GDT: Game #31: San Jose Sharks at Anaheim Ducks~ "This hockey thing is getting old." 7PM.

murdock1116

Registered User
May 27, 2010
1,553
0
Los Angeles
I think at this point you gotta stick with Braun/Irwin/Demers and let them sink or swim. Lets see which of these guys can cut down on their mistakes for the rest of the season.

I agree with people on the Marleau - Couture - Wingels line. They had some great plays, but overall I think Wingels would be best suited for a 3rd line role.

Its interesting because it makes you think, maybe we should be swapping Clowe for another teams doghouse/rental. Like a Clowe for Filppula trade.

Then do something like:

Havlat - Thornton - Burns
Marleau - Couture - Filppula
Sheppard - Pavelski - Wingels
Galiardi - Gomez - Desjardins/Burish

If the team keeps playing like they did last night, we are definitely making the playoffs. Then we'll obviously be this years Kings :sarcasm:
 

OldAsianSharksFan

More 1OV picks please
Jul 20, 2009
6,192
1
San Jose
In the defensive end? No, they weren't.

Braun and Demers will make mistakes in the defensive end, as all young defensemen do. Braun, Demers and Irwin are not known as defensive stalwarts and probably never will be. All three are on the ice because they can provide offense and all three play defense by moving the puck out of the zone and away from opponents.

It's a give-and-take. If you play young PMDs, you'll have better offense but not so good defense. If you play veteran, stay-at-home Dmen, you'll be better defensively but not so offensively.
 

OrrNumber4

Registered User
Jul 25, 2002
16,712
6,174
I think at this point you gotta stick with Braun/Irwin/Demers and let them sink or swim. Lets see which of these guys can cut down on their mistakes for the rest of the season.

I agree with people on the Marleau - Couture - Wingels line. They had some great plays, but overall I think Wingels would be best suited for a 3rd line role.

Its interesting because it makes you think, maybe we should be swapping Clowe for another teams doghouse/rental. Like a Clowe for Filppula trade.

Then do something like:

Havlat - Thornton - Burns
Marleau - Couture - Filppula
Sheppard - Pavelski - Wingels
Galiardi - Gomez - Desjardins/Burish

If the team keeps playing like they did last night, we are definitely making the playoffs. Then we'll obviously be this years Kings :sarcasm:

When Burns moves back to defense, I have no issue letting Irwin, Braun, and Demers sink/swim. That is good competition, plus Petrecki in the minors and a boatload of good D-prospects. Make it clear, "better player plays".
 

hockeyball

Registered User
Nov 10, 2007
21,560
944
I look at conservative hockey like this.

When I was younger I was the sales manager for a retail store. My boss at the time (a total jackass) had me working long hours on a project to clean up the store before the president of the company came to visit. We sadly carried ink cartridges and this was easily the worst part of the store to get properly sorted and tagged. I took a whack at it, made it look better, and he came over to check out my work. I was expecting praise because hey, it looked a lot better, but instead he goes rack by rack checking each and every tag one by one and when he finds one thats old, or wrong, he rips it off and throws the product on the floor. In the end he only found like half a dozen out of hundreds and I said"Come on man, it's never going to be 100%, that took me hours" and he said "Aiming for 99% is the same as failing from the start". I didn't really get it then, and he was a jerk, but it did certainly stick with me.

Point is if the Sharks play to not lose, they've already lost. You need to play to win, and they have not been doing that. If playing to win means they make a few more mistakes and give up a few more goals, I have no problem with that. At least they are playing a system that plays to their strengths and allows their individual improvement to be rewarded. It's tough to ask a young player to learn when you never give him the opportunity to fail, or even play.
 

5H4RK5

Registered User
May 3, 2007
3,820
10
It's a sign we must trade "sacrifice" one player before every game by trade if the Sharks are to make the playoffs. I just hope we have enough players left if we win enough by the trade deadline. :laugh: j/k
 

Juxtaposer

Outro: Divina Comedia
Dec 21, 2009
49,878
23,203
Bay Area
It's a sign we must trade "sacrifice" one player before every game by trade if the Sharks are to make the playoffs. I just hope we have enough players left if we win enough by the trade deadline. :laugh: j/k

17 games left, 22 roster players, right? At the end, it's going to be Burns, Couture, Thornton, Marleau, and Vlasic on the ice for 60 minutes, and they're going to be fired up to win because "DAMNIT THEY JUST TOOK PAVELSKI. WE WILL NOT STAND FOR THIS". :sarcasm:
 

hockeyball

Registered User
Nov 10, 2007
21,560
944
17 games left, 22 roster players, right? At the end, it's going to be Burns, Couture, Thornton, Marleau, and Vlasic on the ice for 60 minutes, and they're going to be fired up to win because "DAMNIT THEY JUST TOOK PAVELSKI. WE WILL NOT STAND FOR THIS". :sarcasm:

And we'll have every pick in this draft. They'll get up at the draft and go "Sorry everyone, San Jose picked the entire draft, thanks for coming out"
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad