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

Pollak: Sharks sign D Colin White to one year deal, $1m

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-04-2011, 03:02 AM
  #301
Hertl Power
Registered User
 
Hertl Power's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Bay Area, California
Country: United States
Posts: 1,383
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Squeeven View Post
IMO I think this money would have been better spent on a 3rd line forward.
Really this only lowers the amount of money the sharks have to spend by 200k. The sharks were going to have one dman in the press box. With it being Vandermeer/White instead of braun it is the difference between 1m vs 815k. We still have over 4.5mil to spend on one or two more forwards. This improves the team without hurting us in any way.


Quote:
Our defense already looks amazing, why would we need Colin White? He's basically an older Doug Murray (I don't mean that Murray is bad, just that they play a similar style, although lately Murray has been big on joining the rush a lot) and cheaper Niclas Wallin. I'm not saying he's bad but we definitely didn't need him at all.
White should be better than Vandermeer. Moving White to the number 6 slot and letting Vandermeer sit in the press box also let's us send Braun to the AHL which will allow him to get plenty of minutes to improve. Sitting him in the nhl wasn't going to help him develop at all.

Quote:
All this talk though about trading Braun though; even if we do trade him where does White fit in? Our 6 d-men are: Boyle, Burns, Vlasic, Demers, Murray and Vandermeer. We'd have to trade away one of those guys for White to fit in.
Vlasic-burns
Murray-Boyle
White-Demers
Vandermeer


Quote:
I'm not sure it would be a good idea to trade Vlasic because without him, our defense is full of a bunch of offensive defensemen except for White, Murray and Vandermeer which isn't too solid as much as I like Murray although he's improved a lot. I think the Sharks should trade Demers and Braun away for a few good 3rd liners and we're fine. If the Sharks do that we still have a good set of offensive and defensive defensemen. But I'm really interested though to see what Doug Wilson's game plan is.
Trading demers for a third liner would screw us more than trading vlasic. Trading both demers and braun is pure stupidity. Currently we have 8 nhl dman. 4 offensive (burns,boyle,demers,braun) and 4 defensive (vlasic-murray-white-vandermeer). This gives us depth if there is an injury and let's us run balenced lines. Trading demers and braun would mean we only have two guys that can really play on the pp and only two guys that have a decent shot from the point. Demers in my opinion has more potential than bruan or vlasic and should be kept especially with his cheap contract.

Hertl Power is offline  
Old
08-04-2011, 03:25 AM
  #302
Melek Taus
Registered User
 
Melek Taus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Santa Cruz, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 83
vCash: 500
Im not too worried about a trade. It's not good asset management to trade a young Vlasic just because White became available. Nothing wrong with being deep on defense. I can see Todd rolling 7D a lot this year

Melek Taus is offline  
Old
08-04-2011, 04:45 AM
  #303
cheechoo train
#playoff_fail
 
cheechoo train's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: San Jose
Country: Azores
Posts: 1,850
vCash: 500
I wrote this up on the main board, but I'm all for the Sharks having 7 defensemen in the everyday lineup. Here's why and how I see it potentially:

As of now, the Sharks aren't able to fill all 4 lines without bringing a few guys up from the minors, so why not have 7 defensemen and replace a bottom line guy who is going to get 5 minutes a night and a few points this season?

Rolling 7 defensemen means the Sharks can specialize more during the game to keep guys fresh. Put White, Vandermeer, Murray, and another defenseman on the PK and put Boyle, Burns, Demers, and Vlasic on the PP then spread out the minutes the rest of the game. The Sharks don't need Burns and Boyle to play 25 minutes a night like they did last year. Something like this would be good:

Burns: 22 min/game
Boyle: 21 min/ game
Vlasic: 18 min/game
Murray: 18 min/game
Demers: 17 min/game
White: 14 min/game
Vandermeer: 10 min/game

Out of the 7 defensemen, Vandermeer played the least amount of minutes last year at 18:12/game. They're all capable of playing big minutes, but that doesn't mean they have to. With this though, everyone stays fresher, is less likely to get injured, and if a defenseman does get injured, they can easily revert back to 6 defensemen since all seven can play good quality minutes when needed. By bringing in Handzus and Murray and having defensemen that are more defensive-minded, you won't need top players like Thornton to play on the PK anymore, or at least as much. Thus, the top guys can fill in for the 5 minutes that the missing bottom guy would have without having to increase their minutes per game by having less time on the PK.

Niemi must easily be the happiest Shark after this offseason.


Last edited by cheechoo train: 08-04-2011 at 04:50 AM.
cheechoo train is offline  
Old
08-04-2011, 04:54 AM
  #304
Hertl Power
Registered User
 
Hertl Power's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Bay Area, California
Country: United States
Posts: 1,383
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheechoo train View Post
I wrote this up on the main board, but I'm all for the Sharks having 7 defensemen in the everyday lineup. Here's why and how I see it potentially:

As of now, the Sharks aren't able to fill all 4 lines without bringing a few guys up from the minors, so why not have 7 defensemen and replace a bottom line guy who is going to get 5 minutes a night and a few points this season?

Rolling 7 defensemen means the Sharks can specialize more during the game to keep guys fresh. Put White, Vandermeer, Murray, and another defenseman on the PK and put Boyle, Burns, Demers, and Vlasic on the PP then spread out the minutes the rest of the game. The Sharks don't need Burns and Boyle to play 25 minutes a night like they did last year. Something like this would be good:

Burns: 22 min/game
Boyle: 21 min/ game
Vlasic: 18 min/game
Murray: 18 min/game
Demers: 17 min/game
White: 14 min/game
Vandermeer: 10 min/game

Out of the 7 defensemen, Vandermeer played the least amount of minutes last year at 18:12/game. They're all capable of playing big minutes, but that doesn't mean they have to. With this though, everyone stays fresher, is less likely to get injured, and if a defenseman does get injured, they can easily revert back to 6 defensemen since all seven can play good quality minutes when needed. By bringing in Handzus and Murray and having defensemen that are more defensive-minded, you won't need top players like Thornton to play on the PK anymore, or at least as much. Thus, the top guys can fill in for the 5 minutes that the missing bottom guy would have without having to increase their minutes per game by having less time on the PK.

Niemi must easily be the happiest Shark after this offseason.
I don't really like the idea of playing 7 d. Playing 11 forwards increases the chances of strains and other injuries up front and that is not something we can handle right now. Doing it for an entire season or even a long stretch will come back to haunt us more than help us.

Hertl Power is offline  
Old
08-04-2011, 05:33 AM
  #305
WTFetus
Moderator
Most popular
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 11,873
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiddenpsyche View Post
I don't really like the idea of playing 7 d. Playing 11 forwards increases the chances of strains and other injuries up front and that is not something we can handle right now. Doing it for an entire season or even a long stretch will come back to haunt us more than help us.
This. 7 D adds unnecessary fatigue to the top-end players, which will only hurt the team in the long-run. McGinn - Desjardins - Mayers line was a great fourth line in the WCF, so I assume McCarthy/McLaren/Mashinter - Desjardins - Murray line will do just as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cheechoo train View Post
By bringing in Handzus and Murray and having defensemen that are more defensive-minded, you won't need top players like Thornton to play on the PK anymore, or at least as much. Thus, the top guys can fill in for the 5 minutes that the missing bottom guy would have without having to increase their minutes per game by having less time on the PK.
Or instead of taking Thornton away from the PK and double shifting him, you could take Thornton away from the PK and not double shift him by not going with 7 D.

WTFetus is offline  
Old
08-04-2011, 08:25 AM
  #306
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,627
vCash: 500
We are not rolling 7d on a regular basis, that's just not going to happen.

Sharks are going to sign a forward (Wellwood) or trade for one before the season starts. I have no doubt of that.

hockeyball is online now  
Old
08-04-2011, 08:45 AM
  #307
Arrch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: NorCal
Country: United States
Posts: 4,331
vCash: 50
Something to also consider....

The article indicated that White isn't looking for a one-and-done season with SJ. So if he does well this year, it's not out of the question to see him get a couple year extension. How would this affect or younger D-men. Do you think Wilson would want him over bringing up a prospect to fill that position?

Arrch is offline  
Old
08-04-2011, 08:47 AM
  #308
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,627
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sacto4Now View Post
Something to also consider....

The article indicated that White isn't looking for a one-and-done season with SJ. So if he does well this year, it's not out of the question to see him get a couple year extension. How would this affect or younger D-men. Do you think Wilson would want him over bringing up a prospect to fill that position?
Which article? I didn't see that anywhere.

hockeyball is online now  
Old
08-04-2011, 09:06 AM
  #309
one2gamble
Registered User
 
one2gamble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 5,946
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
Which article? I didn't see that anywhere.
I thought it was actually a quote from his agent

one2gamble is offline  
Old
08-04-2011, 09:35 AM
  #310
Gene Parmesan
Ice up, son.
 
Gene Parmesan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 32,741
vCash: 500
Colin White could be a very good stop gap until Petrecki or Doherty or whoever is ready for the big show.

Gene Parmesan is online now  
Old
08-04-2011, 09:56 AM
  #311
Arrch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: NorCal
Country: United States
Posts: 4,331
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
Which article? I didn't see that anywhere.
http://www.ngnews.ca/Sports/2011-08-...-with-Sharks/1

Quote:
Hankinson said he expects the new relationship to be a positive one and he hopes to see it extend into a longer contract for his client with the team.
Maybe it's just his agent, but that's what I was referring to.

Arrch is offline  
Old
08-04-2011, 10:08 AM
  #312
Scottiebrea
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 6
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wraith985 View Post
I don't understand why everyone is immediately jumping to the conclusion that Vlasic is going somewhere or that the move was made to 'send him a message' or whatever. What the heck are the indications that Colin White's *one-year* deal is going to push Vlasic out of San Jose?

This reminds me almost exactly of the Niemi situation last year: Doug makes his moves early on and assembles a team that he'd be okay with heading into the season, and then another player becomes available and he makes the deal. Last year, Niittymaki was all set to go as the #1 (or the co-#1 with Greiss) until Niemi became available. This time around, just swap names and numbers - Vandermeer was all set to go as the #6 until White became available. I don't think there's going to be a whole lot of debate about the fact that White is better than Vandermeer, so it's purely just a question of making the team better. You don't pass up those opportunities, especially when you're this far below the salary cap and when you're gunning for the Cup like the Sharks are. This makes sense as purely a depth move, so I don't see any reason to tack on other, unwarranted implications.

I could buy speculation that this means Moore will get shipped somewhere where he might get a shot at sticking for like a 7th rounder or something (with Braun staying in the AHL for one more year), but immediately jumping to Vlasic being on the block or in the doghouse is hilarious.

EDIT: As for the signing itself, I like it a lot. Vandermeer as a #7 is crazy depth and injuries will assuredly rear their head at some point, making that kind of depth valuable. It's very comforting to know that we have a good mix of mobility, offensive talent, and defensive responsibility between the big club and Woostah such that if any one (or multiple) of the top six goes down, there's a decent way to reconfigure the pairings and keep them respectable.
Finally someone I totally like and agree with!

Scottiebrea is offline  
Old
08-04-2011, 10:51 AM
  #313
D Huang
Registered User
 
D Huang's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Bay Area, CA
Country: China
Posts: 753
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to D Huang
demers and white has to be in the top 2 or 3 bottom pairings in the nhl

D Huang is offline  
Old
08-04-2011, 11:55 AM
  #314
ChompChomp
SACK T-MAC
 
ChompChomp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Dallas, TX (Ugh)
Country: United States
Posts: 8,935
vCash: 500
If the pairings end up:

Burns-Vlasic
Boyle-Murray
Demers-White

Any chance that such pairings, assuming all play well and up to expectations, could mean more evenly distributed even strength minutes? For example, each pairing getting about 15 ES minutes per game? And if so, that would be a good thing, right?

ChompChomp is offline  
Old
08-04-2011, 12:11 PM
  #315
one2gamble
Registered User
 
one2gamble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 5,946
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChompChomp View Post
If the pairings end up:

Burns-Vlasic
Boyle-Murray
Demers-White

Any chance that such pairings, assuming all play well and up to expectations, could mean more evenly distributed even strength minutes? For example, each pairing getting about 15 ES minutes per game? And if so, that would be a good thing, right?
I still think the your top 4 should be seeing more minutes than Demers/White. I might even switch it to Burns - White and Demers - Vlasic but we are just going to have to see how this all plays out.

one2gamble is offline  
Old
08-04-2011, 12:18 PM
  #316
KzooShark
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 2,178
vCash: 500
All I know is that Boyle and Burns won't be doing 26 minutes a night this year, and that's probably the most important thing. Probably 22-22-16 is what I'd look into doing with those pairings.

KzooShark is offline  
Old
08-04-2011, 01:27 PM
  #317
WineShark
Registered User
 
WineShark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Napa Valley, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 6,989
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scottiebrea View Post
Finally someone I totally like and agree with!
Finally seems relative ... when its your first post??

WineShark is offline  
Old
08-04-2011, 01:51 PM
  #318
MadmanSJ
Know Your Onion!
 
MadmanSJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 1,317
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WineShark View Post
Finally seems relative ... when its your first post??
He has been waiting in ambush for someone to talk about Blake poorly and decided to just finally take a stand and stick up for Pickles

MadmanSJ is offline  
Old
08-04-2011, 04:20 PM
  #319
irregardless
Registered Dummy
 
irregardless's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: SF
Posts: 1,696
vCash: 500
Man, Demers really needs to change his number to a single digit prime or a double. We now have Boyle, Vlasic, Burns with 22, 44, 88 and Vandermeer, Murray, White with 2, 3, 5.

irregardless is offline  
Old
08-04-2011, 04:35 PM
  #320
Squeeven
Registered User
 
Squeeven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,572
vCash: 500
Looking at Colin White

I'd just like to hear everyone's opinion on Colin White and what you think of his style of play. Personally I don't know much about him which is why I created this thread. But judging by these highlights he seems to have a good shot from the point.

http://video.sharks.nhl.com/videocen...id=DL|SJS|home

At the same time though this long list of injuries worries me, he seems to have a history of knee injuries and all sorts of other injuries.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/teams/players/bio/?id=1542

Can anyone hear tell me what else we can expect from him?

Squeeven is offline  
Old
08-04-2011, 04:44 PM
  #321
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,627
vCash: 500
He's a big, physical, stay at home d-man. Basically Murray but better positionally.

hockeyball is online now  
Old
08-04-2011, 04:48 PM
  #322
WTFetus
Moderator
Most popular
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 11,873
vCash: 500
He's a better positionally, a little less physical, and a worse outlet passing Murray. Seems like a perfect fit for Demers on the third pairing. Slapshot is pretty decent, I'd say on par with Murray (power-wise), not so sure about his accuracy.

WTFetus is offline  
Old
08-04-2011, 04:50 PM
  #323
Gilligans Island
Registered User
 
Gilligans Island's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: SF/Bay Area
Posts: 7,969
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by spurious View Post
Man, Demers really needs to change his number to a single digit prime or a double. We now have Boyle, Vlasic, Burns with 22, 44, 88 and Vandermeer, Murray, White with 2, 3, 5.
No Vlasic needs to change. He's the outlier.

PMDs = double digits
Tough, Hitters = single digits

Gilligans Island is online now  
Old
08-04-2011, 04:52 PM
  #324
gonegonegone*
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: San Diego
Country: United States
Posts: 3,338
vCash: 500
From what I gather from NJ sources, he's a solid defensive dman with zero offensive talent. He was used against tough qualcomp last couple of seasons. He's probably overall on par with Murray to be honest, a similar type of player. He's better positionally than Murray. Great physical hitter, will wreck opposing forwards.

He's the odd man out on a NJ team that already has volenchokv and a ton of defensive dmen in their pipeline (they need skill and offensive talent from their backend).

gonegonegone* is offline  
Old
08-04-2011, 04:57 PM
  #325
Nighthock
**** the Kings...
 
Nighthock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Reno, NV
Country: United States
Posts: 15,818
vCash: 163
stay-at-home mean lookin' SOB

Nighthock is offline  
Closed Thread

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 12:16 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.