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

Thomas Greiss; UPD Assigned to Swedish League Brynas 10/21

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-12-2010, 02:29 PM
  #151
triplea112
Registered User
 
triplea112's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 534
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 210 View Post
It doesn't prove that either.

I'd argue that being the 40th ranked goalie in the NHL doesn't make you all that much better than the goalie ranked 60th...which brings us right back to what I said, unless Greiss is a significant upgrade over a team's current back-up goaltender it's not worth claiming him because then teams have to deal with what to do with the back-up they already have.

That's why goaltenders tend to go through waivers without being claimed.
hit the nail on the head with that one. I'll add that if any team thought he had some serious potential, they would have picked him up. And they didn't. He's an average backup with the potential to be a decent starter someday. no need to freak out.

triplea112 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2010, 02:31 PM
  #152
Le Rosbeef
Registered User
 
Le Rosbeef's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,515
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulrich Liechtenstein View Post
I'm more worried about becoming jaded toward the franchise/management, it just seemed a little crass the way they dealt with him. That pie looks rather delicious..



Can I have this instead of a pie?
Ok, let me put it this way:

Would Sharks fans rather our management were 'nice' to existing players and never tried to improve their chances of winning the cup or be 'crass' and put a potentially better team out on the ice?

There had been no love lost for Murray, Clowe, Huskins etc when their names repeatedly appeared as trade bait on these forums.

So which is it, Sharks fans? We can't pick and choose who we give cuddles and slaps to!

Le Rosbeef is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2010, 02:33 PM
  #153
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,940
vCash: 500
I certainly am not one of the folks who over-reacted (in fact I'm not even sure I reacted at all...)

However, I do still feel like the org has not handled the situation well. Greiss is a an extremely economical backup goalie, and having both Niemi and Niitty at 2m is unnecessary. We are wasting 1.5m sitting on the bench. He's also the most NHL ready goalie we have, and should have been given a 'real' shot before being waived. It sends a lousy message to the rest of the goalies in the pipeline.

It's not a big deal though, certainly not something worth flipping out over, and the worst part about it simply how much it sucks for Greiss.

hockeyball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2010, 02:48 PM
  #154
Graveland
HONE YOUR CRAFT
 
Graveland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sunnyvale
Country: United States
Posts: 11,610
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SharkyMcWoo View Post
Ok, let me put it this way:

Would Sharks fans rather our management were 'nice' to existing players and never tried to improve their chances of winning the cup or be 'crass' and put a potentially better team out on the ice?

There had been no love lost for Murray, Clowe, Huskins etc when their names repeatedly appeared as trade bait on these forums.

So which is it, Sharks fans? We can't pick and choose who we give cuddles and slaps to!
Like I've said before I don't think the gap between Greiss warrants not moving Nitty if we want to take off the kid gloves. We should of waived Nitty and Wallin as soon as was possible.

Graveland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2010, 02:49 PM
  #155
wraith985
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 987
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
I certainly am not one of the folks who over-reacted (in fact I'm not even sure I reacted at all...)

However, I do still feel like the org has not handled the situation well. Greiss is a an extremely economical backup goalie, and having both Niemi and Niitty at 2m is unnecessary. We are wasting 1.5m sitting on the bench. He's also the most NHL ready goalie we have, and should have been given a 'real' shot before being waived. It sends a lousy message to the rest of the goalies in the pipeline.

It's not a big deal though, certainly not something worth flipping out over, and the worst part about it simply how much it sucks for Greiss.
If Doug Wilson had signed both Niittymaki and Niemi on July 1, then we could have this conversation about wasting $1.5 million on the bench. But that's not how it actually happened. Doug went out and got his man on July 1, the guy that he thought was the best goaltender available this summer. A month later, the actual best goaltender available (including all of the ones signed on July 1) actually became available and fell into his lap, he got a bargain, and he took it.

You can't just use hindsight and criticize Doug Wilson for not knowing on July 1 that Antti Niemi would become available sometime in August. So if you criticize, it has to be that you don't agree with Wilson picking up Antti Niemi - the guy who just backstopped the team that swept the Sharks en route to the Cup, and who is clearly better than your two current options in net. While I agree it sucks for Greiss, there is no way that Doug Wilson could have handled it better from an organizational point of view given the way the events actually happened.

Think of it this way - when Manny Malhotra fell into San Jose's lap last summer at $700K, was anyone crying bloody murder that he was taking away Torrey Mitchell's opportunity and that the Sharks were wasting $1.37 million on the fourth line on an unnecessary player?

wraith985 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2010, 02:54 PM
  #156
wraith985
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 987
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulrich Liechtenstein View Post
Like I've said before I don't think the gap between Greiss warrants not moving Nitty if we want to take off the kid gloves. We should of waived Nitty and Wallin as soon as was possible.
First of all, Wallin has a NMC, so that's a nonstarter. Additionally, Wallin's contract was pretty obviously the result of a promise made at trade deadline time, so even if they could waive him, once word got around that the Sharks made him a promise last year and then went back on it once they got what they wanted, good luck getting anyone else to sign here. Twenty years of building good will, wasted. Waiving a freshly-signed player is similar. Talk about sending harmful messages; you're missing the forest for the trees.

wraith985 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2010, 03:01 PM
  #157
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,940
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wraith985 View Post
If Doug Wilson had signed both Niittymaki and Niemi on July 1, then we could have this conversation about wasting $1.5 million on the bench. But that's not how it actually happened. Doug went out and got his man on July 1, the guy that he thought was the best goaltender available this summer. A month later, the actual best goaltender available (including all of the ones signed on July 1) actually became available and fell into his lap, he got a bargain, and he took it.

You can't just use hindsight and criticize Doug Wilson for not knowing on July 1 that Antti Niemi would become available sometime in August. So if you criticize, it has to be that you don't agree with Wilson picking up Antti Niemi - the guy who just backstopped the team that swept the Sharks en route to the Cup, and who is clearly better than your two current options in net. While I agree it sucks for Greiss, there is no way that Doug Wilson could have handled it better from an organizational point of view given the way the events actually happened.

Think of it this way - when Manny Malhotra fell into San Jose's lap last summer at $700K, was anyone crying bloody murder that he was taking away Torrey Mitchell's opportunity and that the Sharks were wasting $1.37 million on the fourth line on an unnecessary player?
Torrey Mitchell still played, the backup goaltender (whoever that might be any given night) does not. So that's 1.5m sitting on the bench any given night (except in the rare case of a game where a goalie is injured). Remember too, if a goalie IS injured, a new backup is brought up anyway, and that 1.5m (now 2m) is still eating up salary (yes on LTIR potentially, but you still lose your 'free' cap space that you might need for a deadline deal). So you can't really argue "well if Niemi is injured, we have Niitty to back him up and that's worth an extra 1.5m over Greiss". The disparity between Greiss and Niitty is small, and I don't see how that is worth 1.5m of dead cap space.

I know what your saying, but Doug overpaid for Niitty (slightly) and he totally failed doing what he planned to do. He planned to beef up his defense, bring in a cheap goalie, and follow the Blackhawks/Red Wings model. He however (whether out of his hands or not) failed to do that. He should have gone after the defense first, as the goalie market was soft anyway, and worried about his situation in goal afterward. He misjudged the market.

hockeyball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2010, 03:16 PM
  #158
Graveland
HONE YOUR CRAFT
 
Graveland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sunnyvale
Country: United States
Posts: 11,610
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wraith985 View Post
First of all, Wallin has a NMC, so that's a nonstarter. Additionally, Wallin's contract was pretty obviously the result of a promise made at trade deadline time, so even if they could waive him, once word got around that the Sharks made him a promise last year and then went back on it once they got what they wanted, good luck getting anyone else to sign here. Twenty years of building good will, wasted. Waiving a freshly-signed player is similar. Talk about sending harmful messages; you're missing the forest for the trees.
Were doing what it takes to get to the playoffs or did you not read that part? If were going to be cruel and snap some necks along the way why pull any punches with anyone?

I can play this game too


Last edited by SpinTheBlackCircle: 10-12-2010 at 03:34 PM. Reason: watch it
Graveland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2010, 03:45 PM
  #159
wraith985
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 987
vCash: 500
As cliche as the phrase is, it's relevant here - this isn't NHL 2011. You don't have the luxury of "focusing" on one position while the world waits for you to hit triangle to get back to the menu so that you can advance to the next arbitrarily-defined signing period where everyone's salary demands magically get updated simultaneously.

Antero Niittymaki was going to have a job on July 1, whether it was in San Jose or elsewhere. Knowing this, Doug Wilson went out and got his man. Slightly overpaid or not, that was the requirement of the situation. We can argue until we're blue in the face about whether Mason or Ellis or whoever else was better, but the point is that Doug Wilson had to pick up *a* goaltender on July 1. At the time, everyone "knew" that if he didn't, he wasn't going to be able to later. You can't now look at that signing in hindsight and blame Doug Wilson for not having a crystal ball. The criticism on July 1 was never "Doug Wilson shouldn't have signed a goaltender" - it was only "Doug Wilson didn't sign the RIGHT goaltender."

We also know that at the same time, Doug Wilson was working on acquiring a defenseman. We know from media reports on UFA day that San Jose was one of the teams in the mix for Dan Hamhuis until the bitter end; he ultimately chose Vancouver *for less money* because he wanted to go back to BC. After the big batch of desirable UFA defensemen were spoken for and duly overpaid, Doug next went after Hjalmarsson, who Chicago matched on July 12.

Meanwhile, Antti Niemi first became available on August 2 when the Blackhawks walked away from his arbitration award, but Doug Wilson didn't move - instead, he pursued Willie Mitchell, by all accounts a smart move. But as we all know, he lost out on Mitchell to LA because he didn't want to commit to a second year - also a smart move, for a guy with the injury history that Mitchell has.

So who else would you have paid while you "focused" on defense? Paul Martin, $5Mx5? Sergei Gonchar, $5.5Mx3? Anton Volchenkov, $4.25Mx6 (length kills this one)? Or perhaps you would have preferred to jump directly to the second tier of defensemen, where the likes of Toni Lydman and Henrik Tallinder got $3Mx3 and $3.5Mx4, respectively. One of the only reasonable contracts I saw out there that was somewhat commensurate in both amount and length was Zbynek Michalek's $4Mx4 in Pittsburgh. You can't stand there with a straight face and say Doug Wilson should have "focused" on defense when the contracts that were signed by the guys we wanted wouldn't have made sense in money or in term, except for those who went to other teams for reasons completely beyond Wilson's control (guys like Kubina and Hamhuis).

So finally - FINALLY - after all that, on September 2, Doug Wilson signs Antti Niemi, realizing that this is the best way he can improve his team, buying himself some insurance in net to the tune of 26-7-0/2.25/.912. For the record, Nabokov's career numbers are 2.38/.912, and there has only been one year since the lockout that he posted a 2.25 or better GAA; Niittymaki and Greiss are worse by a fair margin, though Greiss admittedly has a small sample size.

The tl;dr version is that it's not like Doug Wilson was sitting on his thumbs and decided that he wanted another goaltender all of a sudden. You can't sit there now and criticize the Niittymaki signing and leaving $1.5 million on the bench when you probably would have been among the first to pile on to him not getting anyone on July 1, and rightfully so.


Last edited by wraith985: 10-12-2010 at 03:59 PM.
wraith985 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2010, 03:50 PM
  #160
wraith985
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 987
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulrich Liechtenstein View Post
Were doing what it takes to get to the playoffs or did you not read that part? If were going to be cruel and snap some necks along the way why pull any punches with anyone?

I can play this game too
The only thing demoting Greiss to the minors says is that he's not as good as Niittymaki or Niemi and the Sharks can't carry three goaltenders. Waiving a freshly-signed free agent who you spent the summer telling you wanted and (theoretically) waiving a guy you promised an extension so that you could get him to waive his NTC and travel across the country at all is completely different.

There's a big difference between pulling punches to make one player feel better and pulling punches when the franchise's reputation of 20 years is at stake. Thomas Greiss has every reason to feel hurt, but his feeling hurt will not torpedo the franchise's chances of signing another decent free agent in the next decade.

wraith985 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2010, 04:12 PM
  #161
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 57,010
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
Speaking of which, who's backing up in Worcester right now? Didn't Sexsmith get sent down or something?
Sexsmith is with ECHL Stockton (looking like the starter this weekend).

Hutton may be looking for playing time now.

LadyStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2010, 04:12 PM
  #162
booost
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WineShark View Post
Sunk costs are still real ones. Its not a fallacy. For financial planning purposes it doesn't impact the going forward decision, but the accountants still track those costs and they still end up as expenses.
Point being it doesn't matter how much the sharks spent on developing Greiss, if there is no room for him, then so be it. It does not factor in at all the money or time they invested in him.

booost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2010, 04:15 PM
  #163
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,940
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wraith985 View Post
As cliche as the phrase is, it's relevant here - this isn't NHL 2011. You don't have the luxury of "focusing" on one position while the world waits for you to hit triangle to get back to the menu so that you can advance to the next arbitrarily-defined signing period where everyone's salary demands magically get updated simultaneously.

Antero Niittymaki was going to have a job on July 1, whether it was in San Jose or elsewhere. Knowing this, Doug Wilson went out and got his man. Slightly overpaid or not, that was the requirement of the situation. We can argue until we're blue in the face about whether Mason or Ellis or whoever else was better, but the point is that Doug Wilson had to pick up *a* goaltender on July 1. At the time, everyone "knew" that if he didn't, he wasn't going to be able to later. You can't now look at that signing in hindsight and blame Doug Wilson for not having a crystal ball. The criticism on July 1 was never "Doug Wilson shouldn't have signed a goaltender" - it was only "Doug Wilson didn't sign the RIGHT goaltender."

We also know that at the same time, Doug Wilson was working on acquiring a defenseman. We know from media reports on UFA day that San Jose was one of the teams in the mix for Dan Hamhuis until the bitter end; he ultimately chose Vancouver *for less money* because he wanted to go back to BC. After the big batch of desirable UFA defensemen were spoken for and duly overpaid, Doug next went after Hjalmarsson, who Chicago matched on July 12.

Meanwhile, Antti Niemi first became available on August 2 when the Blackhawks walked away from his arbitration award, but Doug Wilson didn't move - instead, he pursued Willie Mitchell, by all accounts a smart move. But as we all know, he lost out on Mitchell to LA because he didn't want to commit to a second year - also a smart move, for a guy with the injury history that Mitchell has.

So who else would you have paid while you "focused" on defense? Paul Martin, $5Mx5? Sergei Gonchar, $5.5Mx3? Anton Volchenkov, $4.25Mx6 (length kills this one)? Or perhaps you would have preferred to jump directly to the second tier of defensemen, where the likes of Toni Lydman and Henrik Tallinder got $3Mx3 and $3.5Mx4, respectively. One of the only reasonable contracts I saw out there that was somewhat commensurate in both amount and length was Zbynek Michalek's $4Mx4 in Pittsburgh. You can't stand there with a straight face and say Doug Wilson should have "focused" on defense when the contracts that were signed by the guys we wanted wouldn't have made sense in money or in term, except for those who went to other teams for reasons completely beyond Wilson's control (guys like Kubina and Hamhuis).

So finally - FINALLY - after all that, on September 2, Doug Wilson signs Antti Niemi, realizing that this is the best way he can improve his team, buying himself some insurance in net to the tune of 26-7-0/2.25/.912. For the record, Nabokov's career numbers are 2.38/.912, and there has only been one year since the lockout that he posted a 2.25 or better GAA; Niittymaki and Greiss are worse by a fair margin, though Greiss admittedly has a small sample size.

The tl;dr version is that it's not like Doug Wilson was sitting on his thumbs and decided that he wanted another goaltender all of a sudden. You can't sit there now and criticize the Niittymaki signing and leaving $1.5 million on the bench when you probably would have been among the first to pile on to him not getting anyone on July 1, and rightfully so.
Doug Wilson makes mistakes, Ehrhoff was a gigantic mistake for instance, he made some big ones this off-season too. Justify it all you like, the proof is in the pudding. While other GM's definitely made their teams better, Doug Wilson was unable to do so. Results are all that matter in this business, and this year Doug Wilson has yet to get adequate results. Excuses are irrelevant, and I'm certain DW would say the same.

If you want to take that a step further, sure in all likely-hood DW simply could not sign any of those guys, and no one was willing to trade with him. However, teams are not built in an off-season, and his past decisions (Wallin, Huskins, Ehrhoff, Blake, etc) definitely adversely effected his ability to field a solid defense this year. You could also blame drafting, development, on and on, but in the end what matters is the results, and this year, they aren't good enough.

I'm not advocating firing the guy or something, but to say he is blameless is absurd. I could make a million GOOD excuses why I didn't meet my deadline at work but what matters is that I didn't, and that is all my bosses will care about.

So you are correct, pontificating about this and that is pointless, but nothing is more relevant than looking at what we had, what we've got, and saying "someone screwed up".

hockeyball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2010, 04:25 PM
  #164
Led Zappa
Tomorrow Today!
 
Led Zappa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,449
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
Doug Wilson makes mistakes, Ehrhoff was a gigantic mistake for instance, he made some big ones this off-season too. Justify it all you like, the proof is in the pudding. While other GM's definitely made their teams better, Doug Wilson was unable to do so. Results are all that matter in this business, and this year Doug Wilson has yet to get adequate results. Excuses are irrelevant, and I'm certain DW would say the same.

If you want to take that a step further, sure in all likely-hood DW simply could not sign any of those guys, and no one was willing to trade with him. However, teams are not built in an off-season, and his past decisions (Wallin, Huskins, Ehrhoff, Blake, etc) definitely adversely effected his ability to field a solid defense this year. You could also blame drafting, development, on and on, but in the end what matters is the results, and this year, they aren't good enough.

I'm not advocating firing the guy or something, but to say he is blameless is absurd. I could make a million GOOD excuses why I didn't meet my deadline at work but what matters is that I didn't, and that is all my bosses will care about.

So you are correct, pontificating about this and that is pointless, but nothing is more relevant than looking at what we had, what we've got, and saying "someone screwed up".
Except your analogy fails. If I make most of my deadlines with excellent work and fail to meet a couple, my boss is going to look at the whole of my production a cut me much deserved slack since my record vs my competition is exceptional based on the market I'm competing with.

EDIT: Not to say I agree with all of your asserted DW failures.

__________________

Youth Movement! Tally Ho...
Led Zappa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2010, 04:30 PM
  #165
one2gamble
Registered User
 
one2gamble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 5,973
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wraith985 View Post
The only thing demoting Greiss to the minors says is that he's not as good as Niittymaki or Niemi and the Sharks can't carry three goaltenders.
Our point is that this is a non proven argument. Greiss never got a chance, which is the only reason this conversation is even happening. Regardless of the current situation, the kid was never given an opportunity to see how good he actually is and or can be, he is a relatively unknown commodity at the NHL level.

one2gamble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2010, 04:34 PM
  #166
Chaotic8
Boarding Major
 
Chaotic8's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: San Jose, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,369
vCash: 500
IIRC, Greiss had the stronger camp of the three.

Chaotic8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2010, 04:45 PM
  #167
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,940
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Led Zappa View Post
Except your analogy fails. If I make most of my deadlines with excellent work and fail to meet a couple, my boss is going to look at the whole of my production a cut me much deserved slack since my record vs my competition is exceptional based on the market I'm competing with.

EDIT: Not to say I agree with all of your asserted DW failures.
I am only speaking about this specific off-season, and as I said, I didn't say he should be fired or anything. But justifying the current team by saying it's not his fault is wrong. The buck stops here and all that.

Also, you imply that he has not failed previously. He's consistently fielded a great team with max payroll that has failed spectacularly in the playoffs. He has yet to make a trip to the finals, and last season was his closest (swept in the conf finals).

So does he have an untarnished reputation for perfection? No, not even close, is he still better than most GM's, yes.

hockeyball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2010, 04:45 PM
  #168
EvilPirateZamboni
Taco Loco!!!
 
EvilPirateZamboni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 267
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WineShark View Post
Sunk costs are still real ones. Its not a fallacy. For financial planning purposes it doesn't impact the going forward decision, but the accountants still track those costs and they still end up as expenses.
Exactly: sunk costs are irrelevant to making a present day decision.


Last edited by EvilPirateZamboni: 10-12-2010 at 04:47 PM. Reason: punctuation
EvilPirateZamboni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2010, 04:47 PM
  #169
fasterthanlight
Registered User
 
fasterthanlight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Ithaca, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,056
vCash: 50
Surprised and happy he cleared, though it sucks for him.

Dougie has still handled this goalie situation rather poorly, though. I would much rather have greiss and one of nitty/niemi than 1.5 million in cap space sitting on the bench. Why did we sign both niemi and nitty again? Urgh.

fasterthanlight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2010, 04:49 PM
  #170
Led Zappa
Tomorrow Today!
 
Led Zappa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,449
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
I am only speaking about this specific off-season, and as I said, I didn't say he should be fired or anything. But justifying the current team by saying it's not his fault is wrong. The buck stops here and all that.

Also, you imply that he has not failed previously. He's consistently fielded a great team with max payroll that has failed spectacularly in the playoffs. He has yet to make a trip to the finals, and last season was his closest (swept in the conf finals).

So does he have an untarnished reputation for perfection? No, not even close, is he still better than most GM's, yes.
I said I don't agree with "all" of the failures attributed to him "by you". Should have said "by this board".


Last edited by Led Zappa: 10-12-2010 at 05:28 PM.
Led Zappa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2010, 05:07 PM
  #171
wraith985
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 987
vCash: 500
Nobody said that the team as currently composed isn't largely a product of Doug Wilson's tenure as GM, blunders and all. The point was simply that Thomas Greiss being squeezed out of an NHL role this year due to signing both Niittymaki and Niemi was the product of a series of decisions that made sense when they were made, and that it is completely disingenuous to look back at it now with the benefit of hindsight and criticize without providing any reasonable alternative.

What would you do? Would you not sign a goaltender on July 1, knowing only what Doug knew then? Would you not sign Niemi, given that you perceive him to be clear upgrade on your existing goaltenders (as this is clearly what Doug Wilson thinks, whatever he says to the media)? How can you blame Doug Wilson for not landing a defenseman if you concede that everyone out there was either overpaid, over-termed, or wouldn't have come here anyway? Help me out here, because while "the bottom line" is rhetorically fun and punchy, it doesn't have anything to do with analyzing what Doug Wilson actually did this off-season.

EDIT: And before anyone launches into a criticism of Wallin (who, again, was clearly promised this contract last year in order to get him to come here at all) and Huskins eating up cap space, review the definition of a "sunk cost" again. If you understand the concept, then you also understand why the presence of Antero Niittymaki probably made very little difference in Doug Wilson's calculus in picking up Antti Niemi as well.

wraith985 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2010, 05:08 PM
  #172
CupfortheSharks
Registered User
 
CupfortheSharks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,102
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
Results are all that matter in this business, and this year Doug Wilson has yet to get adequate results. Excuses are irrelevant, and I'm certain DW would say the same.
So far this year the results are 3 points in 2 games.

Last year, I thought Heatley in and Michalek/Ehrhoff out was a mistake. But, the results were another playoff birth and 2 series wins. The team played better when it mattered.

This year, I don't think DW is done yet and we won't really know the results until the playoffs.

CupfortheSharks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2010, 05:11 PM
  #173
WineShark
Registered User
 
WineShark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Napa Valley, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 7,003
vCash: 500
I sure wish we could play some games and talk about something more than a third string goalie decision.

WineShark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2010, 05:23 PM
  #174
Le Rosbeef
Registered User
 
Le Rosbeef's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,515
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wraith985 View Post
First of all, Wallin has a NMC, so that's a nonstarter. Additionally, Wallin's contract was pretty obviously the result of a promise made at trade deadline time, so even if they could waive him, once word got around that the Sharks made him a promise last year and then went back on it once they got what they wanted, good luck getting anyone else to sign here. Twenty years of building good will, wasted. Waiving a freshly-signed player is similar. Talk about sending harmful messages; you're missing the forest for the trees.
You've been registered for some time but have few posts.

I can't agree enough with what you've written in this thread tonight, I think you're spot on. I do hope you'll post more often

Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
Doug Wilson makes mistakes, Ehrhoff was a gigantic mistake for instance, he made some big ones this off-season too. Justify it all you like, the proof is in the pudding. While other GM's definitely made their teams better, Doug Wilson was unable to do so. Results are all that matter in this business, and this year Doug Wilson has yet to get adequate results. Excuses are irrelevant, and I'm certain DW would say the same.

If you want to take that a step further, sure in all likely-hood DW simply could not sign any of those guys, and no one was willing to trade with him. However, teams are not built in an off-season, and his past decisions (Wallin, Huskins, Ehrhoff, Blake, etc) definitely adversely effected his ability to field a solid defense this year. You could also blame drafting, development, on and on, but in the end what matters is the results, and this year, they aren't good enough.

I'm not advocating firing the guy or something, but to say he is blameless is absurd. I could make a million GOOD excuses why I didn't meet my deadline at work but what matters is that I didn't, and that is all my bosses will care about.

So you are correct, pontificating about this and that is pointless, but nothing is more relevant than looking at what we had, what we've got, and saying "someone screwed up".
I'd beg to differ on those two points. Trading Ehrhoff was a move Wilson felt was right to enable the cap space to acquire Heatley. You can sit here and say "he could have waived XYZ!" or "traded Billy for a 7th rounder" but the truth is we don't know the slightest thing about what other GMs want. Look today at how Greiss was waived and cleared after everyone and his dog seemed to swear blind he was as good as gone. Mistake implies a factual situation whereas the truth is neither you, I or anyone other than Doug Wilson and his closest aides know what the facts were/are.

You can press whichever view you wish and support it with relevant facts. For example I could say we got Heatley + 5th for an oft-injured Michalek and a 2nd now Cheechoo is back in Worcester. It's all in the presentation.

As for the second point, find me a GM who is blameless and we'll get him in... Nobody is. One man's mistake is another man's opportunity. If that's the standard he's being set against either we have (A.) been spoiled as a fanbase with our expectations or (B.) we are missing the bigger picture.

On topic again, Greiss was the victim of the numbers game only. I can't see any blame being justified in heading Doug's way in signing a Cup Winning goalie to a very good contract after he thought he was set. I've ordered meals in a restaurant before and changed my mind when I saw something else on the menu. People questioning Greiss' pedigree against Niemi's need their heads checking... there's not a GM in the league who would have taken Thomas over Niemi in this situation, sorry.


Last edited by Le Rosbeef: 10-12-2010 at 05:36 PM.
Le Rosbeef is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2010, 05:29 PM
  #175
rangerssharks414
Registered User
 
rangerssharks414's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 11,281
vCash: 500
It sucks for Greiss, but I'm really happy and relieved that he cleared.

rangerssharks414 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 12:28 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.