GDT: Game 67: New Jersey @ San Jose 7:30pm PST SAP Center

stator

Registered User
Apr 17, 2012
5,031
1,017
San Jose
This is a very predicatble loss that I most place on the coaching staff for failing to prepare the team. To help my GDT win% I've only broken my rule once because it was against a celler dweller.

You can find out why in another post, and something the coaching staff and players need to absolutely work on in order to not have an exit in round 1, assuming they make it.



Sharks got to the net, but Nj would have 4 players between them and the net. Have to do a better job getting to the spots and muscling for position. Effort was there, fine details were lacking.

Sharks team speed is not as good as it once was. This allows teams to play a close, smothering style. Sharks can make up for this with getting into good passing lanes and making passes cleaning, but they don't always do this well. Couple that with playing basketball style coverage that gives up time and space, Sharks lose to mediocre teams like this. For some reason, Sharks don't press attacks on offensive or press their defense in tight coverage to choke off the attackers well at home when returning from a road trip.
 
Last edited:

Pinkfloyd

Registered User
Oct 29, 2006
70,430
13,851
Folsom
This is a very predicatble loss that I most place on the coaching staff for failing to prepare the team. To help my GDT win% I've only broken my rule once because it was against a celler dweller.

You can find out why in another post, and something the coaching staff and players need to absolutely work on in order to not have an earlier exit in round 1, assuming they make it.

Yeah because that situation is so going to come up in the playoffs and lol at assuming they make it. You can't honestly believe there is any shot at Vancouver making up 16 points in 16 games, do you?
 

stator

Registered User
Apr 17, 2012
5,031
1,017
San Jose
Yeah because that situation is so going to come up in the playoffs and lol at assuming they make it. You can't honestly believe there is any shot at Vancouver making up 16 points in 16 games, do you?

I knew you would jump in here. I had to say assuming because the Sharks have not clinched a playoff spot yet. So, the certainly is never 100% until then. But, you're right... odds are great that they (Sharks) will make at least the 3rd seed in the division.

So NO, I don't expect the 'Nucks to catch. I don't like their odds for a WC either, so I am anticipating a cross-over. Anything else you want me to clear up my position on?
 

stator

Registered User
Apr 17, 2012
5,031
1,017
San Jose
No, but I know you don't care at all for Polak, so what does it matter?

I'm all for Polak because the defense is too thin for the playoffs and the Sharks could have done worse. Heck, I would not have been all that surprised when Dillon went down to see a headline like "Irwin sights PTO with Sharks".

The unfortunate thing about acquiring Polak is DeMelo who I like better Dillon. Dillon can stick with and be an nusance on a player to prevent a breakawy, and he can scrum it up on the boards, but that's about it for him. He does not have a good enough shot from the point on offensive, and he's not good at cycling and puck control on offense either. So for offense, he can only play the blue line defense perimeter role. He's okay when he is paired with Burns because it's more or less what's needed. But not so with other Shark's dmen.

Plus, on defense, he does not have good situational awareness that prevents him from making a good pass. Too often, he passes to an opponent. Demers was the better player, and DeMelo is going to be a better player soon.
 
Last edited:

Quid Pro Clowe

Registered User
Dec 28, 2008
52,301
9,174
530
I'm all for Polak because the defense is too thin for the playoffs and the Sharks could have done worse. Heck, I would not have been all that surprised when Dillon went down to see a headline like "Irwin sights PTO with Sharks".

The unfortunate thing about acquiring Polak is DeMelo who I like better Dillon. Dillon can stick with and be an nusance on a player to prevent a breakawy, and he can scrum it up on the boards, but that's about it for him. He does not have a good enough shot from the point on offensive, and he's not good at cycling and puck control on offense either. So for offense, he can only play the blue line defense perimeter role. He's okay when he is paired with Burns because it's more or less what's needed. But not so with other Shark's dmen.

Plus, on defense, he does not have good situational awareness that prevents him from making a good pass. Too often, he passes to an opponent. Demers was the better player, and DeMelo is going to be a better player soon.
Yeah, Dillon is an offensive black hole. His shot never gets through and when he plays the puck behind the net the pace is hardly ever proper.

I agree that he's better off with an offensive type of defenseman over Polak.
 

stator

Registered User
Apr 17, 2012
5,031
1,017
San Jose
Yeah and if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle...

Pretty pathetic showing last night!!

Yeah, against the lowest scoring team in the NHL to boot!

Tired of hearing about Couture missing so many games. That just means the Sharks are too thin to dominate in the playoffs. Particularly when one considers centers are the position with the best depth for the Sharks.

Sharks absolutely need dominating performance in the net, but they did not get it last night. I think it's the net performance that will dictate how well the Sharks do in the playoffs. I'll dust off and slightly rework my old saying about this time of the year...

"All roads in the playoffs go through Jones/Reimer. If they ain' there, the road is missing."
 

Lebanezer

I'unno? Coast Guard?
Jul 24, 2006
14,818
10,430
San Jose
Both goals Jones gave up should have been stopped. Doesn't excuse the offense, but Kinkaid made those stops.

The second goal was unlucky. He saved the initial shot and it hit someone in front and got behind him. The first goal though, he should have had that.
 

Tkachuk4MVP

32 Years of Fail
Apr 15, 2006
14,801
2,684
San Diego, CA
The second goal was unlucky. He saved the initial shot and it hit someone in front and got behind him. The first goal though, he should have had that.


Sure, but that's why you shoot when you have an opportunity like that as opposed to curling backward and looking for someone to pass to.
 

nabob

Big Daddy Kane
Aug 3, 2005
34,515
21,092
HF boards
No, but I know you don't care at all for Polak, so what does it matter?

Just was wondering how badly he was injured, saw lots of posts saying he had a broken nose but never any confirmation of it and wasn't able to catch the game last night. Thanks for the answer.

Cheers.
 

Mattb124

Registered User
Apr 29, 2011
6,571
4,008
Was Locomotiv Yaroslavl a lock for the playoffs in 2011?

Thankfully Doug Wilson corrected the back-up goalie situation at the TDL, so the likely area where an unexpected event could have derailed the play-off run has been addressed.
 

Pinkfloyd

Registered User
Oct 29, 2006
70,430
13,851
Folsom
Was Locomotiv Yaroslavl a lock for the playoffs in 2011?

Thankfully Doug Wilson corrected the back-up goalie situation at the TDL, so the likely area where an unexpected event could have derailed the play-off run has been addressed.

That questions seems out of left field.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad