Speculation: 2013 Armchair GM Thread Part VI
- Thread starter Led Zappa
- Start date
CrazedZooChimp
Not enough guts
No. First because Todd is unlikely to ever play him (certainly not 20 games), and second because Stalock is awesome.
If anyone thinks goalies are immune to injuries, they're kidding themselves.
hockeyball
Registered User
- Nov 10, 2007
- 21,557
- 913
And you propose what? Give up on one of our two best goalie prospects so we can sign some 'vet' who hasn't been signed by now for likely a very good reason?
If Stalock is not in the NHL this season, he's gone. That's all there is to it. He gets the backup role this year or he will sign elsewhere in the future. He needs to be given his opportunity, not just for his sake, but for the goalies behind hims sake. Both so they can move up a notch and so they have some hope that they too will be given their 'shot' when it's their turn.
Juxtaposer
Outro: Divina Comedia
Nemo has a strong history of health and endurance. Obviously he's not immune to injury but the thought that it could happen honestly never crossed my mind.
Fistfullofbeer
Moderator
This is what I think is really the case. Unless we pull away from the rest of the division/conference, similar to what the Hawks did last year, there is no way besides Nemo getting injured that Stalock starts more than 12 games.
Not even then. There is an ironman mystique about #1 goalies that is not supported by evidence. Note that both Chicago and Boston dramatically shared goaltending duties. Going ironman means a goalie is going for over 100 games between regular season, playoffs and pre-season. The last goalie to win it all with over 70 reg. season games was Brodeur. The year Pitt won it, Fleury had an injury mid-season. Previously, Chicago shared a lot when Nemo won. Detroit shared big time in the year of their win. Thomas only did ~55 games on his winning year. The Ducks shared big when they won and Carolina won with the backup.
It's seems part of Canadian culture and it is funny that they are dramatically behind in turning out NHL goalies. The Finns and Americans are overrepresented.
All #1's want to go ironman. It is up to the HC to put a cap on it. You can look around the league to find the few coaches who have put their foot down on going ironman. Julien is one of them. TM and previously Wilson do not have a history of putting their foot down on the ironman thing.
Last edited:
AnderFunk
Registered User
Last year really was a great shot for us because of the shortened season. Most years we overplay Marleau/Thornton/Boyle/starting goalie so much that they are all exhausted by the time playoffs start and then we wonder why they underperform. Hopefully McLellan starts to shift a lot of their time to Pavelski/Couture/Vlasic and realizes the old fogies shouldn't be leading the league in ice time.
AgentCooper
Registered User
sharks fan 209
Registered User
- Mar 23, 2010
- 302
- 0
The only thing that makes this offseason any more boring then any other offseason is this year seems a bit better for players staying alive and not dieing in the offseason.
Other then that this has been just as exciting/boring as any other offseason.
Other then that this has been just as exciting/boring as any other offseason.
bullslugg
Registered User
SharksFan1
Registered User
I think it just feels extra boring as a Sharks fan since they barely did any thing this offseason. A couple minor lineup changes, and resigning Torres and extending Couture... that is about it.
The Ice Hockey Dude
Ack! Thbbft!
Being a long time fan, i'm used to it with DW as GM. He's been like this all most every off season. I do think that he'll be more active in refreshing the team as we have core player contracts expiring soon, likely as deals during the season.
Fistfullofbeer
Moderator
Based on Wheelers numbers, if Pavs is looking for something close to 6M per for 6+ years, would you guys do want to get him signed or trade him for assets?
Juxtaposer
Outro: Divina Comedia
RainbowDash
20% Cooler
That depends ENTIRELY on what Thornton and Patty (and maybe Boyle) are willing to take on their extensions.
Also, I would not sign Pavelski for more then 4 years. Players on the smaller side aren't known for their durability or effectiveness in their late 30s.
If we were to trade Pavelski, its best to do it at the TDL where we can get a king's ransom.
vilpertti
Registered User
That is just an empty statement based on flawed "common sense" thinking. Players are individuals, size does not dictate their ability to play long into their 30's in any way. There's Eric Lindroses in big guys and there's Doug Gilmours and Ray Whitneys in the small guy pool.
hohosaregood
Banned
- Sep 1, 2011
- 32,455
- 12,707
You're right but for Pavelski in specific, he thinks the game well but I'm not certain how well his tools are going to age considering his tools weren't that great to begin with. On the other hand, Marleau has great tools and a game that doesn't rely on his speed so I believe his level of play will continue as is.
RainbowDash
20% Cooler
Pardon me. Let me clarify the obvious. Players who are on the smaller side and play LIKE Joe Pavelski (Below average skating ability) aren't known for their durability or effectiveness in their late 30s of post lockout hockey.
I have no interest at all in the Sharks signing players thru into the 35+ range unless they are exceptional in their physical ability (Thornton & Patty). Especially when its committing cap dollars reserved for 1st line quality players.
So unless we see evidence of Pavelski skating like he is Teemu Selanne, I don't see us signing him to the ridiculous long term plan here.
I disagree. The teams that will be after him at tdl will be contenders. Especially since he will be a free agent. Which means they will not wZnt to give up roster players any draft picks will be late firsts which isn't any good. I would have to preferred to move him aT draft where hr could've gotten the most value. if he isn't signing best time to move him is before the season starts.now is that time
vilpertti
Registered User
While I agree I wouldn't go on making a seven year deal for Pavs, his game is perfectly fine to keep on going 35+. He has a great release and goes to areas where he can get that shot off. I don't see those attributes waning unless his hunger for the game declines. And I just don't see that happening with him.
It's certainly possible for Pavs to play at a high level past 35 but his odds of doing it are less than guys like Marleau or Thornton have greater physical abilities.
vilpertti
Registered User
Of course, because Thornton and Marleau are better players with superb physiques, while Pavelski is a player who is good, but not ever going to be in an Art Ross race.
