Brassard

[Off Sides]

I don't know, something seems to stink in San Jose, not saying it's Thornton, or just him, but they are taking away the C for some reason.

 

[Thirty One]

I don't know, something seems to stink in San Jose, not saying it's Thornton, or just him, but they are taking away the C for some reason.

Yeah, their decision making since they lost in the quarters really stinks.

 

[Off Sides]

Yeah, their decision making since they lost in the quarters really stinks.

Or perhaps Thornton was right back when the Bruins traded him?

"Obviously [the Bruins] believe in their coach and their general manager, and I'm next in line, so I've got to move on. ... I came back here to win, and we haven't been winning. Whose fault is that? I'm not sure, but I'm out of here, so it must be mine."

-Thornton
http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/news/story?id=2242875

 

[Zil]

Or perhaps Thornton was right back when the Bruins traded him?

-Thornton
http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/news/story?id=2242875

Is that why the Bruins finished with one of the five worst records in the league the season they traded him while Sharks finished fifth in the West and went to the second round? Expunging Thornton didn't turn the Bruins into a contender. Remaking the rest of their roster did.

 

[Raspewtin]

Expunging Thornton didn't turn the Bruins into a contender. Remaking the rest of their roster did.

Exactly.

The Bruins dumping Thornton and winning the Stanley cup 5 years later with a completely different roster doesn't, in any way, prove Joe is a "loser".

 

[Thirty One]

Exactly.

The Bruins dumping Thornton and winning the Stanley cup 5 years later with a completely different roster doesn't, in any way, prove Joe is a "loser".

Drafting Kessel, Marchand and Lucic in 2006 and trading Raycroft for Rask definitely didn't hurt.

 

[Off Sides]

That quote means something, apparently he feels he was moved because the Bruins were not winning with him.

If you want to believe the Bruins were trying to trade one of the best centers in the game in his prime for cents on the dollar because they are dumb and there is nothing wrong with Thornton in some way that they thought he was detrimental to the team, so be it.

If you want to think San Jose is being dumb by seemingly trying to drive him off their team after several unsuccessful playoff attempts with him, most recently a 4 game collapse after being up 3-0 where he put up 0 points in those 4 games, that is fine as well.

To me, it looks like Thornton is just that good of a player that teams are willing to put up with whatever it is that they find unsettling, right up until the point that they feel no matter what his contributions are, they are a team who can not take a next step with him.

 

[cwede]

they only thing bad about Thornton is his Cap Hit.
He loved playing with Nash for Canada, and vice versa.

my solution -
Send him to Ottawa for Ryan.
Send us Zibanejad and Stone for Nash, Noreau and Donnay.
Let them try together to win Canada's first Cup since Roy won 10 OT games in '93.
We'd get younger, bigger but rely on balanced scoring (with a balanced Cap)

not that this has any thing to do with Brassard....

 

[Zil]

That quote means something, apparently he feels he was moved because the Bruins were not winning with him.

The quote is pretty clearly sarcastic. Thornton had 33 points in 23 games when they dealt him.

If you want to believe the Bruins were trying to trade one of the best centers in the game in his prime for cents on the dollar because they are dumb and there is nothing wrong with Thornton in some way that they thought he was detrimental to the team, so be it.

The team was floundering and they decided to blow things up. Without Thornton they plummeted far enough to draft Kessel and eventually had the cap space to sign Chara.

If you want to think San Jose is being dumb by seemingly trying to drive him off their team after several unsuccessful playoff attempts with him, most recently a 4 game collapse after being up 3-0 where he put up 0 points in those 4 games, that is fine as well.

To me, it looks like Thornton is just that good of a player that teams are willing to put up with whatever it is that they find unsettling, right up until the point that they feel no matter what his contributions are, they are a team who can not take a next step with him.

Does San Jose look they have any clue what they're doing right now? Their general manager publicly declared they're rebuilding and then did very, very little all summer. Now they're messing around with the locker room leadership. Meanwhile, they might've won the Cup and probably at least beaten the Kings if Vlasic didn't get hurt. They're freaking out over some bad optics to end last season rather than acting logically.

 

[Off Sides]

The quote is pretty clearly sarcastic. Thornton had 33 points in 23 games when they dealt him.

And maybe that is part of the problem, overblown sarcasm is not really a enviable trait especially after losing or after collapsing in the playoffs

The team was floundering and they decided to blow things up. Without Thornton they plummeted far enough to draft Kessel and eventually had the cap space to sign Chara.

They blew up the team and in the process got rid of their 26 year old more than a pt per game center? In what world would that make sense unless they for whatever reason did not want Thornton to be part of whatever it was they were going to do next?

Does San Jose look they have any clue what they're doing right now?

No, and I have to wonder if they have put themselves in a spot where they've already re-signed Thornton and now are regretting it

Their general manager publicly declared they're rebuilding and then did very, very little all summer. Now they're messing around with the locker room leadership.

And how can this be considered a good thing if Thornton is part of their leadership?

Meanwhile, they might've won the Cup and probably at least beaten the Kings if Vlasic didn't get hurt. They're freaking out over some bad optics to end last season rather than acting logically.

Could be or it could be they literally are over Thornton and looking to go in a different direction by using the return they could get by moving him if they can convince him to waive.

It still appears to me like I said, Thornton is a player teams put up with because he is so talented, not so much a player teams would want otherwise.

John Thornton already had staked out his position on Twitter when it came to Wilson’s call for a culture change in the locker room – “a culture established by who again?,â€

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/sharks...s-vlasic-injury-update-and-thoughts-on-kings/

 

[Zil]

Wait Thornton's on the roster because he's talented? Whoa. That's crazy talk. We all know the proper reason to add a player to your team is that he's such a swell guy. You know, like John Scott or Tanner Glass?

 

[Off Sides]

Wait Thornton's on the roster because he's talented? Whoa. That's crazy talk. We all know the proper reason to add a player to your team is that he's such a swell guy. You know, like John Scott or Tanner Glass?

Rather than bicker back and forth, I'll just agree to disagree

This guy says pretty much what I am saying and he probably knows a bit about the subject.

http://hockeyjournal.com/news/pros/From_NEHJ-_O-Connell_reflects_on_Bruins_glory

 

[Zil]

Rather than bicker back and forth, I'll just agree to disagree

This guy says pretty much what I am saying and he probably knows a bit about the subject.

http://hockeyjournal.com/news/pros/From_NEHJ-_O-Connell_reflects_on_Bruins_glory

A general manager who got replaced by the time the Bruins won the Cup defends his trade of a Hall of Fame caliber center for scraps. Ok then.

 

[Off Sides]

A general manager who got replaced by the time the Bruins won the Cup defends his trade of a Hall of Fame caliber center for scraps. Ok then.

Like I said agree to disagree if you want but yes a former NHL GM who knows far more about the player in question than you or I felt Thornton never had championship character and decided to start a rebuild without him when he was in his prime.

Isn't that the reasoning behind why some would like to see Thornton here, so it increases the odds of the Rangers winning a championship?

To this point one GM did not see it and traded him and another team, San Jose, who largely has had much better overall rosters than the current Rangers has been unable to get it done with him.

I just do not believe his third team would be the charm.

 

[Zil]

I did an in depth post in this very thread about how much San Jose depends on Thornton. There's no way that if you swapped Thornton for Brassard that this wouldn't be the best overall team he has played for. Thornton is one of the very, very best players in the league and it goes beyond his point totals. If we got a chance to actually make that switch, we'd be nuts to say no.

The fact that this guy was a GM is irrelevant. There have been lots of incompetent GMs and even good ones make the occasional bad move.

 

[Off Sides]

The fact that this guy was a GM is irrelevant. There have been lots of incompetent GMs and even good ones make the occasional bad move.

It's not irrelevant, this is a guy who knew Thornton. If we can find some other former or current GM, coach, who knows Thornton and is saying he has championship character, perhaps then I'd understand where the idea that this GM was a doofus is coming from.

All we hear about it, and yes it's mostly speculation, reading between the lines, and whatnot, is that he has some sort of character flaws that cause issues that lead to whatever team he is on ultimately never living up to their potential.

If he had gone to San Jose and they won a cup then sure, or if San Jose did not have very good rosters (in my opinion they were championship quality) surrounding him, but apparently they are running into exactly what this other former GM was talking about concerning him.

You seem to be relating Thornton's stats to everything when that was never in question. What apparently is in question is his impact on the team, including the locker room and including off the ice.

I now it's unpopular right now on HF to consider that these guys are around each other all the time, that their personality do in fact carry over to what happens on the ice, but look no further than the MSL situation that happened these past playoffs and what the Rangers ended up doing with it to see that stuff that happens off the ice and in the locker room matters.

 

[Zil]

Once you get your team to contention quality, actually pulling off winning a Cup depends a lot more on luck than anyone wants to admit.

 

[TheTakedown]

Once you get your team to contention quality, actually pulling off winning a Cup depends a lot more on luck than anyone wants to admit.

Well, more like chance, to be exact.

 

[Thirty One]

Apparently the Sharks may look externally to fill their vacancy in team captain.

http://www.battleofcali.com/2014/8/29/6081583/sharks-captains-needed-the-applicants

 

[Thirty One]

Well, more like chance, to be exact.

Literally:


chance
[chans, chahns]
noun
luck or fortune

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/chance?s=t