Doug Wilson presser 1p CSNCA April 20

[Coily]

Wilson is going to watch the playoffs unfold and who ever wins it all , he will find a coach that specializes in that style of play that the Stanley Cup Champion has. His coach will fail because what Wilson can't grasp is that style of play changes every year and instead of being proactive and setting trends he is reactive and follows trends....someone else said it better on these boards but that has been his pattern for years and there is no reason to suggest it will change this year....and again next year we will be on the outside looking in

He wants to get a puck possession coach.

So no he's not waiting to see how team X wins he's waiting for everyone to finish, himself included before making a pretty big move for the org.

If you remember he waited until after the 08 playoffs to hire Todd.

 

[Barrie22]

Imitation of the Cup winner is no guarantee of success.

And may take more than one off season to "rebuild" to that style/type of play.

Good thing we don't have a GM that likes to immitate the stanley cup winners. :sarcasm

 

[boylerroom]

Imitation of the Cup winner is no guarantee of success.

And may take more than one off season to "rebuild" to that style/type of play.

Literally NOTHING is a guarantee of success. That's just a lazy argument.

 

[LadyStanley]

Need a hot seat emoticon

 

[Coily]

Need a hot seat emoticon

Mark Purdy

 

[LadyStanley]

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-p...ore-uncertain-with-a-new-coach-002229267.html

Puck Daddy/Cooper on the future of the Sharks after McLellan "firing" (agreeing with Ratto it was a firing).

 

[LeeIFBB]

Looks like he got dressed in the dark.

 

[FeedingFrenzy]

Which NHL coach currently in the PO's is in the last year of his contract?? Cant see DW bringing in another asst.coach to fill the spot. Any college coaches ready to make the jump?

 

[LadyStanley]

Which NHL coach currently in the PO's is in the last year of his contract?? Cant see DW bringing in another asst.coach to fill the spot. Any college coaches ready to make the jump?

Babcock

There are a few out there. But which want to make the jump. Such as former Shark Jim Montgomery at DU.

 

[Sharksrule04]

Thank you for expressing an opinion that too often goes unstated in the modern hockey world. Why, perusing any one of the numerous hockey blogs out there, one would think that on-paper achievement is enough!

Meh, I am still of the opinion that the GM's job is to put a great team together on paper. It's on the players to execute. A GM can acquire Gretzky, Orr and Lemieux, if they don't win the cup, is that his fault? If you think so fine, but I don't see how players can ever be blamed if you have that belief system. It sounds like everyone is absolved of blame in most peoples eyes here except the GM. If a player underperforms people say, "well who acquired him". If a coach can't get the message through to his players they say "who hired him". If the defense isn't quite strong enough "whose job is it to bring in top D-men". If the top players aren't playing well "who gave them those contracts". I still stand by the opinion that most people here just let their hatred dictate their opinions and pass all blame on to DW.

Sure he's not perfect but people make him out to be a GM who has been running the worst franchise in history on this board and its beyond laughable. People here clearly haven't experienced a bad GM if they think DW is bad.

 

[Sharksrule04]

I honestly thought the fire wildon movement was just a small group of people on this board. But i just read ray ratto's article about an organization change. And every one of the comments had to do with wilson needing to be fired.

The day I listen to Ray Ratto regarding anything hockey related is the day John Scott puts up 10 goals in a season.

That guy is most moronic journalist I've ever read material from.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Meh, I am still of the opinion that the GM's job is to put a great team together on paper. It's on the players to execute. A GM can acquire Gretzky, Orr and Lemieux, if they don't win the cup, is that his fault? If you think so fine, but I don't see how players can ever be blamed if you have that belief system. It sounds like everyone is absolved of blame in most peoples eyes here except the GM. If a player underperforms people say, "well who acquired him". If a coach can't get the message through to his players they say "who hired him". If the defense isn't quite strong enough "whose job is it to bring in top D-men". If the top players aren't playing well "who gave them those contracts". I still stand by the opinion that most people here just let their hatred dictate their opinions and pass all blame on to DW.

Sure he's not perfect but people make him out to be a GM who has been running the worst franchise in history on this board and its beyond laughable. People here clearly haven't experienced a bad GM if they think DW is bad.

This idea that you have that it's impossible to blame both the players and the GM is simply false. It's simply lazy that you want to dismiss people's opinions as hate because they're able to criticize a player or a coach and then ask who brought them in because those are both valid things to do.

Nobody has made him out to be a bad GM or running the worst franchise in history and it's yet another example of lazy arguing when you exaggerate to such absurd lengths just because you don't agree with people.

If you gave people credit for what they're saying instead of just ignoring whatever you don't care to respond to, you'd see that people fully understand that it can get worse rather than better at the GM position. The point is that DW has been here for a long time and he's shown what he's capable of in most regards and it's not good enough. Yes, a championship is a high expectation of a manager but it is fair as well and it is not spoiled to have the bar that high. That's just part of the territory. Then you add on to the fact that DW did something this year that he just shouldn't have done and it's a perfectly justifiable position to want him gone and still be able to put responsibility on the players for their play on the ice.

 

[Sharksrule04]

This idea that you have that it's impossible to blame both the players and the GM is simply false. It's simply lazy that you want to dismiss people's opinions as hate because they're able to criticize a player or a coach and then ask who brought them in because those are both valid things to do.

Nobody has made him out to be a bad GM or running the worst franchise in history and it's yet another example of lazy arguing when you exaggerate to such absurd lengths just because you don't agree with people.

If you gave people credit for what they're saying instead of just ignoring whatever you don't care to respond to, you'd see that people fully understand that it can get worse rather than better at the GM position. The point is that DW has been here for a long time and he's shown what he's capable of in most regards and it's not good enough. Yes, a championship is a high expectation of a manager but it is fair as well and it is not spoiled to have the bar that high. That's just part of the territory. Then you add on to the fact that DW did something this year that he just shouldn't have done and it's a perfectly justifiable position to want him gone and still be able to put responsibility on the players for their play on the ice.

Not sure where you get this from. It's not lazy arguing, it's giving up on the argument. I've argued for the past 3 months in great depth my reasoning why DW shouldn't be fired and the responses I put in my prior response were the exact lazy crap that I received. When people can't think or respond beyond the basic hundreds of "Fire DW" posts or can't see any of the positives he's done with this franchise, I will associate that to hatred. I, as well as the people who seem to be in favor of keeping him, tend to at least agree that he makes some mistakes such as the Thornton comments and a few other minor signings that failed, but the people who want him fired simply can't seem to admit his good moves with out saying "then he gave that guy a NMC" or "DW didn't do anything his scouts did". It's tiresome and getting old. He's either getting fired or staying and at this point I've re-read the same arguments over and over and over again.

This isn't directed at you or any poster individually but more so at the tone of the discussions here. There are always poster who explain clear reasons for his firing and seem to be willing to accept that he made some good moves or has a plan intact.

Also, in regards to your first statement, I've seen very few people here mention the failure of the players along with their constant bashing of DW, and anytime they bash the players it seems to fall back to that BS comment of "well who brought that player here?".

 

[OrrNumber4]

f a player underperforms people say, "well who acquired him". If a coach can't get the message through to his players they say "who hired him". If the defense isn't quite strong enough "whose job is it to bring in top D-men". If the top players aren't playing well "who gave them those contracts". I still stand by the opinion that most people here just let their hatred dictate their opinions and pass all blame on to DW.

The problem is...is that this is essentially true. No one reasonable gives the players and coaching staff passes....after all, if they were good you would praise the GM for picking them. But the reason we criticize them is the same reason why DW has to have some blame.

It starts at the top. I can't conceive of any argument where the players are responsible for the coaching staff or the GM position...but the GM has top-down influence.

In general....I believe that the GM provides the players, the coach prepares the players, and that the players execute. Mostly, this is the way you look at things. But when the players execute, sometimes you have to chastise them while also blaming the GM for selecting players that didn't execute.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Not sure where you get this from. It's not lazy arguing, it's giving up on the argument. I've argued for the past 3 months in great depth my reasoning why DW shouldn't be fired and the responses I put in my prior response were the exact lazy crap that I received. When people can't think or respond beyond the basic hundreds of "Fire DW" posts or can't see any of the positives he's done with this franchise, I will associate that to hatred. I, as well as the people who seem to be in favor of keeping him, tend to at least agree that he makes some mistakes such as the Thornton comments and a few other minor signings that failed, but the people who want him fired simply can't seem to admit his good moves with out saying "then he gave that guy a NMC" or "DW didn't do anything his scouts did". It's tiresome and getting old. He's either getting fired or staying and at this point I've re-read the same arguments over and over and over again.

This isn't directed at you or any poster individually but more so at the tone of the discussions here. There are always poster who explain clear reasons for his firing and seem to be willing to accept that he made some good moves or has a plan intact.

Also, in regards to your first statement, I've seen very few people here mention the failure of the players along with their constant bashing of DW, and anytime they bash the players it seems to fall back to that BS comment of "well who brought that player here?".

Imo, a lot of this is pure exaggeration. And it is not BS to bash on the players AND ask who brought them in. Everyone bashes on the players and it is mostly done on an individual level. A lot of them are justifiable criticisms. But asking then about the manager situation is an issue you must be able to separate. It is possible to criticize players AND management. It is not a one or the other situation.

 

[Le Rosbeef]

Not sure where you get this from. It's not lazy arguing, it's giving up on the argument. I've argued for the past 3 months in great depth my reasoning why DW shouldn't be fired and the responses I put in my prior response were the exact lazy crap that I received. When people can't think or respond beyond the basic hundreds of "Fire DW" posts or can't see any of the positives he's done with this franchise, I will associate that to hatred. I, as well as the people who seem to be in favor of keeping him, tend to at least agree that he makes some mistakes such as the Thornton comments and a few other minor signings that failed, but the people who want him fired simply can't seem to admit his good moves with out saying "then he gave that guy a NMC" or "DW didn't do anything his scouts did". It's tiresome and getting old. He's either getting fired or staying and at this point I've re-read the same arguments over and over and over again.

This isn't directed at you or any poster individually but more so at the tone of the discussions here. There are always poster who explain clear reasons for his firing and seem to be willing to accept that he made some good moves or has a plan intact.

Also, in regards to your first statement, I've seen very few people here mention the failure of the players along with their constant bashing of DW, and anytime they bash the players it seems to fall back to that BS comment of "well who brought that player here?".

If I could like this post, I would.

I think you've got it spot on.

 

[Sharksrule04]

The problem is...is that this is essentially true. No one reasonable gives the players and coaching staff passes....after all, if they were good you would praise the GM for picking them. But the reason we criticize them is the same reason why DW has to have some blame.

It starts at the top. I can't conceive of any argument where the players are responsible for the coaching staff or the GM position...but the GM has top-down influence.

In general....I believe that the GM provides the players, the coach prepares the players, and that the players execute. Mostly, this is the way you look at things. But when the players execute, sometimes you have to chastise them while also blaming the GM for selecting players that didn't execute.

I fully agree here, but I don't pass all blame up nor do I pass all praise to a GM when they make a move that turns into a gem. I look at the GM's moves and judge them based on that. If the GM puts together a team that should compete, and makes the moves to address holes when they exist I believe he's done his job. When he makes stupid statements that angers a top player and creates tension in the room now I think he's crossed a line. When he makes a signing of a random player in Europe who turns out to be a surprise, I don't say that GM has a great eye for talent and can constantly find gems. If he has a consistent track record of it, I'll start to entertain the idea.

So from this statement I judge DW positively based on his big trade wins (Thornton, Heatley, Havlat, Burns not evaluating based on hindsight) and how they addressed team needs. I judge DW negatively for his signings/trades that even at the time we knew were bad (White, Burish, Walin, Ehrhoff). I tend to give him a small plus and/or minus for drafting because while he does have scouts, he makes the ultimate decision. So IMO he was bad at drafting from the 08-12 years but has since improved. I won't say Wilson is a genius because he signed Karlsson/Goodrow. They were solid signings but he has just as many of those undrafted UFA signings that have amounted to nothing.

I do not consider speculitive crap such as "should have signed this guy or that guy", because there is no evidence that it was an option in the first place.

The bolded part is the way I strongly believe evaluation of a team should be done. I don't believe in this top down BS. This is a hockey franchise and a new GM doesn't suddenly make players perform better nor does a coach firing unless the coach on the team was clearly not suited for the style the players were acquired to play. Thornton/Marleau/Couture will be the same guys we've seen for the past 5-6 years under a new GM.

The GM gets the players, coach researches and prepares them and the players must execute. If the GM is getting highly desired players and doing so without sacrificing too many pieces then he's doing his job. Yes he should shut his mouth more in DW's case, but his Thornton comments aren't enough for me to want him fired. I think Wilson has a great mind for hockey and I want to see him get a shot to rebuild this franchise. There is a perfect amount of blame to go around at each level (GM, Coach, Players), what annoys me is when it all filters back to the top.

 

[Irbes Mask]

The day I listen to Ray Ratto regarding anything hockey related is the day John Scott puts up 10 goals in a season.

That guy is most moronic journalist I've ever read material from.

You do realise it's satirical, right? Tongue is welded into cheek.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

There is a perfect amount of blame to go around at each level (GM, Coach, Players), what annoys me is when it all filters back to the top.

Well, that's how it works and how it is supposed to work. At the end of the day, the manager is responsible for the results of his workers. You can't simply give DW credit for being in the playoffs for consecutive years and then take none of the heat when they don't.

 

[OrrNumber4]

I fully agree here, but I don't pass all blame up nor do I pass all praise to a GM when they make a move that turns into a gem. I look at the GM's moves and judge them based on that. If the GM puts together a team that should compete, and makes the moves to address holes when they exist I believe he's done his job.

At some point, you have to look at the results of his moves. If he trades for a gem, give him credit. If he makes a sure-fire move that backfires, well, that is on him.

When he makes a signing of a random player in Europe who turns out to be a surprise, I don't say that GM has a great eye for talent and can constantly find gems. If he has a consistent track record of it, I'll start to entertain the idea.

You don't have to say he has a great eye for talent, but you have to give him credit for the move.

I do not consider speculitive crap such as "should have signed this guy or that guy", because there is no evidence that it was an option in the first place.

While it is difficult to look at specifics, I think that you can definitely fault DW for "non-moves" in his 10+ years here. Not getting a top-flight defenseman, etc.

Thornton/Marleau/Couture will be the same guys we've seen for the past 5-6 years under a new GM.

For example, I am very frustrated by JT and Marleaus' production. That is of course, on them. But DW also signed both players to extension...shouldn't he earn some of my ire for the decision to keep them?

If the GM is getting highly desired players and doing so without sacrificing too many pieces then he's doing his job.

"Highly desired"...that is an interesting word choice.

I think the way I would see it is if the GM is constantly making these "great" acquisitions that aren't producing results on the ice...then maybe those acquisitions weren't so "great".

There is a perfect amount of blame to go around at each level (GM, Coach, Players), what annoys me is when it all filters back to the top.

Well, I think in most of our minds, the blame is spread around. On Hfboards, at least, following the playoffs, a lot or ire was focused on the players. Those grievances have been aired..and it looks like those bad players will stay. As the season has progressed, people have turned towards criticizing the GM...and there is an actual chance he might no longer by GM.

 

[FeedingFrenzy]

At some point, you have to look at the results of his moves. If he trades for a gem, give him credit. If he makes a sure-fire move that backfires, well, that is on him.



You don't have to say he has a great eye for talent, but you have to give him credit for the move.



While it is difficult to look at specifics, I think that you can definitely fault DW for "non-moves" in his 10+ years here. Not getting a top-flight defenseman, etc.



For example, I am very frustrated by JT and Marleaus' production. That is of course, on them. But DW also signed both players to extension...shouldn't he earn some of my ire for the decision to keep them?



"Highly desired"...that is an interesting word choice.

I think the way I would see it is if the GM is constantly making these "great" acquisitions that aren't producing results on the ice...then maybe those acquisitions weren't so "great".



Well, I think in most of our minds, the blame is spread around. On Hfboards, at least, following the playoffs, a lot or ire was focused on the players. Those grievances have been aired..and it looks like those bad players will stay. As the season has progressed, people have turned towards criticizing the GM...and there is an actual chance he might no longer by GM.

lol, are you for real?? After the seasons they had, most were patting DW on the back for getting those 2 signed for an HTD.. They under-performed and now you want to blame DW??

 

[Sharksrule04]

While it is difficult to look at specifics, I think that you can definitely fault DW for "non-moves" in his 10+ years here. Not getting a top-flight defenseman, etc.

I would argue Dan Boyle and Brent Burns were/are both top flight d-men especially when they were acquired. Boyle was a #1 at time of the trade, and Burns was coming off an All-Star seasons and a rising #1 capable d-man. If you consider guys like Karlsson and Subban #1's then both of them need to be as well. If you don't consider those guys #1 d-men, then I don't really think there are more than maybe 2-3 #1 d-men in the league.

He also brought in Blake, and while it was towards the end of his career he did have 1 really good season with us and 1 mediocre season.

For example, I am very frustrated by JT and Marleaus' production. That is of course, on them. But DW also signed both players to extension...shouldn't he earn some of my ire for the decision to keep them?

Sure, I don't agree with you, but you're entitled to that opinion and I'd hope you also consider that he signed them below market value and when they signed those contracts the team was one of the best in the league and Marleau/Thornton were both producing at a high level. Thornton still is while Marleau had a down year which could be the start of a decline.

"Highly desired"...that is an interesting word choice.

Not sure why? When the Sharks acquired Burns, Thornton, and Heatley, these were all highly desired guys. Do people not remember how pissed Detroit was when we acquired Burns? The Sharks were able to acquire all of these guys in deals they won.

I think the way I would see it is if the GM is constantly making these "great" acquisitions that aren't producing results on the ice...then maybe those acquisitions weren't so "great".

They are producing results on the ice, just not cups. Thornton has been one of the top producers in the NHL since the trade, Burns has been effective anywhere he's been placed on the team, Heatley put up 40 goals, Boyle was a top producer among D-men for years, etc...
We all want a cup, but not winning one doesn't make these acquisitions suddenly bad. You need 20 guys producing to win a cup, and we've never been lucky enough to have them all do that for April to June. I am still shocked some of our teams didn't have better outcomes.

 

[boylerroom]

Mark Purdy on KNBR this am, talking about he really does believe it was mutual. Thinks, as I do, that DW gave him a tough assignment this year AND he was "at the end of his rope" with these players.

 

[boylerroom]

Not sure where you get this from. It's not lazy arguing, it's giving up on the argument. I've argued for the past 3 months in great depth my reasoning why DW shouldn't be fired and the responses I put in my prior response were the exact lazy crap that I received. When people can't think or respond beyond the basic hundreds of "Fire DW" posts or can't see any of the positives he's done with this franchise, I will associate that to hatred. I, as well as the people who seem to be in favor of keeping him, tend to at least agree that he makes some mistakes such as the Thornton comments and a few other minor signings that failed, but the people who want him fired simply can't seem to admit his good moves with out saying "then he gave that guy a NMC" or "DW didn't do anything his scouts did". It's tiresome and getting old. He's either getting fired or staying and at this point I've re-read the same arguments over and over and over again.

This isn't directed at you or any poster individually but more so at the tone of the discussions here. There are always poster who explain clear reasons for his firing and seem to be willing to accept that he made some good moves or has a plan intact.

Also, in regards to your first statement, I've seen very few people here mention the failure of the players along with their constant bashing of DW, and anytime they bash the players it seems to fall back to that BS comment of "well who brought that player here?".

+1

 

[Led Zappa]

Mark Purdy on KNBR this am, talking about he really does believe it was mutual. Thinks, as I do, that DW gave him a tough assignment this year AND he was "at the end of his rope" with these players.

So, it wasn't the players who were tuning out the coach. It was the coach tuning out the players