Does(Has) the core lack(ed) grit?

[Gene Parmesan]

Most top team cores don't have grit: Pens (malkin is just a little grittier than Thornton), Hawks, Boston (a little lucic?), Vancouver (none), Detroit (none), etc. So this question is weird.

A similar question would be "Do our 4th liners lack top-tier scoring ability?" Yes, but who cares?

Other team's aren't cheapshotting Couture/Marleau/Thornton/Pavelski--they're not hurt or injured or impeded from doing what they do best. No one needs to play the Sharks tough/dirty because the Sharks can't score, so the Sharks don't need to worry about grit right now. Most teams employ grit to protect their star players, very few employ it in their star-core to generate scoring chances. The only one that pops to mind right now is Perry in Anaheim.

The Sharks system is broke. That needs to be fixed first.

Malkin is pretty chicken****..he wouldn't even fight all 5'10 and 180 lbs of Claude Giroux.

 

[oyster]

Tied for last in ROW in West, 2nd fewest goals for in West, worst blue line scoring, any player in the top 4 has more points than rest of bottom 6 combined, Niemi can't buy a win...

We should get someone dirty who yells and hurts people because I'm upset with the team's losing record!

On the Jackets, Bull. Their lower two lines have always been full of sandpaper to the neglect of other skills. And it shows. Their announcers have always played up physical play. They always tilted towards big/slow/physical on the blueline. Please. And yes, losing teams always pull out the grit card, especially their announcers. They can't win because they don't have enough skill, but they certainly can punish. Even the Isles loaded up their lower lines with 3 players on the bench at one point that would clearly be classified as AHL enforcers.

Advice. Don't buy the hype on grit, they are selling adrenaline to the junkies. The vicarious thrill. I buy into the teams that sell winning and the real ingredients that go into it, coaching, skill, team play, etc. I get my thrill from watching the process of mixing the real ingredients.

^ This.

 

[OrrNumber4]

Most top team cores don't have grit: Pens (malkin is just a little grittier than Thornton), Hawks, Boston (a little lucic?), Vancouver (none), Detroit (none), etc. So this question is weird.

A similar question would be "Do our 4th liners lack top-tier scoring ability?" Yes, but who cares?

Other team's aren't cheapshotting Couture/Marleau/Thornton/Pavelski--they're not hurt or injured or impeded from doing what they do best. No one needs to play the Sharks tough/dirty because the Sharks can't score, so the Sharks don't need to worry about grit right now. Most teams employ grit to protect their star players, very few employ it in their star-core to generate scoring chances. The only one that pops to mind right now is Perry in Anaheim.

The Sharks system is broken. That needs to be fixed first.

Boston has Lucic, Krejci, and Marchand, plus Chara. The Canucks have Burrows, Kesler, and Bieksa; plus Kassian in the future. Canucks also have the king of annyonaces in Lapierre (though he is not a core player, obviously). Kane, Toews, Bolland (top shutdown guy), and Keith all play with that edge; plus Shaw in the pipeline...

The Penguins have Crosby, Orpik, Malkin, and Neal...plus Kunitz, who has unfortunately had to be a core player for them this year. Like the Canucks, they also have a king of dirty in Cooke on the third line.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

Boston has Lucic, Krejci, and Marchand, plus Chara. The Canucks have Burrows, Kesler, and Bieksa; plus Kassian in the future. Canucks also have the king of annyonaces in Lapierre (though he is not a core player, obviously). Kane, Toews, Bolland (top shutdown guy), and Keith all play with that edge; plus Shaw in the pipeline...

The Penguins have Crosby, Orpik, Malkin, and Neal...plus Kunitz, who has unfortunately had to be a core player for them this year. Like the Canucks, they also have a king of dirty in Cooke on the third line.

So the Canucks have 3 divers and the biggest spot picker in the NHL? Please. Krejci was tuned up by Benoit Pouliot, Kane and Toews are edgy players? Keith too? Orpik is another guy with his gloves glued on and Sidney Crosby must be gritty because he punches dudes in the nuts. I honestly think you have no idea what you're even arguing about.

 

[Juxtaposer]

Kane, Keith, and Toews are three of the softest players in the league. I don't know where you're getting this "they play with edge" information.

 

[hockeyball]

So the Canucks have 3 divers and the biggest spot picker in the NHL? Please. Krejci was tuned up by Benoit Pouliot, Kane and Toews are edgy players? Keith too? Orpik is another guy with his gloves glued on and Sidney Crosby must be gritty because he punches dudes in the nuts. I honestly think you have no idea what you're even arguing about.

I've just given up. Every argument that involves the words 'heart' or 'grit' ends this way. The words have no strict meaning so everyone defines them in their own unique way and so it is impossible to come to any conclusion.

My opinion is the Sharks have PLENTY of heart and grit, and every team has a 'soft' player or two and it's only an issue if they allow it to effect their game. I don't feel the Sharks are ever intimidated by other team physically. I find this whole discussion to be facepalm worthy.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

I've just given up. Every argument that involves the words 'heart' or 'grit' ends this way. The words have no strict meaning so everyone defines them in their own unique way and so it is impossible to come to any conclusion.

My opinion is the Sharks have PLENTY of heart and grit, and every team has a 'soft' player or two and it's only an issue if they allow it to effect their game. I don't feel the Sharks are ever intimidated by other team physically. I find this whole discussion to be facepalm worthy.

Me neither. People will always equate being outhit to being pushed around I suppose. The Sharks usually respond when physically challenged. It just looks bad when your team loses a fight. Hockey fights are about showing up and standing up for a teammate or yourself or the team...not winning.

 

[Mafoofoo]

Boston has Lucic, Krejci, and Marchand, plus Chara. The Canucks have Burrows, Kesler, and Bieksa; plus Kassian in the future. Canucks also have the king of annyonaces in Lapierre (though he is not a core player, obviously). Kane, Toews, Bolland (top shutdown guy), and Keith all play with that edge; plus Shaw in the pipeline...

The Penguins have Crosby, Orpik, Malkin, and Neal...plus Kunitz, who has unfortunately had to be a core player for them this year. Like the Canucks, they also have a king of dirty in Cooke on the third line.

So by this logic the Sharks have Thornton, Boyle, Burns, and Marleau (maybe)

Then non core players: Murray, Clowe, Sheppard, Desjardins, Wingels

 

[The Ice Hockey Dude]

This teams problems have little to nothing to with the amount of grit in it's core players. It has everything to do with scoring depth as we at the near the bottom of the NHL in Goals for.

 

[OrrNumber4]

So by this logic the Sharks have Thornton, Boyle, Burns, and Marleau (maybe)

Then non core players: Murray, Clowe, Sheppard, Desjardins, Wingels

I'd say that we have Boyle, and maybe I've overlooked Thornton. Part of the issue is that guys like Clowe and Murray, who used to provide a lot of sandpaper, are not at all what they used to be.

 

[hockeyball]

This teams problems have little to nothing to with the amount of grit in it's core players. It has everything to do with scoring depth as we at the near the bottom of the NHL in Goals for.

And I would say that scoring depth issue is a result of a system that focus's on grinding and cycling with players not suited for it. Plus grind and cycle is not a good strategy in the modern NHL in the first place.

 

[Mafoofoo]

I'd say that we have Boyle, and maybe I've overlooked Thornton. Part of the issue is that guys like Clowe and Murray, who used to provide a lot of sandpaper, are not at all what they used to be.

If you're gonna list Crosby, Toews, Kane, Krecji, and Kesler then Thornton and Marleau most definitely belong.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

I'd say that we have Boyle, and maybe I've overlooked Thornton. Part of the issue is that guys like Clowe and Murray, who used to provide a lot of sandpaper, are not at all what they used to be.

Didn't Murray just recently drill Kopitar and beat up Kyle Clifford in the same game?

 

[The Ice Hockey Dude]

And I would say that scoring depth issue is a result of a system that focus's on grinding and cycling with players not suited for it. Plus grind and cycle is not a good strategy in the modern NHL in the first place.

I would say they grind and cycle because they don't have skill depth and are forced to do so to maintain puck possession - their lack of scoring depth / skill is why they do this.
Look at some crappy teams, they do a lot of grind and cycle...

 

[Gene Parmesan]

I would say they grind and cycle because they don't have skill depth and are forced to do so to maintain puck possession - their lack of scoring depth / skill is why they do this.
Look at some crappy teams, they do a lot of grind and cycle...

Yup. Then you factor in injuries and ineffectivness of guys relied on to provide offense and there you have it.

 

[oyster]

To be fair, the cycle can work if used properly and with skilled players. The Sedins can run an extended cycle and hem the other team in for what feels like a power play at even strength. Last season Joe, Joe, and Marleau had a lot of success of the cycle, they still have to a decent extent this season from what I've seen. I feel like this team has maybe 1.5 lines that can make their style of play work, and a lot 4th line quality dumping and leaning on dmen against the boards.

Lately I haven't seen good puck placement from the Sharks when they dump, and every time I see the stretch pass to a man waiting at the red-line boards, who tips in, followed by a single passive forechecker I want to put my foot through the TV.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

I would say they grind and cycle because they don't have skill depth and are forced to do so to maintain puck possession - their lack of scoring depth / skill is why they do this.
Look at some crappy teams, they do a lot of grind and cycle...

When you have depth guys like Sheppard, Burish, Galiardi, and Desjardins who can all stretch the ice reasonably well, their should be a lot more emphasis on at least attempting to play a little more in the transition game. They may not have the shooting or stick-handling to be great at it but at the very least they will open up the ice and make it easier on the breakout if they're at least a threat to do it.

Maintaining puck possession is fine and dandy if you get scoring chances out of it and the depth lines don't do much of that either. This all stems from the head coach's unwillingness to take very many risks out there. Telling a team they aren't good enough to get into a track meet and have to grind it out is a huge red flag about where this team is. This team, by and large, is playing not to lose rather than playing to win.

 

[do0glas]

If you watch, as long as there is a breakout you will usually see a clean zone entry, it's when Stuart vlasic or Murray let us get hemmed that we revert to dumps.

Granted, getting the puck deep works to an extent, but the focus should be beating the other teams forecheck. Our forecheck is passed around quite easily depending on who is on the ice.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

If you watch, as long as there is a breakout you will usually see a clean zone entry, it's when Stuart vlasic or Murray let us get hemmed that we revert to dumps.

Granted, getting the puck deep works to an extent, but the focus should be beating the other teams forecheck. Our forecheck is passed around quite easily depending on who is on the ice.

Thats because the puck placement has been awful. They give the other teams easy out by half chips or rim arounds that the goalie pushes up the boards. If they would make better dumps..they could forecheck more effectively.

 

[FeedingFrenzy]

I think the Sharks biggest problem is the lack of passion by the players. The West Coast mentality. Lack of media hounding your every move.The big dogs are far to comfortable..JT and his scripted post-game "well we played well,just some unlucky bounces".. HOW MANY F-ING TIMES does this team EVER,EVER,EVER play 3 periods of hockey??????????? ZZZEEERRRO.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

I think the Sharks biggest problem is the lack of passion by the players. The West Coast mentality. Lack of media hounding your every move.The big dogs are far to comfortable..JT and his scripted post-game "well we played well,just some unlucky bounces".. HOW MANY F-ING TIMES does this team EVER,EVER,EVER play 3 periods of hockey??????????? ZZZEEERRRO.

Why would media hounding bring out passion? The Kings weren't hounded..the Ducks weren't..why is it the Sharks are the ones to be hounded? And no team plays a full 60 in this league. There is too much parity.

 

[The Ice Hockey Dude]

When you have depth guys like Sheppard, Burish, Galiardi, and Desjardins who can all stretch the ice reasonably well, their should be a lot more emphasis on at least attempting to play a little more in the transition game. They may not have the shooting or stick-handling to be great at it but at the very least they will open up the ice and make it easier on the breakout if they're at least a threat to do it.

Maintaining puck possession is fine and dandy if you get scoring chances out of it and the depth lines don't do much of that either. This all stems from the head coach's unwillingness to take very many risks out there. Telling a team they aren't good enough to get into a track meet and have to grind it out is a huge red flag about where this team is. This team, by and large, is playing not to lose rather than playing to win.

I agree on the transition game. I think the team wants to play this way but is ineffective at it due to the lack of skills / depth / speed. This works to to some effect if you can just make that first pass up and it connects, the players you listed can perhaps do that, you need more of the above to make it work from there.

Interesting thought on the puck possession game, I agree that it's a marker on where the team is these days. I contend we are a mid level team, playing a cycle / grind game which is proven to have some level of success at some level (phooy, yuck booring!) . I think the Wings are doing this also. I don't think its playing a not to lose game as much as it's the coach using the tools he has effectively given their talents and skills.

 

[JoeThorntonsRooster]

Boston has Lucic, Krejci, and Marchand, plus Chara. The Canucks have Burrows, Kesler, and Bieksa; plus Kassian in the future. Canucks also have the king of annyonaces in Lapierre (though he is not a core player, obviously). Kane, Toews, Bolland (top shutdown guy), and Keith all play with that edge; plus Shaw in the pipeline...

The Penguins have Crosby, Orpik, Malkin, and Neal...plus Kunitz, who has unfortunately had to be a core player for them this year. Like the Canucks, they also have a king of dirty in Cooke on the third line.

How do Keith and Kane play with that edge that the Sharks don't? Same with Malkin, Crosby, Kunitz, and Krejci; the Sharks have as many gritty players too.

The whole grit and size argument is ********. It's about which team is the most skilled, gets hot at the right time, and has the best chemistry. Those are the things that the Sharks don't have right now and therefore they'd most likely lose in the playoffs, and they wouldn't even make the playoffs at the moment.

 

[SnarkAttack]

Why would media hounding bring out passion? The Kings weren't hounded..the Ducks weren't..why is it the Sharks are the ones to be hounded? And no team plays a full 60 in this league. There is too much parity.

Playing a full 60 and dominating can't happen because of parity, but 60 minutes of full effort can definitely happen regardless of the opponent.

 

[SnarkAttack]

Really the Sharks depth isn't terrible. It's not great, but other teams have worse. The top 6 and defense, both of which should be very good, are more worrisome to me. They just seem to be getting the least out of their players on all fronts.

edit: except the pk.