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

Sharks no longer interested in Daniel Winnik

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-03-2012, 05:04 PM
  #51
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 32,034
vCash: 2283
Quote:
Originally Posted by WantonAbandon View Post
He was outmatched by the top competition in the NHL? That is always what happens when a team uses a third line forward as their top shutdown. This is a role that Winnik has never been used in by the way. 2010-2011 was a good year for Burish. He was used very differently this last season.

Frankly I think a big reason why Burish wasn't resigned by the stars was the same reason they dropped Riberro and Ott. The Stars are trying to change their culture. That and Burish probably wanted to play for a winner.
There are barometers for gauging success with a shutdown player against top competition. Burish didn't hit any of those. Winnik has and to say he hasn't been used in that role is false. He was used in it in Colorado.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 05:05 PM
  #52
SactoShork
The Youth Movement
 
SactoShork's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 9,634
vCash: 50
Resigning Winnik to make it worth McGinn is cutting off your nose to spite your face.

The trade sucked, but this isn't the Burns deal. Winnik really wasn't very effective in any zone. He had flashes of skill and some grit, but it didn't translate to much of anything in the way of results.

SactoShork is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 05:09 PM
  #53
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,178
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
There are barometers for gauging success with a shutdown player against top competition. Burish didn't hit any of those. Winnik has and to say he hasn't been used in that role is false. He was used in it in Colorado.
You would almost have a point if only you said the Yotes. Winnik faced weak 5 on 5 competition for the Avs. He faced far tougher comp with the Yotes but wasn't their top shutdown. I think he faced Couture level competition. Oh wait.. it wasn't even close to couture comp... more like the QOC Ryan Clowe faced .

Yes Burish was effective against the top comp. Look at his corsi and than look at the corsi of the top competition in the NHL.

WantonAbandon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 05:16 PM
  #54
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 32,034
vCash: 2283
Quote:
Originally Posted by SactoShark View Post
Resigning Winnik to make it worth McGinn is cutting off your nose to spite your face.

The trade sucked, but this isn't the Burns deal. Winnik really wasn't very effective in any zone. He had flashes of skill and some grit, but it didn't translate to much of anything in the way of results.
Winnik was an excellent puck possessor and a solid defensive presence in the minutes he was given. I don't think I could disagree with you more in regards to him not being effective in any zone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by WantonAbandon View Post
You would almost have a point if only you said the Yotes. Winnik faced weak 5 on 5 competition for the Avs. He faced far tougher comp with the Yotes but wasn't their top shutdown. I think he faced Couture level competition.

Yes Burish was effective against the top comp. Look at his corsi and than look at the corsi of the top competition in the NHL.
This past season before he was dealt to the Sharks, he was facing top competition for the Avs. I don't know where you get that he wasn't.

As for Burish, his Corsi On was terrible against the top competition. Absolutely terrible. What you asked doesn't tell you whether he was effective against them. Believing that he was effective in that role is believing that Handzus was effective at hockey this year.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 05:18 PM
  #55
RainbowDash
20% Cooler
 
RainbowDash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Equestria
Posts: 2,011
vCash: 500
WTF? Do you guys know how to read the numbers at behindthenet.ca ?

RainbowDash is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 05:25 PM
  #56
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,178
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Winnik was an excellent puck possessor and a solid defensive presence in the minutes he was given. I don't think I could disagree with you more in regards to him not being effective in any zone.



This past season before he was dealt to the Sharks, he was facing top competition for the Avs. I don't know where you get that he wasn't.

As for Burish, his Corsi On was terrible against the top competition. Absolutely terrible. What you asked doesn't tell you whether he was effective against them. Believing that he was effective in that role is believing that Handzus was effective at hockey this year.
Yes last season he faced tougher comp than the year before, but are you looking at both QOC stats. Are you taking in account of different coaching philosophies?

If Burish was dominating the top competition in the NHL what would that say about him? Yes he had a negative corsi like -7/-12 against guy would would likely be well in the double digits for both corsi stats.

WantonAbandon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 05:26 PM
  #57
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,599
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by UniversalRemonster View Post
WTF? Do you guys know how to read the numbers at behindthenet.ca ?
Was wondering that myself.

Burish had a middle of the road Corsi QoC, not bad, but not top competition.

He had a pretty good GA/60 (1.81) which is a good indicator of his defensive ability.

His +-/60 was positive, also good for a player in his role.

His on ice corsi was about -1, pretty decent for a player in his role again, not great though.

He started a whopping 56.8% of his zone starts in the defensive zone. He was trusted defensively more than almost anyone on the stars.

Is he worth 1.8m? I dunno, but his stats are fine, comparable to Winnik, with a bit less offense (not saying much).

hockeyball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 05:27 PM
  #58
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,178
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by UniversalRemonster View Post
WTF? Do you guys know how to read the numbers at behindthenet.ca ?
Yes I do, but if you know better than please feel free to share your wisdom

WantonAbandon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 05:29 PM
  #59
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,178
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
Was wondering that myself.

Burish had a middle of the road Corsi QoC, not bad, but not top competition.

He had a pretty good GA/60 (1.81) which is a good indicator of his defensive ability.

His +-/60 was positive, also good for a player in his role.

His on ice corsi was about -1, pretty decent for a player in his role again, not great though.

He started a whopping 56.8% of his zone starts in the defensive zone. He was trusted defensively more than almost anyone on the stars.

Is he worth 1.8m? I dunno, but his stats are fine, comparable to Winnik, with a bit less offense (not saying much).
Context is everything... This is what I was talking about. Notice the load he was taking on when compared to the rest of his team mates

http://www.behindthenet.ca/nhl_stati...4+45+46+63+67#

Edit I am well aware that Burish was used differently last season. Were you?


Last edited by WantonAbandon: 07-03-2012 at 05:37 PM.
WantonAbandon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 05:40 PM
  #60
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 32,034
vCash: 2283
Quote:
Originally Posted by WantonAbandon View Post
Yes last season he faced tougher comp than the year before, but are you looking at both QOC stats. Are you taking in account of different coaching philosophies?

If Burish was dominating the top competition in the NHL what would that say about him? Yes he had a negative corsi like -7/-12 against guy would would likely be well in the double digits for both corsi stats.
And you're not looking at the actual results. You are making assumptions. Pavelski and Thornton, albeit better players, were playing against superior competition overall and well into the positive on Corsi. Winnik was also well into the positive and among the top guys on Colorado in both competition brackets although not as high as Burish himself that year. The difference is that Winnik was successful in his role against his opponents. Burish was not.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 06:53 PM
  #61
hohosaregood
Drunken Snacking
 
hohosaregood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,004
vCash: 500
Fact of the matter is that Winnik hasn't signed ANYWHERE yet. If he's really that valuable of a player that people would be willing to pay for, I'm pretty sure he would've been gone before Brandon Prust or some of those lower line players. I know Winnik is good but the fact he hasn't been signed yet tells me he's holding out for something.

hohosaregood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 06:54 PM
  #62
SactoShork
The Youth Movement
 
SactoShork's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 9,634
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Winnik was an excellent puck possessor and a solid defensive presence in the minutes he was given. I don't think I could disagree with you more in regards to him not being effective in any zone.
I should clarify that I'm speaking of results under the ice time given, playing the Sharks system.

I liked Winnik's skill set, but it seemed like he was running against a wall with the Sharks. And since I can't trust that there will be much difference in McLellan's game plan this coming season, I'd have to assume it would be more of the same... 5 points in 21 games, and a mediocre / terrible PK.

Trust me, I'd rather have Winnik than Burish at the latter's salary. But who knows what the demands were?

SactoShork is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 06:58 PM
  #63
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,178
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
And you're not looking at the actual results. You are making assumptions. Pavelski and Thornton, albeit better players, were playing against superior competition overall and well into the positive on Corsi. Winnik was also well into the positive and among the top guys on Colorado in both competition brackets although not as high as Burish himself that year. The difference is that Winnik was successful in his role against his opponents. Burish was not.
But I am. The results were Burish did pretty well against top comp considering his D zone starts were nearly 70% in the year he was used as a top shut down guy. Also the fact that his offensive zone end stats were significantly higher is pretty telling. Now McLellan likes power vs power, but there is a possibility he may try something else against teams that don't have much power. Blues and Yotes for example. McLellan may try and stray away from the matchups those teams want


Last edited by WantonAbandon: 07-03-2012 at 07:07 PM.
WantonAbandon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 07:37 PM
  #64
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 32,034
vCash: 2283
Quote:
Originally Posted by WantonAbandon View Post
But I am. The results were Burish did pretty well against top comp considering his D zone starts were nearly 70% in the year he was used as a top shut down guy. Also the fact that his offensive zone end stats were significantly higher is pretty telling. Now McLellan likes power vs power, but there is a possibility he may try something else against teams that don't have much power. Blues and Yotes for example. McLellan may try and stray away from the matchups those teams want
And yet you're ignoring everything in between like the fact that even with a significant increase in zone finishes, he was still getting lambasted in the things that actually drive the results for the game. Getting outshot like he did is not a recipe for success even if you end in an offensive zone start more than how many times you start in yours. That is simply not a sustainable feat and to say that he was effective while getting severely beaten in this regard is just intellectually dishonest.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 07:47 PM
  #65
Gene Parmesan
Ice up, son.
 
Gene Parmesan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 29,940
vCash: 500
Winnik has priced himself out of SJ it seems.

Gene Parmesan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 07:49 PM
  #66
NWShark*
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,714
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by endy View Post
and no one can say 'oh wow who could have predicted havlat would get hurt??" cuz everyone knew he was a walking injury risk. all in all a "meh" trade as in not bad not good, just was.
Not entirely accurate... didn't Havlat play like 70+ games the 3 seasons prior to coming to SJ? No one predicted he would get hurt trying to climb over the boards on a line change. People who were worried about him getting injured again were just pessimists who didn't bother to look up his stats at the time. It was a freak accident.

Didn't Boyle once about hack his hand off when a skate fell and hit him in the locker room? Freak stuff happens. Havlat is at no greater risk of freak accidents than any other player.

The combo of the Burns and Havlat trades were good for both teams. Great for us because we got a a potential new number 1 D out of it which is incredibly hard to come by even if you try and draft for it.

NWShark* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 07:50 PM
  #67
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,178
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
And yet you're ignoring everything in between like the fact that even with a significant increase in zone finishes, he was still getting lambasted in the things that actually drive the results for the game. Getting outshot like he did is not a recipe for success even if you end in an offensive zone start more than how many times you start in yours. That is simply not a sustainable feat and to say that he was effective while getting severely beaten in this regard is just intellectually dishonest.
No it isn't. You have to look at the total picture... Anyway I'm going to just leave it be now

WantonAbandon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 07:51 PM
  #68
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 32,034
vCash: 2283
Quote:
Originally Posted by WantonAbandon View Post
No it isn't. You have to look at the total picture... Anyway I'm going to just leave it be now
The total picture? The total picture is that he was ridiculously outplayed the times he was on the ice that season against his competition. You're cherrypicking the zone finishes because that's where it ends but there was a hell of a lot more happening in between those whistles that show he wasn't being an effective shutdown player.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 07:53 PM
  #69
Gene Parmesan
Ice up, son.
 
Gene Parmesan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 29,940
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NWShark View Post
Not entirely accurate... didn't Havlat play like 70+ games the 3 seasons prior to coming to SJ? No one predicted he would get hurt trying to climb over the boards on a line change. People who were worried about him getting injured again were just pessimists who didn't bother to look up his stats at the time. It was a freak accident.

Didn't Boyle once about hack his hand off when a skate fell and hit him in the locker room? Freak stuff happens. Havlat is at no greater risk of freak accidents than any other player.

The combo of the Burns and Havlat trades were good for both teams. Great for us because we got a a potential new number 1 D out of it which is incredibly hard to come by even if you try and draft for it.
I agree with you. A recurring theme with cup winners is that big number one dman. Burns isn't there yet but hes fast approaching that status.

Gene Parmesan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 07:56 PM
  #70
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,178
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
The total picture? The total picture is that he was ridiculously outplayed the times he was on the ice that season against his competition. You're cherrypicking the zone finishes because that's where it ends but there was a hell of a lot more happening in between those whistles that show he wasn't being an effective shutdown player.
Judgement of a players performance has to be relative to how he was being used. I'm not cherry picking. Given everything, Burish was effective in the extreme role he was given in 2010-2011

WantonAbandon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 08:04 PM
  #71
MadmanSJ
Know Your Onion!
 
MadmanSJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 1,317
vCash: 500
For the few people trying to keep the balance here so the lamenting doesn't become so lopsided:

Actually, many of us really LIKED McGinn before the trade. How dare you try and play Devil's Advocate with such a serious matter!

I miss my Ginner. I also miss Wellwood.

MadmanSJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 08:08 PM
  #72
Gene Parmesan
Ice up, son.
 
Gene Parmesan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 29,940
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadmanSJ View Post
For the few people trying to keep the balance here so the lamenting doesn't become so lopsided:

Actually, many of us really LIKED McGinn before the trade. How dare you try and play Devil's Advocate with such a serious matter!

I miss my Ginner. I also miss Wellwood.
I like McGinn too but some of the whining about the trade just gets old.

Gene Parmesan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 08:19 PM
  #73
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 32,034
vCash: 2283
Quote:
Originally Posted by WantonAbandon View Post
Judgement of a players performance has to be relative to how he was being used. I'm not cherry picking. Given everything, Burish was effective in the extreme role he was given in 2010-2011
And yet, even with that year, he wasn't as good this year in an easier role. So even if you're given that, he is not a proven third line player. He is hit or miss at that level and is really a solid fourth liner that will give solid secondary penalty kill shifts. He's not a scoring third line player. He's not a physical third line player. He's not an above average defensive third line player. He's not a solid possession player on his own like Winnik is. His actual skills are worse overall than Winnik's. He's a solid fourth line player and I don't mind the contract for that role considering he's not a one-trick pony and will contribute to the PK. But making him into a 3rd line player is a mistake waiting to happen.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 08:20 PM
  #74
Southlake
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 90
vCash: 500
Call me crazy, but part of me still won't completely believe Winnik is gone until he signs elsewhere. Between Wilson's comments, and Winnik's twitter status ping pong, something smells a little like gamesmanship. I imagine Winnik has made negotiations a royal pain, and DW is done. However, I doubt the door is completely shut if Winnik comes to his senses and wants a reasonable contract.

I don't think he's going to re-sign with us, but I also don't think it's 100% certain that he's gone just yet.

Southlake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 08:56 PM
  #75
sjshark91
Registered User
 
sjshark91's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country:
Posts: 23,639
vCash: 2810
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rickety Cricket View Post
Didn't Wilson say he wasn't going to trade for rentals?
I believe. He lied.

sjshark91 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 08:57 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.