Can the sharks legitimately win this year?

[SJeasy]

Okay, but I think the Sharks are hitting hot goaltenders. You only have to look at Quick last playoff. We had out-played him in 2011, and we'd owned him most of the year. He'd had a **** series against the Blues. And then he comes in and dominates us. He wasn't doing anything different. It's not like his play style always beats us. He just had the series of his life at the worst time for us.

I don't think it is so much hot goaltenders as play styles. The Sharks have typically eschewed oddmans and breakaways for a more conservative game. Low risk, good defense. I do think Boston would win a 7 game series and it would look like the Sharks outplayed them and that Rask was hot. Using the Sharks game plan against a hyper conservative defensive system is not so good. Despite that, they have almost beaten LA. Throw in a few oddmans and breakaways and they do. That's what I liked about the outset of the year. It looked like TM was finally coaching the team for the more aggressive play style.

For this season, I have Pitt, Boston, Anaheim and Chicago as being far better than 50/50 to contain the finalists. The Sharks have a chance and it isn't infinitesimal like Washington, Phoenix, Minny or a few others. If they want to improve their odds, they open it up a bit. The biggest indicators for winners are goal diff and ROW going into the playoffs. 5on5 scoring diff is another indicator. There are defensive teams that beat the aforementioned indicators with stingy defense, but they are in Jennings territory for GAA. The Sharks aren't even close to Jennings under TM.

I agree with GP that LA isn't so good because of the scoring issue. Typical Sutter who is falling back on his hyperconservative ways. He won by loosening up a bit two years back. Hitch scares me because he has been loosening up this year even though the Sharks have the Blues' number.

 

[murdock1116]

The Ducks are pretenders. Everything is going right for them right now statistically and they will regress hard.

Shooting Percentage, 1 goal game winning percentage, save percentage, etc. Are all extremely high for them.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

The Ducks are pretenders. Everything is going right for them right now statistically and they will regress hard.

Shooting Percentage, 1 goal game winning percentage, save percentage, etc. Are all extremely high for them.

Look at their record when they allow the first goal. It is ridiculous. Only a handful of teams since the 2005 lockout are over .500 in that situation and the Ducks are a little over 71% this year. Second place are the Sharks and the Bruins at 45%. If there's anything at all that's unsustainable, it's that.

 

[SJGoalie32]

While they did play good against them, Rask will just be the new Quick, Niemi, Roloson, Kipper.

or Turco, Osgood, Hiller, Andersen, Luongo, Elliott....

Wow. The Sharks are clearly the unluckiest team in all of NHL history to keep "magically" hitting such hot goaltending year after year after year after year after.....

Over a seven game series, you have to find ways to beat the other team's goalie. Simply throwing your hands up and the air and saying "oh well, its bad luck", or talking about regression and hot streaks and sustainability means nothing. More seriously, the Sharks often repeat the mantra "stick to our game plan, and results will follow". That is a great regular-season mantra. It is also great if you are a truly dominant team. Otherwise, it won't cut it in the playoffs. Maybe 80% of the time, if the Sharks follow their favorite game plan, they will have the best chance at winning...but the other 20% of the time, they need to figure out what the best way to win is.

+1

Perennially, the Sharks have a very good, but very predictable and stoppable offense. It's consistently good enough to beat the bottom feeders and the mediocre teams on most nights, maybe even good enough to beat the top teams on an off night or fatigued from a lengthy road trip......but when faced with a good team with a stout defense and a solid goaltender who gets 2 weeks to prepare and gameplan against the Sharks (which are usually the kind of teams still left in the Conf Semis and Conf Finals), the Sharks offense is overmatched and unable to persevere. That's not really luck.

I don't think it is so much hot goaltenders as play styles. The Sharks have typically eschewed oddmans and breakaways for a more conservative game........Using the Sharks game plan against a hyper conservative defensive system is not so good.

+2

Goals are scored at the highest rates off of transitions and odd-man rushes.

The Sharks typical game plan is to control the puck in the offensive zone and set up for the perfect shot. That game plan naturally results in higher shot counts and lower scoring percentages. Of course, even with the lower quality of chances, if you launch a large enough quantity of shots at the net, you're bound to beat most teams on most nights.

Problem is, the deeper you go into the playoffs, the better the defenses and goaltenders inevitably get. All the porous defenses with shaky goaltenders are usually gone by the 2nd round. What's left are the teams who CAN weather that onslaught AND who have the offensive skill that they can cash in on the one moment when your offense presses too hard and they can transition back against your goal.

That's what I liked about the outset of the year. It looked like TM was finally coaching the team for the more aggressive play style.

Yup. And that's really what this will all boil down to.....when the playoffs do come around, will the team a) return to that aggressive, relentless, high-tempo, transition attack that fueled the offensive explosion we saw during the first month of the season; and b) will the team have enough healthy players to run that style of play effectively.

 

[Herschel]

I don't think it is so much hot goaltenders as play styles. The Sharks have typically eschewed oddmans and breakaways for a more conservative game. Low risk, good defense. I do think Boston would win a 7 game series and it would look like the Sharks outplayed them and that Rask was hot. Using the Sharks game plan against a hyper conservative defensive system is not so good. Despite that, they have almost beaten LA. Throw in a few oddmans and breakaways and they do. That's what I liked about the outset of the year. It looked like TM was finally coaching the team for the more aggressive play style.

For this season, I have Pitt, Boston, Anaheim and Chicago as being far better than 50/50 to contain the finalists. The Sharks have a chance and it isn't infinitesimal like Washington, Phoenix, Minny or a few others. If they want to improve their odds, they open it up a bit. The biggest indicators for winners are goal diff and ROW going into the playoffs. 5on5 scoring diff is another indicator. There are defensive teams that beat the aforementioned indicators with stingy defense, but they are in Jennings territory for GAA. The Sharks aren't even close to Jennings under TM.

I agree with GP that LA isn't so good because of the scoring issue. Typical Sutter who is falling back on his hyperconservative ways. He won by loosening up a bit two years back. Hitch scares me because he has been loosening up this year even though the Sharks have the Blues' number.

I agree with most of this. I do think ROW is a bit overvalued, personally I like to look at regulation wins Vs regular losses. OT and Shootouts are bot meaningless come playoffs so I remove both.

 

[SJGoalie32]

How about game 7? The Sharks most definitely deserved to win game 7. I can't recall any of the others, but I do distinctly remember thinking the Sharks should have won game 7 if not for Quick.

If your offense is not good enough to beat the other team's goaltender, you deserve to win nothing.

All I'm saying is that how come we have to face Quick when he's putting up .951% and then Chicago gets to face him and he puts up a .897%?

Because the Blackhawks were a better team with a better offense.

Do you really think that systematic differences between us and Chicago made up for the fact that Quick let up DOUBLE the rate of goals against Chicago as us?

Yes. Combined with the greater skills and superior execution of the Blackhawks players throughout the roster.

If we got Quick playing that badly and Niemi puts up the solid average sv% that he did against LA, we win the series in a landslide, just like Chicago did.

Sure. And if Joe Pavelski had 40 goals thus far into this season, he'd be a frontrunner for the Hart Trophy. But he doesn't, which is why he isn't. He's a good player. A VERY good player. But he's not THAT good. And it's not just due to puck luck.

Same with the Sharks team as a whole. There's a reason the Blackhawks managed to make Quick look bad.....because they have a very good offense. An offense that usually executes better than the Sharks do. So they had the talent, skill, and ability to make Quick look bad, and then the good execution to capitalize on Quick's mistakes.

 

[Blades of Glory]

Also:
http://www.extraskater.com/teams/on-ice?type=total&sort=fenwick_pct

The Sharks have ranked in the top-3 in Fenwick-close all season, and it was only after this ridiculous injury situation that they fell to third. When they are healthy, they are a dominant team, one of the four monsters in the West that are a cut above everyone else. LA, Chicago, and St. Louis are the others.

 

[Herschel]

Yup. And that's really what this will all boil down to.....when the playoffs do come around, will the team a) return to that aggressive, relentless, high-tempo, transition attack that fueled the offensive explosion we saw during the first month of the season; and b) will the team have enough healthy players to run that style of play effectively.

IMO this is the first team (when health) that can open up and play more aggressively. In past seasons the Sharks were almost forced to live and die with the possession game because they lacked the talent/speed to run and gun.

With this said I would rather live and die with a possession game over a team that is forced to live and die with a run and gun game.

 

[oyster]

It's possible. Getting out of the west will be tough. I think we may be lucky that the Sharks aren't sending more players to Sochi.

 

[USF Shark]

They are serious contenders...if we stay healthy. I'm glad we have fewer Olympians this year to give most of our players a nice break. I'm a little worried about the possibility of Nemo getting tired and of Patty playing to much (less worried about Pavs and Vlasic because they're younger), but I think the break does us more good than almost any other team in the NHL

 

[FeedingFrenzy]

Sharks will contend. As always. But the bottom line is execution with a dash of luck wins the Cup. Sharks fail to execute more often than not. We know what this team is capable of. The pieces are here, get healthy and go win a CUP!

 

[Gene Parmesan]

They are serious contenders...if we stay healthy. I'm glad we have fewer Olympians this year to give most of our players a nice break. I'm a little worried about the possibility of Nemo getting tired and of Patty playing to much (less worried about Pavs and Vlasic because they're younger), but I think the break does us more good than almost any other team in the NHL

I'm not worried about it. Its completely overblown. These guys are highly conditioned athletes who routinely play an upwards to 100 games in a full season. Plus Patty is a cyborg.

 

[WTFetus]

These guys are highly conditioned athletes who routinely play an upwards to 100 games in a full season.

Yet Thornton had to personally ask McLellan for less practices in the past because the team was tired.
A couple of extra Olympic games won't suddenly make the players suck, but it could certainly affect them.

 

[Led Zappa]

Yet Thornton had to personally ask McLellan for less practices in the past because the team was tired.
A couple of extra Olympic games won't suddenly make the players suck, but it could certainly affect them.

Wasn't that due to the compressed season and more about short term recovery?

 

[hohosaregood]

Yet Thornton had to personally ask McLellan for less practices in the past because the team was tired.
A couple of extra Olympic games won't suddenly make the players suck, but it could certainly affect them.

I think there's a pretty decent chance that TMac may give the older guys a couple games of rest at the end of the season. At the rate they're going, they probably won't be fighting for a playoff spot by then. They may end up fighting for home advantage but a couple games off worth of rest may be more valuable than that home advantage. Although, considering how every team in the Pacific is killing it at home, home ice advantage may be something worth fighting for.

 

[WTFetus]

Wasn't that due to the compressed season and more about short term recovery?

I don't remember if it was last season or the season prior, but this current season is pretty packed too because of the Olympics.

 

[Negatively Positive]

Russia is also a lot farther than Vancouver. 10+ hour flights back and forth. Hopefully the Sharks can take advantage with some top players rested and ready to kick ass out of the break.

 

[Juxtaposer]

Russia is also a lot farther than Vancouver. 10+ hour flights back and forth. Hopefully the Sharks can take advantage with some top players rested and ready to kick ass out of the break.

I like Marleau and Vlasic's chances of being unaffected by the travel/time zone issues more than, say Getzlaf and Perry's.

 

[Leidi J]

If completely healthy again, which is still possible for the playoffs, then I actually truly think this team is at least equal to if not better than the best teams in the league. Period. So my answer is yes.

Some people here are SOOOO overwhelmingly negative about everything, it's not fun to read or engage or discuss anymore right now and it makes it even more difficult to look forward to the future and get through these injury plagued times

 

[Coily]

I don't remember if it was last season or the season prior, but this current season is pretty packed too because of the Olympics.

It was last year, Joe cited because of the travel they needed a few more days off.

 

[Barrie22]

It was last year that thornton had to ask. It also didn't help that mclellan was still running the older guys 20+ minutes every night with zero days off basically.

It is why last year was such a crappy year for almsot all of the older superstars in the league and a lot of the younger guys did great. Amd also why last season is such a bad example to draw any comparisons for (see couture for this).

 

[spintheblackcircle]

The Ducks are scary good. I think the Sharks can take anyone else, but the Ducks are just stupid good. Right now.

 

[hockfan1991]

If your offense is not good enough to beat the other team's goaltender, you deserve to win nothing.



Because the Blackhawks were a better team with a better offense.



Yes. Combined with the greater skills and superior execution of the Blackhawks players throughout the roster.



Sure. And if Joe Pavelski had 40 goals thus far into this season, he'd be a frontrunner for the Hart Trophy. But he doesn't, which is why he isn't. He's a good player. A VERY good player. But he's not THAT good. And it's not just due to puck luck.

Same with the Sharks team as a whole. There's a reason the Blackhawks managed to make Quick look bad.....because they have a very good offense. An offense that usually executes better than the Sharks do. So they had the talent, skill, and ability to make Quick look bad, and then the good execution to capitalize on Quick's mistakes.

I agree with jux. Sure Chicago has a higher powered offense that will make a difference. But anyone who watched sj la then chi la knows that quick gave up more soft goals in 1 period I can recall 3 when he got pulled against the hawks. Then he did in a full 7 games plus against the sharks. Sharks softened him up for the hawks. Quick played out of his mind vs the sharks. And his fatigue showed when hawks were scoring from center ice and low percentage shots which has nothing to do with a high powered offense

 

[HOOCH2173]

it pained me but i voted no.

You need to be able to beat the Schmucks in their house! So far that has not proven good. sigh....

and yes Chicago and the Kings but I would through in the Blues too!

 

[sr228]

The Ducks are scary good. I think the Sharks can take anyone else, but the Ducks are just stupid good. Right now.

I can not figure out the Ducks at all. They are riding some ridiculous percentages and I keep expecting their house of cards to crash but it's been almost 100 games (last season + this season).

I still can't convince myself they're for real and I don't think they'll get too far in the playoffs but what they've done so far this season is impressive.