Injury Report: Vlasic 12/30

[Quid Pro Clowe]

One of the smartest scenes ever, lol.

That episode couldn't have been timed any better. Just before it aired the first time me and some buddies were discussing Schneider and talking about how all his movies were the same and how much they sucked.

 

[LadyStanley]

During today's Barracuda game, discussion on radio between Gackle and Nollenberger included tidbit that Vlasic did not want to wear cage while fractures are healing, like Joakim Ryan.

 

[LadyStanley]

Vlasic skating with Heed during today's practice. Both traveling to Alberta.

 

[Limekiller]

Vlasic skating with Heed during today's practice. Both traveling to Alberta.

Now THAT is an interesting pairing. Let Vlasic be the elite version of Martin and shut people down, while Heed acts as the 2nd tier version of Burns and generates offense. I will be curious to see how they do together.

 

[Fistfullofbeer]

Now THAT is an interesting pairing. Let Vlasic be the elite version of Martin and shut people down, while Heed acts as the 2nd tier version of Burns and generates offense. I will be curious to see how they do together.

I think that may work as a good pairing. That 1st pairing could definitely use some offensive contribution. They have not been very good this year. 15 combined points over 40 games is really lacking for a top pairing.

That is one reason I am excited to see Heed or Ryan on the roster. Outside of Burns we have no other D-man on the active roster that can help on offense. I would be just happy to see one of those two on the bottom pairing. Mueller/Dillon/DeMelo paired with Heed or Ryan. Shelter them and play Heed or Ryan on the 2nd PP.

 

[Juxtaposer]

Vlasic-Heed were 100% paired because they were thoffered two odd guys out. I guarantee that won't be a pair.

 

[CrypTic]

Vlasic-Heed were 100% paired because they were thoffered two odd guys out. I guarantee that won't be a pair.

I doubt that they'll be a pair beyond practice while Vlasic is out but I'd like to see the Sharks try Heed or Ryan on the bottom pair and PP2, like fistfullofbeer said.

 

[Lebanezer]

 

[The Nemesis]

But I thought Pete DeBoer was an idiot how was scratching Schlemko for no reason except that he (DeBoer) is an idiot?

 

[OffSydes]

But I thought Pete DeBoer was an idiot how was scratching Schlemko for no reason except that he (DeBoer) is an idiot?

Fire DW for signing players that get hurt. Enough is Enough !

 

[Sideshow Raheem]

But I thought Pete DeBoer was an idiot how was scratching Schlemko for no reason except that he (DeBoer) is an idiot?

Yeah, I forgot that the injury Schlemko sustained on December 31st came before the three games he was scratched for from December 20th through the 27th.

 

[The Nemesis]

Yeah, I forgot that the injury Schlemko sustained on December 31st came before the three games he was scratched for from December 20th through the 27th.

Or maybe he was hurt then, tried to play through it with minimal rest/days off, and that didn't work.

I guess that idea gets in the way of the DeBoer idiocy hot take.

 

[DonskoiDonscored]

Sharks organization is not transparent. People leap to drastic conclusions based on lack of transparency. More at 11.

 

[CanadienShark]

But I thought Pete DeBoer was an idiot how was scratching Schlemko for no reason except that he (DeBoer) is an idiot?

Fire him. Fire everyone!

Yeah, I forgot that the injury Schlemko sustained on December 31st came before the three games he was scratched for from December 20th through the 27th.

Well... you persevere. I'll give you that.

 

[Sideshow Raheem]

Or maybe he was hurt then, tried to play through it with minimal rest/days off, and that didn't work.

I guess that idea gets in the way of the DeBoer idiocy hot take.

Why would DeBoer and Schlemko call it a "coach's decision" to scratch him for that three-game stretch (including mentioning that he wasn't gonna change lineups between games because they had won) but now call it an injury? Especially when DeBoer explicitly stated Schlemko suffered the injury during the Kings game.

I swear, everyone on this board loves constructing these elaborate eleven-dimensional chess theories to explain run of the mill bad decision making.

 

[Timo Time]

Why would DeBoer and Schlemko call it a "coach's decision" to scratch him for that three-game stretch (including mentioning that he wasn't gonna change lineups between games because they had won) but now call it an injury? Especially when DeBoer explicitly stated Schlemko suffered the injury during the Kings game.

I swear, everyone on this board loves constructing these elaborate eleven-dimensional chess theories to explain run of the mill bad decision making.

Oh the irony.

 

[Mattb124]

Why would DeBoer and Schlemko call it a "coach's decision" to scratch him for that three-game stretch (including mentioning that he wasn't gonna change lineups between games because they had won) but now call it an injury? Especially when DeBoer explicitly stated Schlemko suffered the injury during the Kings game.

I swear, everyone on this board loves constructing these elaborate eleven-dimensional chess theories to explain run of the mill bad decision making.

Just wow.

There is only one of....(do I say "us" or "you"?).

 

[Sideshow Raheem]

Oh the irony.

Just wow.

There is only one of....(do I say "us" or "you"?).

Lol sure thing guys, Schlemko and DeBoer were actually lying when they said he was scratched for three games by "coach's decision" in order to hide an injury. But something magically changed over the next two days which made them fine with announcing to the world Schlemko sustained an injury against L.A. and is now on IR.

 

[hohosaregood]

Injuries can also be coach's decisions. Could play a guy who is 80% healthy at the risk of further injury but more effective than the next guy whose 100% is like 75% of the injured guy.

 

[The Nemesis]

Why would DeBoer and Schlemko call it a "coach's decision" to scratch him for that three-game stretch (including mentioning that he wasn't gonna change lineups between games because they had won) but now call it an injury? Especially when DeBoer explicitly stated Schlemko suffered the injury during the Kings game.

I swear, everyone on this board loves constructing these elaborate eleven-dimensional chess theories to explain run of the mill bad decision making.

We're in the age of non-disclosure on injuries. Guys get "upper body injury" when they hurt their hip or some nonsense because everyone's paranoid about giving away an "edge" because of injury knowledge. If Schlemko was banged up and they thought he could play, but also thought he could sit a game to heal up, it's not a stretch to think they would play it down as a DNP-CD or the like.

Also, I hope you fully appreciate the irony of calling out other people for coming up with ludicrous tinfoil hat theories to explain things.

 

[Sideshow Raheem]

We're in the age of non-disclosure on injuries. Guys get "upper body injury" when they hurt their hip or some nonsense because everyone's paranoid about giving away an "edge" because of injury knowledge. If Schlemko was banged up and they thought he could play, but also thought he could sit a game to heal up, it's not a stretch to think they would play it down as a DNP-CD or the like.

Also, I hope you fully appreciate the irony of calling out other people for coming up with ludicrous tinfoil hat theories to explain things.

But suddenly they're okay with disclosing that he's injured now? This makes zero sense. Also you're missing the part where DeBoer said he was injured during the Kings game. And the other part, during the three games where Schlemko was being scratched, where DeBoer said he wasn't going to change a winning lineup to bring Schlemko in (indicating he was an option). I don't know why it's so hard for you to accept DeBoer at his word that he thought DeMelo, for whatever combination of reasons, was a better option than Schlemko for those games.

When have I ever come up with a tinfoil hat theory? My "theory" is pretty simple and consistent: DeBoer is bad at his job.

 

[hohosaregood]

two words:lol

 

[Mattb124]

But suddenly they're okay with disclosing that he's injured now? This makes zero sense. Also you're missing the part where DeBoer said he was injured during the Kings game. And the other part, during the three games where Schlemko was being scratched, where DeBoer said he wasn't going to change a winning lineup to bring Schlemko in (indicating he was an option). I don't know why it's so hard for you to accept DeBoer at his word that he thought DeMelo, for whatever combination of reasons, was a better option than Schlemko for those games.

When have I ever come up with a tinfoil hat theory? My "theory" is pretty simple and consistent: DeBoer is bad at his job.

You miss the point. You accuse people making up hair-brained schemes as to why coaches do things but you willfully dismiss the obvious reasons, even if not publicized.

I think back to the playoff game where the Preds scratched Radulov and Kostisyn because they violated a team rule. Players are accountable to their teams and it is pretty standard practice for coaches to bench players when their conduct is detrimental to the team. If the player puts themselves in a position to miss more games because their replacement is clicking, it is on the player - not the coach.

And much to your chagrin questionable decisions by division-leading coaches surrounding bottom pairing defensemen is not a fireable offense.

 

[WTFetus]

FWIW, I'm actually agreeing with Sideshow here. Schlemko is injured now, but before, I'm pretty confident it was just healthy scratches. Schlemko sounded dumbfounded with his comments of why he was scratched. Deboer's excuse was that he's scratching players if they aren't playing up-to-par (which I thought was ridiculous since Schlemko was the 2nd best D after Burns at the time).
Both of those comments don't come out if Schlemko is just injured. "Upper-body injury", "Day-to-day", "Banged up" are all vague excuses that coaches make all the time to not give other teams an edge. You don't say what was actually said. It really doesn't make sense to not say he was injured before, but announce it now.

Seems like we're just trying to rewrite history in any way to not critique a decision. First, some argue he "partied" with his Calgary friends. Then that he had some "locker-room" drama. And now he was injured the whole time?

 

[Sideshow Raheem]

Seems like we're just trying to rewrite history in any way to not critique a decision. First, some argue he "partied" with his Calgary friends. Then that he had some "locker-room" drama. And now he was injured the whole time?

Exactly. Same deal with the "Matt Nieto has an unreported mental illness which is why he doesn't play" explanation, which was pretty clearly ********. I don't understand why people bother to come up with these fantastical theories when the simplest explanation is almost always the correct one: DeBoer values players weirdly.