Rumor: Interest in Marleau (report: willing to waive NMC for LA, ANA, NYR)
- Thread starter Celly4Celebrini
- Start date
- Status
It really isn't though. He plays any where from 50 seconds to 1 minute more then 4 of the other top 6 players. And he plays 1 minute less then pavelski.
So if he is being double shifted more then his fellow top 6 mates it is the equivalence of 1 extra shift per game. Nothing really to be jumping and saying his bad +/- is due to extra shifts.
Which is still more than what the Joes have to do but it isn't just that. One, you're again using the entire season to come to that conclusion. The talk was the past couple weeks. Marleau is in the positive in that time and about equal to Thornton. Marleau has had to deal with an important person going out and being replaced. Thornton and Pavs haven't. Donskoi's spot is necessary obviously but vastly different from losing a Couture since Donskoi's not that big a deal on that line. But the +/- argument isn't really relevant anyway in this context. The adversity is different and the responsibilities are different.
Again, you're using the whole season...I'm using the past couple weeks accounting for Couture's injury and the time it took for those guys to get on the same page. They're a big time positive and every bit a positive as Thornton's line.
Pavelski is the one that plays 1 minute more per game then marleau.
And it is not taking time to adjust for thornton and pavelski to a rookie being on the line? Lol. And if donskoi is irrelevant to the top line then the joes are basically playing short handed for all of there shifts lol.
Timos Death Stare
Seek and Destroy
I believe PFs point is fairly obvious. Donskoi/anyone else on that line is less of an impact than losing couture on the 2nd line.
What? No he doesn't. Pavs plays 15 seconds more per game than Marleau.
And with the way Thornton and Pavs play, no it doesn't because their game doesn't change.
Oh we are going to now add power plays and penalty kills because they have so much to do with plus minus lol.
Even strength time pavs plays a minute more then marleau. Which kills your theory of marleau is double shifted more then any one else on the team.
You can't even reference the proper facts for your points. Even strength, Pavs plays 19 seconds more per game than Marleau. And no, it doesn't kill that theory even if what you said was true. All that would mean is that Pavs and Thornton get more shifts and they do at even strength as a line. They hardly, if ever, move down the lineup to help another line.
Timos Death Stare
Seek and Destroy
I don't really care about the argument but Marleau was double shifted on the 4th line last game when Haley went out for fighting.
I've seen it happen with Pavs too but my personal opinion is that Marleau is better suited for it and I think the coaching staff feels this way too
CrypTic
Registered User
- Oct 2, 2013
- 5,069
- 81
We're not in a good position to trade Marleau bc we don't have anyone to replace him on the 2nd line, PP, and PK. So, unless we've given up on the season (which I think they'll be very reluctant to do bc Boston has our 1st), we'd need a good 2-way/defensive LW who can score. We also need an offensive D, preferably RHD, probably for the 3rd pair.
I don't think he'd waive for Winnepeg, though.
Pavelski2112
Bold as Boognish
T0uGh C0oki3
Goodbye Jumbo Joe
- Dec 19, 2014
- 3,863
- 100
ScottyDont
Registered User
If we were to consider trading Marleau, the fact that another team is pursuing him hard means we have the leverage.... I think
Ninja Hertl
formerly sharkohol
do0glas
Registered User
- Jan 26, 2012
- 13,271
- 683
Trading marleau is going for a rebuild unless we get a blue chip prospect back or a young forward with top six potential.
So the team just needs to figure out what it is. But with couture, karlsson and Torres out its the worst time to entertain trades. Let's let this ride till January.
So the team just needs to figure out what it is. But with couture, karlsson and Torres out its the worst time to entertain trades. Let's let this ride till January.
hockeyball
Registered User
- Nov 10, 2007
- 21,557
- 911
mfw people think that trading Marleau would be a good idea
It's a good idea if we keep playing like we are. This team is going nowhere, and Couture alone isn't going to fix that. If anything, Couture's loss just gave us an early preview of how messed up this team is. It's like we picked up a team last night when we were drunk and then woke up and saw it without it's make-up on.
do0glas
Registered User
- Jan 26, 2012
- 13,271
- 683
I really don't agree. Everyone wants to hang onto the notion that we are running some 1a/1b setup but couture is clearly our #1 C. Think about our team with him based on what you've seen hertl accomplish.
Hertl was eating third line comp up. Tierney was eating fourth line comp up. Move them up a line. Hertl still crushing it, tierney isn't ready. So we become a two line team instead of a four line team. We've cut our overall effectiveness in half with one player out.
The fact that this team has remained .500 is actually a testament to our line up. We've been running some iterating of brown Haley lerg and goodrow for over a month! That's not even a line! It's just three players that they trot out to give the NHL players a breather.
We've resorted to dropping nieto just so that line doesn't get run off the ice. With couture and karlsson back this team is stacked.
Karlsson-jumbo-pavs
Marleau-couture-ward
Donskoi-hertl-goldobin
Nieto-tierney-wingels
I'd think about getting stollery up or mueller to play with Tennyson a sit Dillon for a bit. But our top 4 is good enough, except when you have two lines that aren't ready for the comp they are facing.
I don't agree. We are much deeper at forward than we are with defenseman. This team would be better if we swapped Marleau for a top 4 PMD. He could QB the second power play unit and bolster our 3rd pairing.
Hertl has shown he belongs in the top 6. When Couture comes back he takes Marleau's spot on the 2nd line. You still have Tierney, Wingles, Nieto, Goldobin, and Donskoi or Karlsson fighting for spots on the 3rd line.
If Marleau wants to go DW can accommodate him. I think he still wants to stay here and this is just a bunch of smoke.
This team has depth on depth talent up front. There is little depth in high end talent up front. They cannot make up for the fact that Couture is out let alone for Marleau being out. Hertl is no Marleau. Hertl more makes up for Couture in terms of play style. They don't have anyone at that skill level that has Marleau's speed and they can't afford to lose that if they expect to compete.
LadyStanley
Registered User
http://us.rd.yahoo.com/sports/rss/n...on-sharks--hockey-hall-of-fame-135555135.html
Rusanowsky on the Puck Daddy Marek vs Wyshynski podcast talking about situation (and the joys of Burnzie).
Rusanowsky on the Puck Daddy Marek vs Wyshynski podcast talking about situation (and the joys of Burnzie).
I think only team Marleau would waive for would be Tampa. But Tampa needs cap space so how about Stamkos to Calgary and Marleau to Tampa.
Only idea that would make sense. But I doubt Marleau wants to move.
Only idea that would make sense. But I doubt Marleau wants to move.
VanIslander
A 19-year ATDer on HfBoards
That's the thing. He's one of the least likely to waive his NTC. He has emphasized his happiness living with his family in the bay area and his intention to stay.
I believe he'll finish out his contract and if the Sharks don't re-sign him, he'll retire. The only issue is whether the organization will give him a lowball offer and whether he will take it. I say ther's a 50/50 chance between his retirement at the end of next season or re-signing at under $5 million per year. I see no other likely option.
allan5oh
Has prospect fever
- Oct 15, 2011
- 11,311
- 356
I was thinking about it, and as an outsider here's what I think:
1) Sharks go for rebuild. Trade Marleau for futures package. This is extremely unlikely and flies in the face of logic. The GM contacted yours, not the other way around. Marleau is not on the market. GMs also rarely contact each other and say "Hey you know if you decide to rebuild, we'd be interested in x player". Sharks might retool, but I don't think they'll rebuild.
2) Marleau goes for a replacement player like you said. But that's like replacing Marleau with Marleau. Or maybe a less talented but younger LW and a pick? Somebody like Ladd for example.
3) Marleau goes out for a player in another position. But then you just create a hole where Marleau was. A good example would maybe be Tyler Myers.
I don't think any of those three scenarios make any sense. Plus you add in the NMC.
hockeyball
Registered User
- Nov 10, 2007
- 21,557
- 911
Marleau for a defensemen makes sense, we can't replace Marleau, but we have that problem either way. He's gone after next season no matter what, and he may fall of a cliff before then production wise even if not. We do not have a cup caliber team right now anyway, Marleau isn't going to make or break anything any more than filling a hole on D is. We can replace Marleau with Goldobin, and next year Meier. It's a drop off, but it's one we are going to have to absorb anyway shortly, might as well fill a major hole now if we can instead of letting him walk and having two holes.
- Status
