LA

On Nov 3, 7:51 am, MS <n....DeleteThis@attbi.com> wrote:

> Don't forget their defensive plan of following the opponent all over
> the ice until he gets a good shot on goal.

LOL! I knew I couldn't understand it! ;-)

Marleau, in today's Mercury News, was quoted as saying "we have to get
a sense of urgency"....

Uh huh. Nice thought. Maybe Wilson should have them hold hands in
the locker room and repeat that, over and over...

I've got news for Patsy. Either you got it, or you don't.
 >> Stay informed about: LA 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: LA 

On Nov 3, 12:30 pm, itsmarkwag... RemoveThis @gmail.com wrote:
> On Nov 3, 7:51 am, MS <n... RemoveThis @attbi.com> wrote:
>
> > Don't forget their defensive plan of following the opponent all over
> > the ice until he gets a good shot on goal.
>
> LOL! I knew I couldn't understand it! ;-)
>
> Marleau, in today's Mercury News, was quoted as saying "we have to get
> a sense of urgency"....
>
> Uh huh. Nice thought. Maybe Wilson should have them hold hands in
> the locker room and repeat that, over and over...
>
> I've got news for Patsy. Either you got it, or you don't.

They can all go curling, again.
 >> Stay informed about: LA 

On Nov 4, 8:08 am, James Farrar <james.s.far... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 06:32:31 -0700, tack <thetac... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> >Firstly, my advice is, if you don't already have it, get Directv's
> >hockey package, so you'll be able to watch early-round playoff games.
> >You probably won't have a local entrant, so that TV package will come
> >in handy.
>
> Well, I've got to hand it to you: you're now bitching after wins as
> well as after losses. (Though I did have to go check "how many the
> Sharks lost by" having seen that you started a thread after the game.)

Perhaps, you should get not only your clocks, but your calendars,
adjusted. I posted this thread after the Sharks were pasted 4-1 at
home by LA.

I did not see last might's win, so I'll leave the post-mortem to you
or others. In any event, IMHO, it changes nothing concerning the
pattern of inconsistency and complacency that's been well
established.
 >> Stay informed about: LA 

On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 06:32:31 -0700, tack <thetacker RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote:

>Firstly, my advice is, if you don't already have it, get Directv's
>hockey package, so you'll be able to watch early-round playoff games.
>You probably won't have a local entrant, so that TV package will come
>in handy.

Well, I've got to hand it to you: you're now bitching after wins as
well as after losses. (Though I did have to go check "how many the
Sharks lost by" having seen that you started a thread after the game.)
 >> Stay informed about: LA 

On Nov 4, 8:20 pm, James Farrar <james.s.far....TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 08:51:14 -0800, tack <thetac....TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Nov 4, 8:08 am, James Farrar <james.s.far....TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 06:32:31 -0700, tack <thetac....TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >Firstly, my advice is, if you don't already have it, get Directv's
> >> >hockey package, so you'll be able to watch early-round playoff games.
> >> >You probably won't have a local entrant, so that TV package will come
> >> >in handy.
>
> >> Well, I've got to hand it to you: you're now bitching after wins as
> >> well as after losses. (Though I did have to go check "how many the
> >> Sharks lost by" having seen that you started a thread after the game.)
>
> >Perhaps, you should get not only your clocks, but your calendars,
> >adjusted. I posted this thread after the Sharks were pasted 4-1 at
> >home by LA.
>
> Ah, that makes more sense. I missed a day's newsgroup access, having
> had a guest Friday night.
>
> This means the other pattern is unchanged: lots of bitching after a
> loss, zero comment after a win. I apologise for my error.

I said I didn't SEE the game, as I indicated. I should comment
nonetheless? (BTW, I've commented on almost every game I've seen this
year. Perhaps, if it seems like too much criticism after too many
losses, that says something about the team's mediocre record and
lackluster play, so far.)

Tell you what, if you have something intelligent to say about the
team's performances, instead of ad hominem attacks on me, personally,
perhaps, you can enlighten and amuse us. (If you can put your pom-
poms aside for a minute, of course.)
 >> Stay informed about: LA 

On Nov 4, 9:47 pm, James Farrar <james.s.far....TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 18:11:40 -0800, tack <thetac....TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Nov 4, 8:20 pm, James Farrar <james.s.far....TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 08:51:14 -0800, tack <thetac....TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >On Nov 4, 8:08 am, James Farrar <james.s.far....TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 06:32:31 -0700, tack <thetac....TakeThisOut@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >Firstly, my advice is, if you don't already have it, get Directv's
> >> >> >hockey package, so you'll be able to watch early-round playoff games.
> >> >> >You probably won't have a local entrant, so that TV package will come
> >> >> >in handy.
>
> >> >> Well, I've got to hand it to you: you're now bitching after wins as
> >> >> well as after losses. (Though I did have to go check "how many the
> >> >> Sharks lost by" having seen that you started a thread after the game.)
>
> >> >Perhaps, you should get not only your clocks, but your calendars,
> >> >adjusted. I posted this thread after the Sharks were pasted 4-1 at
> >> >home by LA.
>
> >> Ah, that makes more sense. I missed a day's newsgroup access, having
> >> had a guest Friday night.
>
> >> This means the other pattern is unchanged: lots of bitching after a
> >> loss, zero comment after a win. I apologise for my error.
>
> >I said I didn't SEE the game, as I indicated. I should comment
> >nonetheless?
>
> That referred to the group as a whole, actually, but I see that I
> didn't actually make that clear.
>
> >Tell you what, if you have something intelligent to say about the
> >team's performances, instead of ad hominem attacks on me, personally,
> >perhaps, you can enlighten and amuse us.
>
> Not worth it, since the end-of-the-world-is-nigh brigade ignores
> anything even slightly positive.
>
> I've also seen only one game this season, due to the slight handicap
> of being in the wrong continent.
>
> >(If you can put your pom-poms aside for a minute, of course.)
>
> You were saying about ad hominem?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

The purpose of a newsgroup is debate and discussion. I think most
posters here, many, who have followed this team for years, try to be
objective about what they observe and offer critiques, as genuine
expressions of frustrations from seeing a pattern of repeated behavior
that ultimately leads to failure for a team that's been picked by many
"experts" for the last two two years to be the Cup winner. They've
looked like anything but, in fact.
 >> Stay informed about: LA 

On 2007-11-04 19:47:55 -0800, tack <thetacker RemoveThis @gmail.com> said:

> On Nov 4, 9:47 pm, James Farrar <james.s.far... RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 18:11:40 -0800, tack <thetac... RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Nov 4, 8:20 pm, James Farrar <james.s.far... RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 08:51:14 -0800, tack <thetac... RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Nov 4, 8:08 am, James Farrar <james.s.far... RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 06:32:31 -0700, tack <thetac... RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Firstly, my advice is, if you don't already have it, get Directv's
>>>>>>> hockey package, so you'll be able to watch early-round playoff games.
>>>>>>> You probably won't have a local entrant, so that TV package will come
>>>>>>> in handy.
>>
>>>>>> Well, I've got to hand it to you: you're now bitching after wins as
>>>>>> well as after losses. (Though I did have to go check "how many the
>>>>>> Sharks lost by" having seen that you started a thread after the game.)
>>
>>>>> Perhaps, you should get not only your clocks, but your calendars,
>>>>> adjusted. I posted this thread after the Sharks were pasted 4-1 at
>>>>> home by LA.
>>
>>>> Ah, that makes more sense. I missed a day's newsgroup access, having
>>>> had a guest Friday night.
>>
>>>> This means the other pattern is unchanged: lots of bitching after a
>>>> loss, zero comment after a win. I apologise for my error.
>>
>>> I said I didn't SEE the game, as I indicated. I should comment
>>> nonetheless?
>>
>> That referred to the group as a whole, actually, but I see that I
>> didn't actually make that clear.
>>
>>> Tell you what, if you have something intelligent to say about the
>>> team's performances, instead of ad hominem attacks on me, personally,
>>> perhaps, you can enlighten and amuse us.
>>
>> Not worth it, since the end-of-the-world-is-nigh brigade ignores
>> anything even slightly positive.
>>
>> I've also seen only one game this season, due to the slight handicap
>> of being in the wrong continent.
>>
>>> (If you can put your pom-poms aside for a minute, of course.)
>>
>> You were saying about ad hominem?- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> The purpose of a newsgroup is debate and discussion. I think most
> posters here, many, who have followed this team for years, try to be
> objective about what they observe and offer critiques, as genuine
> expressions of frustrations from seeing a pattern of repeated behavior
> that ultimately leads to failure for a team that's been picked by many
> "experts" for the last two two years to be the Cup winner. They've
> looked like anything but, in fact.

I wonder if DW or RW reads this newsgroup. They could learn a lot from
our "critiques".
 >> Stay informed about: LA 

On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 08:51:14 -0800, tack <thetacker.RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Nov 4, 8:08 am, James Farrar <james.s.far....RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 06:32:31 -0700, tack <thetac....RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >Firstly, my advice is, if you don't already have it, get Directv's
>> >hockey package, so you'll be able to watch early-round playoff games.
>> >You probably won't have a local entrant, so that TV package will come
>> >in handy.
>>
>> Well, I've got to hand it to you: you're now bitching after wins as
>> well as after losses. (Though I did have to go check "how many the
>> Sharks lost by" having seen that you started a thread after the game.)
>
>Perhaps, you should get not only your clocks, but your calendars,
>adjusted. I posted this thread after the Sharks were pasted 4-1 at
>home by LA.

Ah, that makes more sense. I missed a day's newsgroup access, having
had a guest Friday night.

This means the other pattern is unchanged: lots of bitching after a
loss, zero comment after a win. I apologise for my error.
 >> Stay informed about: LA 

On Nov 5, 12:20 am, "Mr. T" <ted.peder... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 4, 7:47 pm, tack <thetac... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Nov 4, 9:47 pm, James Farrar <james.s.far... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 18:11:40 -0800, tack <thetac... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >On Nov 4, 8:20 pm, James Farrar <james.s.far... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 08:51:14 -0800, tack <thetac... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> >On Nov 4, 8:08 am, James Farrar <james.s.far... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> >> On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 06:32:31 -0700, tack <thetac... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> >> >Firstly, my advice is, if you don't already have it, get Directv's
> > > >> >> >hockey package, so you'll be able to watch early-round playoff games.
> > > >> >> >You probably won't have a local entrant, so that TV package will come
> > > >> >> >in handy.
>
> > > >> >> Well, I've got to hand it to you: you're now bitching after wins as
> > > >> >> well as after losses. (Though I did have to go check "how many the
> > > >> >> Sharks lost by" having seen that you started a thread after the game.)
>
> > > >> >Perhaps, you should get not only your clocks, but your calendars,
> > > >> >adjusted. I posted this thread after the Sharks were pasted 4-1 at
> > > >> >home by LA.
>
> > > >> Ah, that makes more sense. I missed a day's newsgroup access, having
> > > >> had a guest Friday night.
>
> > > >> This means the other pattern is unchanged: lots of bitching after a
> > > >> loss, zero comment after a win. I apologise for my error.
>
> > > >I said I didn't SEE the game, as I indicated. I should comment
> > > >nonetheless?
>
> > > That referred to the group as a whole, actually, but I see that I
> > > didn't actually make that clear.
>
> > > >Tell you what, if you have something intelligent to say about the
> > > >team's performances, instead of ad hominem attacks on me, personally,
> > > >perhaps, you can enlighten and amuse us.
>
> > > Not worth it, since the end-of-the-world-is-nigh brigade ignores
> > > anything even slightly positive.
>
> > > I've also seen only one game this season, due to the slight handicap
> > > of being in the wrong continent.
>
> > > >(If you can put your pom-poms aside for a minute, of course.)
>
> > > You were saying about ad hominem?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > The purpose of a newsgroup is debate and discussion. I think most
> > posters here, many, who have followed this team for years, try to be
> > objective about what they observe and offer critiques, as genuine
> > expressions of frustrations from seeing a pattern of repeated behavior
> > that ultimately leads to failure for a team that's been picked by many
> > "experts" for the last two two years to be the Cup winner. They've
> > looked like anything but, in fact.
>
> Amen bro. Hey I'll chime in that there was a lot to like about the
> first LA game. They did in fact plant a guy in front of the net often.
> For how loudly people in here have been calling for them to do that, I
> would think there would have been some praise (a small nod to James).
> It was one of those strange games where the opponent's goalie did do a
> good job, the Sharks got like a million shots, but yet still they
> could have a million more. Specifically, they still had a lot of
> chances where all that was required was quick low shot on net where
> they missed the net completely.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

The difference between having effective shots, or offense, and just
buzzing around ineffectually (even with lots of shots, statistically)
can be evidenced quickly by watching some other games. It stands out
rather evidently to me, by watching non-Shark contests (where you can
just be an objective observer), how devoid of real shooters and
scorers the Sharks really are. Yes, there are lots of guys who hustle
around and even get open for shots, now and again, but they just bat
them somewhere, not "shoot" them, with control and precision, into the
net. That's what "scorers" do, as opposed to guys who may be big and
fast, but are otherwise lacking in scoring finesse.

If you can't effectively and with reasonable percentage put the
biscuit in the net on open chances and rushes, then it's imperative to
be relentless and bludgeon other teams into submission. When the
Sharks get lured into an open-ice, end-to-end game, it turns out,
ironically, not to be a good thing beause they just don't have the
scoring finesse to bury their chances, and too often the opponents do.

To take advanatge of the Sharks' primary advantage, size, they need to
play much more of a "Philly" game and much less a skate-and-shoot game.
 >> Stay informed about: LA 

On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 18:11:40 -0800, tack <thetacker.DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Nov 4, 8:20 pm, James Farrar <james.s.far....DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 08:51:14 -0800, tack <thetac....DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Nov 4, 8:08 am, James Farrar <james.s.far....DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 06:32:31 -0700, tack <thetac....DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >Firstly, my advice is, if you don't already have it, get Directv's
>> >> >hockey package, so you'll be able to watch early-round playoff games.
>> >> >You probably won't have a local entrant, so that TV package will come
>> >> >in handy.
>>
>> >> Well, I've got to hand it to you: you're now bitching after wins as
>> >> well as after losses. (Though I did have to go check "how many the
>> >> Sharks lost by" having seen that you started a thread after the game.)
>>
>> >Perhaps, you should get not only your clocks, but your calendars,
>> >adjusted. I posted this thread after the Sharks were pasted 4-1 at
>> >home by LA.
>>
>> Ah, that makes more sense. I missed a day's newsgroup access, having
>> had a guest Friday night.
>>
>> This means the other pattern is unchanged: lots of bitching after a
>> loss, zero comment after a win. I apologise for my error.
>
>I said I didn't SEE the game, as I indicated. I should comment
>nonetheless?

That referred to the group as a whole, actually, but I see that I
didn't actually make that clear.

>Tell you what, if you have something intelligent to say about the
>team's performances, instead of ad hominem attacks on me, personally,
>perhaps, you can enlighten and amuse us.

Not worth it, since the end-of-the-world-is-nigh brigade ignores
anything even slightly positive.

I've also seen only one game this season, due to the slight handicap
of being in the wrong continent.

>(If you can put your pom-poms aside for a minute, of course.)

You were saying about ad hominem?
 >> Stay informed about: LA 

On Nov 4, 6:47 pm, James Farrar <james.s.far....DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 18:11:40 -0800, tack <thetac....DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Nov 4, 8:20 pm, James Farrar <james.s.far....DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 08:51:14 -0800, tack <thetac....DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >On Nov 4, 8:08 am, James Farrar <james.s.far....DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 06:32:31 -0700, tack <thetac....DeleteThis@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >Firstly, my advice is, if you don't already have it, get Directv's
> >> >> >hockey package, so you'll be able to watch early-round playoff games.
> >> >> >You probably won't have a local entrant, so that TV package will come
> >> >> >in handy.
>
> >> >> Well, I've got to hand it to you: you're now bitching after wins as
> >> >> well as after losses. (Though I did have to go check "how many the
> >> >> Sharks lost by" having seen that you started a thread after the game.)
>
> >> >Perhaps, you should get not only your clocks, but your calendars,
> >> >adjusted. I posted this thread after the Sharks were pasted 4-1 at
> >> >home by LA.
>
> >> Ah, that makes more sense. I missed a day's newsgroup access, having
> >> had a guest Friday night.
>
> >> This means the other pattern is unchanged: lots of bitching after a
> >> loss, zero comment after a win. I apologise for my error.
>
> >I said I didn't SEE the game, as I indicated. I should comment
> >nonetheless?
>
> That referred to the group as a whole, actually, but I see that I
> didn't actually make that clear.

Please not this again. First it was the Sharks were supposedly flying
high. It was just a couple of grouches in this group trying to rain on
their parade. Eventually it became a player's meetings, and clear to
everyone that the Sharks were struggling, and that the coaches and
players themselves were highly dissatisfied. If nothing else the stats
paint a very clear picture of a highly impotent offense.

Setoguchi is the only player that shoots like he means it, IMO. And
Joe can't do it all, although he's trying.
 >> Stay informed about: LA 

On Nov 4, 7:47 pm, tack <thetac... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 4, 9:47 pm, James Farrar <james.s.far... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 18:11:40 -0800, tack <thetac... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> > >On Nov 4, 8:20 pm, James Farrar <james.s.far... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 08:51:14 -0800, tack <thetac... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >On Nov 4, 8:08 am, James Farrar <james.s.far... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >> On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 06:32:31 -0700, tack <thetac... DeleteThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >> >Firstly, my advice is, if you don't already have it, get Directv's
> > >> >> >hockey package, so you'll be able to watch early-round playoff games.
> > >> >> >You probably won't have a local entrant, so that TV package will come
> > >> >> >in handy.
>
> > >> >> Well, I've got to hand it to you: you're now bitching after wins as
> > >> >> well as after losses. (Though I did have to go check "how many the
> > >> >> Sharks lost by" having seen that you started a thread after the game.)
>
> > >> >Perhaps, you should get not only your clocks, but your calendars,
> > >> >adjusted. I posted this thread after the Sharks were pasted 4-1 at
> > >> >home by LA.
>
> > >> Ah, that makes more sense. I missed a day's newsgroup access, having
> > >> had a guest Friday night.
>
> > >> This means the other pattern is unchanged: lots of bitching after a
> > >> loss, zero comment after a win. I apologise for my error.
>
> > >I said I didn't SEE the game, as I indicated. I should comment
> > >nonetheless?
>
> > That referred to the group as a whole, actually, but I see that I
> > didn't actually make that clear.
>
> > >Tell you what, if you have something intelligent to say about the
> > >team's performances, instead of ad hominem attacks on me, personally,
> > >perhaps, you can enlighten and amuse us.
>
> > Not worth it, since the end-of-the-world-is-nigh brigade ignores
> > anything even slightly positive.
>
> > I've also seen only one game this season, due to the slight handicap
> > of being in the wrong continent.
>
> > >(If you can put your pom-poms aside for a minute, of course.)
>
> > You were saying about ad hominem?- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> The purpose of a newsgroup is debate and discussion. I think most
> posters here, many, who have followed this team for years, try to be
> objective about what they observe and offer critiques, as genuine
> expressions of frustrations from seeing a pattern of repeated behavior
> that ultimately leads to failure for a team that's been picked by many
> "experts" for the last two two years to be the Cup winner. They've
> looked like anything but, in fact.

Amen bro. Hey I'll chime in that there was a lot to like about the
first LA game. They did in fact plant a guy in front of the net often.
For how loudly people in here have been calling for them to do that, I
would think there would have been some praise (a small nod to James).
It was one of those strange games where the opponent's goalie did do a
good job, the Sharks got like a million shots, but yet still they
could have a million more. Specifically, they still had a lot of
chances where all that was required was quick low shot on net where
they missed the net completely.
 >> Stay informed about: LA