Speculation: Sharks looking to move Niemi (and other goaltending talk)

[OrrNumber4]

Maybe, but it isn't just about the trio. The Stanley cup formula only works with the right supporting cast. The Preds have completed the Stanley cup formula and did so years ago. Unfortunately they have never had the right supporting cast.

The Sharks don't currently have the right supporting cast, but they are a lot closer than the Preds.

Well, the thing with the Preds...you get the feeling that if they could only spend more money, they'd be a legitimate contenders, because their base is so good (Rinne, Weber; used to have Suter).

Really, that is their primary issue.

There was a window where all your mock assumptions were true. I'd say the 09 - 10 and 10-11 Seasons

Well...Nabakov was a disaster in the playoffs. Niemi was never really a top-5 goalie...

Look at the "#2 forwards" on other SC-winning team. Zetterberg, Malkin, Kane, Krejci/Lucic, Carter....Marleau doesn't really fit in with that group. He's on the low-end of that group, at best.

How does Boyle compare to Lidstrom, Gonchar, Keith, Chara, and Doughty? He's maybe better than Gonchar of that group.

Then take Thornton, within the context of his playoff failures...how does he compare with Crosby/Datsyuk/Kopitar/Toews/Bergeron?

You look at those guys, and see that they are either far better than Thornton (Crosby), or just a lot more versatile (even when Thornton had committed to all three zones around 2010). Outside of Crosby, those players are much better three-zone players.

They were slightly worse than the rest but still good enough to win with.

Now? Thornton, Vlasic, and Stalock probably aren't a good enough F/D/G trio to win with.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

The Preds haven't completed the formula at all. Not even close. If they won, their forward group would easily have been the worst of any cup winner in the past 20 years. That's why these teams don't win cups.

It's best for San Jose's future to tank and try to acquire at least one of those players with a top-5 pick (preferably the forward) and then trade futhres for the defenseman.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Well...Nabakov was a disaster in the playoffs. Niemi was never really a top-5 goalie...

Look at the "#2 forwards" on other SC-winning team. Zetterberg, Malkin, Kane, Krejci/Lucic, Carter....Marleau doesn't really fit in with that group. He's on the low-end of that group, at best.

How does Boyle compare to Lidstrom, Gonchar, Keith, Chara, and Doughty? He's maybe better than Gonchar of that group.

Marleau is better than Carter, Krejci/Lucic, and arguably PKane but I agree with the general premise of this post.

 

[spintheblackcircle]

Marleau is better than Carter, Krejci/Lucic, and arguably PKane but I agree with the general premise of this post.

Kane? Evander, yes. Patrick, hell no.

 

[Alwalys]

Consistency? That's a laugh. Quick is either in god-mode or in sieve-mode. As someone else pointed out earlier, there is no in between with Quick.

The Kings' amazing skaters is what makes them consistently great. Not Quick. They win despite Quick.

Ok, this is getting out of hand. The idea that the Kings win Cups in spite of Quick is ludicrous. Absolutely ludicrous.

Antti Niemi is a league-average starting goaltender. He would have had an NHL career whether or not he won the Cup in Chicago. The way people act around here makes you think he's 2014 Marty Brodeur.

The numbers don't lie. Quick is one of the statistically best active playoff goalies and Niemi is one of the worst. It's no coincidence Quick has 2 cups and a finals appearance in the past 3 seasons while Niemi has a historic 0-3 series loss to show for his efforts.

It's funny, Niemi is one season removed from a Vezina runner-up campaign, and now people are questioning if he's even an NHL starter. Yes, it was a shortened season, but it was still twice as many games as Stalock has in his NHL career, and people are ready yo crown him "savior".

Niemi had one of the most underwhelming Vezina "campaigns" I've seen and despite my partisan desire, it was pretty hard to make a case for him winning the Vezina. The result was in line, 3rd place.

You might as well not mention Stalock in any response to me as it doesn't make any kind of a point. I do not assert Stalock is better than Niemi, or even as good. In fact I think there's a good chance he isn't as good, which is bad news for us and magnifies the need in goal.

Kane? Evander, yes. Patrick, hell no.

That was my first reaction, then I considered that Marleau is a better 2-way forward than every one of those guys listed with the possible exception of Zetterberg, whom Marleau has bested in the playoffs. The fact that he is used in such a heavy defensive role makes us forget sometimes, but patty scores up there with Kane despite playing some of the hardest minutes in the league while Kane plays very sheltered minutes. And patty has been above 80 points twice, while Kane only did it once. Kane has never even come close to scoring 40 goals, but patty is STILL a threat to do it every season.

 

[hohosaregood]

Everybody on this team.

 

[SJeasy]

A bit on Niemi/Stalock.

I haven't expressed it here previously, but I don't even have a full eval/projection on Stalock. His style is different and there are few like him. He is small, smaller than Quick. Halak is the only NHL starter of comparable size and he does it by excellent reads and positioning as well as athleticism (which looks a little scrambly). The thing with Halak is that he falls apart under heavy load (games). He's almost Vezina caliber under a light load which NHL coaches are reluctant to do. I wouldn't be surprised if Quick does better with fewer games.

Niemi is atrocious for the playoffs. Over 40 games with the Sharks and no shutouts. Compared to others that is flat out bad. Shutouts are a gauge of goalie focus and Nemo's third period play is not very flattering either which helps confirm my view. When Nemo is on, he is roughly at the bottom end of the top 10 NHL goalies. He is unusual in being remarkably unathletic. He takes longer to regain his skates from a scramble than any other goalie. He avoids scrambles and uses his pads rather than his skates to get across (slower than it would be with skates). He has a posture when he is on that maximizes his size (very good). He doesn't read the play that well and compensates for his lack of athleticism by freezing which is unusual and probably fools opposition shooters. The league is getting used to him and that advantage may be going away. I think it was an advantage in shootouts and I think it is starting to go away in that regard as well. Shooters expect a reaction and don't get it; I expect the opposition to start going exclusively with wristers and not trying to go across the grain or with dekes.

 

[spintheblackcircle]

That was my first reaction, then I considered that Marleau is a better 2-way forward than every one of those guys listed with the possible exception of Zetterberg, whom Marleau has bested in the playoffs. The fact that he is used in such a heavy defensive role makes us forget sometimes, but patty scores up there with Kane despite playing some of the hardest minutes in the league while Kane plays very sheltered minutes. And patty has been above 80 points twice, while Kane only did it once. Kane has never even come close to scoring 40 goals, but patty is STILL a threat to do it every season.

Kane is 10 years younger and has outscored him since joining the league as an 18 year old. Kane has 53 more points than Marleau in 15 less games. Kane is on the upswing with at least 10 years ahead of him. Also since Kane has entered the league, Marleau goes from .83 PPG in the regular season to .70 PPG and Kane goes from .96PPG in the regular season to .98. He's actually better in the playoffs when TRULY playing better competition.

He is the most clutch player in the NHL, I don't care if the advanced stats people don't believe in clutch. There is a reason the same people play biggest in the biggest games.

 

[WantonAbandon]

Well...Nabakov was a disaster in the playoffs. Niemi was never really a top-5 goalie...

Look at the "#2 forwards" on other SC-winning team. Zetterberg, Malkin, Kane, Krejci/Lucic, Carter....Marleau doesn't really fit in with that group. He's on the low-end of that group, at best.

How does Boyle compare to Lidstrom, Gonchar, Keith, Chara, and Doughty? He's maybe better than Gonchar of that group.

Then take Thornton, within the context of his playoff failures...how does he compare with Crosby/Datsyuk/Kopitar/Toews/Bergeron?

You look at those guys, and see that they are either far better than Thornton (Crosby), or just a lot more versatile (even when Thornton had committed to all three zones around 2010). Outside of Crosby, those players are much better three-zone players.

Well... Nabokov put together a few good playoff runs, at least overall; there would always be at least one game where he laid an egg. As for goalies, both Nabokov and Niemi were nominated for the Vezina trophy.

As for defense: Lidstrom was a generational talent and Chara is a step below him. Now there was a time when Boyle could score 16 goals and 57 points, so I think he was very close to Keith.

There was a time when Thornton was comparable to the guys you mention. His playoffs haven't been that bad. And some of those guys you mention, like Crosby for instance, have had dispointing post seasons as well.

Personally I think Marleau is very comparable to Zetteberg. When they have gone at it head to head it they kind of shut eachother down. In the Sharks WCF runs I think Marleau actually won the matchup.

In the end, during their Western Conference appearences, I think the Sharks had completed the cup formula and their "base", as you would call it, was just as good as the Hawks and Canucks, but unfortunetly the Hawks and Canucks had the much better supporting cast.

Spintheblack: Regarding your Kane and Marleau comparisons, you have to at least consider Kane played for the far superior team. That should at least wipe out your points comparison. Regarding Marleau's playoff production, when compared to his regular season production, it is actually quite good.

 

[Quid Pro Clowe]

The team is going to do everything in it's power to give Stalock the starting job. I believe he was thought of when Wilson mentioned youth in key positions. If Stalock struggles, I have no doubt they'll put Niemi in and ride him until he struggles.

Niemi is a decent backup/1b because of the direction the team is going in. He isn't a part of the long-term plans and they want to use these two years to see if Stalock will be.

 

[Irbes Mask]

please elaborate. I'll give you he has experience but that's it IMO. Stalock has a more well rounded game. Nemo can only dream to play the puck like Stalock does. This is a huge advantage to AS and the Sharks.

Nemo is a good goalie but has had a rollercoaster career in SJ. Time to move him and get something in return. Let Nemo backup Stalock until a trade is made.

Just because he has these ad nauseum repeated puck handling skills does not make him more well rounded than Niemi.

Niemi isn't even better than Grosenick/Sateri

Over 40 games with the Sharks and no shutouts. Compared to others that is flat out bad. Shutouts are a gauge of goalie focus and Nemo's third period play is not very flattering either which helps confirm my view. .

Not really. Shutouts are a culmination of many different factors. They're hardly a gauge to a goalie's state of mind.

 

[spintheblackcircle]

Spintheblack: Regarding your Kane and Marleau comparisons, you have to at least consider Kane played for the far superior team. That should at least wipe out your points comparison.

Sharks gave up fewer goals than the Hawks, so that should wipe out Marleau being better defensively, using that logic.

 

[WantonAbandon]

Sharks gave up fewer goals than the Hawks, so that should wipe out Marleau being better defensively, using that logic.

Perhaps, but I never made that point. However I will now. If you glance at how Kane is used, it is pretty easy to infer that Marleau is much better defensively.

Bottom line is Kane came up in the NHL on a far superior team. You have to take that into consideration when comparing stats.

 

[hockeyball]

Perhaps, but I never made that point. However I will now. If you glance at how Kane is used, it is pretty easy to infer that Marleau is much better defensively.

Bottom line is Kane came up in the NHL on a far superior team. You have to take that into consideration when comparing stats.

As one of Marleau's biggest fans I will just say this.

I'd trade him for Patrick Kane so fast Marleau's eyebrows would burst into flames then run around in circles laughing until I passed out.

 

[Kcoyote3]

Kane is 10 years younger and has outscored him since joining the league as an 18 year old. Kane has 53 more points than Marleau in 15 less games. Kane is on the upswing with at least 10 years ahead of him. Also since Kane has entered the league, Marleau goes from .83 PPG in the regular season to .70 PPG and Kane goes from .96PPG in the regular season to .98. He's actually better in the playoffs when TRULY playing better competition.

He is the most clutch player in the NHL, I don't care if the advanced stats people don't believe in clutch. There is a reason the same people play biggest in the biggest games.

That is true. Watching Kane play is invigorating in the playoffs. Still not worth 10.5 million though.

 

[Juxtaposer]

Have we been kidding ourselves this whole time, that Thornton and Marleau are equivalent to those players?

Hasn't that been an issue for the Sharks? For a long time, they've been pretending that Thornton is just as good as the other top centers as the league, that Marleau is just as good as the #2s on the other teams in the league, that Boyle is just as good as those other teams' top defensemen, and that Nabakov and Niemi are just as good as the top goalies in the league.

Amazing. It's truly a skill you have to turn every thread into a "bash Thornton and especially Marleau" thread.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

Amazing. It's truly a skill you have to turn every thread into a "bash Thornton and especially Marleau" thread.

Was just going to say that.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Kane may be better than Marleau now but I wouldn't be so quick to say he was in 2010. He scored 5 more points than Marleau while Marleau scored 13 more goals. There is absolutely no doubt as to who the better defensive forward was then and even if Kane directly contributed to 5 more goals for, I have no doubt Marleau prevented more then 5 goals against. He was better than Kane in 2010 and was easily a #2 forward that you could win with and still is.

I would say Thornton and Marleau were better than Toews and Kane in 2010 but Toews and Kane are better now.

I buy that Thornton, Boyle, Nabokov, Niemi aren't good enough to win with with the roles that they were put in but I don't buy that with Marleau.

 

[Eid Ma Clack Shaw]

Kane and Toews were better than Thornton and Marleau in 2010, and even more so now. They were on a stacked team, but they weren't slouches either. It's tough to say.

Anyway, I doubt Niemi gets moved, though I guess anything is likely.

 

[WantonAbandon]

As one of Marleau's biggest fans I will just say this.

I'd trade him for Patrick Kane so fast Marleau's eyebrows would burst into flames then run around in circles laughing until I passed out.

I'm not sure the comparison is very fair. But it is fair to say that Marleau is much more affordable.

It might be a bit more fair to ask who would you rather have for one season and one season only. I'm not claiming the answer is Marleau.

 

[hockeyball]

I'm not sure the comparison is very fair. But it is fair to say that Marleau is much more affordable.

It might be a bit more fair to ask who would you rather have for one season and one season only. I'm not claiming the answer is Marleau.

Taking price into account is an entire other story.

I would still trade Marleau for Kane in a second because Kane would give us a new franchise player. Normally I wouldn't pay anyone that kind of money, but you need franchise players and once Thornton is gone (even if thats a few years from now) we don't have one to replace him.

 

[WantonAbandon]

Taking price into account is an entire other story.

I would still trade Marleau for Kane in a second because Kane would give us a new franchise player. Normally I wouldn't pay anyone that kind of money, but you need franchise players and once Thornton is gone (even if thats a few years from now) we don't have one to replace him.

Yeah, but you would need better players around Kane. Look goals and points garner the big contracts for good reason. Marleau is the better options in Kane, but of course you can acquire players to fill those roles.

Part of Marleau's value is he is not only cheaper, but he will save a team money in other areas as well.

 

[magic school bus]

Is this really a discussion? Pat Kane plays with **** players like Michal Handzus and still outproduces Marleau.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Is this really a discussion? Pat Kane plays with **** players like Michal Handzus and still outproduces Marleau.

He also plays with Patrick Sharp who is a great player in his own right.

 

[Alwalys]

He is the most clutch player in the NHL, I don't care if the advanced stats people don't believe in clutch. There is a reason the same people play biggest in the biggest games.

Advanced stats people see the reason Kane does what he does -- he gets extremely favorable deployment. Check it out, compare the two. Marleau plays some of the toughest minutes of ANY forward in the league while Kane is flat out sheltered. Marleau is really on another level as a 2-way forward, one of the best in the league if not the best.