Running Stanley Cup Playoff Thread

The big play I question for the Sharks was Boyle's icing at the end of regulation. Yes, it was a bad call that kept the faceoff in the Sharks' zone instead of the neutral zone. But he hauled off and smacked that thing into next week like he was trying for an icing call. Bad clear.

 

My point exactly. Why isn't there an effort in Game 5 throughout the playoffs? And why is it acceptable? It shouldn't be. Making it to the West finals in back-to-back years is nice, but the idea is not to go to the West finals, it's to win the Stanley Cup.

Just to dismiss it as a "lame goal" misses the point ... what should be asked is, "why are they in a position where they lose on a lame goal?" If the Sharks aren't asking themselves that question at the end of each season, they should be ... and they should also keep asking why their answers keep coming up wrong!

 

They played the President's Trophy winner, but other than that, no real reason I can think of.

 

Sharks got beat by a better team this year. Hasn't always been the case. But with each passing year, they compete harder and pay more attention to the little things.

Heck, there are a lot of teams in all sports that one could claim underachieve. But, again, what can management do? You either get better players (which isn't always easy to do) or get the players you have to play better. I agree they could use another top defenseman, but who couldn't?

When I look at the rosters, Vancouver really surprises me. They don't get much from their third and fourth lines -- Hansen, Raymond, Glass, Higgins, Torres, and others who names escape me. And their defense seems to get a lot of hype in the media, but aside from Hamhuis, strike me as very average.

 

I'm not dismissing the goal as simply a lame one. I agree that they should not be in that position.

What I did like is the Sharks finally got defensive. Now, that should not have taken that long, they should have been playing this way the whole series.

 

They don't have good enough players.

Thornton and Marleau are among the top 10 duos in the league but, forget their playoff reputation, they simply are no match in skill level for the Sedins (or, last year, for Toews and Kane). Douglas Murray is a big body and big hitter but can't move the puck the way a top-tier defenseman should. The Sharks have a scrappy, gritty second-line center in Couture (or Pavelski last night) while the Canucks have an all-world animal in Ryan Kesler. Heatley was the guy the Sharks traded for for about three months and then has been little more than a spare part since the 2010 Olympics. Niemi rode a hot streak last year but, in the 18 games of the playoffs, was mediocre or worse in well over half of them.

It is a roster built to go deep into the playoffs, but it isn't nearly as talented a roster as the Sharks would have you believe. Vancouver just flat skated past them so many times in this series.

 

Do you give this head coach and talent core (Thornton, Marleau, etc.) another year to get it done before you give up and start over? Two more years?

The Sharks have become to the NHL what the Andy Reid-era Philadelphia Eagles are to the NFL - good enough to do everything....except win the big one. I know the belief that if you keep putting yourself in position to win the big one every year, eventually the breaks are bound to go your way. But at what point, after repeatedly trying the same thing and failing, do you radically change things, even if it means going back a few steps?

 

You give them until 2014 because Thornton, Marleau and Heatley have no-trade clauses and you can't do anything about it. So you get used to these kinds of finishes, because there isn't the cap room to bring in a difference-maker once those guys are accounted for. They had a chance to change up the mix when Marleau was a free agent last season, but they brought him back, so it's Ride Or Die with this core.

 

Exactly my point, and great comparison to the Eagles. (At least Philly made a Super Bowl; Sharks haven't seen the Finals yet.) It makes you wonder what their deal is. They have talent and superstars and a coach who won a Stanley Cup (as an assistant). I mean, conference finals are nice but over time your fans expect you to get over that hump. They struggled against an LA team missing its best player, almost let Detroit win four in a row and then lost every winnable game in the Vancouver series. There has to be something going on chemistry-wise or the team does not have that "mental toughness" people like to talk about. Thornton, Marleau, Heatley aren't getting any younger. Neither is Boyle.

 

The Sharks just have to reload on the blueline; get some quality stay at home defensemen who can clear the defensive zone better than Murray, Vlasic, Wallin, White. Every team they played had better defensemen than the Sharks.

In many respects the Sharks have become the Wings but without the Cup victory. Remember, up until the late 90's, Stevie Y had not won yet. Then after a couple, there were deep runs but a lot of empty seasons until '08 & '09.

I think patience more than "blow them up." Thornton became a real leader this year, which was an improvement. They've got good young forwards, the problem has been the defense.

 

The Eagles comparison ... this I can understand. And it makes the most sense. I won't pretend to know enough about hockey to pinpoint exactly why this keeps happening to San Jose, there are times the parts don't add up to the whole. And there are times the other team is better and you have to tip your hat to them, you still wonder why they keep falling short.

Major shakeup? Again, I'll defer to those with deeper knowledge of the game. But after falling short in back-to-back years, some changes wouldn't be surprising.