What the hell is going on with the Sharks?

[joe dirte]

You really should wait until at least 5% of the season is played to bring up how people thought your prediction was dumb.

Yup. I'll be calling it all year.

 

[joe dirte]

You are likely still going to be called an idiot for that...

As for the thread: two loses in 3 games? Has any team ever been able to rebound from that before!?

I'm not talking about wins and losses.

 

[member 157595]

Curse of Melnyk.

Ate Karlsson’s liver before he left.

As I pondered this, I started to realize it's not that unrealistic.

 

[Dominance]

I thought from the moment they got Karlsson that it was weird that they were the team had traded for him, and that San Jose still wouldn’t be good enough. Sure, it’s early, but this team is gone in the first two rounds of the playoffs for sure. They already had a great defense and a guy who basically did everything that Karlsson brings in Burns, and now those two will be deferring to each other and not dominating huge amounts of game time as they have done so excellently in the past. And their forward lineup is still just okay. Worse, even, than last year, depending on how much one appreciated what Tierney brought.

San Jose bent Ottawa over in the trade, but it won’t do much for them. I can’t see Karlsson resigning with a team clearly aging and nearing a significant downswing, either.

 

[spintheblackcircle]

On the Sharks board, when someone said we should try to trade for EK I said "no they shouldn't. No freaking way. " Primarily because of the cost they would have to give up for him. Now when I saw what they actually gave up, I was a little happier about it. But I still think he is a redundancy. Right now everybody is waiting for someone else to do something. Nobody's actually doing.

 

[Zegs2sendhelp]

Its okay... you guys can take it easy until we get healthy ^.^

 

[glovesave_35]

I haven't watched them enough to comment with much insight. But, I do think San Jose's PP this year will be a great test for the theory that teams should pretty much always run a 4F-1D PP. Nashville is the team that does it the most, and they are generally a middle of the pack PP team. Most of the ones that have been elite over the past couple years run a 4f-1d set up like Pitt, Toronto, Tampa, Washington, and Tampa who are the top 5 PP's in the NHL during the 2016-17 and 2017-18 seasons when combined.

Nashville is one of the only teams that I can think of that constantly runs the 3f-2d set-up, and despite having elite talent, are only the 12th best PP over the past 2 years (11 if you remove Vegas).

Now, Karlsson and Burns are arguably the two best offensive defencemen in the league (it might not be much of an argument). So it will be interesting to see how this PP does, and whether it can be a top 5 or top 10 unit. Now, I know PP's can be erratic, so its a bit unfair to go off of one-season of data and draw too much of a conclusion, but I do think it has some interest as a test case.

I think it really depends on the ponies you have. If you are stacked up front and one guy can properly accentuate the point play, then it can definitely work.

In the case of SJ you have two of the best offensive defensemen in the world. And one of them used to be a forward. I don't know how much we can truly learn from them regarding what you're after.

 

[nbwingsfan]

I thought from the moment they got Karlsson that it was weird that they were the team had traded for him, and that San Jose still wouldn’t be good enough. Sure, it’s early, but this team is gone in the first two rounds of the playoffs for sure. They already had a great defense and a guy who basically did everything that Karlsson brings in Burns, and now those two will be deferring to each other and not dominating huge amounts of game time as they have done so excellently in the past. And their forward lineup is still just okay. Worse, even, than last year, depending on how much one appreciated what Tierney brought.

San Jose bent Ottawa over in the trade, but it won’t do much for them. I can’t see Karlsson resigning with a team clearly aging and nearing a significant downswing, either.

No way their offense is worse when even as a D, Karlsson brings in twice as much offense as Tierny.

 

[aufheben]

I love this time of year.

RIP Flyers

 

[Clode]

Its been 3 games. Remember how Winnipeg started last year? Or Boston? If they are still playing like this in the middle of November then I would start asking questions.

 

[Dominance]

No way their offense is worse when even as a D, Karlsson brings in twice as much offense as Tierny.

Burns already performed that role. Just because Karlsson is also a 70+ point scorer doesn’t mean he’s going to create an additional 70 goals. Not even remotely close.

 

[PatrikBerglund]

SJ has a great D-line, but an underwhelming and ageing (or too young to be able to contribute enough) group of forwards + a severely overrated goalie.

I predict a long season and possibly being a bubble team at best.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

In my humble opinion, the Sharks are pretenders and Karlsson is lipstick on a pig.

Their core is getting old. Thornton, Burns, Pavelski, Vlasic are all on the wrong side of 30. The clock is ticking on their effectiveness big time.

Couture, Kane, and Hertl aren't good enough to carry the offense.

Who knows if Karlsson will be back next year.

Come January everyone will know it's time for them to re-build.

Vlasic is 31 years old, how is that the wrong side of 30?
Burns is 33 and is still very productive.
Agreed with Pavelski declining and Thornton retiring, though.

I think they have a window of 2-3 years or so while Vlasic, Burns, and Couture are still productive. Then they better hope their younger players like Meier can step up and their prospects like Merkley pan out.

 

[nbwingsfan]

Burns already performed that role. Just because Karlsson is also a 70+ point scorer doesn’t mean he’s going to create an additional 70 goals. Not even remotely close.

That's some strange logic there.

So Toronto isn't going to have a better offense by adding a PPG C because they already had a PPG C in that same role?
I never said they're going to add another 70 goals. They traded a 70pt player for a 30-40pt player. That's still an increase regardless of "roles".

 

[Paperbagofglory]

They are going to win the cup, this is going to be a hilarious bump.

Almost every top team from last year got older or worse depth wise. The Sharks added a generational offensive defenseman to their core without changing much from their team who have a legit number 1 started, good forwards and 2 allstars on their back end.

Who in the Western conference actually got better? Its the team with Karlsson i imagine.

 

[93LEAFS]

I think it really depends on the ponies you have. If you are stacked up front and one guy can properly accentuate the point play, then it can definitely work.

In the case of SJ you have two of the best offensive defensemen in the world. And one of them used to be a forward. I don't know how much we can truly learn from them regarding what you're after.

Well that’s what sort of makes it interesting. If a PP that uses to of the best offensive D in the league finishes middle of the pack it raises interesting questions.

 

[Dominance]

That's some strange logic there.

So Toronto isn't going to have a better offense by adding a PPG C because they already had a PPG C in that same role?
I never said they're going to add another 70 goals. They traded a 70pt player for a 30-40pt player. That's still an increase regardless of "roles".

It’s a difficult topic; I definitely see your point, and it’s valid. I’d argue that the increase will be minimized by the fact that a significant portion of what Karlsson creates - even 10 of the “extra” 30 points - might have otherwise been produced by Burns, and on the power play and such, they might be factoring together into plays that Burns could have created on his own. I know I’m not being very clear, but do you understand what I’m trying to get at?

Of course, Karlsson is a big improvement. There’s no doubting that, at both ends of the ice. I just don’t think it was an improvement the Sharks badly needed, or one large enough to really change the course of the otherwise almost identical team.

 

[Fire Benning]

Their PP setup is trash, they have no one set up for one-timers for some reason, they have the talent to do it.

They've also only played 3 games, I reckon they'll still be fine. We'll revisit this after 20 games.

 

[supsens]

That's some strange logic there.

So Toronto isn't going to have a better offense by adding a PPG C because they already had a PPG C in that same role?
I never said they're going to add another 70 goals. They traded a 70pt player for a 30-40pt player. That's still an increase regardless of "roles".

Tierny looks like a fairly solid player, with more ice time and PP time I think he is looking at 50 points this year. But he isn't Ek thats for sure.

 

[GrantLemons]

Vlasic is 31 years old, how is that the wrong side of 30?
Burns is 33 and is still very productive.
Agreed with Pavelski declining and Thornton retiring, though.

I think they have a window of 2-3 years or so while Vlasic, Burns, and Couture are still productive. Then they better hope their younger players like Meier can step up and their prospects like Merkley pan out.

I mean, the wrong side of 30 means over 30. Last I checked 31 > 30. That's not to say Vlasic can't still be a great player, but the point of the statement "wrong side of 30" means that their best days are likely behind them.

I agree they'll be good for another 2-3 years, though I'm not sure they'll have a window for that long, especially if EK walks and/or Jumbo retires after this season.

I think their window could be as small as just this season.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

I mean, the wrong side of 30 means over 30. Last I checked 31 > 30. That's not to say Vlasic can't still be a great player, but the point of the statement "wrong side of 30" means that their best days are likely behind them.

I agree they'll be good for another 2-3 years, though I'm not sure they'll have a window for that long, especially if EK walks and/or Jumbo retires after this season.

I think their window could be as small as just this season.

Ah that's fair, I thought it might mean declining in your 30s which only applies to some players. Some players even peak after 30 (Sedins).

 

[izzy]

Vlasic is 31 years old, how is that the wrong side of 30?
Burns is 33 and is still very productive.
Agreed with Pavelski declining and Thornton retiring, though.

I think they have a window of 2-3 years or so while Vlasic, Burns, and Couture are still productive. Then they better hope their younger players like Meier can step up and their prospects like Merkley pan out.

the wrong side of 30 would he anything after 30

not confusing lol

 

[EdmFlyersfan]

Country Club atmosphere...

 

[Stephen]

In my humble opinion, the Sharks are pretenders and Karlsson is lipstick on a pig.

Their core is getting old. Thornton, Burns, Pavelski, Vlasic are all on the wrong side of 30. The clock is ticking on their effectiveness big time.

Couture, Kane, and Hertl aren't good enough to carry the offense.

Who knows if Karlsson will be back next year.

Come January everyone will know it's time for them to re-build.

I agree. I've been looking at that Sharks roster for a couple of years and think they are due for a Detroit/Vancouver style regression. Karlsson was a big veteran add but kind of not at the position of greatest need (center).

 

[Used As A Shield]

They are ugly!

And Spott coaching the powerplay is bad.