Western Conference Semifinals: (5) Los Angeles Kings vs (6) San Jose Sharks

[iamlilc]

Best series of the playoffs.

Hope it's LA/Chi, will make for a great series.

I think/hope so too.

I get the feeling that LA will not only make the finals, but repeat. I never feel like they're going to lose when it counts - they're clutch.

[tgraveline]

I'm so angry right now. I'd say Quick stole this series. There were so many great scoring chances he robbed. That's not taking away the strong play be the guys in front of him. Doughty especially was a force in the defensive zone. Just so frustrated right now.

[PrairieDog]

So is the long talked about shake up in SJ finally going to happen? Marleau or Big Joe (or both) get moved? Boyle? I doubt JT goes anywhere but Marleau & Boyle would be obvious choices.

[MXHockey]

So is the long talked about shake up in SJ finally going to happen? Marleau or Big Joe (or both) get moved? Boyle? I doubt JT goes anywhere but Marleau & Boyle would be obvious choices.

I think they stand pat, and re-tweak for one more year like Vancouver will.

Thornton, Boyle, and Marleau are all on their final year of their contract. I believe Pavelski might be on his last year as well next season.

Couture is an RFA end of next year.

[Zorro]

San Jose just needs a little more scoring depth.. I think they definitely played well enough to win this series. They did come within 2 goals of beating the Kings.. But their 3rd and 4th lines had zero goals in the series, hence why they need more scoring depth..

Joe Thornton will not be traded, that is crazy talk.. If anyone Marleau is gone..

Couture and Pavelski were both robbed by Quick in game 7 aswell..

Great series..

[doulos]

Series was so close that it's tough to say that they need to do much else. Someone eats Cheerios instead of Corn Flakes for breakfast this morning and the Sharks might have moved on.

[blayze]

You guys are giving the Sharks way too much credit...

It's always the same old shit with the Sharks... they played well, they outshot their opponents, they came SO close etc etc and yet they somehow always lose. At some point, you can only blame it on so much... third/fourth lines, luck, refs, corn flakes, whatever you want. At the end of the day what it comes down to is that the Sharks simply do not have winners. They don't have guys who smell blood and go for the kill... their players do not overcome adversity when it matters most. They are like the Canucks basically.

To win a cup, you need heart and soul guys, you need big-game players and you need guys who will do whatever humanly possible to win... I'm talking about guys like Quick, Toews, Bergeron, Zetterberg, Crosby, etc.

It's a personnel issue, and it's time they gutted this team if they ever want to smell a championship.

[dongjohnson]

Agree with Blayze again here... Marleau disappeared for several long stretches in that game. Pavelski mishandled pucks on what could've easily been two goals. This is what always happens to them. They need to make some moves and blow it up.

[metaldude26]

Who says the Sharks management really cares about winning Cups? I mean, yes, they obviously care. But blow it up? Does that mean tanking it to get high picks because I think that would be ill advised. Yeah, maybe they continually come up short but they also continually make the playoffs. Their nine straight playoffs appearances puts them second in the NHL in active streaks behind Detroit. In a market like San Jose that is huge because they aren't going to draw unless the team keeps making the playoffs and playing meaningful games.

And really, what are we complaining about here? San Jose hasn't been aggressive enough? This team has been as aggressive as anyone. They went out and stole Joe Thornton. They picked up Dan Boyle. They got Dany Heatley. They then swapped out Heatley for Marty Havlat, etc. They sold a ton to get Brent Burns. They ripped Antti Niemi away from the Blackhawks. AND they rejiggered their lineup halfway through this season moving some bigger names and key pieces and it made them a better team.

Sure, they still have Marleau and Thornton and Pavelski and those guys have never really won anything but they've been damn close a bunch of times. Over a third of the league would kill to have had the decade the Sharks have just had. Yeah, no Cup wins and perhaps there is something "inherently" flawed about the Sharks top players but I think that's BS. They've had bad luck and injuries and sometimes have simply lost to better teams. And yes, those are just excuses. You probably don't lose every year for a decade simply because of bad luck every year (although it's definitely possible) but they've been there every year and like I said, that counts for a lot.

Ask a Blues fan about the past seven years since the Lockout. You think they've enjoyed blowing things up after 25 or so years of playoff hockey? Maybe they never won it all during that streak but they were competitive. Blowing things up has yet to yield any improvements and the growing pains had to have been painful.

I agree with the notion that the Sharks will have to pull the plug on Marleau and Thornton at some point to remain competitive long term and it would be best to get out a year early than a year late but I just don't like the overreaction and blanket statement that they "need to blow things up". That's wrong because few teams have done it better than they have of late.

[blayze]

Who says the Sharks management really cares about winning Cups?

Sure the reality is that some ownership groups (ie: Ontario Teacher's Pension Plan) may be content icing a mediocre team and milking the profits, but this being a fantasy hockey forum, I presume we are talking about what the Sharks SHOULD do based on the assumption that their ultimate goal is winning a cup.

Not to dismiss the rest of your entire post, but you are taking this discussion in a whole different direction to which there is no answer - if you're not going to assume that the ultimate goal of every NHL franchise is to win a cup then what's there left to even talk about.

If I'm GM of the sharks, and my mandate is to win a cup at some point, then yes, I'd rather blow up the team than continue to ice guys like Thornton/Marleau only to get eliminated year after year in the mid rounds.

[bigbabybuda]

I have to completely agree with my man blaze here and I seriously doubt there are very many owners in any professional sports league that are content with just making profits. These guys are multi millionaires with huge ego's. There is a lot better ways for the majority of them to invest that kind of money which would bring way higher returns on there investments. They buy these teams as there toys and to stroke there own ego's by winning. They do not become that rich in the first place by doing anything except trying to win....


On another note Shitttttt Voynov is sick!

[metaldude26]

Sure the reality is that some ownership groups (ie: Ontario Teacher's Pension Plan) may be content icing a mediocre team and milking the profits, but this being a fantasy hockey forum, I presume we are talking about what the Sharks SHOULD do based on the assumption that their ultimate goal is winning a cup.

Not to dismiss the rest of your entire post, but you are taking this discussion in a whole different direction to which there is no answer - if you're not going to assume that the ultimate goal of every NHL franchise is to win a cup then what's there left to even talk about.

If I'm GM of the sharks, and my mandate is to win a cup at some point, then yes, I'd rather blow up the team than continue to ice guys like Thornton/Marleau only to get eliminated year after year in the mid rounds.

My point is that the Sharks value staying competitive now too much to go that route. The league may be set up where teams can tank it for half a decade like the Oilers and still remain somewhat viable but the Sharks just won't do that. They value icing a quality product too much to do that to themselves and their fans. They want to remain competitive at all costs. So beyond a Godfather type offer for those guys that would reboot the Sharks while keeping them competitive now I don't think the Sharks can afford to sell off Thornton/Marleau just because that core hasn't won a Cup yet. Who's to say they can't eventually build a core around those guys that eventually wins it all?

As an Oilers fan I can say for certain that the whole tearing things down strategy is just embarrassing and it's long and it's tedious. It can work in Canada because the fans will come anyway. Would it work in San Jose where few of the fans grew up with hockey?

I just think there are more ways to skin a cat. I think you can hang around for years before finally breaking through if you hit on the right free agent signings/draft picks and that that's a much more tolerable strategy for fans than a complete blow up.

Again, they will eventually need to move on from Marleau and Thornton to maintain their status as annual playoff team and they do want to get out early rather than late or risk turning into the Calgary Flames but is now the time to completely blow things up or could a couple tweaks make them better next year and could a couple injuries in LA make that team beatable?

And since you brought up the fact that this is a fantasy forum, this may just be a case of differing values but in my fantasy leagues I ALWAYS want to be a contender. I value having a shot every season. I hate the idea of "blowing it up." Why would I roll the dice on prospects eventually turning me into a champion when I can keep trying to win year after year while always keeping an eye toward the future. Maybe my team breaks through and maybe it doesn't but I have to take that chance because I cannot tolerate the idea of not giving myself a chance.

[metaldude26]

I have to completely agree with my man blaze here and I seriously doubt there are very many owners in any professional sports league that are content with just making profits. These guys are multi millionaires with huge ego's. There is a lot better ways for the majority of them to invest that kind of money which would bring way higher returns on there investments. They buy these teams as there toys and to stroke there own ego's by winning. They do not become that rich in the first place by doing anything except trying to win....


On another note Shitttttt Voynov is sick!

My point is that while yes they care about winning the Cup because seriously no one doesn't want to win, they also value the concept of always being competitive and they aren't going to risk not being competitive now to perhaps have a better shot at winning later.

I can't remember where I read/heard this but the Sharks saw what happened to attendance in 2002-03 (the only season they've missed the playoffs in the past 15 seasons) and realized they really could not afford to have a losing season. It's why they got aggressive when they stumbled mid-season and it's why they continue to be aggressive every off-season.

As I said in previous posts, this is not a team that isn't trying to win it all. But they aren't going to tear it all down in some scheme to somehow get better somewhere down the line. Future Cups count for jack shit if you never get there. There can only be one winner each year and it takes a ton of talent but a ton of luck as well. San Jose wants to be in the conversation every year because not only does it give them a shot at winning but they have the added incentive to remain competitive now because they don't want to alienate fans. I don't see anything wrong with that.

But I should add that the funny thing is that if any GM was going to blow things up it's Doug Wilson. Dude has cojones. He's made some of the most aggressive moves of any GM. But he's not going to throw guys away for some pipe dream of the future. If he does it, it will be a move that helps the team now.

[blayze]

I'm not going to comment on all the economic stuff because that is the reality and a very real consideration. Having said that, I don't think we're actually that far apart in our views - I think there's a discrepancy in our interpretations of what "blowing it up" really means.

For me, blowing it up means getting rid of Thornton/Marleau (and maybe Pavelski). That's all there is to it - they are the leaders and the identity of this organization and that makes them the root cause of the problem. This is going to hurt some Sharks fans, but these guys are LOSERS. It is pointless building a team around chronic losers. A good club establishes a solid foundation first (ie: Crosby/Toews/Z/Datsyuk), and THEN you build around it with peripheral/depth guys. I'm not advocating they "blow it up" by selling the farm for draft picks... but they HAVE to get rid of these two guys. It's not even just their on-ice performance... it's a mental thing at this point, and it manifests throughout the locker room. It breeds an environment where their team mates have probably already accepted that it's "ok" to lose. This club is in dire need of a new identity.

Who's to say they can't eventually build a core around those guys (Thornton & Marleau) that eventually wins it all?

This is the one part of your response that I do unequivocally disagree with. First of all, Thornton/Marleau ARE the core. You don't build a core around the core... you build utility and depth around the core, but like I said above, if the core is shit to begin with then you're just wasting your time... it's like building a sky scraper on top of a fault line. Second, as you alluded to above... they've already tried infinite permutations of guys to build around this "core"... Heater, Gooch, Pavs, Clowe, Havlat, Boyle, Burns. They've had a revolving door of players to play with these two guys... at some point you need to cut your losses and come to the logical conclusion that THEY ARE THE PROBLEM.

But don't take my word for it... listen to this guy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3dZP3io-xc


On a side note, as embarrassing as the Oilers are right now, I would bet my house that they win a cup before the Sharks if the Sharks continue toiling down the same path they've been on for the last decade.

[lockedge]

Honestly, the Sharks are one Couture-like player away from taking the next step, with or without some of their bigger names.

Honestly, I think that if the Sharks could lock Joe Thornton in a rink all summer and make him only do shooting drills, and always match Malreau's line up against someone who will piss Marleau off considerably, I think the issues with those two would be fixed. Joe's too predictable when he stops shooting the puck(see this series), and Patty takes that next step when he's getting pissed off by someone like Perry or whatever. At least, that's how I see it.

I figure, if they can't do that, sell one of them off. it'll ****ing suck, because it would likely be Marleau, and he's my 2nd favourite shark of all time, but hey. Keep the other for a bit while Boyle's sold off too, or maybe SJ acquires a great Defensive draft pick for him to tutor until he retires. Somehow rid the team of Havlat too.

Build around Couture and Burns and possibly Pavs too, keep Niemi, try hard to get Galiardi back on a decent developmental curve, make Wingels into a monster, and do the whole claw for a playoff spot thing until they are confident with their core. Obviously dip into FA every year, and see what happens, too.

I think they could use a re-tooling. I think that this year proved that there can be addition by subtraction while still remaining a good team. More re-tooling just seems like a natural decision at this point.