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

Todd Mclellan needs go

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-19-2013, 02:25 PM
  #126
Can HaZ Trainz
Frightened Inmate #2
 
Can HaZ Trainz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: San Leandro, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 1,687
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpinTheBlackCircle View Post
Let the year play out. Deal our pending UFA's. Change the coach and GM after the year.
This.
It's a critical time for the franchise due to a possible lame duck season for the front office. We as fans can only hope that the teams turns it around fast, or really makes the FO changes during the offseason. It's been said before, a GM in desperation could easily mess up a teams future.


Last edited by Can HaZ Trainz: 03-19-2013 at 02:27 PM. Reason: Typo
Can HaZ Trainz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 02:28 PM
  #127
do0glas
Registered User
 
do0glas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 6,928
vCash: 500
They love to wait behind the net so the other team has time to clog the neutral zone. That may speak some to instructions from Larry on break outs. But it could also speak to Murray being on the ice.

do0glas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 02:29 PM
  #128
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 19,280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Can HaZ Trainz View Post
This.
It's a critical time for the franchise due to a possible lame duck season for the front office. We as fans can only hope that the teams turns it around fast OR really makes changes during the offseason. It's been said before, a GM in desperation could easily mess up a teams future.
I don't really have a problem with this, but I would still trade Clowe and Murray. They are almost certainly not going to be re-signed and they are not doing us ANY good either. I'd also consider trading Greiss if someone wants him (since we'll never let him play anyway!) and Handzus if he wants to go. I don't see any of those trades effecting the team short term and could really help long term.

As for the rest, the only downside until waiting for the off-season is there is less chance of taking advantage of a desperate gm on trade deadline day. You will get 'bonus' value out of anyone because the team trading for them is not getting a rental, they get a new player for the playoffs and another year still on the contract.

hockeyball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 02:35 PM
  #129
Gene Parmesan
Spider 2 Y Banana.
 
Gene Parmesan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 46,892
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by do0glas View Post
They love to wait behind the net so the other team has time to clog the neutral zone. That may speak some to instructions from Larry on break outs. But it could also speak to Murray being on the ice.
Then they rim it up the boards and it usually ends up coming right back to them.

Gene Parmesan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 02:49 PM
  #130
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 hockeyball View Post
I don't really have a problem with this, but I would still trade Clowe and Murray. They are almost certainly not going to be re-signed and they are not doing us ANY good either. I'd also consider trading Greiss if someone wants him (since we'll never let him play anyway!) and Handzus if he wants to go. I don't see any of those trades effecting the team short term and could really help long term.

As for the rest, the only downside until waiting for the off-season is there is less chance of taking advantage of a desperate gm on trade deadline day. You will get 'bonus' value out of anyone because the team trading for them is not getting a rental, they get a new player for the playoffs and another year still on the contract.
The negative on deadline trades is that it is extremely rare to get top 10 picks in exchange. Even more rare for top 5. They need a high pick and that likely won't be available at the deadline.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 02:49 PM
  #131
Nolan11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,153
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
I don't really have a problem with this, but I would still trade Clowe and Murray. They are almost certainly not going to be re-signed and they are not doing us ANY good either. I'd also consider trading Greiss if someone wants him (since we'll never let him play anyway!) and Handzus if he wants to go. I don't see any of those trades effecting the team short term and could really help long term.

As for the rest, the only downside until waiting for the off-season is there is less chance of taking advantage of a desperate gm on trade deadline day. You will get 'bonus' value out of anyone because the team trading for them is not getting a rental, they get a new player for the playoffs and another year still on the contract.
100% agree! Trade all our rentals as HB indicated. Get some picks or prospects for players that won't be here next year. (This could include more than the 4 above, like RFAs we may not qualify, or maybe Gomez if we don't plan on extending.)

If we can get a high value return, I would trade Boyle before the deadline, too. Some bubble or contending team would love to have him for a better run this year and next. There should be a reasonable offer out there (which would go down after the TDL). Keep some of the cap hit, too, if it gets us more value return.

All others, listen to offers

Nolan11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 02:52 PM
  #132
TealManV
A man has said
 
TealManV's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 621
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
The negative on deadline trades is that it is extremely rare to get top 10 picks in exchange. Even more rare for top 5. They need a high pick and that likely won't be available at the deadline.
I completely agree, but we could acquire another 1st at the deadline and then package 2 1sts to move into the top 5. If we keep playing this way we might be pretty close to the top 5!

TealManV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 02:56 PM
  #133
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 19,280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
The negative on deadline trades is that it is extremely rare to get top 10 picks in exchange. Even more rare for top 5. They need a high pick and that likely won't be available at the deadline.
True, but that doesn't really apply to Clowe/Murray/Handzus since they are free agents anyway. But I agree on the rest, it's a tough call.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nolan11 View Post
100% agree! Trade all our rentals as HB indicated. Get some picks or prospects for players that won't be here next year. (This could include more than the 4 above, like RFAs we may not qualify, or maybe Gomez if we don't plan on extending.)

If we can get a high value return, I would trade Boyle before the deadline, too. Some bubble or contending team would love to have him for a better run this year and next. There should be a reasonable offer out there (which would go down after the TDL). Keep some of the cap hit, too, if it gets us more value return.

All others, listen to offers
I would actually consider re-signing Gomez again if he'll come cheap again. I think he's being missused and would be a good fit for the team I would like us to be. He's the kind of 'vet' you want on your roster, an underpaid very hard working, fast skating, cup winner. He's a good depth player that can fill in just about anywhere if needed. If he comes back under $1m that is.

hockeyball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 02:57 PM
  #134
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 TealManV View Post
I completely agree, but we could acquire another 1st at the deadline and then package 2 1sts to move into the top 5. If we keep playing this way we might be pretty close to the top 5!
By going 2 1st's they might go from 8 to 4. Top 3 usually requires tanking or a transaction almost a year ahead (eg how the B's got Seguin). I would target the Seguin route as optimal. They won't be able to go 12 to 5 with 2 1st's; it is a very sharp curve in terms of the values. Look at what the Isles got for allowing a team their #5 pick some time ago, it was a whopper.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 02:59 PM
  #135
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 19,280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
By going 2 1st's they might go from 8 to 4. Top 3 usually requires tanking or a transaction almost a year ahead (eg how the B's got Seguin). I would target the Seguin route as optimal. They won't be able to go 12 to 5 with 2 1st's; it is a very sharp curve in terms of the values. Look at what the Isles got for allowing a team their #5 pick some time ago, it was a whopper.
Or you could just try to get 2-3 lottery picks and hope for the best

hockeyball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 03:01 PM
  #136
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 29,901
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
By going 2 1st's they might go from 8 to 4. Top 3 usually requires tanking or a transaction almost a year ahead (eg how the B's got Seguin). I would target the Seguin route as optimal. They won't be able to go 12 to 5 with 2 1st's; it is a very sharp curve in terms of the values. Look at what the Isles got for allowing a team their #5 pick some time ago, it was a whopper.
Unfortunately, we don't have a Kessel, unless you're talking about Couture. And you'd have to be very, very careful which team we traded him to. I can't think of one off the top of my head that would have a chance at returning a lottery pick with Couture added. Couture is becoming quite the possession player. He just passed Marleau for first on the team recently.

TheJuxtaposer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 03:03 PM
  #137
Nolan11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,153
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
True, but that doesn't really apply to Clowe/Murray/Handzus since they are free agents anyway. But I agree on the rest, it's a tough call.



I would actually consider re-signing Gomez again if he'll come cheap again. I think he's being missused and would be a good fit for the team I would like us to be. He's the kind of 'vet' you want on your roster, an underpaid very hard working, fast skating, cup winner. He's a good depth player that can fill in just about anywhere if needed. If he comes back under $1m that is.
I would re-sign Gomez, too, for 1-2 years at max 1.25 million. He would be a great stop-gap 3rd line center for us while Hertl is developing. Hertl gets here early, drop Gomez to 4th line or where ever needed.

Nolan11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 03:06 PM
  #138
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 19,280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
Unfortunately, we don't have a Kessel, unless you're talking about Couture. And you'd have to be very, very careful which team we traded him to. I can't think of one off the top of my head that would have a chance at returning a lottery pick with Couture added. Couture is becoming quite the possession player. He just passed Marleau for first on the team recently.
Doug Wilson trades Couture I will lose my freaking mind. He's the most untouchable guy on the team. A bird in the hand and all that.

If you trade Couture, even if you get a better player somehow (unlikely) your net gain is going to be pretty small.

hockeyball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 03:11 PM
  #139
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 29,901
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
Doug Wilson trades Couture I will lose my freaking mind. He's the most untouchable guy on the team. A bird in the hand and all that.

If you trade Couture, even if you get a better player somehow (unlikely) your net gain is going to be pretty small.
Well, it sure worked out for Boston. They're lucky though, that it was Toronto and that they were so incompetent as to think a one-dimensional goal-scorer would get them to the playoffs.

But yeah, Easy's right on the valuation of lottery picks. Moving from out of the top-10 into the top-5 is nearly impossible. The Islanders supposedly offered their entire 2012 draft to the Jackets just to move from 4 to 2.

TheJuxtaposer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 03:19 PM
  #140
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 TheJuxtaposer View Post
Unfortunately, we don't have a Kessel, unless you're talking about Couture. And you'd have to be very, very careful which team we traded him to. I can't think of one off the top of my head that would have a chance at returning a lottery pick with Couture added. Couture is becoming quite the possession player. He just passed Marleau for first on the team recently.
I'm thinking Boyle, JT, Marleau, Pavs. But it would have to be off-season and he would have to get a stop gap trade or FA like Horton or he would suffer in the standings. I have no illusions about the team getting worse with any of those 4 being traded with no return. The Sharks just don't have the depth on the farm. They don't have a single prospect threatening Kennedy or Kearns for the scoring lead.

I also think it is a mistake to pin hopes on Couture as a #1 center. I could see Couture in a 1a/1b scenario, but not better than that. And Couture presents the issue of speed which means the GM has to work extra hard on a speedy wing to complement Couture.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 03:22 PM
  #141
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 19,280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
I'm thinking Boyle, JT, Marleau, Pavs. But it would have to be off-season and he would have to get a stop gap trade or FA like Horton or he would suffer in the standings. I have no illusions about the team getting worse with any of those 4 being traded with no return. The Sharks just don't have the depth on the farm. They don't have a single prospect threatening Kennedy or Kearns for the scoring lead.

I also think it is a mistake to pin hopes on Couture as a #1 center. I could see Couture in a 1a/1b scenario, but not better than that. And Couture presents the issue of speed which means the GM has to work extra hard on a speedy wing to complement Couture.
Bruins won with a #1c no better than Couture, he just needs the right wingers as you said. He's too good to be a #2 center really, not an elite #1 though.

hockeyball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 03:34 PM
  #142
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 29,901
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
I'm thinking Boyle, JT, Marleau, Pavs. But it would have to be off-season and he would have to get a stop gap trade or FA like Horton or he would suffer in the standings. I have no illusions about the team getting worse with any of those 4 being traded with no return. The Sharks just don't have the depth on the farm. They don't have a single prospect threatening Kennedy or Kearns for the scoring lead.

I also think it is a mistake to pin hopes on Couture as a #1 center. I could see Couture in a 1a/1b scenario, but not better than that. And Couture presents the issue of speed which means the GM has to work extra hard on a speedy wing to complement Couture.
Realistically, which of those four do you think someone would trade a top-5 pick for? Teams with a top-5 pick are generally those that are far away from competing, not ones who want to trade for a 34 y/o C, 37 y/o D, or 28 y/o C who's a UFA in a year.

I agree on Couture, but you know that.

@HB Bergeron is a lot better than Couture.

TheJuxtaposer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 03:39 PM
  #143
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 19,280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
Realistically, which of those four do you think someone would trade a top-5 pick for? Teams with a top-5 pick are generally those that are far away from competing, not ones who want to trade for a 34 y/o C, 37 y/o D, or 28 y/o C who's a UFA in a year.

I agree on Couture, but you know that.

@HB Bergeron is a lot better than Couture.
I'm talking about potential wise. I think Couture can/will be as good as Bergeron. Another good example would be Kopitar. Couture is capable of reaching that level imo. Not the Joe Thornton, Giroux, etc level

hockeyball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 03:41 PM
  #144
Graveland
HONE YOUR CRAFT
 
Graveland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sunnyvale
Country: United States
Posts: 12,342
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
Bruins won with a #1c no better than Couture, he just needs the right wingers as you said. He's too good to be a #2 center really, not an elite #1 though.
If he only needs the right wingers how about trading Thornton or Marleau for someone like Ladd?

Graveland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 03:44 PM
  #145
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 29,901
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
I'm talking about potential wise. I think Couture can/will be as good as Bergeron. Another good example would be Kopitar. Couture is capable of reaching that level imo. Not the Joe Thornton, Giroux, etc level
Kopitar is Joe Thornton level. Bergeron is closer to Thornton than Couture, I don't think you're giving him enough credit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barry Dylan View Post
If he only needs the right wingers how about trading Thornton or Marleau for someone like Ladd?
What makes you think that Andrew ****ing Ladd would be the right winger for Couture? Ladd is an incredibly overrated hockey player.

TheJuxtaposer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 03:48 PM
  #146
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 19,280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
Kopitar is Joe Thornton level. Bergeron is closer to Thornton than Couture, I don't think you're giving him enough credit.



What makes you think that Andrew ****ing Ladd would be the right winger for Couture? Ladd is an incredibly overrated hockey player.
Kopitar is not Joe Thornton in his prime level, nor is Bergeron. I like both guys, but they are a step down. Remember, I'm a closet Kings fan too, I watch a lot of Kings games. I'm not downing on either guy, but they certainly are not on Giroux/Thornton level nor of course the Crosby/Malkin level.

My point is just that Couture's only deficiency is skating, and he appears to be improving in that regard quite a bit. I see no reason he can not and will not reach that level.

hockeyball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 03:59 PM
  #147
Hatrick Marleau
Nikolay GOALdobin
 
Hatrick Marleau's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: With JR
Posts: 4,358
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
Kopitar is not Joe Thornton in his prime level, nor is Bergeron. I like both guys, but they are a step down. Remember, I'm a closet Kings fan too, I watch a lot of Kings games. I'm not downing on either guy, but they certainly are not on Giroux/Thornton level nor of course the Crosby/Malkin level.

My point is just that Couture's only deficiency is skating, and he appears to be improving in that regard quite a bit. I see no reason he can not and will not reach that level.
Couture isn't big enough, he is a good skater not a great one, he has good hands not great hands, he is a good passer not a great one, he is very good defensively, and a very good shot. All those skills add up to a very good all around player. He will never reach Kopitar level. He will reach Bergeron offensively and likely pass him but he won't be elite defensively like Bergeron.

Hatrick Marleau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 04:00 PM
  #148
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 TheJuxtaposer View Post
Realistically, which of those four do you think someone would trade a top-5 pick for? Teams with a top-5 pick are generally those that are far away from competing, not ones who want to trade for a 34 y/o C, 37 y/o D, or 28 y/o C who's a UFA in a year.

I agree on Couture, but you know that.

@HB Bergeron is a lot better than Couture.
You have to catch a GM in a Brian Burke moment where he thinks he only needs one piece to jump him into the playoffs. IMO, the only one of the 4 that might inspire that thinking is JT. The other GM has to think that the pick that he is giving up will not be a top 5 because he thinks that one player will put him on the bubble or above.

I am not talking about what I think, I am talking about the overblown expectations of some GMs. I know that moving teams up and down the standings is considerably more difficult than any one player will address. It is a combination of coaching, system and personnel and the personnel are additive only in very small increments.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 04:05 PM
  #149
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 29,901
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
You have to catch a GM in a Brian Burke moment where he thinks he only needs one piece to jump him into the playoffs. IMO, the only one of the 4 that might inspire that thinking is JT. The other GM has to think that the pick that he is giving up will not be a top 5 because he thinks that one player will put him on the bubble or above.

I am not talking about what I think, I am talking about the overblown expectations of some GMs. I know that moving teams up and down the standings is considerably more difficult than any one player will address. It is a combination of coaching, system and personnel and the personnel are additive only in very small increments.
Burke is a special kind of stupid though. Not sure anyone else will manage to be that way. Maybe Buffalo?

As for Kopitar, you're dead wrong about him. He's better than Thornton right now. So's Bergeron. Remember, Kopitar is my favorite non-Shark, I know his talent backward and forward. He put on a defensive clinic in the playoffs, Selke-worthy. Plus being a PPG, while making Brown and Williams look like elite first liners. He's a special, special player, the main reason why the Kings are so good.

TheJuxtaposer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2013, 04:07 PM
  #150
Hatrick Marleau
Nikolay GOALdobin
 
Hatrick Marleau's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: With JR
Posts: 4,358
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
Burke is a special kind of stupid though. Not sure anyone else will manage to be that way. Maybe Buffalo?

As for Kopitar, you're dead wrong about him. He's better than Thornton right now. So's Bergeron. Remember, Kopitar is my favorite non-Shark, I know his talent backward and forward. He put on a defensive clinic in the playoffs, Selke-worthy. Plus being a PPG, while making Brown and Williams look like elite first liners. He's a special, special player, the main reason why the Kings are so good.
Tambellini

Hatrick Marleau 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 07:38 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.