The Sharks, Again, Need To Look In The Mirror

With new coaching leadership coming in, apparently from the puck-
possession school, the Sharks need to examine who they really want to
be and how they're going to get there. This is a team in no-man's
land, neither an effective puck possession team nor one capable of
pulverizing opponents deep in their own end. And, for either school,
they lack enough talented shooters/scorers.

Personally, I have always favored the Detroit-style puck-possession
game. If the other guys don't have it, they can't score, no matter
what part of the ice you're on. That's the best plan, no question.

However --and, a huge however-- no puck-possession team is going to be
particularly effective playing 41 games on the Tank's jumping-bean
mush pile. Either ownership, management and engineering needs to get
realistic about producing better ice and lowering in-rink air
temperatures, or they might as well forget the folly of building a
skating, puck-possession team. Absent huge change in ice quality,
they'd be better off just getting a big, mean team and taking no
prisoners. (Of course, in the new "kinder, gentler" NHL, this is
problematic, too, at least until you get to the playoffs, but, that's
where it matters, right?)

So, before we sign, trade or draft, somebody has to ask themselves
serious questions about what kind of team can really be effective in
the environment that management expects to deliver. Not matching one
to the other will result in a wasted effort.

On Jun 19, 7:38 am, tack <thetac... RemoveThis @gmail.com> wrote:
> With new coaching leadership coming in, apparently from the puck-
> possession school, the Sharks need to examine who they really want to
> be and how they're going to get there.  This is a team in no-man's
> land, neither an effective puck possession team nor one capable of
> pulverizing opponents deep in their own end.  And, for either school,
> they lack enough talented shooters/scorers.
>
> Personally, I have always favored the Detroit-style puck-possession
> game.  If the other guys don't have it, they can't score, no matter
> what part of the ice you're on.  That's the best plan, no question.
>
> However --and, a huge however-- no puck-possession team is going to be
> particularly effective playing 41 games on the Tank's jumping-bean
> mush pile.  Either ownership, management and engineering needs to get
> realistic about producing better ice and lowering in-rink air
> temperatures, or they might as well forget the folly of building a
> skating, puck-possession team.  Absent huge change in ice quality,
> they'd be better off just getting a big, mean team and taking no
> prisoners.  (Of course, in the new "kinder, gentler" NHL, this is
> problematic, too, at least until you get to the playoffs, but, that's
> where it matters, right?)
>
> So, before we sign, trade or draft, somebody has to ask themselves
> serious questions about what kind of team can really be effective in
> the environment that management expects to deliver.  Not matching one
> to the other will result in a wasted effort.

The Sharks are about a hundred miles from being a mean team, so that's
a 5 year plan if you go that route. I'll give Murray and Clowe some
points for mean, and McLaren, if he can revive himself. Beyond that
there isn't anyone who puts any fear into anyone, unless you consider
Shelley a useful player as well.