Fire Deboer

[Juxtaposer]

The 2017 Sharks probably would have best Edmonton with a healthy Couture and Thornton but they were in no way a contender.

 

[Boy Hedican]

So being a top-7 team in the league isn't a contender by your standards? I'm not going to sift back through old posts, but i'd be top dollar you were a staunch defender of last year's loss to EDM being chalked up to untimely injuries of our 1 and 2 C. If you weren't, and you dont think that played a major role why we lost, then i suggest spending some time on that series.

I think primarily you need to cool down from this loss to Vegas. I thought we had this series; i didn't think Fluery would play as well as he did; i didnt think our speed was lacking. What is clear now, though, is that Vegas is a legit contender, and they are actually near the Cup....They are a final 4 team for ****s sake. This wasn't a playoff fluke, they won the Pacific too, remember?

And why, why, why do you pin the Game 6 home losses on the GM? What possible influence besides encouragement could they have on the team? The fact that you thought we could beat Vegas, you and tons of Sharks fans and NHL experts, means that DW did his job well! if anything this is a coaching and player issue, but by every other measuring test both the coach and the players overachieved this season.

I agree with you. THey are a legit contender. We, however, are just behind that. I thought we played them well for the most part. And a few bad bounces our way could have shaped this series differently. But, in 7 games, usually the better team wins. We have some work to do...

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

So being a top-7 team in the league isn't a contender by your standards? I'm not going to sift back through old posts, but i'd be top dollar you were a staunch defender of last year's loss to EDM being chalked up to untimely injuries of our 1 and 2 C. If you weren't, and you dont think that played a major role why we lost, then i suggest spending some time on that series.

I think primarily you need to cool down from this loss to Vegas. I thought we had this series; i didn't think Fluery would play as well as he did; i didnt think our speed was lacking. What is clear now, though, is that Vegas is a legit contender, and they are actually near the Cup....They are a final 4 team for ****s sake. This wasn't a playoff fluke, they won the Pacific too, remember?

And why, why, why do you pin the Game 6 home losses on the GM? What possible influence besides encouragement could they have on the team? The fact that you thought we could beat Vegas, you and tons of Sharks fans and NHL experts, means that DW did his job well! if anything this is a coaching and player issue, but by every other measuring test both the coach and the players overachieved this season.

Okay, dude. I said we could have won the Edmonton series and the Vegas series. I would have been happy about that kind of effort against Winnipeg, Nashville, Tampa, or Boston; a fairly even series where we were battling injuries. But we lost to WEAK teams. We could have won against either one but the fact that we didn’t destroy them fairly easily shows that we are not true contenders.

Please don’t call us a top-7 team because we won 6 games and Boston won 5. Boston was much better than us. Being in the top-8 means nothing because Winnipeg, Tampa, Nashville, and Boston were clearly on another level from the rest of the NHL before the season started. Being top-5 would not matter because nobody besides those 4 had a real chance to win and the only way San Jose would win was if Joe Thornton returned to the lineup

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Except you need a good group to build the team. Obviously, Edmonton shows us constitanlty how difficult that is. Buffalo is right behind them.

I’d be shocked if those two stay in Buf. Hell, I’ll be shocked if McDavid stays in Edmonton.

McDavid and Eichel both immediately signed a team friendly 8 year contract when they had the option to do so.

All that you need to do is not be an idiot when you build around them. If Edmonton wasn’t doing things like trading Taylor Hall for Adam Larson and signing Milan Lucic to the ridiculous contract that they did, they would probably be contending.

 

[Boy Hedican]

The 2017 Sharks probably would have best Edmonton with a healthy Couture and Thornton but they were in no way a contender.

I dunno. We played like dog **** during that last stretch in 17 and I’m not sure them being healthy would have impacted us THAT much. Maybe, but bleh...we played so bad in that last stretch.

 

[Boy Hedican]

Okay, dude. I said we could have won the Edmonton series and the Vegas series. I would have been happy about that kind of effort against Winnipeg, Nashville, Tampa, or Boston; a fairly even series where we were battling injuries. But we lost to WEAK teams. We could have won against either one but the fact that we didn’t destroy them fairly easily shows that we are not true contenders.

Please don’t call us a top-7 team because we won 6 games and Boston won 5. Boston was much better than us. Being in the top-8 means nothing because Winnipeg, Tampa, Nashville, and Boston were clearly on another level from the rest of the NHL before the season started. Being top-5 would not matter because nobody besides those 4 had a real chance to win and the only way San Jose would win was if Joe Thornton returned to the lineup

What? Boston was at a different level before the season started? Lol. Nope.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

What? Boston was at a different level before the season started? Lol. Nope.

Sorry, I meant the playoffs when I said the season. The NHL’s “second season”, as your @Boy Hedican might call it.

 

[Juxtaposer]

I dunno. We played like dog **** during that last stretch in 17 and I’m not sure them being healthy would have impacted us THAT much. Maybe, but bleh...we played so bad in that last stretch.

Maybe so. But that definitely wasn’t my point.

What I’m getting at is that I don’t think this team has been a real contender for very many years. 2009, 2010, 2011, 2016. 2008 was all Thornton and Nabokov (and I guess Campbell). I can’t speak of the 2006 and 2007 teams because I didn’t watch them seriously. And none of those teams were the best team in the league. 2016 and 2011 were close IMO.

Making the playoffs is very easy in the NHL. The construction of the 2012-2015 teams should not be praised.

 

[Boy Hedican]

McDavid and Eichel both immediately signed a team friendly 8 year contract when they had the option to do so.

All that you need to do is not be an idiot when you build around them. If Edmonton wasn’t doing things like trading Taylor Hall for Adam Larson and signing Milan Lucic to the ridiculous contract that they did, they would probably be contending.

Yet there’s a much of idiots building teams around super stars. You think it’s THAT easy? You think you just have to not be an idiot? Bro...I know you’re young, but you have some real world experience to endure before you proclaim how simple “not being an idiot” really is. It’s easy to be right from afar.

 

[OrrNumber4]

At this point id rather just see what DW is capable of post thornton/marleau than throwing in the towel like St louis kinda did or the rangers. **** that. I was up for a rebuild in like 2012-14, and I'm already seeing what I wanted to see where we have a bunch of new young talented players that get to learn how to win together. Also rebuilding isn't always so pretty, despite mclellan not adjusting Id blame the losing culture rearing its head on that 50% home PK. What doug is doing breeds pride in the locker room, so I'm pretty interested to see if he can finesse his way back into top contender without rebuilding. That's ****ing interesting.

Maybe starting with a blank slate and a completely new culture would be a better idea, no? Who knows how good DW will be as a rebuilding GM? It takes a different kind of GM; consider how Lombardi was hampered in San Jose. He couldn’t get value for players like Selanne and Damphousse because he couldn’t wrap his head around the idea that his team was no longer a contending team.

No one is expecting a Cup every year. But it would be nice to have a single Cup from the last FIFTEEN years this team has been a “contender” for. It is absolutely insane that a team can be a contender for fifteen years and not win a Cup. Obviously this is a severe simplification, but let’s for a second be generous and say that there are ten contending teams per year. Every year one of those teams will win the Cup for fifteen years. To have a one in ten chance of winning a Cup for fifteen years and not win it a single time is ridiculous. Frankly, it’s a severe underperformance. DW should get as much credit for building a contending team for fifteen years as scorn for not winning a single Cup in those fifteen years. Obviously the teams he built were not good enough.

How many years were the Sharks the best team in the league? How about top-3? This is a serious question.

Making the playoffs is far too easy in the NHL. Be an average team and you can make it. It’s not an accomplishment.

Bingo. At the end of the day, cup results are what matters. It seems like the rest of the NHL gives their GM 3-5 years to reach the next big stage (playoffs, contending, championship) before giving him the boot. The Sharks, for all their preaching about a winning culture, don’t appear to do that.

How many years were the Sharks the best team in the league? How about top-3? This is a serious question.

Making the playoffs is far too easy in the NHL. Be an average team and you can make it. It’s not an accomplishment.

Tough question because there has frequently been two different versions of the Sharks. RS!Sharks2006 finished with the best record in the league after they acquired Thornton. Playoff!Sharks2006 were broken by a grinding Edmonton team. RS!Sharks2009 won the president’s trophy but Playoff!Sharks2009 quietly lost to the eighth seed. I can go on and on.

RS, on game 82 the 2004, 2006, 2009, 2010, and 2011 Sharks were arguably considered top-3 in the league. In the playoffs, only in 2004, 2010, and 2016 were they top-3 in the league (by definition...either you make the SC or you are the best of the CF losers).

 

[Boy Hedican]

Maybe so. But that definitely wasn’t my point.

What I’m getting at is that I don’t think this team has been a real contender for very many years. 2009, 2010, 2011, 2016. 2008 was all Thornton and Nabokov (and I guess Campbell). I can’t speak of the 2006 and 2007 teams because I didn’t watch them seriously. And none of those teams were the best team in the league. 2016 and 2011 were close IMO.

Making the playoffs is very easy in the NHL. The construction of the 2012-2015 teams should not be praised.

In 16, we were legit. We won games we shouldn’t have. We scored. We were SO resilient. I wanted to feel this about our 18 squad, but they never brought that same spark.

 

[OrrNumber4]

They had the second best team in the NHL in 2016. Otherwise, I agree. And even in that season, stupid depth acquisitions like Spaling and Polak really hurt us.

Realistically, 2016 proved that we had the core to consistently be a contender for years, but that DW didn’t properly build around them in any of those years.

Or it was the emergence of Burns, the play of secondary characters like Vlasic and Couture, and Joe Thornton finally making the changes to his game to make this team a contender.

Talent-wise, you look at the depth that year, and other than Joel Ward, it wasn’t too dissimilar from past teams (cap contexualized). The difference is that in 2016, the star players led the way and the depth players were able to follow.

It cannot be said enough that Thornton had his best playoffs as a 36-year-old.

And why, why, why do you pin the Game 6 home losses on the GM? What possible influence besides encouragement could they have on the team? The fact that you thought we could beat Vegas, you and tons of Sharks fans and NHL experts, means that DW did his job well! if anything this is a coaching and player issue, but by every other measuring test both the coach and the players overachieved this season.

This is a solid point. The old adage is that the GM builds the team, the coach deploys them, and the players play. If you thought this team was good enough “on paper” to beat Vegas, then you have to temper your criticisms of Doug Wilson.

 

[tiburon12]

No one is expecting a Cup every year. But it would be nice to have a single Cup from the last FIFTEEN years this team has been a “contender” for. It is absolutely insane that a team can be a contender for fifteen years and not win a Cup. Obviously this is a severe simplification, but let’s for a second be generous and say that there are ten contending teams per year. Every year one of those teams will win the Cup for fifteen years. To have a one in ten chance of winning a Cup for fifteen years and not win it a single time is ridiculous. Frankly, it’s a severe underperformance. DW should get as much credit for building a contending team for fifteen years as scorn for not winning a single Cup in those fifteen years. Obviously the teams he built were not good enough.

How many years were the Sharks the best team in the league? How about top-3? This is a serious question.

Making the playoffs is far too easy in the NHL. Be an average team and you can make it. It’s not an accomplishment.

Since the Sharks entered the league, only 13 teams have won the Cup. 27 seasons, 13 different winners. Only 4 different winners since 2009! So yes, maybe in a perfect statistically-average world, we should have won once, but that isnt the case in hockey and you are being purposefully ignorant if you try to say otherwise. and the odds are always 1-31, not 1-15. the regular season does matter, and its the GM

Of course it would be nice to have a cup, obviously. But the failings of this team in the past 4-5 seasons have been so far from the GM. After the 2014 collapse, his plan has been executed incredibly well. We fired the coach and got a better one who took us to the finals. We took a step back and let players develop, and those players have developed into solid, still-improving NHLers. We suffered brutal injuries last playoffs and this playoffs we lost to a better team - keeping in mind we only made the playoffs thanks to some key trades.

We have a right as fans to be disappointed and expect more, but direct your blame more accurately. The only blunders DW has yet to correct were the Boedker deal and the Burns and Vlasic deals, though with the big contracts, his hands were tied (having worked in professional sports on the business side, signing big pending UFAs to larger than desired deals is not new)

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Yet there’s a much of idiots building teams around super stars. You think it’s THAT easy? You think you just have to not be an idiot? Bro...I know you’re young, but you have some real world experience to endure before you proclaim how simple “not being an idiot” really is. It’s easy to be right from afar.

The thing is, I am not paid to make those decisions, and I NEVER would have signed Lucic or traded Hall for Larsson. Almost every HFer said they were stupid, too.

If Chiarelli had just polled HF on every decision he made, and didn’t make the ones that were over 2/3 saying it was a bad decision, he would have made the playoffs every year. And HF is full of kids younger than me (I’m 21) with a lot less knowledge and a lot less hockey viewing and/or playing experience. You could have literally polled HF on the Larsson/Hall trade and the Lucic signing and asked “would an idiot make this move?” And 2/3 of HF would say yes.

McDavid and Draisaitl had 139 combined even strength points this season. In 2016, Thornton, Pavelski, and Hertl had 142 even strength points. That line carried us to the SCF and McDavid-Draisaitl alone scored almost as much as all 3 of them at ES on a terrible Oilers team without a superstar like Burns on defense and a fantastic LW like Hertl. All they needed was a decent team built around McDavid and Draisaitl and they easily would have made the playoffs and likely done better. They were in the NHL’s worst division and could have taken that spot from Anaheim, Vegas, us, or LA.

 

[Juxtaposer]

In 16, we were legit. We won games we shouldn’t have. We scored. We were SO resilient. I wanted to feel this about our 18 squad, but they never brought that same spark.

I don’t think we won a whole lot of games we shouldn’t have in 2016. I think the team was just that good and had the character to match. I can’t emphasize enough how great that 2016 team was. And like ON4 says, it’s not because of depth. It was because the stars played like stars.

 

[OrrNumber4]

At least that 2016 run destroyed the constantly perseverating meme that depth was a massive reason the Sharks’s didn’t enjoy success in the post-lockout era. Oh, and that the regular season can be conflated with the playoffs.

 

[tiburon12]

Okay, dude. I said we could have won the Edmonton series and the Vegas series. I would have been happy about that kind of effort against Winnipeg, Nashville, Tampa, or Boston; a fairly even series where we were battling injuries. But we lost to WEAK teams. We could have won against either one but the fact that we didn’t destroy them fairly easily shows that we are not true contenders.

I know you did, which is why i said that the fact that you considered us to be better than them means that DW did his job. He doesnt make coaching decisions nor does he actually play. Those two series losses are not on him at all

Please don’t call us a top-7 team because we won 6 games and Boston won 5. Boston was much better than us. Being in the top-8 means nothing because Winnipeg, Tampa, Nashville, and Boston were clearly on another level from the rest of the NHL before the season started. Being top-5 would not matter because nobody besides those 4 had a real chance to win and the only way San Jose would win was if Joe Thornton returned to the lineup

sure, let me just throw around a bunch of conditions and avoid facts and numbers. Sharks were a top-31 team this year. Better?

Or how about if the sharks advanced, but Nashville doesnt, does that mean that the Sharks are not a top-4 team but Nashville is, despite finishing better than they did??

 

[Pinkfloyd]

At least that 2016 run destroyed the constantly perseverating meme that depth was a massive reason the Sharks’s didn’t enjoy success in the post-lockout era. Oh, and that the regular season can be conflated with the playoffs.

Huh? Depth was kind of a big reason why they had that run. They were able to play their six d-men enough to not wear down their top guys. They had nine guys posting at least a half a point per game which was at least seven forwards. They had two third line guys producing at a good clip for 3rd liners. Top guys get more room if depth guys are producing as well. They got both that year. So I really have no idea what in the hell you think you're talking about.

 

[DrFeelgood]

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Bad decision.

 

[DrFeelgood]

Bad decision.

I'm more annoyed at keeping Spott than DeBoer. I'm fine with DeBoer but Spott needs to be gone

 

[Friday]

How does Spott survive again!?

 

[Lebanezer]

Bad decision.

It was expected though, and hardly surprising. Doug holds on to coaches too long, so we're in for another year of no accountability from Deboer. I still expect great things from the Sharks next year, no matter who they sign or who the coach is. I just hope that Doug makes the roster decisions easier for Deboer.

 

[Friday]

Deboer isn't perfect but he's better than many other choices

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

It was expected though, and hardly surprising. Doug holds on to coaches too long, so we're in for another year of no accountability from Deboer. I still expect great things from the Sharks next year, no matter who they sign or who the coach is. I just hope that Doug makes the roster decisions easier for Deboer.

It’s funny because when McLellan had clearly become stale, it was the 2012-2015 period of time where the Sharks won only one playoff series and missed the playoffs and got reverse swept once as well.

I think that if you ran a statistical analysis, it would show that teams do a lot better with coaches in years 1-3 than years 4+. It might be more optimal, probability wise, to fire a coach every 3 or 4 seasons.

Why do you expect great things from the Sharks no matter what? Are you saying that in the context of “there needs to be great things from this time, I will accept nothing less”, or in the context of “if I had to make a bet, San Jose will win the Pacific Division in the regular season and the playoffs.”?