-Our puck possession game goes down the drain.
-Other star players like Heatley and Marleau have less open space since the other team doesn't need to go ahead and double team and focus on Thornton.
-Pavelski/Marleau is our first line center and Pavelski/Couture is our 2nd line center. Center depth is lost and if Marleau playes center wing depth is lost.
-Internal salary cap most likely imposed because of the loss of merch sales generated by Thornton, so now we have less money to use.
I know you have some sort of hatred towards Thornton clutchy because I guess he ran over your dog or something but Thornton is very important to the team in more ways than the stat sheet.
Ive said it before, Sharks - Thornton = no playoffs. And i'm not talking about 1 or 2 years of futility then a rise back to the top. We're talking Atlanta Thrashers-esque bottom feeding with not even a close shot at the playoffs for a neverending amount of seasons. If the Bruins hadn't traded him they wouldve won a Cup sometime in the last 5 years.
Ive said it before, Sharks - Thornton = no playoffs. And i'm not talking about 1 or 2 years of futility then a rise back to the top. We're talking Atlanta Thrashers-esque bottom feeding with not even a close shot at the playoffs for a neverending amount of seasons. If the Bruins hadn't traded him they wouldve won a Cup sometime in the last 5 years.
Such a ridiculous viewpoint. Certainly Thornton is key in this team being a contender. However, when was the last time a team with a roster like ours (minus Joe+ 7 million added to team depth) missed the playoffs.
Such a ridiculous viewpoint. Certainly Thornton is key in this team being a contender. However, when was the last time a team with a roster like ours (minus Joe+ 7 million added to team depth) missed the playoffs.
I think he's saying if the Sharks had never traded for Thornton we'd be like the Thrashers. Assuming no Thorton = no Heatley, no boyle, etc.
Ive said it before, Sharks - Thornton = no playoffs. And i'm not talking about 1 or 2 years of futility then a rise back to the top. We're talking Atlanta Thrashers-esque bottom feeding with not even a close shot at the playoffs for a neverending amount of seasons. If the Bruins hadn't traded him they wouldve won a Cup sometime in the last 5 years.
The Sharks first couple seasons out of the lockout would have missed the playoffs w/o Jumbo. The Bruins with him with the talent they've had the past five years wouldn't be winning a Cup either. There's no telling where the Sharks would be w/o Thornton's acquisition now but I sincerely doubt we'd be bottom feeders. Doug Wilson wouldn't have just let that happen and neither would the owners since money matters to them and losing doesn't make money.
The Sharks first couple seasons out of the lockout would have missed the playoffs w/o Jumbo. The Bruins with him with the talent they've had the past five years wouldn't be winning a Cup either. There's no telling where the Sharks would be w/o Thornton's acquisition now but I sincerely doubt we'd be bottom feeders. Doug Wilson wouldn't have just let that happen and neither would the owners since money matters to them and losing doesn't make money.
There is no way to know what would have happened had we not acquired Joe. I tend to believe we would be worse off, but who knows.
Still, we are very lucky to have a super-star who loves his team, loves playing here, and plans to retire here if he can. A bird in the hand.
There is no way to know what would have happened had we not acquired Joe. I tend to believe we would be worse off, but who knows.
Still, we are very lucky to have a super-star who loves his team, loves playing here, and plans to retire here if he can. A bird in the hand.
I'm not saying we would've been better off not trading for Thornton. I'm simply saying that I don't believe the Sharks would've been bottom feeders w/o him. I refuse to believe that ownership and Doug Wilson would allow it. Their goals have been playoffs and profit and they go hand in hand. I know that Blake, Boyle, and Heatley may not have happened w/o Thornton but we'd still be looking at Ehrhoff, Vlasic, Michalek, Marleau, Pavelski, Couture, Setoguchi, Carle, Stuart, and Sturm. We'd still have a solid group of players to put into a lineup or use as trade bait.
Because it's not all about how many points a guy scores! I agree, give me the Thornton of last year with "less points" and I'll take it all day long. He was great last year, I loved his improved 2 way play, and I love some of the nastiness that he incorporated (especially in the playoffs ala game 4 against the wings).
I'm not saying we would've been better off not trading for Thornton. I'm simply saying that I don't believe the Sharks would've been bottom feeders w/o him. I refuse to believe that ownership and Doug Wilson would allow it. Their goals have been playoffs and profit and they go hand in hand. I know that Blake, Boyle, and Heatley may not have happened w/o Thornton but we'd still be looking at Ehrhoff, Vlasic, Michalek, Marleau, Pavelski, Couture, Setoguchi, Carle, Stuart, and Sturm. We'd still have a solid group of players to put into a lineup or use as trade bait.
I agree, I doubt we'd be bottom feeders. But Joe gets a lot of grief and he shouldn't. He's got his flaws, he's not the best player in the league, but he's pretty damn good, and he comes cheap (relatively) for his talent level. Joe is simply not the reason we have failed to win the cup, he's not blameless, but I truly think we are better off with him than without him.
Look at the guys people have said in the past they would rather have (that may have been available) than Joe.
Savard: Injury prone, probably done as a player (at least at the level he was). It's possible he would not have received the brutal hit that knocked him out, but it's also just as possible that he would have (it's not the first time for him).
Kovalchuk: After this summers shenanigans, is that a guy you really would want on this team at this point?
Iginla: Great player, but he's not at Joe's level, and he's declining as fast as anyone in the league right now.
etc. Point being, if you look at the list of guys who are better than Joe, then subtract the players that are simply not available, then subtract the players that have seriously declined, ended their careers, or turned out to be huge head cases... You end up with a pretty short list.
We got Joe, for a steal of a deal, and he's given us some pretty awesome memories and some great entertainment. We haven't hoisted the cup (yet) but so have not a lot of super-stars. The last player on this team we should be complaining about is Joe Thornton.
without thornton the team doesn't make a boat load of money every season, and that would probably wouldn't of got owners to open the cheque books these past few years so they could field a team full of stars.
You know, no one ever said this so I will. What the hell could take Thornton and Wilson two weeks.
Wilson: Hey Joe, how do you want?
Thornton: Hey Doug, I definitely want to be a Shark, how about _______(insert number between 6-7.5 mill) for 3/4 (circle one) years"
Wilson: Done (willing to accept anything anything less than 7.5).
Would anyone else be pretty surprised if it goes that long?
Thornton will either sign this week, or the week they come back from the road trip (10/25). This week makes the most sense since they got nothing else to do til Saturday.
You know, no one ever said this so I will. What the hell could take Thornton and Wilson two weeks.
Wilson: Hey Joe, how do you want?
Thornton: Hey Doug, I definitely want to be a Shark, how about _______(insert number between 6-7.5 mill) for 3/4 (circle one) years"
Wilson: Done (willing to accept anything anything less than 7.5).
Would anyone else be pretty surprised if it goes that long?
Player will get on the bus 14th
Player will have his own hotel room and not have to share
Player will have rigatoni twice a week as an after game meal
Player will have a designated parking space available for any practice
Player will have access to a luxury box 6 times a year at players discretion
Players smelly shirts will be laundered after a game, folded and handed back as soon as possible, but at no time before interviews.
You know, no one ever said this so I will. What the hell could take Thornton and Wilson two weeks.
Wilson: Hey Joe, how do you want?
Thornton: Hey Doug, I definitely want to be a Shark, how about _______(insert number between 6-7.5 mill) for 3/4 (circle one) years"
Wilson: Done (willing to accept anything anything less than 7.5).
Would anyone else be pretty surprised if it goes that long?
If this is serious...
-hockey to be played
-signing a contract (especially millions of dollars) usually involves a lot more than a handshake or coffee break
-it's probably going to involve John Thornton (brother/agent), and while I don't know much about him, if he's a lawyer he's going to look it over quite thoroughly and redact some stuff regardless of Joe's sunny attitude. also might involve some other folks on the Sharks' end who aren't DW
-hockey to be played
-signing a contract (especially millions of dollars) usually involves a lot more than a handshake or coffee break
-it's probably going to involve John Thornton (brother/agent), and while I don't know much about him, if he's a lawyer he's going to look it over quite thoroughly and redact some stuff regardless of Joe's sunny attitude. also might involve some other folks on the Sharks' end who aren't DW
It is tongue in cheek, but it is worth noting Joe's last contract took ten minutes- and that ten minute period occurred on the first day Joe was eligible to sign a new contract. My main point is from an organizational standpoint, this is without a doubt priority number one for the organization so I don't see what could possibly take until the end of October, because realistically whatever Joe demands Doug will agree to it.
It is tongue in cheek, but it is worth noting Joe's last contract took ten minutes- and that ten minute period occurred on the first day Joe was eligible to sign a new contract. My main point is from an organizational standpoint, this is without a doubt priority number one for the organization so I don't see what could possibly take until the end of October, because realistically whatever Joe demands Doug will agree to it.
But they had months (free of hockey and a new baby) to negotiate it. I don't disagree that it'll probably be done sooner than later but it was a little different then. And yeah, whatever JT asks for, will be agreed to ... so maybe John is trying to make a little extra.
It is tongue in cheek, but it is worth noting Joe's last contract took ten minutes- and that ten minute period occurred on the first day Joe was eligible to sign a new contract. My main point is from an organizational standpoint, this is without a doubt priority number one for the organization so I don't see what could possibly take until the end of October, because realistically whatever Joe demands Doug will agree to it.
Not necessarily. They couldn't sign until July 1, but they could have been talking a while.
It is tongue in cheek, but it is worth noting Joe's last contract took ten minutes- and that ten minute period occurred on the first day Joe was eligible to sign a new contract. My main point is from an organizational standpoint, this is without a doubt priority number one for the organization so I don't see what could possibly take until the end of October, because realistically whatever Joe demands Doug will agree to it.
It should also be noted management #1 priority up to now has been sorting out the roster, finding someone to take Greiss, and someone who will give us a top 4 defenseman. Once the season settles in, a contract can get done and from all outward indications, it will....... as soon as the dirty t-shirt clause is finalized between the attorneys.
It should also be noted management #1 priority up to now has been sorting out the roster, finding someone to take Greiss, and someone who will give us a top 4 defenseman. Once the season settles in, a contract can get done and from all outward indications, it will....... as soon as the dirty t-shirt clause is finalized between the attorneys.
Really that is more of a formality anyway- but I can understand how Joe would want it in writing, and for Wilson you don't f around with your franchise player, especially for such a critical clause. Its the new NTC.
Also speaking of sorting out the roster's, LS has a very interesting thread going on the business board. Worth a read who are of the opinion that oh 80,000 or so is acceptable cap space- nice find LS.
