Speculation: When is a rebuild not a rebuild?

[OrrNumber4]

Guess we just have different definitions of versatility. When I think of versatility, I think of a player who can fit into any role given that line's need. So think of a player like Marleau or Pavelski.
Wingels works on any line, but only if his role stays the same; ie asking him to the primary playmaker won't turn out well.

Marleau isn't versatile. Marleau can thrive in a fast-paced, North-South game where he is the primary goal-scorer. He doesn't thrive in a checking, tight game. He's not a playmaker (at all!). He isn't a great forechecker, good on the boards, great in front of the net, or a notable stick-handler.

Pavelski lacks speed. He isn't a good forechecker and doesn't have the size to battle it out in front.

Wingels might not have the talent of either player. But he doesn't have a glaring weakness in his game...he just doesn't have any game-breaking abilities like Marleau or Thornton. What he does have is skill after skill to fall back on...

 

[Kitten Mittons]

I don't think Pavelski is a good playoff performer. He's just as useless as everyone else is when they're losing. If they're winning and he's hot? Sure, he's great.

Playoff performer crap is bs anyway.

 

[WTFetus]

Marleau isn't versatile. Marleau can thrive in a fast-paced, North-South game where he is the primary goal-scorer. He doesn't thrive in a checking, tight game. He's not a playmaker (at all!). He isn't a great forechecker, good on the boards, great in front of the net, or a notable stick-handler.

Pavelski lacks speed. He isn't a good forechecker and doesn't have the size to battle it out in front.

Wingels might not have the talent of either player. But he doesn't have a glaring weakness in his game...he just doesn't have any game-breaking abilities like Marleau or Thornton. What he does have is skill after skill to fall back on...

I just disagree on pretty much everything...

Marleau is an excellent forechecker and a very underrated passer. Pavelski may not have size, but he's probably the best at getting loose pucks in front of the net (Hertl seems to be closing that gap).

Wingels may not have any weaknesses per se, but because he doesn't have the talent level of say Marleau, for the number of qualities he does have, a lot of them aren't good enough. Again, as long as his role stays the same, he'll be great on any line. But if you ask him to be that line's puckhandler, playmaker, cycler, etc, I don't think he'd do that well. For pretty much everything you criticized Marleau for, you could say the same for Wingels (except forechecking which they're both good at).

 

[Kitten Mittons]

My problem with Wingels is that he often forgets that he actual skill. Maybe playing on the 4th line so much, he is conditioned to a simple game. Seems to happen with a lot of our prospects that aren't selected in the 1st round.

 

[WantonAbandon]

Marleau isn't versatile. Marleau can thrive in a fast-paced, North-South game where he is the primary goal-scorer. He doesn't thrive in a checking, tight game. He's not a playmaker (at all!). He isn't a great forechecker, good on the boards, great in front of the net, or a notable stick-handler.

.

Marleau thrived in a tight checking system for years. Perhaps most of his career. Marleau is a fantastic forechecker. He is also a really good playmaker.
I don't know who you have been watching.

 

[OrrNumber4]

I just disagree on pretty much everything...

Marleau is an excellent forechecker and a very underrated passer. Pavelski may not have size, but he's probably the best at getting loose pucks in front of the net (Hertl seems to be closing that gap).

Wingels may not have any weaknesses per se, but because he doesn't have the talent level of say Marleau, for the number of qualities he does have, a lot of them aren't good enough. Again, as long as his role stays the same, he'll be great on any line. But if you ask him to be that line's puckhandler, playmaker, cycler, etc, I don't think he'd do that well. For pretty much everything you criticized Marleau for, you could say the same for Wingels (except forechecking which they're both good at).

Agree to disagree on the forechecking. So often Marleau is the third guy high, he doesn't even forecheck...

Playmaker? Really? Marleau can't hit the broadside of a barn with his passes.

Remember that whole bit about scoring in the final 3 games of series? Marleau has 14 assists in 60 games...

Wingels doesn't have the talent, that is true. But I think he could complement anybody.

Marleau thrived in a tight checking system for years. Perhaps most of his career. Marleau is a fantastic forechecker. He is also a really good playmaker.
I don't know who you have been watching.

Thrived? It wasn't until Ron Wilson and the new rules opened things up that Marleau started to thrive. When Ron Wilson went back to that system...well, we all remember what happened that year.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Marleau thrived in a tight checking system for years. Perhaps most of his career. Marleau is a fantastic forechecker. He is also a really good playmaker.
I don't know who you have been watching.

I really don't know either at this point. He has his flaws and you can bring them up, but, those aren't his flaws.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Agree to disagree on the forechecking. So often Marleau is the third guy high, he doesn't even forecheck...

Playmaker? Really? Marleau can't hit the broadside of a barn with his passes.

Remember that whole bit about scoring in the final 3 games of series? Marleau has 14 assists in 60 games...

Wingels doesn't have the talent, that is true. But I think he could complement anybody.



Thrived? It wasn't until Ron Wilson and the new rules opened things up that Marleau started to thrive. When Ron Wilson went back to that system...well, we all remember what happened that year.

Your assessment skills are certainly questionable. He may often be 3rd man high these days but he has spent many years being the forechecker and done well. A guy of Marleau's skills is not one you want to be forechecking if you can afford it.

As for playmaker, he is certainly underrated if you say he can't hit the broadside of a barn with his passes. The guy is just in the top 150 all time in assists.

How one defines thrived is relative. Considering the circumstances of his first six years where he scored 20 goals a year in a dead puck, dead coach era, I would say he thrived relative to his peers. And RW didn't ever go back to that system so that point you think you had isn't really there. Marleau just sucked that year.

 

[hohosaregood]

This just seems like a bizarre assessment of Marleau. He's a fine playmaker and forechecker. Hell, if you went off that F1, F2, F3 thing that Easy always talks about, Marleau is usually the F1(forechecker), Nieto/Havlat did the whole F2 playmaking thing and Couture was the F3 in his scenarios. Not to mention the fact that he does have pretty consistent assist numbers throughout his career and the fact that Couture scores goals at a higher rate than him at EV the last two years.

 

[Mattb124]

Playmaker? Really? Marleau can't hit the broadside of a barn with his passes.

That makes his 37 assists last season (good for 3rd on the team behind Thornton and Pavelski, and 36th in the NHL amongst forwards) all the more impressive.

 

[Mafoofoo]

That makes his 37 assists last season (good for 3rd on the team behind Thornton and Pavelski, and 36th in the NHL amongst forwards) all the more impressive.

They were all shots he took that someone tipped.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

They were all shots he took that someone tipped.

Actually, they were all like my primary assist on Thornton's series winner all those years ago against the Kings...I just kick it over on accident...all the time.

 

[vilpertti]

Marleau isn't ... good on the boards

You mean, like HFBoards? Yeah, he's quite invisible here.

In the rink, though, he's an effective player "on the boards".

 

[WantonAbandon]

Thrived? It wasn't until Ron Wilson and the new rules opened things up that Marleau started to thrive. When Ron Wilson went back to that system...well, we all remember what happened that year.

Ron Wilson was just as risk adverse. He did not open things up. Yes, the new rules helped Marleau. But so did better team mates and age, much more so.

 

[Nolan11]

Now that dust has settled from the draft, who even has room + need for our stars? I'm at a bit of a loss in coming up with one decent proposal now. Any ideas out there?

 

[Coily]

Now that dust has settled from the draft, who even has room + need for our stars? I'm at a bit of a loss in coming up with one decent proposal now. Any ideas out there?

We're not trading our "stars".

 

[Nolan11]

We're not trading our "stars".

Kinda my point. I can't think of a reasonable win-win scenario at the moment that has any of our top six centers heading to another team. Hard to rebuild without doing anything.

 

[Coily]

Kinda my point. I can't think of a reasonable win-win scenario at the moment that has any of our top six centers heading to another team. Hard to rebuild without doing anything.

The Sharks aren't rebuilding.

 

[Nolan11]

The Sharks aren't rebuilding.

So what are they doing?

 

[Juxtaposer]

So what are they doing?

Absolutely nothing.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Absolutely nothing.

Not true...they're thuggin' it up. They're starting their slow descent into mediocrity.

 

[Bowie22]

So what are they doing?

Saving $$$, so Plattner can buy more golf courses to use as team training facilities.

 

[Coily]

Not true...they're thuggin' it up. They're starting their slow descent into mediocrity.

1 player = thuggin' it up.....

Anyways the Sharks are going younger where they can and are trying to change the culture of the team.

Take that for what you want, bottom line is they are getting younger, spending less, and content with staying a playoff team while doing so.

 

[Clarkington III]

I still think it's a standoff between DW and Thornton/Marleau/(to a lesser extent and down the road) Pavelski.

DW is willing to burn a year (take a step back), to see what he has in the pipeline, grow the younger players, grab a higher 2015 draft slot and hopefully pick up a couple more 2015 firsts between the rumored players.

If Thornton/Marleau want a cup, they waive for somewhere else for a better chance to win the cup, then I wouldn't want them here to be an influence on future core members. Pavelski is still young enough to be productive but I'd love to get max value in a step backward.

 

[Irbes Mask]

1 player = thuggin' it up.....

Anyways the Sharks are going younger where they can and are trying to change the culture of the team.

Take that for what you want, bottom line is they are getting younger, spending less, and content with staying a playoff team while doing so.

But Mike Brown! Jon Scott! AHL Scrub guy! It's the Santa Clara Street Bullies!