Still proud of this team

[Sharksrule04]

I want to see us 20 games into the season with a better record than last year having lost 3 of the last 4 games with 5-1 loss in there and wait for the Fire Doug Wilson thread to pop it's head up

I expect that thread to pop up in 3 weeks when we haven't traded for a top 10 pick and made 0 big FA signings.

 

[tahoesharksfan]

Kind of scary if the injury speculations are as serious as we fear.

This is my biggest concern about this team right now. What speculations are you not sharing?!

 

[Gene Parmesan]

This is my biggest concern about this team right now. What speculations are you not sharing?!

Well DeBoer said #44 and #68 were dealing with fairly serious injuries. He also said a "laundry list". That has me worried.

 

[tahoesharksfan]

Well DeBoer said #44 and #68 were dealing with fairly serious injuries. He also said a "laundry list". That has me worried.

I'll have to go watch that video...when I get a chance...

Vlasic was obviously not 100% when he came back and it showed at different times throughout the playoffs (although he looked like he was getting it all back prior to the
finals). Hopefully it's nothing that a good off season of attention/conditioning won't fix.

It hurt my hamstrings/groin areas just to watch that split job of Melker's!

 

[Quid Pro Clowe]

I'll have to go watch that video...when I get a chance...

Vlasic was obviously not 100% when he came back and it showed at different times throughout the playoffs (although he looked like he was getting it all back prior to the
finals). Hopefully it's nothing that a good off season of attention/conditioning won't fix.

It hurt my hamstrings/groin areas just to watch that split job of Melker's!

No call, either, but only the Sharks got away with penalties!

 

[Mafoofoo]

Well after digging myself out of the post game 6 lake of sadness I'm proud of the effort the team put in even if they didn't win the cup. It'll be our year eventually, hopefully.

 

[Requin]

Feelings summary after a couple days:

• I'm more heartbroken about this loss than I've ever been - literally still have to stop myself from crying every time I see Sharks stuff - but for the first time in years, I don't feel like the team let me down.
• I have all the sads and all the happys. Our poor boys... but also... best hockey season ever! What a loveable team, what a run. Plus, it was the year of John Scott All-Star MVP!
• This is the most positive I have ever heard a Sharks team be about their teammates and their coach. Remember the "co-workers, not teammates" rhetoric of only a year or so ago? Or the days of RW when the whole lockerroom clearly hated him? I am loving this year's unity.
• Just a couple RFA signings from coming back with the same group! Next year will be fun.
• Guys we went to the Stanley Cup Mother****ing Finals. That's pretty sick.

 

[Bleedred]

I would have felt just a little bit sad for Stalock if the team won a cup and he didn't get a ring out of it. Not that he deserved it by any means, but that he was traded off a cup winner at the deadline.

Our old friend Nabby was in an identical situation last year if Tampa Bay had won the cup. Would have felt more bad for Nabby though, as he was once a good goalie that Was just finished and had nothing left.

 

[Felys]

After a few days of reflection, I've come away with being extremely glad that I'm a Tottenham Hotspur fan and have been primed by a decade of letdowns. Perennial "chokers" doesn't bother me anymore since my team always finishes behind *@$!ing Arsenal.

Still, I'm absolutely thrilled that my 2 most favorite teams across all sports decided to deliver much more than they could've ever promised on paper this year. Both teams were legitimate threats for the cup/trophy at the end of the season and just suffered running into tougher competition in the final stretch.

 

[OrrNumber4]

Really couldn't disagree more! One good thing about the Penguins winning the cup is it can finally put ridiculous arguments like this to rest. You don't need superstars in every position of your lineup. You don't need a Marty Brodeur in net, and you don't need multiple Norris trophy candidates. There is no single ingredient for a team to win the Stanley Cup. The Penguins have Crosby, Malkin, Letang and Kessel and then a bunch of solid players, no different than the Sharks. In fact I'd argue the Sharks are the better team on paper. The Penguins spread their top talent throughout the lineup and the filler players stepped up, plain and simple.

You are going to claim our 3rd/4th lines and 3rd D pairing are weak but not acknowledge the mediocre players on the Penguins who are playing way over their heads? Just take a look at the Pens D. With Daley out, they have 2 maybe 3 guys who are justifiable top 4 guys. Up front they have guys who were basically AHLers until the 2nd half of this season and could easily return to being 10 goal players while playing in their top 6.

The Sharks lineup was 100% more built for a Cup than the Penguins was and arguments like this show that certain fans never want to account for momentum, matchups, hot streaks or simply gelling at the right time.

Does anyone think Bonino is going to be nearly a point-per-game player next season? Or Rust and Sheary becoming top 6 forwards like they're slotted in the lineup? Please.

This team had a D-man who was cast off from the OILERS. And yes, Shultz has offensive abilities but no one in their right mind would have thought he'd slot in the top 6 of a Cup winning team.

So no we did not "over-achieved". The only people who will believe this are the ones who argue the rigid rules such as a cup winning team must have ____, ____ & _____ and to be fair this year I think we had those typical guidelines (1-2 Norris d-men, good #1 & #2 Center and a great goalie).

This years team simply achieved. As Sharks fans we've been brain washed by past seasons to think the Sharks are cursed and cannot win and then we undervalue our team/players searching for some desperate reason why we didn't win. The team this year was built to go all the way and they almost did. There isn't a team in the West that I look at and think, "we should have lost to them".

Our top 4 D is as good as pretty much any top 4 in the league and I'd argue on the level of any top 4 of the past few Cup winners. Our forward group has great depth, top end talent and players good to great in both ends of the ice. We have what looks like a world class goalie. This team is built to win.

You need 2 of 3 of a Norris quality D-man, a franchise-quality forward, and a Vezina-quality goaltender in order to win a cup in this league. Since expansion (and probably in the history of the league), only two teams have won the cup violating this paradigm: the 2009 and 2016 Pittsburgh Penguins. Both teams had the best player in the world on the roster, with the guy many think a top-5 player behind him. Both teams also had a defenseman who is, IMO, just shy of Norris-quality, and while Fleury and Murray were hardly all-world caliber, both were certainly top-15/top-10ish goalies for the playoff run.

 

[Sharksrule04]

You need 2 of 3 of a Norris quality D-man, a franchise-quality forward, and a Vezina-quality goaltender in order to win a cup in this league. Since expansion (and probably in the history of the league), only two teams have won the cup violating this paradigm: the 2009 and 2016 Pittsburgh Penguins. Both teams had the best player in the world on the roster, with the guy many think a top-5 player behind him. Both teams also had a defenseman who is, IMO, just shy of Norris-quality, and while Fleury and Murray were hardly all-world caliber, both were certainly top-15/top-10ish goalies for the playoff run.

Disagree, there is no checklist or ingredient to winning the cup. You can look at teams and try to pick similarities and sure many of these teams that won had top D-men and forwards and a good goalie. They weren't going to win with crappy players. For every team that won with these ingredients, I'm sure there are many more that did not, which simply proves there is a lot more to winning a cup that what goes on paper.

Side note, Sharks definitely meet this formidable checklist.
Burns + Vlasic = 2 Norris caliber D-men
Thornton, Pavs, Couture = Franchise caliber forwards
Jones = Top Notch goalie

 

[Eighth Fret]

You need 2 of 3 of a Norris quality D-man, a franchise-quality forward, and a Vezina-quality goaltender in order to win a cup in this league. Since expansion (and probably in the history of the league), only two teams have won the cup violating this paradigm: the 2009 and 2016 Pittsburgh Penguins. Both teams had the best player in the world on the roster, with the guy many think a top-5 player behind him. Both teams also had a defenseman who is, IMO, just shy of Norris-quality, and while Fleury and Murray were hardly all-world caliber, both were certainly top-15/top-10ish goalies for the playoff run.

You don't need 2-3 Norris level D. LA, Chicago, and Boston all only had one Norris caliber defenseman when they won.

 

[Pavelski2112]

You don't need 2-3 Norris level D. LA, Chicago, and Boston all only had one Norris caliber defenseman when they won.

He meant 2 out of 3 of those options (Norris D, franchise #1C, and Vezina-caliber goaltending), which is generally true.

 

[Eighth Fret]

He meant 2 out of 3 of those options (Norris D, franchise #1C, and Vezina-caliber goaltending), which is generally true.

Ah, got it. Then yes, I agree for the most part. And I will refine his assertion when it comes to the need at forward, and say you need a franchise-quality center in particular.

Norris D-man
Franchise/elite center
And then you need enough depth around them to account for any matchups or injuries that inevitably come up during a Cup run.

Vezina goaltending is more of a nice to have imo. As long as you don't have bad goaltending (Dallas this year), you can usually get by with average to slightly above average goaltending.

 

[DonskoiDonscored]

You need 2 of 3 of a Norris quality D-man, a franchise-quality forward, and a Vezina-quality goaltender in order to win a cup in this league. Since expansion (and probably in the history of the league), only two teams have won the cup violating this paradigm: the 2009 and 2016 Pittsburgh Penguins. Both teams had the best player in the world on the roster, with the guy many think a top-5 player behind him. Both teams also had a defenseman who is, IMO, just shy of Norris-quality, and while Fleury and Murray were hardly all-world caliber, both were certainly top-15/top-10ish goalies for the playoff run.

Chris Tierney, Roman Polak, Martin Jones.

Boom. done.

 

[OrrNumber4]

Disagree, there is no checklist or ingredient to winning the cup. You can look at teams and try to pick similarities and sure many of these teams that won had top D-men and forwards and a good goalie. They weren't going to win with crappy players. For every team that won with these ingredients, I'm sure there are many more that did not, which simply proves there is a lot more to winning a cup that what goes on paper.

Side note, Sharks definitely meet this formidable checklist.
Burns + Vlasic = 2 Norris caliber D-men
Thornton, Pavs, Couture = Franchise caliber forwards
Jones = Top Notch goalie

What I am saying is that there have been teams that just had a superstar goalie, or just had a franchise forward, or just had "almost-franchise-quality" players throughout the lineup...and only two such teams have won the SC in 50+ years.

There have definitely been teams that have won a cup with poor coaching, poor depth, poor special teams, etc. because their top players pulled them through.

And...your standards are a bit low. Vlasic isn't a Norris-caliber D-men...he would need to have a better season than the one he just had, for a start. Pavelski and Couture are not franchise-caliber forwards, just like Marleau never really was one (save for maybe a one or two year span). Thornton is one; someone who can compete with players like Crosby, Kopitar, Malkin, Getzlaf, Benn, Seguin, Tavares, etc.

Ah, got it. Then yes, I agree for the most part. And I will refine his assertion when it comes to the need at forward, and say you need a franchise-quality center in particular.

Norris D-man
Franchise/elite center
And then you need enough depth around them to account for any matchups or injuries that inevitably come up during a Cup run.

Well, the idea is that if your franchise-caliber player gets injured...there's not much you can do. Also, the idea is that a franchise-caliber player is able to win against the vast majority of matchups he comes up against. Thornton losing against Crosby is understandable...but Thornton has lost to Bolland, Niedermayer, Carter, and Stoll in the past. That's less understandable.

Vezina goaltending is more of a nice to have imo. As long as you don't have bad goaltending (Dallas this year), you can usually get by with average to slightly above average goaltending.

Except that 2016 probably had the worst goaltenders since the 2010 finals.

Look at the goaltending performances of the goalies who have won cups since 1980. Smith, Fuhr, Roy, Vernon, Barrasso, Richter, Brodeur, Osgood, Belfour, Khabibulin, Ward, Giguere, Fleury, Niemi, Thomas, Quick, Crawford, and Murray. Multiple Vezina winners and finalists on that list, and goalies like Ward had a tremendous run.

Sure, there are some averagish goalies on that list (and Jones would have been one of them), but you can also find SC-winning teams without a superstar defenseman or center...just not without both and with a superstar goaltender.

Chris Tierney, Roman Polak, Martin Jones.

Boom. done.

Somewhat unfair to include Jones in your joke. After all, he could be that caliber of goaltender.

 

[Led Zappa]

4 of the NHL Top goals of the PO's on NHL Network were against the Sharks. Talk about rubbing salt in the wound