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, 02:52 PM
  #1
flatroc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2
vCash: 500
Sharks no longer interested in Daniel Winnik

Criminy..

Article showed up in a local paper - borrowed from the Mercury News:

"After signing Burish, Wilson acknowledged that the Sharks were no longer interested in bringing back Daniel Winnik"

So, what DID we get for Jamie McGuinn??

flatroc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 02:53 PM
  #2
SharksAddict
Registered User
 
SharksAddict's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,524
vCash: 500
TJ Galiardi.

SharksAddict is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 02:53 PM
  #3
Rickety Cricket
Registered User
 
Rickety Cricket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Not Kent Huskins
Country: United States
Posts: 28,459
vCash: 500
Ffs...

Rickety Cricket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 02:56 PM
  #4
JayP812
The Team of Tomorrow
 
JayP812's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Bay Area
Country: United States
Posts: 5,936
vCash: 500
Guys, don't forget about the 7th in next years draft. I think that made the trade worth it.

JayP812 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 02:58 PM
  #5
Rickety Cricket
Registered User
 
Rickety Cricket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Not Kent Huskins
Country: United States
Posts: 28,459
vCash: 500
Didn't Wilson say he wasn't going to trade for rentals?

Rickety Cricket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 02:59 PM
  #6
glasgow26
Registered User
 
glasgow26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 3,897
vCash: 500
Not surprising. Wilson said this on July 1. I think a lot of you will be singing a different tune about Galiardi by the mid-way point of the season, though. He's just two years removed from scoring 15 goals and 39 points in 70 games. You guys all hated McGinn in 2010-11 and wanted him in the minors last season, and now that he's gone you miss him. Galiardi had a down year (probably thanks to being injured the last two years) but could easily rebound and pot 20 this season. He's still young (24, same as McGinn) and has a solid skill set. He's also a great agitator, as most of you should remember from our first-round series against the Avs two years ago.

Galiardi has only played 17 games in teal. Give him a chance to show what he can do.

glasgow26 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 03:00 PM
  #7
wishman
Registered User
 
wishman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 775
vCash: 500
And don't forget about Sgarbossa. Yeah, he's just a prospect and might not turn into anything. But I think he ended up leading the OHL in scoring playing on a mediocre team and from what I've read from a few scouts, is definitely NHL material.

wishman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 03:06 PM
  #8
Korolyuk15
Registered User
 
Korolyuk15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: London
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 940
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by glasgow26 View Post
Not surprising. Wilson said this on July 1. I think a lot of you will be singing a different tune about Galiardi by the mid-way point of the season, though. He's just two years removed from scoring 15 goals and 39 points in 70 games. You guys all hated McGinn in 2010-11 and wanted him in the minors last season, and now that he's gone you miss him. Galiardi had a down year (probably thanks to being injured the last two years) but could easily rebound and pot 20 this season. He's still young (24, same as McGinn) and has a solid skill set. He's also a great agitator, as most of you should remember from our first-round series against the Avs two years ago.

Galiardi has only played 17 games in teal. Give him a chance to show what he can do.

These are all very good points...people's memories are short, and the fact the sharks exited early without much from anyone, let alone galliardi, while McGinn flourished definitely makes this seem especially bad

But either way...Sharks got fleeced here...Sgarbossa could have been another Pavelski (slow, but talent for scoring goals, surprise development)

Winnik is gone

McGinn is gone

Galliardi might be as good or better than McGinn...


No matter how you size that up, this trade did not help the team overall...

Korolyuk15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 03:07 PM
  #9
Iron Chef
Registered User
 
Iron Chef's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,966
vCash: 500
The trade hurts because McGinn went on a tear right after being traded, whereas Winnik and Galiardi couldnt even combine for the same number of points as McGinn. Then, Winnik leaves, so feel we traded away Logan Couture for peanuts.

But in all honesty, McGinn did "return to form" shortly before the season ended. I agree that Galiardi has lots of potential that may be seen after a full training camp with the team and a (hopefully) better system that caters to tenacious people like him. I'm also curious what type of offer McGinn got, so thats also something to be considered when all is said and done.

Bottom line, lets wait a while before we show up at DWs doorstep with pitchforks

Iron Chef is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 03:07 PM
  #10
Bizz06
#FireDougWilson
 
Bizz06's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: San Jose
Posts: 2,838
vCash: 500
McGinn was already in the process of being replaced by Wingles anyway.

Bizz06 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 03:07 PM
  #11
Nighthock
**** the Kings...
 
Nighthock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Reno, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 15,845
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SharksAddict View Post
TJ Galiardi.
yep ... has a higher ceiling than McGinn, I believe

after Burish, if Winnik was signed Galiardi would most likely be buried on the 4th line and his potential would dwindle ... I love Winnik, but 2.5 mil for a 4th liner just doesn't make sense

Nighthock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 03:09 PM
  #12
USF Shark
Zôion politikòn
 
USF Shark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: DC Area
Country: United States
Posts: 20,584
vCash: 500
http://www.mercurynews.com/sharks/ci...-burish-4-year

Quote:
After signing Burish, Wilson acknowledged that the Sharks were no longer interested in bringing back Daniel Winnik, a forward acquired from Colorado at the trade deadline who fulfills a similar role and also became a free agent Sunday.
FYI: Please post the article you are referencing when starting a thread like this.

__________________
"I hate books; they only teach us to talk about things we know nothing about."
-Jean Jacques Rousseau

Last edited by USF Shark: 07-03-2012 at 03:21 PM.
USF Shark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 03:24 PM
  #13
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,225
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by flatroc View Post
Criminy..

Article showed up in a local paper - borrowed from the Mercury News:

"After signing Burish, Wilson acknowledged that the Sharks were no longer interested in bringing back Daniel Winnik"

So, what DID we get for Jamie McGuinn??
We got a chance to have a third line that could push the pace and an improved penalty kill. McGinn couldn't help in either of those areas and Winnik fell a bit short. If Winnik wanted 2.5 million as once reported than Wilson deserves some Kudos. Seriously I'll mail him a box.

WantonAbandon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 03:25 PM
  #14
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 32,838
vCash: 500
Asking Burish to replace Winnik is just a boneheaded idea. Burish is not a 3rd line caliber player. Winnik was.

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 03:26 PM
  #15
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,225
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rickety Cricket View Post
Didn't Wilson say he wasn't going to trade for rentals?
That doesn't mean he was willing to pay Winnik 700k a year more Burish to accomplish such an oath.

WantonAbandon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 03:27 PM
  #16
magic school bus
***********
 
magic school bus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: San Jose, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 14,981
vCash: 500
Wilson!

magic school bus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 03:27 PM
  #17
Mafoofoo
:facepalm:
 
Mafoofoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles
Country: United States
Posts: 13,068
vCash: 500
God dammit DW. Why the hell not? Is Winnik asking for Pavelski money or what?

Mafoofoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 03:28 PM
  #18
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,225
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
Asking Burish to replace Winnik is just a boneheaded idea. Burish is not a 3rd line caliber player. Winnik was.
He has been a third liner. Their point production is pretty similar. Burish has been used effectively against top comp in the NHL.

Burish and Winniks games are very simmilar. The one difference I can think of is that Burish brings more sandpaper and aggresion to his game. This is something Wilson wanted. If you think Burish is not a 3rd linner then I don't see how you think Winnik was.

WantonAbandon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 03:29 PM
  #19
SpinTheBlackCircle
Global Moderator
boots and pants
 
SpinTheBlackCircle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 33,734
vCash: 500
What a godawful trade

__________________
Gots all my pertinence on it and such
SpinTheBlackCircle is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 03:31 PM
  #20
Chileiceman
Registered User
 
Chileiceman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Chile
Posts: 8,543
vCash: 500
I'd pick Winnik over Burish. Burish agitates more, but I'd say Winnik is a better all around hockey player.

As an Avs fan, I hope Galiardi pans out. His potential is huge, but he hasn't been able to get it all together since 09-10, with injuries, being put in the doghouse and some just flat out poor play.

Chileiceman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 03:33 PM
  #21
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 32,838
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WantonAbandon View Post
He has been a third liner. Their point production is pretty similar. Burish has been used effectively against top comp in the NHL.

Burish and Winniks games are very simmilar. The one difference I can think of is that Burish brings more sandpaper and aggresion to his game. This is something Wilson wanted. If you think Burish is not a 3rd linner then I don't see how you think Winnik was.
He has been a third liner in Dallas but he was overextended in that role. Point production is similar but Winnik is a shutdown level defensive player with exceptional possession skills. Burish does not have either. Burish may be more chirpy than Winnik but in terms of actual physical aggression, Burish doesn't bring much of it.

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 03:36 PM
  #22
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,225
vCash: 500
You guys do realize that everything else about McGinn beside his goal totals and ludicrously high shooting percentage was pretty bad right? For the Avs too.

Edit: I fully expect McGinn to do a Comeau. Actually Comeau probably would still have better value then McGinn


Last edited by WantonAbandon: 07-03-2012 at 03:47 PM.
WantonAbandon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 03:38 PM
  #23
Lebanezer
Registered User
 
Lebanezer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New York
Country: Lebanon
Posts: 2,758
vCash: 500
I think we should reserve judgement on the Winnik situation until he signs somewhere. If he signs for 3+, which I could see happening after Prust got 2.5, then DW let him walk because his salary demands were totally outlandish. If he signs for 2-2.5 then DW was just being stupid. I'm honestly surprised he hasn't been signed yet. I figured he'd go the first day.

Lebanezer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 03:39 PM
  #24
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 32,838
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WantonAbandon View Post
You guys do realize that everything else about McGinn beside his goal totals and ludicrously high shooting percentage was pretty bad right? For the Avs too.
I don't think anyone cares as long as he's scoring. The name of the game is scoring goals more than the other team. Everything else is secondary guidelines towards that end.

Pinkfloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2012, 03:39 PM
  #25
WantonAbandon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 5,225
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
He has been a third liner in Dallas but he was overextended in that role. Point production is similar but Winnik is a shutdown level defensive player with exceptional possession skills. Burish does not have either. Burish may be more chirpy than Winnik but in terms of actual physical aggression, Burish doesn't bring much of it.
Yes Burish has been used in the shutdown role very effectively waaayy back in the 2010-2011 season. There is not enough differences between the two to warrant a significant increase in pay to sign Winnik.

WantonAbandon 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 11:29 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.