Why did the Sharks 2006-2019 not win a cup?

[Matty Sundin]

Didn’t follow the Sharks much during this era but I was aware they were always a consistent good team during this time frame. What gives though and why only 1 finals appearance to show for it? I know obvious answer is being chokers but why? How did they keep the same GM this long when most teams would have canned their management being this good in regular seasons with high expectations but no cup to show for it in 13 years. I always thought the Sharks were the mini dynasty(kings,hawks,pens) that never was.

Click to read more...

 

[klefbombs shoulder]

You could probably push the window back to 2004, where the Sharks lost in the CF to Calgary. Like any big question its a combination of many things. I would argue they were in the harder conference during that window. There best player (Thornton) also never really took over a playoff in a way you would expect him to. Looking back on it, they were one of the best teams in the League for a 15 year period and its quite surprising they never got a cup.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Thornton needed to be better in a number of the Series they lost. That's a vast over-simplification of course, but your best players need to be the best on the ice and the Sharks didn't always get that.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

The defense group was never Cup level, goaltending didnt step up in the playoffs and the playoff Thornton factor.

Really, if I had to pick 1 thing its the defense. A great/elite D group would've been able to mask the other warts with how close they got

 

[Michael Farkas]

Unfortunately, for as good as Nabokov was...he wasn't an amazing playoff goalie. They turned to Niemi, he was a zilch. Reimer gets pulled in 1 out of 4 games it feels like, for good reason. They maximized Martin Jones for a few years...but he fell off suddenly and had no ability to adapt to make his game better. So, once he got found out, he never got it back. Not really a battler anyhow.

A lot of it was in net for me. Not all, but plenty.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Unfortunately, for as good as Nabokov was...he wasn't an amazing playoff goalie.

He played his heart out in that 07 Western Conference Semifinal against Detroit. He was getting bombarded all Series but kept them in it. That wasn't one of their better teams in that era unfortunately, and he got old a bit after that. Unfortunately his timeline didn't really line up with the rest of the team's all that well.

 

[GMR]

Marleau/Thornton never had a dominant playoff. If your two best players are pedestrians in the playoffs, you're rarely going anywhere. I agree with others that goaltending/defense can make up for lack of scoring from the top guys, but they didn't have that either.

 

[Mohar Ikram]

They are great in RS but during playoffs, they bumble the game a lot... that full reverse sweep in 2014 first round is embarrassing to remember on. Granted they had at least one final in that period but so much wasted opportunity. They replace Aging Damphousse who did not comeback with Thornton (a future HOF) who is definitely make a crazy jump as playmaker for them but he never have the same effect on playoffs. Marleau did have quite a memorable few runs but those are early in his career and by the time of their 2016 run, he is basically just a squad member at that time.

You got so many superstars in your final run but somehow your best player is solely young gun Logan Couture. That cannot happen if you depends on your star but they always falter.

That's why I think the player you pity the most is Pavelski - playoff performer over and over again (and became the greatest American playoff goal scorer in that proceedings) but still one foot short... everytime.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Being led by magic men like Marleau and Thornton is probably issue #1.

 

[Buddy The Elf]

Not sure this is the reason but I was always confused with the constant roster shuffling after every playoff loss. I guess the GM thought they were missing something but apparently could never figure out what it was. I don't think it was goaltending because they had pretty good goaltending during most of that stretch. The constant over most of that time was Marleau and Thornton so I guess that's why they get the blame from a lot of people.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

The Pens beat them in the 2016 finals

 

[Brodeur]

Reminds me a bit of the Chargers of that era. Just a mine field in the conference.

2006-2009: Red Wings + Ducks
2010-2015: Blackhawks + Kings

Maybe not too different than the post-lockout Capitals; On paper the 2018 Caps might not have even been the best squad they had. The 2016 Sharks squad which made the SCF probably wasn't the best version of that era.

Like a lot of teams, it's maybe easy to point at the stars but I'm looking at some of the rosters they had and there's some depth issues. Looks like for a couple runs they were still relying on broken versions of Ryane Clowe and Martin Havlat to provide secondary offense.

And naturally with hindsight you wonder with a couple draft picks, like if they had gone with Suter/Parise in 2003 instead of Michalek/Bernier or Kopitar instead of Setoguchi in 2005.

 

[MadLuke]

2004 is maybe the better place to start for that franchise, 104pts and reached conference final that year.

The 2004-2019 won by far the most regular season game in the nhl, but would any of the
RedWings
Bruins
Capitals
Penguins
Hawks
Senators
Ducks
Lighting
Canucks
Predators
Sabres

Won 0 cup in that timeline, in a subway question like (and in a way why Price or Lundqvist did not), after a while they could not have all do it because there is only a cup by year.

Here the Sharks are number 1 team and by a good amount so it does not apply.

Like the Sens, lockout happen during their prime window year, like the Sens outside Hasek goaltending not always bad but not always on the positive side, Jones-Niemi, the Hawks could win with that type of goaltending, the best RedWings teams, but you need them to be hot (like the Penguins winning year) and that a bit flipping a coin.

I think it is something fair about Thornton-Marleau in the playoff, if they do not get any blame to never get it done, would it not destroy the notion to ever give praise to those who do, when you have that much of a team for so long.

 

[buffalowing88]

2004 is maybe the better place to start for that franchise, 104pts and reached conference final that year.

The 2004-2019 won by far the most regular season game in the nhl, but would any of the
RedWings
Bruins
Capitals
Penguins
Hawks
Senators
Ducks
Lighting
Canucks
Predators
Sabres

I'm not sure that we deserve to be mentioned among those teams but I'm not complaining

 

[Henry Miller]

Some luck is always needed to some extent which it seems they never totally got. They were a good enough team where if things broke the right way they would have at least one Cup, but things never did.

 

[Felidae]

I'm looking at the playoff scoring leaders during those years, particularly the mid to late 2000s were Thornton was in his prime. There's no denying his playoff numbers sucked but looking deeper I expected there might be some context to explain his lack of production. Well...

2005-06
After having the best season in franchise history, Thornton has 9 points in 11 games. He's tied with Cheechoo, but Marleau leads them in scoring with 15 points.

It's not like the rest of the roster lacked scoring, erhoff had 8, Preissing 7, Bernier 6, etc.

2006-07
Has the 2nd best season in franchise history (1st if you consider 2005 wasn't a full season with the sharks)

Leads his team with 11 points in 11 games in the postseason. The next highest leader on the shark? 4 other players tied for 6 points. I think it's fair to say he pulled his weight here relative to how the rest of his team did, even if "just" being a PPG is underwhelming in itself.

2007-08
Once again leads his team in scoring by a significant amount. He has 96 points when the next highest on the team (michalek) has 55. Not much to work with offensively.

Leads his team with 10 points in 13 games in the postseason. Underwhelming production once again, and his teammates aren't too far behind either. Pavelski and clowe are just a point below, Cheechoo and Marleau within 2 points, and there's no significant drop off within the rest of the roster.

2008-09
Leads his team in scoring once again, but this time has a lot more help offensively. Marleau isn't that far behind. Setoguchi and Pavelski have more points than last years 2nd best point producer.

Led his team with 5 points in 6 games in the postseason. Dan Boyle and Rob Blake, 2 defenseman, are a point behind him. The rest of the forwards are slacking with half a point per game or lower.


2009-10
Still led his team in scoring, but this time, Heatley and Marleau are a few points within tying Thornton for the lead while scoring far more goals. It's arguable whether Thornton was the best forward on the team at this point. At the same time though, this is the most help he's had offensively since 2005-06. Maybe with teammates on his level, he can finally not be the sole focus of opposing teams in the playoffs, allowing him to actually produce! Well..

With 15 games played, Thornton finishes.. 5th in scoring with 12 points! Pavelski leads the postseason with 17 points, being their only player above a PPG. But Boyle, Heatley and Marleau all outproduce Thornton.


So in this timespan, he led his team in playoff scoring 3 out of 5 times. Only 1 of those times he lead his team by a significant margin. Remember that this is the timeframe where he had 5 of his 6 top 10 point finishes in the regular season and led his team in scoring every year.

There's no way around it, those mid to late 2000s postseasons were shockingly underwhelming for a player of his calibre. His postseason totals from 2005 to 2009 were 47 points, 38 assists, 9 goals in 56 games. Marleau was just behind with 44 points, 26 goals in 55 games. The same Marleau that Thornton outproduced by 111 points during the regular season in the exact same timespan while playing less games.

Funnily enough, in 2010-11. After not being the scoring leader during the regular season for the first time as a Shark. He goes on to lead them in the postseason with 17 points in 18 games. There were a few teammates close to him, but this is Arguably a top 3 postseason of his career. Then he'd lead his team in points one final time the next year with 5 points in 5 games, and that was the end of him ever being the points leader in the postseason. I'll cut him some slack during the 2010s though since he was clearly no longer in his prime.

.

 

[bambamcam4ever]

They were never the best teams in the league, or even the 2nd in any season, but they were probably a little unlucky to only make one final. They had a good shot if they didn't blow the 3-0 lead in 2014 though.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Inconsistent goaltending, bad luck, and lack of depth on both ends were the real issues. People love to put it all on Thornton and Marleau, and sure…they didn’t always play well, but they had other issues too.
2006 and 2007 I don’t see how anyone thought we were favorites to win. We had Thornton and that was it.
2009 and 2014 will always haunt them though. 2008, 2010, and 2011, we lost to clearly better teams. 2012 and 2013, I wouldn’t say we were cup ready. 2016 a lot of things came together but we were out played and our coached in the finals.

 

[Nucks2001]

As a Canucks fan, those Sharks teams remind me a lot of the Canucks during that time. Thornton and Marleau were much like the Sedins, they just weren’t as good in the playoffs vs. Regular season. Kesler was the main reason we won the Nashville series in 2011 and was probably the best forward in the finals. The Sedins only feasted on a weak Niemi. Luongo though shaky at times was the biggest reason the Canucks made it to a game 7 or even the finals that run. That’s one thing the Sharks didn’t have. An elite goalie in his prime.

It a shame. Those Sharks teams were loaded with talent and they will probably go down as some of the greatest teams to never win a cup.

 

[McGarnagle]

I think the way they were built and the system they played that provided great results over a long scope in the regular season was easily countered by smart coaches in the post-season.

Their best player who their whole offense was built around was a playmaker who stayed on the periphery and wouldn't drive to the net to create goals. He was the best in the universe at what he did for a few years there, but opposing defense could really just key in on his linemates and clamp down on them to give Thornton no one open to set up.

Much has been made of Thornton's mentality over the years, but I don't think it's a matter of effort or not trying hard enough or caring enough about winning. I just think his style of play and his strengths were conducive to success in a broad sample size over 82 games of seeing different teams playing out their regular systems every night, and not conducive to a short competitive series with opposing coaches able to line match more diligently and intently.

 

[Bleedred]

Unfortunately, for as good as Nabokov was...he wasn't an amazing playoff goalie. They turned to Niemi, he was a zilch. Reimer gets pulled in 1 out of 4 games it feels like, for good reason. They maximized Martin Jones for a few years...but he fell off suddenly and had no ability to adapt to make his game better. So, once he got found out, he never got it back. Not really a battler anyhow.

A lot of it was in net for me. Not all, but plenty.

Reimer was there only for a minute during that era. He came over as a rental in 2016 when Stalock was a completely unserviceable backup to Jones. He was never gonna start a playoff game, unless Jones completely fell apart in 2016, which he did not.

I agree with a lot of this, but 2004 playoff Nabokov was good enough. I thought Niemi played remarkably well in the first 2013 first round exit to LA, but that was his only memorable playoffs with the Sharks for me. He was awful for a lot of the 2011 playoffs when they went to the conference finals. I thought Nabokov was poor in the 2010 conference finals run and I remember him being terrible in the first run loss to Anaheim in 2008.

2006 was a really weird time, where he lost his starting job to Vesa Toskala. He was pretty decent that playoffs, but got destroyed in a couple of the games against Edmonton.

 

[MadLuke]

2006-2019, western conference winner

2006: Pronger
2007: Pronger-Niedermayer
2008: Lidstrom
2009: Lidstrom
2010: Keith
2011: Canucks
2012: Doughty
2013: Keith
2014: Doughty
2015: Keith
2016: Sharks

Brent Burns turned into a bonafida #1 D in 2015-2016, they made the final right away.

How much of Thornton and the Sharks storyline change if they are the one with a Keith instead of Boyle or Campbell or Ehrhoff or Hannan has number one.

Canuck reached the finals with a group, Penguins won it without anyone of note, nothing is ever a necessity, but that one aspect that the western winner of that era usually was quite strong, superstar D eating 27 or more minutes a night and always the best one in each series almost every year.

 

[x Tame Impala]

I think the way they were built and the system they played that provided great results over a long scope in the regular season was easily countered by smart coaches in the post-season.

Their best player who their whole offense was built around was a playmaker who stayed on the periphery and wouldn't drive to the net to create goals. He was the best in the universe at what he did for a few years there, but opposing defense could really just key in on his linemates and clamp down on them to give Thornton no one open to set up.

Much has been made of Thornton's mentality over the years, but I don't think it's a matter of effort or not trying hard enough or caring enough about winning. I just think his style of play and his strengths were conducive to success in a broad sample size over 82 games of seeing different teams playing out their regular systems every night, and not conducive to a short competitive series with opposing coaches able to line match more diligently and intently.

That's a fair point. It wasn't choking necessarily but perhaps Thornton's playstyle just wasn't conducive to winning in the playoffs. That is a major factor for sure but I think there were many times they were simply outmatched roster-wise. The 2010 Hawks, 2011 Canucks, and 2016 Penguins were complete buzzsaws of teams. The Sharks didn't have much of a shot against them.

It does go to show however that some players thrive in the playoffs and others don't, depsite their spectacular regular seasons. There is real value in players who elevate their games and get wins when the games are the closest and toughest.

 

[MVP of West Hollywd]

They were a skilled team but never elite at preventing goals due to defense and goalies. They may have overperformed in the regular season a bit for their talent. I don't remember the cap situation but I think not resigning Brian Campbell hurt them, their best regular season stretch ever to me and when they looked like favorites was when they had him as a rental and even though they had a disappointing loss to Stars I would have liked to see them run it back.

 

[wetcoast]

You could probably push the window back to 2004, where the Sharks lost in the CF to Calgary. Like any big question its a combination of many things. I would argue they were in the harder conference during that window. There best player (Thornton) also never really took over a playoff in a way you would expect him to. Looking back on it, they were one of the best teams in the League for a 15 year period and its quite surprising they never got a cup.

This is exactly how I think of them as well much like I think every year that this is the year the Sabers make the playoffs....