Are the Sharks becoming the Cubs?

[Quid Pro Clowe]

They last won 105 years ago with much fewer teams than what sj has to contend with.

This is a bad comparison.

 

[lunarbrian]

When the Cubs become a perennial playoff team that doesn't make it to the World Series, then the Sharks will be like the Cubs. Until then , no, the sharks are not like the Cubs. (And I grew up in Chicago and was a Cubs fan until I moved to California and adopted the Giants as my baseball team around 1992. It took me 14 years of living in California to finally move on from the Cubs!)

 

[Irbes Mask]

The narrative I want to push? And what narrative is that? I didn't say I completely agreed with him, although I don't think the comparison is within the realm of absurdity. I just wanted to pose the question and see what other people thought of the comparison and whether it was a fair one.

Sadly enough, the Sharks are arguably becoming "that" team in the NHL

That narrative.

It's not based on fact. It's based on short term instant gratification fandom.

 

[jurisdoctor]

That narrative.

It's not based on fact. It's based on short term instant gratification fandom.

Based on facts? Whether someone thinks the comparison between the Sharks and the Cubs are warranted or even fair need not always be based on facts, but feelings, opinions, and conjecture. That's what makes these discussions interesting. You can lay out your case using all the facts you think support your argument, however, there are almost always counter-facts. I'm not saying that you were wrong in any of your facts, however, when you say that the comparison is "absurd", there are people that would disagree with you on that.

20+ years and counting and no Stanley Cup, not even a Finals to speak of given the Shark's level of talent year after year? Yep, that's pretty short term instant gratification fandom right there. Personally, I don't think there's a curse, just a complete lack of a killer instinct, the desire to cut someone's heart out and show it to them kind of motivation. Unless there's a major change in team culture, I don't see a Cup in their immediate future, which is unfortunate because there's no fan base that deserves a championship more than this one. You may think that the Cubs comparison is "absurd" now, but how about after another 5 more years of futility? 10 more years? 25+ years? How long would it take you to change your mind?

 

[Irbes Mask]

Based on facts? Whether someone thinks the comparison between the Sharks and the Cubs are warranted or even fair need not always be based on facts, but feelings, opinions, and conjecture. That's what makes these discussions interesting. You can lay out your case using all the facts you think support your argument, however, there are almost always counter-facts. I'm not saying that you were wrong in any of your facts, however, when you say that the comparison is "absurd", there are people that would disagree with you on that.

20+ years and counting and no Stanley Cup, not even a Finals to speak of given the Shark's level of talent year after year? Yep, that's pretty short term instant gratification fandom right there. Personally, I don't think there's a curse, just a complete lack of a killer instinct, the desire to cut someone's heart out and show it to them kind of motivation. Unless there's a major change in team culture, I don't see a Cup in their immediate future, which is unfortunate because there's no fan base that deserves a championship more than this one. You may think that the Cubs comparison is "absurd" now, but how about after another 5 more years of futility? 10 more years? 25+ years? How long would it take you to change your mind?

It took the kings 40 years. It took the Rags 50. 20 years for a cup is nothing, especially when you consider that time elapsed between the end of the California Gold Rush (1855) and the inception of the Cubs franchise (1870) is a shorter period of time than the entirety of the existence of the Sharks and those Cubs didn't win their first WS until the 37th year of their existence. In the grand scheme of things yes 20 years is short term.

Killer instinct. Desire to cut someone's heart out and show it to them kind of motivation all narratives and interpretations from a fan. Why not say what you really mean, in that, you don't like the game the Sharks' players play, their style. It has nothing to do with 'killer instinct' or however you want to boil down the cutting out of hearts and it certainly has no qualitative basis in the locker room that you'll ever know of.

Calling the last N years of Sharks hockey futile only shows you've never tasted futility. Fans of many other dysfunctional franchises would laugh at that notion.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Based on facts? Whether someone thinks the comparison between the Sharks and the Cubs are warranted or even fair need not always be based on facts, but feelings, opinions, and conjecture. That's what makes these discussions interesting. You can lay out your case using all the facts you think support your argument, however, there are almost always counter-facts. I'm not saying that you were wrong in any of your facts, however, when you say that the comparison is "absurd", there are people that would disagree with you on that.

20+ years and counting and no Stanley Cup, not even a Finals to speak of given the Shark's level of talent year after year? Yep, that's pretty short term instant gratification fandom right there. Personally, I don't think there's a curse, just a complete lack of a killer instinct, the desire to cut someone's heart out and show it to them kind of motivation. Unless there's a major change in team culture, I don't see a Cup in their immediate future, which is unfortunate because there's no fan base that deserves a championship more than this one. You may think that the Cubs comparison is "absurd" now, but how about after another 5 more years of futility? 10 more years? 25+ years? How long would it take you to change your mind?

Considering the futility of the Cubs is not even remotely similar to the futility of the Sharks, it makes the comparison absurd. Cubs are futile during the season. Cubs haven't made the playoffs in 5 years. Haven't been to the championship series in 11 years. They've only made the playoffs 16 times ever and only six times in the LCS era which started in 1969. The Sharks have been to the conference finals 3 times which the Cubs have equaled in LCS appearances. Sharks have been to the second round 8 times not including those three finals appearances. Cubs have only 3 LDS appearances not including the LCS appearance they had in that format.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

Sharks are more like the 80's Cleveland Browns. The Kings are John Elway.

 

[jurisdoctor]

Yes, but look at the talent level of the Cubs during those periods and look at the talent level of the Sharks, there's not much comparison there. I think there should be a distinction between pure futility versus a function of expectation and actual results. The Cubs just haven't had the players it takes to even EXPECT that they'd win or even come close to a championship.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Yes, but look at the talent level of the Cubs during those periods and look at the talent level of the Sharks, there's not much comparison there. I think there should be a distinction between pure futility versus a function of expectation and actual results. The Cubs just haven't had the players it takes to even EXPECT that they'd win or even come close to a championship.

Which is only further proof that the comparison isn't valid.

 

[Hobocop]

As a Cubs fan, this comparison doesn't even make sense. The Cubs aren't famous for fizzling out in the playoffs, they are famous for not winning, ever.

If the Sharks go another eighty years with no championships while sometimes slipping into irrelevance for years at a time, maybe then we can start talking.

 

[WantonAbandon]

Sure if they don't win in a century...

 

[jurisdoctor]

Sure if they don't win in a century...

Oh, ok...so only 75 more years for you then? Heh. The Sharks may actually oblige you.

 

[ADifferentTim]

I'm not a fan of both teams and I too find the "Sharks = Cubs" comparison incoherent.

A more appropriate and coherent comparison would be between the New York Knicks and the Toronto Maple Leafs, objectively speaking.

1. Both Knicks and Maple Leafs are hyped by their respective media, to quote ESPN's Stephen A. Smith, as "one of the most storied franchises" in their respective leagues.

2. Both Knicks and Maple Leafs are US billion dollar franchises in their respective leagues, according to Forbes Magazine.

3. Both Knicks and Maple Leafs have concurrent near-half century title droughts in their respective leagues. The Knicks last won the NBA Title in 1973, within the same decade the late Howard Cosell stated, "The Bronx is burning", while the Maple Leafs last won in 1967, right before the Expansion Six debut season.

4. Both Knicks and Maple Leafs' respective arenas have been dubbed as "Meccas" of their own respective media, leagues, and sports. Canadians, I'm pretty sure you're tired ad nauseum, hearing about how "Toronto is the mecca of hockey" and fellow Americans, I'm pretty sure you're tired of hearing similarly, "New York is the mecca of basketball".

Back on topic, I would objectively parallel the Sharks to the Raptors.

1. Both teams have/had players who are/were their respective faces. Concurrently with the Sharks is Joe Thornton and in the past for the Raptors was Vince Carter.

2. Both teams originally emerged as expansion teams in the 1990s for their respective leagues. Sharks in 1991-1992 NHL season, Raptors in 1995-1996 NBA season.

3. Both teams have yet to appear in their respective leagues' championship final round.

Before I get accused of "trolling" this time around, I did more fact-checking. You're welcome.

 

[murdock1116]

I always felt the Sharks were kinda like the pre-championship Dallas Mavericks. Always at the top but choked to other/better teams.

Maybe there is a happy ending for us yet...

 

[PacificOceanPotion]

We will hoist the cup...I want that on my grave stone...

 

[SC2008]

Buffalo St. Louis Washington Phoenix (Winnipeg) have been around longer without winning the cup. We still pretty far down the depth chart.

 

[landshark]

Sharks are not in any way shape or form the Cubs. Sharks haven't won anything, ever, and the Sharks don't have a goat-curse causing their misery.
The Sharks miseries are self-inflicted.

BAAAAaAaAaAaaaH!!

 

[CrazedZooChimp]

The Sharks aren't even the most cursed team in hockey. I mean, hell, the Blues made the finals their first three seasons, got swept in all three (this was back when there were only 3 rounds in the playoffs), and haven't been since. They've only made the conference finals twice since then. And there are other teams who've had it basically as rough. Why doesn't anyone talk about the Winnipeg/Phoenix Franchise that has made the conference finals once in their history?

 

[Quid Pro Clowe]

The Sharks aren't even the most cursed team in hockey. I mean, hell, the Blues made the finals their first three seasons, got swept in all three (this was back when there were only 3 rounds in the playoffs), and haven't been since. They've only made the conference finals twice since then. And there are other teams who've had it basically as rough. Why doesn't anyone talk about the Winnipeg/Phoenix Franchise that has made the conference finals once in their history?

That was their only year not losing in the 1st rd. Ever.

Sharks are just an easy target due to their regular season success.

 

[damacles1156]

Not even close......The Kings waited 43 years.....Think about that. Wasn't Chicago's Cup-less streak at 47 years in 2010 ?

Think about this, the NYI haven't won a post season series in two decades.

 

[Church Hill]

I think they need to suck for another few generations to be compared. Also, there are NHL teams with much longer streaks (and much closer near-misses) than the Sharks.

 

[SC2008]

Not even close......The Kings waited 43 years.....Think about that. Wasn't Chicago's Cup-less streak at 47 years in 2010 ?

Think about this, the NYI haven't won a post season series in two decades.

The funny thing too is that the Kings have only played in FOUR Conference finals. Three of them coming in the last three years. The other was the Gretzky '93 Finals. In comparison, the Sharks have already played in 3.

 

[Ninja Hertl]

No, the Cubs actually won Championships before becoming a joke.

Huh. They won championships in a league that was later bought by the MLB, if I'm not mistaken.

And those championships (championship?) happened before they were even playing at Wrigley.

 

[SJSharksfan39]

I'm starting to think this whole Sharks not winning the cup but making the playoffs every year curse is a bit over exaggerated. Sharks are too young of a team to make this cubs comparison. They will get it done one day. Hopefully I'm still alive when that happens.

 

[Swervin81]

Back on topic, I would objectively parallel the Sharks to the Raptors.

1. Both teams have/had players who are/were their respective faces. Concurrently with the Sharks is Joe Thornton and in the past for the Raptors was Vince Carter.

2. Both teams originally emerged as expansion teams in the 1990s for their respective leagues. Sharks in 1991-1992 NHL season, Raptors in 1995-1996 NBA season.

3. Both teams have yet to appear in their respective leagues' championship final round.

Before I get accused of "trolling" this time around, I did more fact-checking. You're welcome.

As a fan of both the Sharks and Raps (and Leafs, too), I wish the Raps were the Sharks. Even in the Raps' best years back in the VC days, we only made the playoffs 3 of those years and won one playoff series. Hell, that was the only series we ever won in franchise history. After the VC years, the Raps have only made the playoffs three times and bowed out in the first round (most recently being this past April). To put this in perspective, ever since VC was traded, the Sharks have made the playoffs every single year and have won 8 playoff series. Oh, and they have been a hell of a lot better run, been way more consistent, and have had way more talent than 90% of the teams the Raps have ever fielded. Hell, the only thing the Raps have over the Sharks is that you can't say they ever choked. They have always had the hearts of lions.

The comparison just isn't there. Besides, what superstars have the Raps ever had? Stoudamire, McGrady, Carter, and Bosh? The Sharks had 4 superstars in 2010 alone (Jumbo, Marleau, ****in' All-Star, and Boyle).