take is that the vets have to commit to mentoring youngsters. I know a lot have families. But they really need to get down to it. Stuff like the post-season celebration needs to not see the light of day. We need stuff like Marleau keeping Bernier in his house, etc. I don't know that any vets are doing this. I am not fond of Boyle's track record for mentoring in play. His value is for his own play and nothing else; that is only of value if they are really going for the silver thingy. Otherwise, it is a boat anchor by keeping the record up when they need a high pick or someone to create a carbon copy of himself. If someone is short on the weight room, he needs to go as well. Whatever emerges next year, it needs to be a whole lot more committed.
I agree on no more Wallin's and White's. I understood what management was thinking bringing them in, even though I didn't agree with it and don't want to see it going forward.

Can the coaching staff or management request that veterans take young guys in? I recall reading somewhere that Giroux lived with Briere for a while and now he's got Schenn living with him. I agree that it can help development. I guess the lack of youth coming up in our system could be the reason why mentorship isn't a point of interest for coaching or management.

Eighth Fret is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 01:08 AM
  #64
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
They play a 'slow' style, somewhat similar to ours (but not AS slow). Plus the Sedins are not particularly quick.

They certainly are faster than us, but they don't play a speed system is all. You can be slow of foot, and you can play slowly, Sharks do both.
Depends what line is out there. The Canucks play all styles in a sense. I actually wouldn't mind seeing McLellan take after the Nucks odd system just minus the sheltered matchups.

In my opinion the Canucks weirdness may be the best hope for the Sharks

WantonAbandon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 01:26 AM
  #65
The McMafia
Registered User
 
The McMafia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 307
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WantonAbandon View Post
Depends what line is out there. The Canucks play all styles in a sense. I actually wouldn't mind seeing McLellan take after the Nucks odd system just minus the sheltered matchups.

In my opinion the Canucks weirdness may be the best hope for the Sharks
Line-by-line systems hurt interchangeability within the roster unless every forward can pick up all of the little details. I doubt McLellan or another coach would institute that - you end up with situations where the Sedins more or less require one another, and have less success with other linemates.

As per the overall topic...

I hold the opinion that you need to get value for your current players before they start to break down or end up leaving for nothing. Clowe and Murray fit the bill on the latter, and are unique players. Some team might bite on a deal and overpay.

I loved Boyle's game when he first came over but I don't like it anymore - the whole team needs to move to a far quicker system, and players that hold onto the puck for a long time aren't going to work (I consider JT an exception due to his total abilities). I would vote for Boyle to be moved for three reasons: playstyle, age, and cap hit.

The deals would need to happen in the offseason if you were planning to retool and compete that year - I assume management has this mindset. Also, if you were planning to make a run in free agency at a big player, a deal or deal(s) would have to be done at the draft to either make space or signal that you're still in the hunt.

What the team does at the draft will probably end up showing their cards, be it rebuild, retool, or status quo.

The McMafia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 01:39 AM
  #66
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The McMafia View Post
Line-by-line systems hurt interchangeability within the roster unless every forward can pick up all of the little details. I doubt McLellan or another coach would institute that - you end up with situations where the Sedins more or less require one another, and have less success with other linemates.

As per the overall topic...

I hold the opinion that you need to get value for your current players before they start to break down or end up leaving for nothing. Clowe and Murray fit the bill on the latter, and are unique players. Some team might bite on a deal and overpay.

I loved Boyle's game when he first came over but I don't like it anymore - the whole team needs to move to a far quicker system, and players that hold onto the puck for a long time aren't going to work (I consider JT an exception due to his total abilities). I would vote for Boyle to be moved for three reasons: playstyle, age, and cap hit.

The deals would need to happen in the offseason if you were planning to retool and compete that year - I assume management has this mindset. Also, if you were planning to make a run in free agency at a big player, a deal or deal(s) would have to be done at the draft to either make space or signal that you're still in the hunt.

What the team does at the draft will probably end up showing their cards, be it rebuild, retool, or status quo.
Trading Boyle would require a defensemen in return. I'd go with promising youngster 1st or 2nd round pick combo. Kulikov may be possible... If not I don't think trading Boyle would be worth it.

WantonAbandon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 01:49 AM
  #67
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 27,014
vCash: 1379
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eighth Fret View Post
I agree on no more Wallin's and White's. I understood what management was thinking bringing them in, even though I didn't agree with it and don't want to see it going forward.

Can the coaching staff or management request that veterans take young guys in? I recall reading somewhere that Giroux lived with Briere for a while and now he's got Schenn living with him. I agree that it can help development. I guess the lack of youth coming up in our system could be the reason why mentorship isn't a point of interest for coaching or management.
Giroux lived with Briere until like last year maybe, and now Schenn lives with Briere and Couturier lives with Briere.

I think the main problem is that the Sharks really don't have any players young enough to justify having them live with an older player. Our youngest is Couture and he's 23. Bernier was only like 20/21 when he lived with Patty, and that was before he had a family; I remember a really awkward quote from Patty that went something like "I figured Stevie wouldn't want to stay once we started having babies" or something, when Steve moved out.

TheJuxtaposer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 02:08 AM
  #68
Eighth Fret
Registered User
 
Eighth Fret's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
Giroux lived with Briere until like last year maybe, and now Schenn lives with Briere and Couturier lives with Briere.

I think the main problem is that the Sharks really don't have any players young enough to justify having them live with an older player. Our youngest is Couture and he's 23. Bernier was only like 20/21 when he lived with Patty, and that was before he had a family; I remember a really awkward quote from Patty that went something like "I figured Stevie wouldn't want to stay once we started having babies" or something, when Steve moved out.
Papa Briere

I agree, that was my reponse to Easy in regards to that aspect of mentorship. I suppose someone could have taken Couture in when he was younger, but he came in as a 21/22 year old. We really haven't had many guys come in lately at 19/20 year of age that could really use that mentorship off the ice. On the ice, I think Boyle could be better with the younger guys (Braun, Demers). Not sure how much mentorship is going on with the forwards.

Eighth Fret is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 02:26 AM
  #69
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,465
vCash: 500
Marleau and Bernier was a bad connection though.

OrrNumber4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 02:30 AM
  #70
Eighth Fret
Registered User
 
Eighth Fret's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,202
vCash: 500
To he honest, Marleau doesn't strike me as the mentoring type.

Jumbo, Pavs, and Burns seem to me like they'd make good all-around mentors. Whether they want to take on that responsibility is another story.

Eighth Fret is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 03:02 AM
  #71
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 27,014
vCash: 1379
Quote:
Originally Posted by superroyain10 View Post
Marleau and Bernier was a bad connection though.
What makes you say that?

TheJuxtaposer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 03:12 AM
  #72
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 Eighth Fret View Post
Papa Briere

I agree, that was my reponse to Easy in regards to that aspect of mentorship. I suppose someone could have taken Couture in when he was younger, but he came in as a 21/22 year old. We really haven't had many guys come in lately at 19/20 year of age that could really use that mentorship off the ice. On the ice, I think Boyle could be better with the younger guys (Braun, Demers). Not sure how much mentorship is going on with the forwards.
Odd notes.

IIRC, Briere has 3 kids. From what I have seen Boyle isn't doing it. Blake was. Not saying Bernier/Patty was the best partnership, but at least there was effort there.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 03:20 AM
  #73
WTFetus
Moderator
Most popular combo
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 12,142
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
IIRC, Briere has 3 kids.
No wife though.

You could say Roenick was sort of doing it. He had Mitchell and Setoguchi over a lot.

WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 03:29 AM
  #74
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 27,014
vCash: 1379
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
No wife though.

You could say Roenick was sort of doing it. He had Mitchell and Setoguchi over a lot.
Errrr, that was less "mentorship".

And another thing about the Briere situation, his kids are all old enough to be fairly self-sufficient. Most of the older Sharks have babies or toddlers or both.


Last edited by TheJuxtaposer: 05-08-2012 at 03:49 AM.
TheJuxtaposer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-08-2012, 10:45 AM
  #75
MadmanSJ
Know Your Onion!
 
MadmanSJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 1,317
vCash: 500
This team has a fever, and the only prescription is less Marleau.

MadmanSJ 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 09:21 AM.

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.