LA

On Nov 4, 5:20 pm, James Farrar <james.s.far... RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote:

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

Hi James,

Since you intended that for the group...

When I've "bitched" about the team, I have also included positives.
I'll repeat one, as it still applies...

The Sharks, even given their inconsistent and frustrating performance,
are still in first place. They also have an excellent center, and a
very good goalie.

Why do I complain about them? Because the are certainly
underperforming. Even their GM is publicly stating that. So, what's
the beef? Fact is, I figure as a season ticket holder and fan who
goes back to the days of their first games at the Cow Palace, and
watching probably some 60+ games during the season, I'm allowed my
opinions. Heck, in a literal sense, I've paid for them! ;-)

On Nov 5, 1:50 am, tack <thetac....RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 5, 12:20 am, "Mr. T" <ted.peder....RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Nov 4, 7:47 pm, tack <thetac....RemoveThis@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > 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.
>
> > 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.

Yeah I pretty much agree. The Rocket year for Cheech he had that
snapshot wired to go just under the crossbar almost every single time.
That's the closest they've had to a sniper. Given that, they need to
just try to get the goalie moving, and get some low shots on net and
hope for rebounds. Back to basics. And yes, I agree that could mean a
fundamental shift in what they are trying to become, like you say.
They've been trying to become Detroit, according to DW, maybe they
need to be Philly.