I didn't post after Game 3, although I probably should have. That was a game where the Sharks outplayed the Avs from start to finish and got beat because Craig Anderson stood on his head all game, and the Sharks made a mistake in overtime.
The Sharks win 9 times out of 10 if they play like that. If they play the same tonight, they should win.
We'll see how it all goes.
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Friday, April 16, 2010
Holy @#%^, the Sharks Win!
That's not a typo. The Sharks won it! They still have a chance in the series. The Sharks did play their game for the majority of the game. They were physical, they controlled the puck, and they punished the smaller but faster Avs team.
The win covers up a lot, but it doesn't change the fact that Nabokov is going to have to step up his game by about 100% for the Sharks to take the series. Anderson let in 6 goals, but faced 46 shots and, by my count, didn't give up any cheap ones. On the other hand, Nabokov let in 5 on 22 shots. Maybe, MAYBE, 3 of them were legitimate.
In any case, it's a win, and the Sharks have the momentum going back to Colorado. The Avs had to feel like the game was theirs to win; all the breaks went their way, and they were 30 seconds away from taking it. Anderson couldn't have played any better, and Nabakov couldn't have played any worse. But, the series goes back now tied, with nobody in control, but the momentum pointing the Sharks direction. I think that the series hinges on the first playoff game in Colorado. Whoever wins that game should take it.
Hopefully, I'll actually be able to watch the game.
On a side note, Versus just went from Hockey, to Whacked Out Sports. Yay Versus!
The win covers up a lot, but it doesn't change the fact that Nabokov is going to have to step up his game by about 100% for the Sharks to take the series. Anderson let in 6 goals, but faced 46 shots and, by my count, didn't give up any cheap ones. On the other hand, Nabokov let in 5 on 22 shots. Maybe, MAYBE, 3 of them were legitimate.
In any case, it's a win, and the Sharks have the momentum going back to Colorado. The Avs had to feel like the game was theirs to win; all the breaks went their way, and they were 30 seconds away from taking it. Anderson couldn't have played any better, and Nabakov couldn't have played any worse. But, the series goes back now tied, with nobody in control, but the momentum pointing the Sharks direction. I think that the series hinges on the first playoff game in Colorado. Whoever wins that game should take it.
Hopefully, I'll actually be able to watch the game.
On a side note, Versus just went from Hockey, to Whacked Out Sports. Yay Versus!
NHL Playoffs Abomination
So, I should start off by apologizing for essentially abandoning this blog after getting it started with the other authors. That is, if there is actually anyone reading this or checking on it. But, I digress.....
During the Olympics there was a lot of talk about the NHL gaining fans because of the quality of Olympic hockey play. That was a fantastic thought, but I said at the time that it wouldn't actually happen. Part of the problem was that hockey was buried on CNBC or MSNBC, which meant that people wouldn't have the opportunity to see it, even if the ratings and interest was up overall. The only Olympic hockey that actually made it onto NBC were the finals, which was great, but not good enough to actually launch some additional interest in the NHL. The country got interested in hockey for the time it took for the US to play Canada in the finals, and then promptly forgot about it and went back to talking about the hot Canadian curler.
But the larger problem that nobody was talking about was the fact that NBC was burying hockey for a reason. THEY KNEW WHAT PEOPLE WANTED TO SEE AND IT WASN'T HOCKEY! It's an easy argument to make that hockey was on the secondary networks and therefore there wasn't any viewership, but I guarantee you that NBC would have been responsive enough to the viewership to move the games onto the major networks if there had been the call for it. The reality is there just wasn't the overall interest in hockey.
But, for the sake of argument, lets say that I'm completely wrong, and that NBC screwed up in a major way, and that Hockey was underexposed during the Olympics and that people were genuinely interested. That moves me on to the actual reason for the post.
The NHL should be embarrassed that they can't manage to get national broadcasts for the playoffs. The NHL can blame it on whomever they want but the reality is that the NHL turned down ESPN's offer after the lockout and decided to go with Versus, which was something else at the time. The fact that I can't even remember what the hell the network was should say enough. But, now, I'm forced to find alternative means to try and watch the game because I live outside of broadcast area for the Sharks game. That's unacceptable! How does the NHL expect to gain fans when they can't manage to have national broadcasts for their product? Playoff hockey is fantastic -- the on ice product is amazing and, in my opinion, doesn't need to be messed with, but how does the league expect to remain viable if they don't have anyone broadcast their games?
I think the first thing that they need to do is get out from under the contract they signed with Versus. When I've actually been able to watch, the national broadcasts from the network are awful, the announcers are terrible, and it's clear that they don't know how to maximize the tension and passion that are the NHL playoffs. The next thing that they need to do is realize that in order to get the best of their product on national television, they may have to sign a short term contract that isn't incredibly advantageous to the NHL. That's fine, do it so that more people actually get to watch the games.
Speaking of watching the games, I'm watching the end of the Detroit, Phoenix game on Versus. There's 50 seconds left and Detroit is up by 3. Yet, for some reason, Versus hasn't pulled away from the game yet, when there's 15 minutes left in a one goal Shark game. This is unbelievable. This network has to be run by idiots, or Detroit fans. Has there ever been a game that had 3 goals scored in 20 seconds?
Final horn, and they go to break while the game is still being played in San Jose. Versus has to be one of the worst run networks on the planet. I'm pretty sure Versus is where all the failed GM's and everybody who's ever been involved in running the Warriors go to when they are fired from every job that'll have them . Pretty soon, Versus will be hiring Matt Millen to get the best on air talent. It's only a matter of time before Charles Rodgers becomes an announcer for Versus hockey.
Now they are in studio, and the game is being played in San Jose, but they are summing up the Detriot game. Fantastic choice, what we all want to see are poorly run replays from a game we just watched, rather than the 1 seed playing from behind.
Also, on a separate note, Nabakov is awful in the playoffs. Is there anyone who inspires less confidence than him in the playoffs? I'm convinced that he's going to give it away the game and I have to believe that the Sharks players think the exact same thing. Do they have any confidence in him at this point? Do they think that for a second they're going to win because of him when it counts? Or do you think that they know that if they're to win, it's going to be despite of Nabakov. Nabakov has given up 5 goals on 18 shots. 18 shots! He's been terrible. I'd feel more comfortable with Greiss in the net and I bet the Sharks would too. As an admittedly novice hockey fan, it's clear that success in the playoffs depends on the play of the goalies. Nabakov cannot step up and make plays when it's necessary. He's a choke artist. He was awful when it mattered in the Olympics, and he's awful in the playoffs.
If they win tonight, it's possible they make it out of the first round. But do you really believe Nabakov will play well in Colorado with the series on the line?
During the Olympics there was a lot of talk about the NHL gaining fans because of the quality of Olympic hockey play. That was a fantastic thought, but I said at the time that it wouldn't actually happen. Part of the problem was that hockey was buried on CNBC or MSNBC, which meant that people wouldn't have the opportunity to see it, even if the ratings and interest was up overall. The only Olympic hockey that actually made it onto NBC were the finals, which was great, but not good enough to actually launch some additional interest in the NHL. The country got interested in hockey for the time it took for the US to play Canada in the finals, and then promptly forgot about it and went back to talking about the hot Canadian curler.
But the larger problem that nobody was talking about was the fact that NBC was burying hockey for a reason. THEY KNEW WHAT PEOPLE WANTED TO SEE AND IT WASN'T HOCKEY! It's an easy argument to make that hockey was on the secondary networks and therefore there wasn't any viewership, but I guarantee you that NBC would have been responsive enough to the viewership to move the games onto the major networks if there had been the call for it. The reality is there just wasn't the overall interest in hockey.
But, for the sake of argument, lets say that I'm completely wrong, and that NBC screwed up in a major way, and that Hockey was underexposed during the Olympics and that people were genuinely interested. That moves me on to the actual reason for the post.
The NHL should be embarrassed that they can't manage to get national broadcasts for the playoffs. The NHL can blame it on whomever they want but the reality is that the NHL turned down ESPN's offer after the lockout and decided to go with Versus, which was something else at the time. The fact that I can't even remember what the hell the network was should say enough. But, now, I'm forced to find alternative means to try and watch the game because I live outside of broadcast area for the Sharks game. That's unacceptable! How does the NHL expect to gain fans when they can't manage to have national broadcasts for their product? Playoff hockey is fantastic -- the on ice product is amazing and, in my opinion, doesn't need to be messed with, but how does the league expect to remain viable if they don't have anyone broadcast their games?
I think the first thing that they need to do is get out from under the contract they signed with Versus. When I've actually been able to watch, the national broadcasts from the network are awful, the announcers are terrible, and it's clear that they don't know how to maximize the tension and passion that are the NHL playoffs. The next thing that they need to do is realize that in order to get the best of their product on national television, they may have to sign a short term contract that isn't incredibly advantageous to the NHL. That's fine, do it so that more people actually get to watch the games.
Speaking of watching the games, I'm watching the end of the Detroit, Phoenix game on Versus. There's 50 seconds left and Detroit is up by 3. Yet, for some reason, Versus hasn't pulled away from the game yet, when there's 15 minutes left in a one goal Shark game. This is unbelievable. This network has to be run by idiots, or Detroit fans. Has there ever been a game that had 3 goals scored in 20 seconds?
Final horn, and they go to break while the game is still being played in San Jose. Versus has to be one of the worst run networks on the planet. I'm pretty sure Versus is where all the failed GM's and everybody who's ever been involved in running the Warriors go to when they are fired from every job that'll have them . Pretty soon, Versus will be hiring Matt Millen to get the best on air talent. It's only a matter of time before Charles Rodgers becomes an announcer for Versus hockey.
Now they are in studio, and the game is being played in San Jose, but they are summing up the Detriot game. Fantastic choice, what we all want to see are poorly run replays from a game we just watched, rather than the 1 seed playing from behind.
Also, on a separate note, Nabakov is awful in the playoffs. Is there anyone who inspires less confidence than him in the playoffs? I'm convinced that he's going to give it away the game and I have to believe that the Sharks players think the exact same thing. Do they have any confidence in him at this point? Do they think that for a second they're going to win because of him when it counts? Or do you think that they know that if they're to win, it's going to be despite of Nabakov. Nabakov has given up 5 goals on 18 shots. 18 shots! He's been terrible. I'd feel more comfortable with Greiss in the net and I bet the Sharks would too. As an admittedly novice hockey fan, it's clear that success in the playoffs depends on the play of the goalies. Nabakov cannot step up and make plays when it's necessary. He's a choke artist. He was awful when it mattered in the Olympics, and he's awful in the playoffs.
If they win tonight, it's possible they make it out of the first round. But do you really believe Nabakov will play well in Colorado with the series on the line?
Sunday, January 31, 2010
The Olympics Are Upon Us
Well, readers... if you're still here... it's been an utter eon since I put 'pen to paper' and updated this blog. I'd make excuses and try to pretend I was busy, but the truth is I just haven't been motivated. Until now, really.
The Olympics are almost upon us and quite honestly I'm very excited. Almost as excited as a four-year-old on Christmas morning. The World Juniors this year fed my Olympic hunger and, while I know it isn't realistic I'd love to see a repeat at the big show. Yeah, yeah. We all need dreams to get us through life. Welcome to mine.
I'd love to say I've compiled a whole mid-season breakdown. That I've been doing research and that has caused the delay. That I'm going to wax poetic about what's happened thus far in the '09/'10 season. The truth is I've done none of those things and have no real intention of even mentioning the first half. For the most part at least.
I will say that this season finds us in much the same place we were last season (as far as San Jose is concerned anyhow) - 1st overall in the NHL and looking shaky at times. I'm going to leave it at that for fear of spending 1,000 words fueled by emotion, letdown and disappointment trying to explain how the standings don't mean anything. The only thing that matters is the post... blah, blah, blah. We've done this all before. Let's move on.
The Olympics are in Vancouver, Canada this year and the big talk isn't who will win the Gold. The big talk is who will lose to Canada. Egotistical much? Maybe just a bit. Though it's a well deserved bit of ego. Canada is the epicenter of hockey for all intents and purposes. You can disagree, you can try to say Minnesota or Europe or outer space are more important to hockey, but you'd be wrong. Canada - the birthplace and still the center of all that is holey... erm... hockey.
So, what happens in the Olympics? Who does lose to Canada? I'm asking you, readers. I want to know what you think will happen. Get our your crystal ball, put your medal winners in order and post 'em up. We'll discuss it all in the comments section (see, I told you I had nothing clever and substantial to write - thus I let you do most of my job).
With that I welcome you to 2010, half-heartedly promising to update more. "Put your head down and skate."
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
2009-2010 Sharks' Schedule Announced
Today, July 15, 2009 the official '09/'10 Sharks' schedule was announced. Follow the link below to read the article in it's entirety.
There will be no All Star game this year. Instead, the Olympics will suspend the season for just about a month.
It also appears the the big three (Joe, Patty and Nabby) will have one more shot together. As much as I wanted blood after the mess of the playoffs part of me is just a touch relieved.
October can't come soon enough.
Official link to schedule.
COMPLETE 2009-10 SCHEDULE
OCTOBER
Thu 1 @ Colorado 6:30 p.m.
Sat 3 @ Anaheim 7:00 p.m.
Tue 6 @ Los Angeles 7:30 p.m.
THU 8 COLUMBUS 7:30 p.m.
SAT 10 MINNESOTA 7:30 p.m.
MON 12 PHOENIX 7:30 p.m.
Thu 15 @ Washington 4:00 p.m.
Sat 17 @ N.Y. Islanders 4:00 p.m.
Mon 19 @ N.Y. Rangers 4:00 p.m.
Thu 22 @ Tampa Bay 4:30 p.m.
Sat 24 @ Atlanta 4:00 p.m.
Sun 25 @ Philadelphia 4:00 p.m.
WED 28 LOS ANGELES 7:30 p.m.
FRI 30 COLORADO 7:30 p.m.
NOVEMBER
Sun 1 @ Carolina 10:30 a.m.
Wed 4 @ Columbus 4:00 p.m.
Thu 5 @ Detroit 4:30 p.m.
SAT 7 PITTSBURGH 7:30 p.m.
TUE 10 NASHVILLE 7:30 p.m.
THU 12 DALLAS 7:30 p.m.
Sat 14 @ St. Louis 5:00 p.m.
Sun 15 @ Chicago 4:00 p.m.
Tue 17 @ Nashville 5:00 p.m.
FRI 20 PHILADELPHIA 7:30 p.m.
Sat 21 @ Anaheim 7:00 p.m.
WED 25 CHICAGO 7:30 p.m.
Fri 27 @ Edmonton 6:00 p.m.
Sun 29 @ Vancouver 7:00 p.m.
DECEMBER
TUE 1 OTTAWA 7:30 p.m.
THU 3 ST.LOUIS 7:30 p.m.
SAT 5 CALGARY 7:00 p.m.
WED 9 LOS ANGELES 7:30 p.m.
FRI 11 DALLAS 7:30 p.m.
Sat 12 @ Phoenix 5:00 p.m.
THU 17 ANAHEIM 7:30 p.m.
Mon 21 @ Dallas 5:30 p.m.
Tue 22 @ Chicago 5:00 p.m.
SAT 26 ANAHEIM 7:30 p.m.
MON 28 PHOENIX 7:30 p.m.
WED 30 WASHINGTON 7:30 p.m.
Thu 31 @Phoenix 4:00 p.m.
JANUARY
SAT 2 EDMONTON 7:00 p.m.
MON 4 LOS ANGELES 7:30 p.m.
WED 6 ST. LOUIS 7:30 p.m.
SAT 9 DETROIT 7:30 p.m.
Mon 11 @ Los Angeles 7:30 p.m.
Tue 12 @ Phoenix 6:00 p.m.
THU 14 BOSTON 7:30 p.m.
SAT 16 EDMONTON 1:00 p.m.
MON 18 CALGARY 7:30 p.m.
Tue 19 @ Los Angeles 7:30 p.m.
THU 21 ANAHEIM 7:30 p.m.
SAT 23 BUFFALO 7:30 p.m.
THU 28 CHICAGO 7:30 p.m.
SAT 30 MINNESOTA 7:30 p.m.
FEBRUARY
TUE 2 DETROIT 7:30 p.m.
Thu 4 @ St. Louis 5:00 p.m.
Sat 6 @ Nashville 5:00 p.m.
Mon 8 @ Toronto 4:00 p.m.
Wed 10 @ Columbus 4:00 p.m.
Thu 11 @ Detroit 4:30 p.m.
Sat 13 @ Buffalo 4:00 p.m.
MARCH
TUE 2 NEW JERSEY 7:30 p.m.
THU 4 MONTREAL 7:30 p.m.
SAT 6 COLUMBUS 7:30 p.m.
THU 11 NASHVILLE 7:30 p.m.
SAT 13 FLORIDA 7:30 p.m.
Sun 14 @ Anaheim 5:00 p.m.
Tue 16 @ Dallas 5:30 p.m.
Thu 18 @ Vancouver 7:00 p.m.
Fri 19 @ Calgary 6:00 p.m.
Sun 21 @ Edmonton 5:00 p.m.
Tue 23 @ Minnesota 5:00 p.m.
THU 25 DALLAS 7:30 p.m.
SAT 27 VANCOUVER 7:00 p.m.
SUN 28 COLORADO 5:00 p.m.
Wed 31 @ Dallas 5:30 p.m.
APRIL
Fri 2 @ Minnesota 5:00 p.m.
Sun 4 @ Colorado 5:00 p.m.
Tue 6 @ Calgary 6:30 p.m.
THU 8 VANCOUVER 7:30 p.m.
SAT 10 PHOENIX 7:30 p.m.
SAT 10 PHOENIX 7:30 p.m.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Julius Peppers in Red and Gold?
Ever since the 49ers traded their 2nd and 4th round draft picks in the 2009 draft to Carolina for a first round pick in the 2010 draft there have been rumors that Julius Peppers is San Francisco bound. I would like to be among the first to voice my strong opinion on what an excellent move this would be.
I don’t think that Carolina would let go of their franchise defensive end/OLB to just get back their first round pick next year. As much as I would love to see that, that would be a terrible exchange for Carolina, and let’s face it, I don’t think Scot McCloughan has the balls, or the aptitude, to make that offer, if he did, he would have just offered the 2nd and 4th round picks for Peppers and save himself and the Carolina front office some headaches. Carolina is looking for 2 first round picks, at least according to just about everything I have read on the matter since the end of the previous season. I don’t think Peppers is worth quite that much, he is a proven playmaker, and could be the difference on defense that we need. However that is quite a steep price to pay, even for someone as talented as Peppers, and I just don’t think he is that big of a difference maker. Parys Haralson looked very good at times last year, specifically times when the defense got off the field and got the rest they needed in the game, and Manny Lawson is in his second season coming off ACL surgery, I expect more out of him this year. I am also intrigued by our final pick of the draft this year, Ricky Jean-Francois. He was projected as a potential third round pick with gobs of talent, however some off-field issues kept him from going early on the second day of the draft. If he can get his head screwed on straight, as I wrote in my analysis of the draft, I think he has the potential to make a difference. Due to these factors, both of our first round picks next year are not worth giving up to get Peppers.
I do think there is a deal to be made though. The deal would have to include one of the first round picks, probably whichever is lower next year, and a player to go along with the pick. My proposal, if I were the GM of the 49ers, would be to send Manny Lawson and the lower pick to Carolina for Peppers, assuming he is ready to sign a long term deal to play in San Francisco. We would exchange one hybrid DE/OLB with tons of potential for another proven hybrid DE/OLB that can get the pressure on the QB that we have lacked so badly in the Erikson/Nolan era. Even if Peppers isn’t himself bringing the pressure, he attracts tons of attention from the offense which would allow Haralson a much clearer path to the QB, something I believe he would take advantage of. It would also allow Justin Smith to not be double or triple teamed every snap and potentially give the 49ers a fairly potent pass rush, something that has prevented us from realizing the aspirations we have had the previous two years. A pass rush takes pressure off of our DB’s because the opposing QB doesn’t have all day to decide what to do with the ball, he is forced to get rid of it quickly, much like our QB’s have had to do in the previous several seasons. We do have elite DB’s, we do have elite ILB’s, now it’s time to get an elite player who can get some pressure on the QB and take our defense from middle of the pack to the top 3rd in the NFL which also allows us to play the type of football that Coach Singletary wants to play, that is to win games 10-7 or 14-10. Let’s hope our front office pulls its head out of it collective rear end and make this deal that so badly needs to be made.
I don’t think that Carolina would let go of their franchise defensive end/OLB to just get back their first round pick next year. As much as I would love to see that, that would be a terrible exchange for Carolina, and let’s face it, I don’t think Scot McCloughan has the balls, or the aptitude, to make that offer, if he did, he would have just offered the 2nd and 4th round picks for Peppers and save himself and the Carolina front office some headaches. Carolina is looking for 2 first round picks, at least according to just about everything I have read on the matter since the end of the previous season. I don’t think Peppers is worth quite that much, he is a proven playmaker, and could be the difference on defense that we need. However that is quite a steep price to pay, even for someone as talented as Peppers, and I just don’t think he is that big of a difference maker. Parys Haralson looked very good at times last year, specifically times when the defense got off the field and got the rest they needed in the game, and Manny Lawson is in his second season coming off ACL surgery, I expect more out of him this year. I am also intrigued by our final pick of the draft this year, Ricky Jean-Francois. He was projected as a potential third round pick with gobs of talent, however some off-field issues kept him from going early on the second day of the draft. If he can get his head screwed on straight, as I wrote in my analysis of the draft, I think he has the potential to make a difference. Due to these factors, both of our first round picks next year are not worth giving up to get Peppers.
I do think there is a deal to be made though. The deal would have to include one of the first round picks, probably whichever is lower next year, and a player to go along with the pick. My proposal, if I were the GM of the 49ers, would be to send Manny Lawson and the lower pick to Carolina for Peppers, assuming he is ready to sign a long term deal to play in San Francisco. We would exchange one hybrid DE/OLB with tons of potential for another proven hybrid DE/OLB that can get the pressure on the QB that we have lacked so badly in the Erikson/Nolan era. Even if Peppers isn’t himself bringing the pressure, he attracts tons of attention from the offense which would allow Haralson a much clearer path to the QB, something I believe he would take advantage of. It would also allow Justin Smith to not be double or triple teamed every snap and potentially give the 49ers a fairly potent pass rush, something that has prevented us from realizing the aspirations we have had the previous two years. A pass rush takes pressure off of our DB’s because the opposing QB doesn’t have all day to decide what to do with the ball, he is forced to get rid of it quickly, much like our QB’s have had to do in the previous several seasons. We do have elite DB’s, we do have elite ILB’s, now it’s time to get an elite player who can get some pressure on the QB and take our defense from middle of the pack to the top 3rd in the NFL which also allows us to play the type of football that Coach Singletary wants to play, that is to win games 10-7 or 14-10. Let’s hope our front office pulls its head out of it collective rear end and make this deal that so badly needs to be made.
Thursday, May 7, 2009
The Giants Lineup
It’s no secret that the Giants, on most nights struggle to hit their way out of a wet paper bag. The Giants currently rank last in runs scored (90), homeruns (14), second to last in on base percentage (.310), last in slugging percentage (.367), and the list goes on and on. Simply put, the Giants just aren’t hitting right now and, to be honest, there doesn’t seem to be much hope that the Giants will improve themselves by any large margin during the season.
The previous post made a great argument that I have to disagree with slightly. It’s true, we should have gone after Dunn. Had we been able to get him for the same 2 year deal that the Nationals did, he would be an absolute bargain and immediately become the best hitter on the Giants by a large margin. He can play left, right, and first, so we could have moved him around and still gotten time for Lewis and Winn, both of whom can play any outfield position. Ishikawa would have been relegated to a late inning defensive replacement, and would have been able to get a couple hundred at bats over the course of the season to try to adjust to major league pitching. Plus, it would have allowed the Giants to send down Velez, who serves no purpose on the Giants roster.
Where I disagree is with the signing of Hudson. He would have made the Giants better in the short term, but would have hurt the development of the team in the long term. Burriss is struggling at the plate right now but has shown the ability to hit major league pitching over a large enough sample size to suggest he can do it again. He plays great defense at second and is only 24. He’s past the point where he can develop any further in the minors and needs to see the field consistently to see whether or not he’s going to become a good hitter at the major league level. The point is that, because of when he would have been signed, Hudson would have blocked a major league ready player at a time when the Giants are trying to get significantly younger and at a time when their playoff chances are really dependant on getting a big, middle of the order bat, rather than a player like Hudson.
So, the Giants have neither Dunn nor Hudson, and are left with Ishikawa at first and Burriss at second. The more I watch Ishikawa hit, the less optimistic I am about his ability to turn it around. What I thought was patience seems now to be indecisiveness because he can’t seem to pull the trigger when he gets a good pitch to hit. Multiple times now, I’ve seen him take good fastballs on a 0-1 or 2-0 count because it either wasn’t the pitch he was looking for or he wasn’t able to make the decision to swing soon enough. I don’t know if he can turn this kind of thing around, but he’s probably running out of time to do it in.
But even if Ishikawa can turn it all around, where’s his future on the Giants? The San Jose Giants, probably the most loaded team in the minors, has our future infield on it. Buster Posey will be the starting catcher next year, and Connor Gillaspie will be the starting third baseman either next year or the year after. Kung Fu Panda Sandoval is going to move to first, and that still leaves the Giants trying to find Villalona a spot. One of those players is going to end up in the outfield, and it’s a tossup as to which one.
I hope that I’m wrong. I hope that Ishikawa gets his head right (because I don’t think it’s his swing) and becomes a very productive first baseman with a great glove and he makes it hard for the Giants to make decisions with their young players. He’s certainly got the potential to do so, but potential can only keep you on the field for so long. You have to turn it into production.
The previous post made a great argument that I have to disagree with slightly. It’s true, we should have gone after Dunn. Had we been able to get him for the same 2 year deal that the Nationals did, he would be an absolute bargain and immediately become the best hitter on the Giants by a large margin. He can play left, right, and first, so we could have moved him around and still gotten time for Lewis and Winn, both of whom can play any outfield position. Ishikawa would have been relegated to a late inning defensive replacement, and would have been able to get a couple hundred at bats over the course of the season to try to adjust to major league pitching. Plus, it would have allowed the Giants to send down Velez, who serves no purpose on the Giants roster.
Where I disagree is with the signing of Hudson. He would have made the Giants better in the short term, but would have hurt the development of the team in the long term. Burriss is struggling at the plate right now but has shown the ability to hit major league pitching over a large enough sample size to suggest he can do it again. He plays great defense at second and is only 24. He’s past the point where he can develop any further in the minors and needs to see the field consistently to see whether or not he’s going to become a good hitter at the major league level. The point is that, because of when he would have been signed, Hudson would have blocked a major league ready player at a time when the Giants are trying to get significantly younger and at a time when their playoff chances are really dependant on getting a big, middle of the order bat, rather than a player like Hudson.
So, the Giants have neither Dunn nor Hudson, and are left with Ishikawa at first and Burriss at second. The more I watch Ishikawa hit, the less optimistic I am about his ability to turn it around. What I thought was patience seems now to be indecisiveness because he can’t seem to pull the trigger when he gets a good pitch to hit. Multiple times now, I’ve seen him take good fastballs on a 0-1 or 2-0 count because it either wasn’t the pitch he was looking for or he wasn’t able to make the decision to swing soon enough. I don’t know if he can turn this kind of thing around, but he’s probably running out of time to do it in.
But even if Ishikawa can turn it all around, where’s his future on the Giants? The San Jose Giants, probably the most loaded team in the minors, has our future infield on it. Buster Posey will be the starting catcher next year, and Connor Gillaspie will be the starting third baseman either next year or the year after. Kung Fu Panda Sandoval is going to move to first, and that still leaves the Giants trying to find Villalona a spot. One of those players is going to end up in the outfield, and it’s a tossup as to which one.
I hope that I’m wrong. I hope that Ishikawa gets his head right (because I don’t think it’s his swing) and becomes a very productive first baseman with a great glove and he makes it hard for the Giants to make decisions with their young players. He’s certainly got the potential to do so, but potential can only keep you on the field for so long. You have to turn it into production.
Monday, May 4, 2009
Screw Ramirez, Two Free Agents the Giants truly missed on
While all the attention this free agency was on the Giants supposed interest in Manny Ramirez, two free agents that could have truly affected the Giants ability to make it to the postseason fell through the cracks.
Adam Dunn
For what Manny Ramirez ended up with for one season, the Giants could have made Adam Dunn their everyday 1st baseman for two. While not as sound on the defensive end, there is a reason many power hitters play that position, they can be hidden there. While the Giants have prospect Angel Villalona who is gawd-awful at third and can be/will be transitioned to first, he is still 2-3 years down the line.
Adam Dunn's other drawback is that he strikes out too often ... has anyone else been watching the games so far? In 15 less at bats, Ishikawa has just as many strikeouts as Dunn.
If Dunn were on the Giants, and having similar numbers, he would lead them in homeruns, walks, on-base percentage, slugging, and then obviously OBS (a combo of the two); be third in batting average; and fourth in hits among Giants regulars.
Orlando Hudson
Orlando Hudson signed on with the team we do not speak of on February 21. I guess by that time, the Giants had decided to go for "No Deal or No Deal" at second between Burriss, whom along with Lewis should start doing push-ups everytime they hit a pop-fly, and Frandsen, who was coming off injury.
In an incentive laden deal, where Orlando could earn about 7 million a year including base and incentives, the Dodgers were paying for performance (hmmmm ... wish there was more incentive in a certain pitcher's contract ... ) It was a one year deal, however it did cost the Dodgers this year's upcoming 1st round pick.
Hudson's OBP would put him 2nd on the Giants behind the quickly cooling Fred Lewis. The big thing he would do over either Burriss or Frandsen is solidify the top half of the line-up.
Lineup had the Giants acquired Dunn and Hudson
2B O Hudson
RF R Winn
3B P Sandoval
1B A Dunn
C B Molina
LF F Lewis
SS E Renteria
CF A Rowand
Now I'll just let you think about that. As we go thru this season, wasting the last good year in Randy Johnson's arm, and having a young nucleus of Lincecum, Cain, and Sanchez waste away in the depths of a season hoping for .500, think of what could have been. If the Giants were in anyway serious about Ramirez, they could have had Dunn and Hudson to solidify the lineup we think and cringe about on a daily basis. Instead of mid 90s Braves, we are early 2000s Tigers.
Adam Dunn
For what Manny Ramirez ended up with for one season, the Giants could have made Adam Dunn their everyday 1st baseman for two. While not as sound on the defensive end, there is a reason many power hitters play that position, they can be hidden there. While the Giants have prospect Angel Villalona who is gawd-awful at third and can be/will be transitioned to first, he is still 2-3 years down the line.
Adam Dunn's other drawback is that he strikes out too often ... has anyone else been watching the games so far? In 15 less at bats, Ishikawa has just as many strikeouts as Dunn.
If Dunn were on the Giants, and having similar numbers, he would lead them in homeruns, walks, on-base percentage, slugging, and then obviously OBS (a combo of the two); be third in batting average; and fourth in hits among Giants regulars.
Orlando Hudson
Orlando Hudson signed on with the team we do not speak of on February 21. I guess by that time, the Giants had decided to go for "No Deal or No Deal" at second between Burriss, whom along with Lewis should start doing push-ups everytime they hit a pop-fly, and Frandsen, who was coming off injury.
In an incentive laden deal, where Orlando could earn about 7 million a year including base and incentives, the Dodgers were paying for performance (hmmmm ... wish there was more incentive in a certain pitcher's contract ... ) It was a one year deal, however it did cost the Dodgers this year's upcoming 1st round pick.
Hudson's OBP would put him 2nd on the Giants behind the quickly cooling Fred Lewis. The big thing he would do over either Burriss or Frandsen is solidify the top half of the line-up.
Lineup had the Giants acquired Dunn and Hudson
2B O Hudson
RF R Winn
3B P Sandoval
1B A Dunn
C B Molina
LF F Lewis
SS E Renteria
CF A Rowand
Now I'll just let you think about that. As we go thru this season, wasting the last good year in Randy Johnson's arm, and having a young nucleus of Lincecum, Cain, and Sanchez waste away in the depths of a season hoping for .500, think of what could have been. If the Giants were in anyway serious about Ramirez, they could have had Dunn and Hudson to solidify the lineup we think and cringe about on a daily basis. Instead of mid 90s Braves, we are early 2000s Tigers.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Benjie Hits a Triple!
Just a couple brief thoughts from the game last night ....
1) Lincecum could win another Cy Young this year -- his changeup is one of the best that I've seen, with movement running down and in to right handed hitters.
2) Enjoy the offensive explosion -- they'll be few and far between.
3) Fred Lewis looks lost at the plate -- he didn't have a quality swing all night.
4) Brian Wilson is not as good as he's supposed to be -- he has great movement on his slider, but he needs to be able to throw it for a strike to make hitters look for something other than his fastball.
5) Keep playing Nate -- production should earn playing time.
6) Send Velez to the minors -- he's overmatched and serves no purpose on the roster.
7) Bochy has at least this one thing right -- just try to win each series and don't look any farther than that.
Winning the series with the Dodgers is a great way to end April. Overall, a positive first month of the season.
1) Lincecum could win another Cy Young this year -- his changeup is one of the best that I've seen, with movement running down and in to right handed hitters.
2) Enjoy the offensive explosion -- they'll be few and far between.
3) Fred Lewis looks lost at the plate -- he didn't have a quality swing all night.
4) Brian Wilson is not as good as he's supposed to be -- he has great movement on his slider, but he needs to be able to throw it for a strike to make hitters look for something other than his fastball.
5) Keep playing Nate -- production should earn playing time.
6) Send Velez to the minors -- he's overmatched and serves no purpose on the roster.
7) Bochy has at least this one thing right -- just try to win each series and don't look any farther than that.
Winning the series with the Dodgers is a great way to end April. Overall, a positive first month of the season.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Doug Wilson calls playoff frustration "Overhwelming"
Two days removed from a disappointing end to the most promising season yet we finally hear from management. Doug Wilson says "“The emotions are raging right now, the frustration is overwhelming. The feelings of disappointment should run deep. We owe an apology to our fans and our owners. They deserve better. This ownership group has always given us what we needed.” Let me say I think that is an understatement.
After promises all year that this year would be different we find ourselves in the exact same spot as we did roughly 12 months ago. Changes were promised after last year, and changes are what we got. We fired what everyone thought was the problem in Ron Wilson, while I still think it was the right move I now find myself questioning if our failures really were his fault. We got rid of Matt Carle who did not meet expectations, and replaced him with Dan Boyle, we signed Rob Blake, and were forced to trade away one of our most mentally tough players in Craig Rivet due to salary cap issues. We brought in a new coach from a successful system who brought along successful assistants. All that was supposed to change the culture. And for a while there it did look like we had changed this team from a good regular season team who disappeared in the playoffs to a great regular season team ready to contend with the big boys. And even in the middle of the season when things started going south we tried to jumpstart the team by trading one of our most promising prospects in Nick Bonino, who proved his mental toughness to me in the final minute of the NCAA championchip game and in the Beanpot Tournament, for Travis Moen, a gritty defensive specialist who helped put Anaheim over the top two years ago. While I still like Moen, and hope we re-sign him this off season, I have a feeling this trade will come to haunt us down the line. We even mined the depths of NHL retirees and brought Claude Lemieux back after a 5 and a half year absence from the NHL.
Doug Wilson has promised changes, but he did that last year and see what we got? I hope there will be drastic changes. As much as I hate what I am about to type, Joe Thornton has got to go. He focuses too much on trying to make pretty passes to score pretty goals. That is fine in the regular season, but that type of hockey just doesn't work in the post season, you dont win Stanley Cups on pretty goals. There is a reason players like Claude Lemieux have average regular season, but are among the top performers in the playoffs. They know where to find that intensity, how to fight for position and they get in there and score those dirty goals. Pretty goals win you a presidents cup, dirty goals win you a Stanley Cup. That's the bottom line and the Sharks just dont have that 3rd or 4th line player that is going to go get in the goalies face, cause havoc in front of the net and pot a few dirty goals in the process. Players like Holmstrom, Lemieux and Anaheims 3rd line from 2007 are the players you need to win a cup.
Back to Joe for a second, he tried to force pretty plays all series long and it never worked. Joe is a very large body, and he has excellent hands, when the playoffs roll around he needs to get off the half boards and in front of the net. Block the goalies view, make a defender focus on you parked in front of the net and when the shot is released, dont open up and give the goalie a view of the puck. Sure it is much easier said than done, but if Joe were determined to do these things, he would have. Not only does Joe need to do this to score goals, but with that A on his chest, he needs to do it to lead, so guys like Ryane Clowe see what needs to be done to get wins in the playoffs. Ryane Clowe was absent much of this series too, he found himself floating along the blue line or in the high slot becuase thats what he saw from the veterans. Clowe's hands are entirely too good for him to be floating 25+ feet from the net, he needs to be in the crease, throwing elbows, fighting for position, blocking the goalies view and getting his blade on the ice ready to collect a rebound and put it right back in the net. That is the formula that led to 53 wins and a presidents cup, and we abandoned it in the playoffs. Yes we got a lot of shots, but what good are shots if there is no one in the crease to collect the rebound and score that dirty goal?
Now I dont think we need to blow up the team and start all over from scratch, we have good pieces, Boyle is one of the best defensemen in the game, and our second line is full of promising young players. If I were Doug Wilson I would trade Joe, for prospects and picks along with a player ready to hit the ice next year. We need to resign both Rob Blake and Jeremy Roenick, Patty should stay but be stripped of his C, which should be given to JR. JR has the fire, that intensity and the drive to do whatever it takes, and that is what you want from your captain and with him missing a good deal of time this year he has the legs to play one more season. I also think we should stop trading away our draft picks for rental players each and every year. First its Bill Guerin, then Brian Campbell and now Travis Moen, we know how all of these worked out and if we could do those deals over again I dont think we would make a single one of them. This is all just a start but it moves us in the right direction and with some careful, well thought out manuvering we can retool our entire team and be ready to compete next year and to get rid of that overwhelming frustration.
In addition news Captain Patrick Marleau revealed he was playing with a sprained MCL and Joe Pavelski is off to help the USA in the Hockey World Championships.
After promises all year that this year would be different we find ourselves in the exact same spot as we did roughly 12 months ago. Changes were promised after last year, and changes are what we got. We fired what everyone thought was the problem in Ron Wilson, while I still think it was the right move I now find myself questioning if our failures really were his fault. We got rid of Matt Carle who did not meet expectations, and replaced him with Dan Boyle, we signed Rob Blake, and were forced to trade away one of our most mentally tough players in Craig Rivet due to salary cap issues. We brought in a new coach from a successful system who brought along successful assistants. All that was supposed to change the culture. And for a while there it did look like we had changed this team from a good regular season team who disappeared in the playoffs to a great regular season team ready to contend with the big boys. And even in the middle of the season when things started going south we tried to jumpstart the team by trading one of our most promising prospects in Nick Bonino, who proved his mental toughness to me in the final minute of the NCAA championchip game and in the Beanpot Tournament, for Travis Moen, a gritty defensive specialist who helped put Anaheim over the top two years ago. While I still like Moen, and hope we re-sign him this off season, I have a feeling this trade will come to haunt us down the line. We even mined the depths of NHL retirees and brought Claude Lemieux back after a 5 and a half year absence from the NHL.
Doug Wilson has promised changes, but he did that last year and see what we got? I hope there will be drastic changes. As much as I hate what I am about to type, Joe Thornton has got to go. He focuses too much on trying to make pretty passes to score pretty goals. That is fine in the regular season, but that type of hockey just doesn't work in the post season, you dont win Stanley Cups on pretty goals. There is a reason players like Claude Lemieux have average regular season, but are among the top performers in the playoffs. They know where to find that intensity, how to fight for position and they get in there and score those dirty goals. Pretty goals win you a presidents cup, dirty goals win you a Stanley Cup. That's the bottom line and the Sharks just dont have that 3rd or 4th line player that is going to go get in the goalies face, cause havoc in front of the net and pot a few dirty goals in the process. Players like Holmstrom, Lemieux and Anaheims 3rd line from 2007 are the players you need to win a cup.
Back to Joe for a second, he tried to force pretty plays all series long and it never worked. Joe is a very large body, and he has excellent hands, when the playoffs roll around he needs to get off the half boards and in front of the net. Block the goalies view, make a defender focus on you parked in front of the net and when the shot is released, dont open up and give the goalie a view of the puck. Sure it is much easier said than done, but if Joe were determined to do these things, he would have. Not only does Joe need to do this to score goals, but with that A on his chest, he needs to do it to lead, so guys like Ryane Clowe see what needs to be done to get wins in the playoffs. Ryane Clowe was absent much of this series too, he found himself floating along the blue line or in the high slot becuase thats what he saw from the veterans. Clowe's hands are entirely too good for him to be floating 25+ feet from the net, he needs to be in the crease, throwing elbows, fighting for position, blocking the goalies view and getting his blade on the ice ready to collect a rebound and put it right back in the net. That is the formula that led to 53 wins and a presidents cup, and we abandoned it in the playoffs. Yes we got a lot of shots, but what good are shots if there is no one in the crease to collect the rebound and score that dirty goal?
Now I dont think we need to blow up the team and start all over from scratch, we have good pieces, Boyle is one of the best defensemen in the game, and our second line is full of promising young players. If I were Doug Wilson I would trade Joe, for prospects and picks along with a player ready to hit the ice next year. We need to resign both Rob Blake and Jeremy Roenick, Patty should stay but be stripped of his C, which should be given to JR. JR has the fire, that intensity and the drive to do whatever it takes, and that is what you want from your captain and with him missing a good deal of time this year he has the legs to play one more season. I also think we should stop trading away our draft picks for rental players each and every year. First its Bill Guerin, then Brian Campbell and now Travis Moen, we know how all of these worked out and if we could do those deals over again I dont think we would make a single one of them. This is all just a start but it moves us in the right direction and with some careful, well thought out manuvering we can retool our entire team and be ready to compete next year and to get rid of that overwhelming frustration.
In addition news Captain Patrick Marleau revealed he was playing with a sprained MCL and Joe Pavelski is off to help the USA in the Hockey World Championships.
Mike Vick to the Niners?
I wanted to pose an open question -- I know that the Niners have come out and stated that there is no possibility of them pursuing Vick, but was that the right move? Should the Niners consider signing him? Even if he's still the same player that he was when he went to jail, would signing him be a publicity nightmare that would make it not worth the effort?
Post any thoughts you might have on the subject
Post any thoughts you might have on the subject
Damn Dodgers!
I’m a huge Giants fan and I have been ever since 1993, when Barry Bonds came to San Francisco and kept the Giants from becoming the Marlins. Being a Giants fan means that you are contractually obligated to hate the Dodgers with a passion normally reserved for child molesters or Nic Cage movies. I mean, did you see him in Con Air? What was that accent about? Do you think he even read the script before he took the part? If you haven’t seen him in Wicker Man, don’t do that to yourself. But I would suggest watching this clip collection http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6i2WRreARo&feature=related to see him at his absolute best (a little PG -13ish).
Anyway…..I hate the Dodgers. But after watching the game last night I can hate them, while at the same time appreciate the product that they’re putting on the field. First, I was incredibly impressed with Billingsley. He has great command and poise on the mound, but what really struck me most about him was his ability to consistently throw his breaking balls for strikes. As the game wore on, it became clear that he didn’t have his best fastball. So, he went for his curve and just hammered the outside of the zone with it. He threw it for a first pitch strike, and at any other point in the count. So, he essentially started working backwards; instead of using his fastball to set up his off-speed pitches, he used his off-speed pitches (specifically his curveball) to set up everything else. That meant that he didn’t need to be precise with his fastball, because the Giants hitters couldn’t adjust. He didn’t get the win, but pitched well enough to deserve it.
But Billingsley wasn’t the only Dodger that I was impressed with; their young hitters are outstanding. I think that the misconception is that Manny is pretty much responsible for all of their offensive production, or at least they couldn’t get it done without him. He’s obviously one of the best hitters in the game, possibly ever, and enough has been written about that and his impact on the Dodgers offense. But Andre Ethier and James Loney were both incredibly impressive, especially for young talent, and are developing into genuine stars. Both of them showed remarkable plate discipline, with Loney working a 1-2 count into a bases loaded walk after fouling off pitch after pitch after pitch, and showing an amazing eye at the plate.
Compare that kind of patience with what the Giants showed and you get depressed, unless you look at Ishikawa. He looked good at the plate again last night, and even when he’s not hitting, he still shows the ability to take a couple of pitches and try to see as many different pitches in an at bat as possible. He’s got a compact swing that I think will make him into a hitter with 20ish homerun power, but primarily power to the left and right center gaps; in other words, I think we can expect a lot of doubles from him. He’s also showed a nice ability to take the ball in the opposite direction.
It’s sad when a young hitter like Ishikawa shows more patience then a supposedly veteran hitter in Uribe. Uribe comes up with the bases loaded after Aurelia drew 2 walks (I say this because the 3 – 1 pitch was so obviously a ball, even the Dodgers seemed surprised when they got the call), and then he swings at the first pitch that’s thrown. Let me break this down for you: Broxton had just walked Aurelia, scoring a run and tying the game, he’s having control problems, the umpire just gave Broxton a gift strike in the last at bat, so the logical thing to do would be to take at least the first pitch to see if he can get it over the plate. What does Uribe do? He check swings at a borderline pitch that probably would have been called a ball – way to make a pitcher work! His bat should have been glued to his shoulder in that situation, unless he gets a fat fastball over the middle of the plate. I use Uribe as an example, but he’s just representative of the larger problem of overaggressive hitting by the Giants.
There were some bright spots though. Sanchez struggled with his control, but still managed to string together 5 innings of work with no earned runs. The first 2 Dodger runs were unearned off a series of errors, which will happen occasionally. Defensively, there was one play that stood out in my mind as a positive, and it came from Aaron Rowand in the 7th. A liner was hit to shallow center, and Rowand charged in, accelerated, and held his glove out like he was going to make a knee high catch. Seeing that, the runner held at second. The ball probably dropped 10 feet in front of Rowand, but the base-runner was reading Rowand’s body language and thought there was a chance the ball could be caught, so when it dropped he was only able to advance to third. Had the bullpen come through, that could have been the difference in winning the game and losing.
Speaking of the bullpen, they looked decent. I don’t think they pitched particularly poorly, but were victim to some 50/50 calls by the Umpire and some prolonged work over the past couple days. Hopefully tonight they can get some rest with the Franchise on the mound.
Looking forward to tonight’s game – who would have thought we’d be near .500 right now?
image credit -- touchstone pictures
Anyway…..I hate the Dodgers. But after watching the game last night I can hate them, while at the same time appreciate the product that they’re putting on the field. First, I was incredibly impressed with Billingsley. He has great command and poise on the mound, but what really struck me most about him was his ability to consistently throw his breaking balls for strikes. As the game wore on, it became clear that he didn’t have his best fastball. So, he went for his curve and just hammered the outside of the zone with it. He threw it for a first pitch strike, and at any other point in the count. So, he essentially started working backwards; instead of using his fastball to set up his off-speed pitches, he used his off-speed pitches (specifically his curveball) to set up everything else. That meant that he didn’t need to be precise with his fastball, because the Giants hitters couldn’t adjust. He didn’t get the win, but pitched well enough to deserve it.
But Billingsley wasn’t the only Dodger that I was impressed with; their young hitters are outstanding. I think that the misconception is that Manny is pretty much responsible for all of their offensive production, or at least they couldn’t get it done without him. He’s obviously one of the best hitters in the game, possibly ever, and enough has been written about that and his impact on the Dodgers offense. But Andre Ethier and James Loney were both incredibly impressive, especially for young talent, and are developing into genuine stars. Both of them showed remarkable plate discipline, with Loney working a 1-2 count into a bases loaded walk after fouling off pitch after pitch after pitch, and showing an amazing eye at the plate.
Compare that kind of patience with what the Giants showed and you get depressed, unless you look at Ishikawa. He looked good at the plate again last night, and even when he’s not hitting, he still shows the ability to take a couple of pitches and try to see as many different pitches in an at bat as possible. He’s got a compact swing that I think will make him into a hitter with 20ish homerun power, but primarily power to the left and right center gaps; in other words, I think we can expect a lot of doubles from him. He’s also showed a nice ability to take the ball in the opposite direction.
It’s sad when a young hitter like Ishikawa shows more patience then a supposedly veteran hitter in Uribe. Uribe comes up with the bases loaded after Aurelia drew 2 walks (I say this because the 3 – 1 pitch was so obviously a ball, even the Dodgers seemed surprised when they got the call), and then he swings at the first pitch that’s thrown. Let me break this down for you: Broxton had just walked Aurelia, scoring a run and tying the game, he’s having control problems, the umpire just gave Broxton a gift strike in the last at bat, so the logical thing to do would be to take at least the first pitch to see if he can get it over the plate. What does Uribe do? He check swings at a borderline pitch that probably would have been called a ball – way to make a pitcher work! His bat should have been glued to his shoulder in that situation, unless he gets a fat fastball over the middle of the plate. I use Uribe as an example, but he’s just representative of the larger problem of overaggressive hitting by the Giants.
There were some bright spots though. Sanchez struggled with his control, but still managed to string together 5 innings of work with no earned runs. The first 2 Dodger runs were unearned off a series of errors, which will happen occasionally. Defensively, there was one play that stood out in my mind as a positive, and it came from Aaron Rowand in the 7th. A liner was hit to shallow center, and Rowand charged in, accelerated, and held his glove out like he was going to make a knee high catch. Seeing that, the runner held at second. The ball probably dropped 10 feet in front of Rowand, but the base-runner was reading Rowand’s body language and thought there was a chance the ball could be caught, so when it dropped he was only able to advance to third. Had the bullpen come through, that could have been the difference in winning the game and losing.
Speaking of the bullpen, they looked decent. I don’t think they pitched particularly poorly, but were victim to some 50/50 calls by the Umpire and some prolonged work over the past couple days. Hopefully tonight they can get some rest with the Franchise on the mound.
Looking forward to tonight’s game – who would have thought we’d be near .500 right now?
image credit -- touchstone pictures
Hello readers. Welcome to Wednesday.
This particular Wednesday finds us trying something new. New to us at any rate. If it works and you like it we’ll make it a regular thing. If it fails and no one cares then we’ll move on to something else.
Barry and I have been having a bit of a back and forth regarding ‘culture’ in sports and what it takes to make that a winning culture. Drink it in with your eyes and then let your fingers carry on the debate or even give us feedback (good and bad, we want to hear it all).
Without further ado The Bay Area Sports Blog presents [insert clever name here]:
Barry H: In your post about the Sharks/Ducks series, you came back to the idea of a "culture of failure" permeating the Sharks organization. That post got me wondering about what it means to have a winning culture in an organization and how you develop one.
What do you think breeds a culture of winning in any sport?
Ryan C: I think we need to define culture, as it pertains to our discussion first.
Culture -
n.
a. The totality of socially transmitted behavior patterns, arts, beliefs, institutions, and all other products of human work and thought.
b. These patterns, traits, and products considered as the expression of a particular period, class, community, or population: Edwardian culture; Japanese culture; the culture of poverty.
c. These patterns, traits, and products considered with respect to a particular category, such as a field, subject, or mode of expression: religious culture in the Middle Ages; musical culture; oral culture.
d. The predominating attitudes and behavior that characterize the functioning of a group or organization.
I bolded the important part for ya'. That really says it all. The attitude and behavior of the team. That's some powerful stuff and I didn't even write it.Breeding a culture of winning starts at the top. The corporate and office leaders. Management and owners. They all have to believe in winning, promote winning and carry themselves as winners no matter what. That trickles down through an organization. It's infectious. Players have to buy into that attitude and carry it through to their play, their locker room attitude and their lives. There can be no doubt, no matter how dire a situation might seem that the guys are winners. Period. That's a good start.
It works the same for the opposite, though as well. Your take?
Barry: To a certain extent, I would agree with you. But the more that I think about the situation, the more I think that we need to redefine our terms. It's not about a culture of winning, in my estimation, as much as it is about a culture of excellence. By the definition offered above, the Sharks do have a culture of winning because day in and day out they win and their point totals during the regular season reflect that.
I think the excellence begins to play into the equation in the post season, because as that point, you’re a winner surrounded by other winners. In the playoffs you need to excel. Certain teams’ posses that culture of excellence; the Patriots (since 2001), Steelers, Spurs, Lakers, Yankees, and Red Wings all have it. It’s not an accident that they are consistent winners.
The Sharks are in a unique position – they have the talent to make the leap into excellence. But, honestly, either way you cut it, with your definition or mine, we’re still back at the same position. How do they take the next step?
My initial thought would be to look to another organization that was in a similar position and look to see how they did it. You?
Ryan: I see your point, but I don't agree. The Sharks don't have a culture of winning because they fail at the end goal. I've said in the past it isn't the journey, it's the destination. The ultimate goal in a hockey season is a Stanley Cup. San Jose fails at that in such a grand fashion every year. Thus I don't think they have a culture of winning. It almost seems like they've just accepted that they'll never get past round 3 and they're ok with it. It's ridiculous.
What's it going to take? I don't have all the answers, but it might take wiping it all out and starting over.
Barry: As I said, I don't think it matters as to how you define it, either as winning or excellence. Ultimately it goes back to the same thing -- abject failure in the postseason.
The more I think about it, the more I believe that really what the Sharks are missing is that one big play, that one break that makes the postseason for them and gives them some momentum. I go back to the Patriots run in 2001, when they had the "tuck" call that basically handed them the game. At that point, they had the momentum to go into the Super Bowl and win it. Winning breeds winning. I can't think of a time in the postseason where the Sharks have gotten that big break. And I know that a counterargument to that is that you create your own luck, but I would argue that the Sharks are doing enough to create their own luck, they just aren't getting any.
I don't think that you blow it up and start it all over. The Sharks are just too good to do that. Plus, you have to think about how it looks to the fans. I honestly think that the best thing to do at this point for the team is for ownership to come out and say that they believe in the team despite the failure, and that they're doing nothing. They have confidence in the team they have put together, the team has confidence in each other, and they're going to win the cup next year.
Ryan: I don't know. The Sharks certainly did have a break in game 5. They had the momentum. They had the drive. Then it all went south. The big players (Patty, Joe, Nabby, et al) are the ones that can change things and they consistently don't. That's a big problem. Sure, one call could make things shift but that isn't enough to go on. Big, highly paid players need to be big, highly paid playmakers. Period.
Ok. Let's pretend the team stays the same next year. Maybe a deadline deal to add that mysterious, elusive 'something'. Then they fail again. What do you do then? How long do you let it continue? I don't think you need to kill it all and involve Norse Gods, but I do think you need to cut out the cancer. That cancer just might be Thornton and Marleau. Their play basically tells the rest of the squad that it's ok to leave you best game at home. It's ok to sleep through things until it's almost too late. That anger and fire has to be there from the word Go and it just hasn't been. Not since the lockout and not really before either.
Barry: They got breaks, every team gets them, but I don't think they got the big break, or enough of those little breaks didn't add up to the big one. And not every team needs them, but I do think that the teams that aren't used to winning in the postseason need them to happen.
I know that you talk about having one of the big guys step up and put the team on their shoulders, but hockey being such the team game that it is, what I saw in game 6 was players trying to do too much on their own. Opportunities are created by playing within a system, and then the players step up and execute. Obviously that didn't happen.
As for how long you let this go, I think you give it one more year, and if it doesn't happen you trade one or two of the big three. I also think that the culture of the team can change through the production of your younger players. We saw what having Torrey on the ice did for the energy level of the Sharks, so maybe having him for a whole season, along with increased production from Clowe, Seto, and others will kind of pass the mantle to a younger generation that hasn't been around long enough to experience all the playoff failures. The one think about good young players is that their energy is infectious.
Ryan: Give me a break. No pun intended. The little breaks are the ones you have to capitalize on. The execution was horrible when those breaks did happen. Look at the PP numbers for San Jose in the post - dismal at best. Every penalty can be looked at as a break and they squandered every one.It is a team game and that's where my biggest problem lies. No way does San Jose win a cup without everyone producing. At the same time it takes leadership to get production and that isn't there. The coaches did what they had to do all year. In the post-season it's purely on the shoulders of the team leaders and that just brings us back to the "Big 3".
Another year? I don't know. I'd move at least one guy right away. Hell, get Marleau out of there and make Pavelski captain. Maybe that would spark some change. The kid steps up when he needs to in the regular season. Maybe that boost of confidence will find its way into the post season.
Barry: I would say though, that clearly the Sharks need that big break to get them some momentum in the playoffs. Penalties help, but they aren't the kind of breaks that I'm talking about. The 5 on 3 the Ducks got is a big break. Penalties are the standard advantages that a team gets during a game. I don't think that we're going to agree on this one.
But regardless, we're getting away from what I think was the original topic, which is what creates a culture of winning. If you're a GM for a major sports team and need to get over the hurdle, and you've determined that you don't have the culture of winning in your organization, what do you do?
Ryan: You look at the players. Look at who isn't performing. The fact that they keep not performing year after year pretty much says that it's ok to be an underachiever. At least that's what it says to me when they're kept around year after year after... you get the point. Move at least one key player and it sends a message - we're done screwing around. Losing isn't acceptable any longer. I really think that would go a long way towards changing the culture around the San Jose locker room.
Barry: I think that's probably a good way to go about it. Without being intimately familiar with the players and the day to day workings of the organization it's hard to figure out exactly how to address the issue.
In terms of the Sharks, moving a big player certainly would send a message. But I think that it's a difficult situation. I can't blame management or coaching, so it has to fall squarely on the player’s shoulders. They were put in a position to succeed and they didn't. I guess I'm coming around more to your way of thinking after all on this.
Ryan: Everyone comes around eventually. I guess I just have that charm. Well, I think we might be beating a dead horse so until next time. Ciao!
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Dodgers v. Giants -- Game 2 tonight
Dodgers and Giants. Almost enough to make you forget the Sharks blew the big one last night. But the game tonight should be good. Two young pitchers, one of whom seems to be the next big thing, in Billingsley, and one of whom is on his way to being a very good starter, in Sanchez. All things point to a night of good starting pitching and a low scoring game. That means that instead there’ll probably be 10 runs scored between the teams.
The biggest thing that I would like to see tonight is consistent control from Sanchez. He’s got great stuff, but he needs to learn to control it every night. Fortunately, he’s got an amazing model to work from in Randy Johnson. Given that he’s struggled lately, Randy’s still proven to be remarkably consistent in not walking hitters and either striking them out, or forcing them to put the ball in play. Obviously, it helps to have a filthy fastball, slider combination. But, the upside with Sanchez is that he has fantastic stuff, he just needs to learn to control it. But, control can be taught. Stuff, not so much.
Pablo…..it’s obvious that you are an amazing talent and the only thing that’s standing between you and being an elite hitter is pitch selection. Take a page out of Pujols’ book and take a strike for God’s sake. That goes for everyone on the Giants. Nothing boosts a pitchers confidence like a 1-2-3 inning where he only threw 10 pitches. Working a count and making a pitcher throw more pitches not only runs up their pitch count and tires them out, but it also can get in their head. With Billingsley being a young pitcher, the deeper into counts we can work the better. That, combined with a few ball/strike calls going our way can lead to mistake pitches, which lead to good things.
The biggest thing that I would like to see tonight is consistent control from Sanchez. He’s got great stuff, but he needs to learn to control it every night. Fortunately, he’s got an amazing model to work from in Randy Johnson. Given that he’s struggled lately, Randy’s still proven to be remarkably consistent in not walking hitters and either striking them out, or forcing them to put the ball in play. Obviously, it helps to have a filthy fastball, slider combination. But, the upside with Sanchez is that he has fantastic stuff, he just needs to learn to control it. But, control can be taught. Stuff, not so much.
Pablo…..it’s obvious that you are an amazing talent and the only thing that’s standing between you and being an elite hitter is pitch selection. Take a page out of Pujols’ book and take a strike for God’s sake. That goes for everyone on the Giants. Nothing boosts a pitchers confidence like a 1-2-3 inning where he only threw 10 pitches. Working a count and making a pitcher throw more pitches not only runs up their pitch count and tires them out, but it also can get in their head. With Billingsley being a young pitcher, the deeper into counts we can work the better. That, combined with a few ball/strike calls going our way can lead to mistake pitches, which lead to good things.
Giants 5 Dodgers 4
The only good sporting news coming out of the Bay Area last night was that the Giants beat the Dodgers, coming from behind to win by 1. Obviously I made the choice to watch the Sharks game last night and I haven’t had the opportunity to watch the replay of this one, so basically any information I could give you would come from ESPN highlights.
What I will say is that it looks like Zito is pitching a whole lot better this year than in years past. I’m not sure if that’s because of a new and improved workout regimen, or because he very clearly has no pressure on him to perform anymore because nobody anywhere expects him to pitch well. Somehow though, he’s putting up some decent numbers. Hopefully that’ll continue. I may have to stop referring to him by his alternate names, like Barry "Trade Me" Zito, or Barry "If I was a right-hander I'd be out of the league" Zito, or Barry "Sabean's Mistake" Zito. Seriously though, I don't hate the guy, he's been nothing but a positive force off the field and is, by all accounts, a great human being. It's not his fault that he's overpaid by a country mile. I just hate that the Giants are putting such a large portion of their money into a guy who pitches like a 5th starter, but is paid like an ace.
It looks like Sandoval is going to be catching every 5th day or so for Zito, by the way. I don’t have a problem with this. We need to give Molina a rest occasionally, and we need to keep Sandoval in the lineup so that he can improve. I mean, yeah, Molina is our cleanup hitter, but the fact that I even have to write that sentence shows what a sad state our batting order is in. Molina has no future on our team beyond this year, and maybe next. After that, Buster Posey will be taking his spot. So removing him from the lineup to keep Sandoval in seems to be the right move.
The Giants team this year has to be all about development for the future, and seeing what is there for you talent wise. The future of this team isn’t going to be built around Rowand, Winn, Molina or Aurelia. It’ll be around our young pitching and hitting. That’s why I think that we need to play guys like Ishikawa, Burris, Sandoval, etc… pretty much every day, regardless of their struggles, to find out what we have and to let those players develop. I’m not a manager, but common sense says that a young player is going to perform a heck of a lot better when they know that the job is theirs, and they don’t have to be looking over their shoulder every time they have an 0 – 4 day with 3 strikeouts. They’re young. It’s going to happen. 20 games isn’t a huge sample size. Give them time.
I’m not looking for a winning team this year; I’m looking for a team that’s fun to watch.
What I will say is that it looks like Zito is pitching a whole lot better this year than in years past. I’m not sure if that’s because of a new and improved workout regimen, or because he very clearly has no pressure on him to perform anymore because nobody anywhere expects him to pitch well. Somehow though, he’s putting up some decent numbers. Hopefully that’ll continue. I may have to stop referring to him by his alternate names, like Barry "Trade Me" Zito, or Barry "If I was a right-hander I'd be out of the league" Zito, or Barry "Sabean's Mistake" Zito. Seriously though, I don't hate the guy, he's been nothing but a positive force off the field and is, by all accounts, a great human being. It's not his fault that he's overpaid by a country mile. I just hate that the Giants are putting such a large portion of their money into a guy who pitches like a 5th starter, but is paid like an ace.
It looks like Sandoval is going to be catching every 5th day or so for Zito, by the way. I don’t have a problem with this. We need to give Molina a rest occasionally, and we need to keep Sandoval in the lineup so that he can improve. I mean, yeah, Molina is our cleanup hitter, but the fact that I even have to write that sentence shows what a sad state our batting order is in. Molina has no future on our team beyond this year, and maybe next. After that, Buster Posey will be taking his spot. So removing him from the lineup to keep Sandoval in seems to be the right move.
The Giants team this year has to be all about development for the future, and seeing what is there for you talent wise. The future of this team isn’t going to be built around Rowand, Winn, Molina or Aurelia. It’ll be around our young pitching and hitting. That’s why I think that we need to play guys like Ishikawa, Burris, Sandoval, etc… pretty much every day, regardless of their struggles, to find out what we have and to let those players develop. I’m not a manager, but common sense says that a young player is going to perform a heck of a lot better when they know that the job is theirs, and they don’t have to be looking over their shoulder every time they have an 0 – 4 day with 3 strikeouts. They’re young. It’s going to happen. 20 games isn’t a huge sample size. Give them time.
I’m not looking for a winning team this year; I’m looking for a team that’s fun to watch.
Monday, April 27, 2009
Always the Bridesmaid, Never the Bride
I put off writing this all day. My original intention was to simmer overnight and have this up in the morning, but as I got to work I realized that I still couldn't do it. So here I am, the evening after finally putting words to 'paper'. I thought long and hard all day about how I was going to recap last nights Game 6 of the first round. I had a lot of ideas that I rejected as fast as they popped up. During all that I realized it doesn't matter. If you watched the game then you know how it played out and picking at a fresh wound is just painful. If you didn't there is only one word that can describe last night: choke.
Instead of rehashing the questionable play put forth by yet another bested Sharks squad I'm going to take a look back at how we got here. What happened? How in God's Name did the best team in the NHL lose to an 8th seeded team in round one? Once again I have a single word: culture. We'll come full circle, but I'm gonna Tarantino this a bit and go way, way back.
Not too far back that it isn't still a touch fresh, though. To just after the lockout. That's really when the trend started. Quickly getting up to speed shouldn't be too hard. The Sharks have averaged 107 points per season since the lockout. 117 points in the '08-'09 season earned a President's Cup (albeit a backed into one). Those are great numbers and have led to division titles. Excellent! But who cares? I don't. We all know the real season starts after all 30 teams have played all 82 games.
Let's quickly review the post-seasons since the lockout:
2006
Playoffs would find San Jose in a fifth seed spot and advancing as far as round two. After gaining a 2 games to none lead over the Edmonton Oilers the Sharks dropped four straight to start their golf season.
2007
This year was supposed to be different. You could feel it. It was going to be a good playoff run. 107Pts in the regular season, a number five seed and changes were made that seemed exciting. Guerin was added as the critical piece to bring a Cup home. Alas, it wasn't meant to be. The Sharks made it to round two once again only to blow it against Detroit. With less than a minute to play in game 4 and the potential to take a 3-1 series lead captain Marleau made a critical error that allowed the Wings to tie the game, win in overtime and prevent San Jose from winning another series game.
2007 allowed the Sharks to try darts and horseshoes.
2008
2008! Once again changes abound. Key pieces were added at the trade deadline and San Jose was finally ready for the long haul to The Cup. Enter Calgary. San Jose had to fight through seven nasty games to barely make it out of that series and their only reward was to face Dallas. A collapse in the second round allowed Dallas to advance. Once again Joe, Nabby, Seto, JR and the gang hit the links.
That brings us up to pace. I hope, dear reader that you see a trend developing and it disturbs you. It certainly disturbs me. Doug Wilson is brilliant, he really is. Critical moves at just the right time and the development of young talent is a game that no one in the NHL can rival Mr. Wilson at. The problem though is that it just continues to not work.
Rivet, Campbell, Guerin... it's a long list of names that were the 'critical pieces'. The final bits of the puzzle to finally bring a Cup home. They couldn't get the job done so Wilson found others that maybe could. Blake, Boiler, Lukowich, Moen... even digging deep and giving an aging Lemieux a chance. Anything to get that needed experience and finally show the NHL that San Jose is no one-trick pony.
Not a single one of those pieces made the impact that was promised. Not a single one performed in a playoff series to the extent that the Sharks needed. Zero impact from key deadline trades. Maybe the formula just isn't working, Mr. Wilson.
It isn't fair to blame those guys, though. They were hired to come in and do a job and they did most of it. Great regular season play, contributions not only on the ice but off. Experience that just wasn't there before. That does make a difference. It just never materialized into the right difference.
I know it's trite and seems to be the trend, but I'm gonna go ahead and put this squarely on Jumbo Joe's shoulders. Stick Patty up on top with cotton candy in hand and I think you find the real problem. Neither one made an impact that, as leaders would have been more critical than anything else another member of the 23 man squad could have done. Thornton had a paltry 5 points to finish a -3 in the slaughtering that was handed out by Anaheim. Yeah, a fight at the faceoff of game 6 should have done something, but it didn't. Too little, too late. Marleau wasn't much better. Perennial playoff dropouts.
I'm not going to let Nabokov off the hook, either. Don't think I forgot about him. Nabby managed stats that anyone would be embarassed of – 2.82 goals against and an .890 save percentage. Utterly tragic. The Nabokov of the regular season is a stellar, stand-on-his-head nightly type of goalie. One of the elite. The playoffs often find him looking like a dumb-struck kid fresh out of high school that suddenly finds himself tending net in the NHL. Amazing when it doesn't matter and utter bollocks when it does.
Back to what I said about 23 men. It takes them all, this is true. The blame has to go somewhere though and those three men named above deserve to shoulder more than their fair share. The crux of the problem, in this humble man's opinion lays with those three. Sort it out, boys because I think at least one of you doesn't return next year. Here's a stick, have fun.
GM Doug Wilson fired coach Ron Wilson after he failed to advance the team yet again last season. Well, Doug I think it's safe to say that coaching wasn't really the problem. Sure, the new system works. McClellan is doing a great job, getting guys to produce in the regular stretch and looked poised to bring the ship back upright. The end result was the same though. Where does that leave us? Was Ron Wilson really the problem or not? We may never know, but I for one think not.
GM Doug Wilson has also made strategically brilliant moves to gain key players in the off season and at the trade deadline. Every one of those players has failed to make the impact that was expected. Pressure dictating performance? Maybe a little. Lack of desire? Doubtful. Leadership? There it is again, isn't it. So are the trades to blame? No way, Jose! Look at the core. Just like any healthy body there is a healthy core behind it. Get production from the leaders and the rest of the gang follows along. It worked all regular season. The playoffs only reinforce my belief by producing Nada. Zip. Zilch.
San Jose is in the record books for yet another reason after the 2009 playoffs – they've managed to become just the second team since the lockout to win a President's Trophy and take a first round exit. There may be a silver lining to that, however. When Detroit did it they rallied back the following year to make the finals and snagged a Cup in 2008. Maybe that's really what's going on in San Jose. I'm not convinced, but I'm willing to pretend.
So where do we go? If I'm Doug Wilson I move the Captain and Joe. Keep Nabby because we know he's solid during regular season play. Shuffle some pieces. Mix things up. Look to developing talent. Keep some of those draft picks for the organization instead of trading them on broken promises and rentals. Is it going to hurt? In the short-term it's going to feel like a slow death, but in the long term I think the payoff far outweighs the heartache.
Culture: I told you we'd make it back here. Every team has a culture. It's what they're built on, believe in and preach day in and day out. San Jose has built a very solid one that has lasted quite a while. Unfortunately, it's a culture of failure. The Sharks are so ingrained with it no amount of scrubbing will clean it off. The only way to change it is to rebuild from the inside out and kick to the curb the garbage. I know some won't agree with that assessment and that's fine. I stand by it. At the end of the day it matters not how you got there, but where you ended up. I'll take an 8th seed in round one and a Cup over a President's Trophy and golf lessons any day.
Leaders are born, not made and that is becoming more and more obvious in San Jose.
Photo credit - AP Photo/Henry DiRocco
49ers 2009 Draft
Ill give my evaluation of the 2009 NFL draft by the San Francisco 49ers. First I think the trade to Carolina to give away our second and fourth round pick this year for a first round pick next year. I thought this was a fairly week draft in general and there wasn't much for our needs in those positions and gaining a second first round pick next year is a good decision where the odds of getting a game breaking player are double. Now to the picks.
Rd 1 No 10 overall: Michael Crabtree, WR, Texas Tech
I think the 49ers benefitted from an injury to steal possibly the 2nd or 3rd best player in this draft at the tenth spot. His foot injury, and thus lack of combine numbers, combined with the potential of being a diva indicated some ego problems to many teams who wanted to stay away from a guy like that. This will not be a problem for us, the first time he is out in Santa Clara running that 45 ft hill in 100 degree heat after practice will shut him up pretty quickly and get him to fall in line. It worked with V.D. last year and should work again. I think Crabtree will be an impact player next year and am excited about our young recievers.
Rd 3 No 74 overall: Glen Coffee, RB, Alabama
A good compliment to Frank Gore. Should be able to give him spells in short yardage situations. Again didn't really address a pressing need, but I think it was a good pick here again due to there not really being quality choices worth taking this high in positions I think we really needed, those positions being a tackle (maybe not so pressing, lets see how Marvel Smith works out), Nose Tackle (I was a little sad to see B.J. Raji go one pick ahead of us), edge pass rusher and safety. I think between Clayton and Coffee we have enough to give Gore the rest he needs and we should be able to get productions out of one of the two of them.
Rd 5 No 146 overall: Scott McKillop, ILB, Pittsburg
With Takeo Spikes and Patrick Willis Im not really sure why we drafted in this position. Not really a pressing need at all, I imagine he should get some good time on special teams where hopefully he can become a contributer. I wouldn't expect much more than that from him, however he could be a nice surprise.
Rd 5 No 171 overall: Nate Davis, QB, Ball State
This is my favorite late round pick by us and I think a steal this late in the draft. He fell this far due to a learning disability many were afraid would affect onfield decisions. He will not be an immediate impact, I would be surprised if he saw the field this year, he probably wont even get on the field next year, but with some hard work, both in practice, and especially in the film room, he could have the potential to be an NFL quarterback, possibly even a good one, but it will take years of work with no playing time, does he have the mental toughness to do this? I guess we will find out.
Rd 6 No 184 overall: Bear Pascoe, TE, Fresno State
Dont know much about him, never saw him play, but he has the size to be a good blocker, hopefully he can be a cheaper Billy Bajema this year. He's got the size to be a second blocker and out there on the end with Vernon Davis we could have very good blocking front end which is right in line with what Singletary wants to do in our offense this coming year.
Rd 7 No 219 overall: Curtis Taylor, S, LSU
Finally we address a need. How much of an impact will he have this year? Who knows. Maybe he will have a good camp and surprise everyone, maybe he will have a terrible camp and not even make the team. We will find out soon enough. I have read he has had some off field issues, maybe if Singletary can help him get his act together he can become a value pick for is.
Rd 7 No 244 overall: Ricky Jean-Frnacois, DT, LSU
A little undersized, but posses above average skills needed for his position. Has had some injury issues, mostly a little earlier in his career, hopefully he is over them, also had some off field issues. If Singletary can get him to focus on football and keep him away from whatever problems he might have had he could also be a contributer and a very good value from the seventh round. Also could not make the team, he did fall to number 244 for a reason.
-Image courtesy of ESPN.com
Open Thread for the Sharks Game
You know how this works. Post comments for everyone to read and respond to.
San Jose Sharks - Game 7
First, welcome to the blog. Looks like this is the first post so... welcome. Hope you all enjoy. On to business.
Now you might think I'm getting ahead of myself, but I'm not. Truth be told, tonight is game seven. The Sharks need to enter this game with that mindset and the top players (I'm looking at you Jumbo) need to step up and set the tone early. Desperation, passion and aggression are what it's going to take to win. I for one think they can pull it out. It isn't going to be easy, but there is no reason that The Sharks can't make it happen.
Even in the regular season there were slumps and they always found ways to stay on top.
Go to the body early, often and crash the net. Control the puck. Calm the hell down. Control the turnovers. Control the neutral zone.
We've already seen Hiller isn't a magician. He's just a young goalie that has been very lucky (boo me on that all you want, but it's true). His defense has made giant contributions to keeping that puck out of the net just as much as he has. Juicy rebounds are bouncing the wrong way. Posts are being hit right and left. Luck has to tilt at some point and that point could very well be now.
If tonight doesn't happen look for big changes to the lineup come fall.
Now you might think I'm getting ahead of myself, but I'm not. Truth be told, tonight is game seven. The Sharks need to enter this game with that mindset and the top players (I'm looking at you Jumbo) need to step up and set the tone early. Desperation, passion and aggression are what it's going to take to win. I for one think they can pull it out. It isn't going to be easy, but there is no reason that The Sharks can't make it happen.
Even in the regular season there were slumps and they always found ways to stay on top.
Go to the body early, often and crash the net. Control the puck. Calm the hell down. Control the turnovers. Control the neutral zone.
We've already seen Hiller isn't a magician. He's just a young goalie that has been very lucky (boo me on that all you want, but it's true). His defense has made giant contributions to keeping that puck out of the net just as much as he has. Juicy rebounds are bouncing the wrong way. Posts are being hit right and left. Luck has to tilt at some point and that point could very well be now.
If tonight doesn't happen look for big changes to the lineup come fall.
In real life, a Shark would kick the hell out of a Duck
After watching the Sharks pull it out in overtime against the Ducks on Saturday, a few things went through my head.
First tonight’s game decides the series for both teams. Obviously, the Sharks need to win or their done, but whoever wins the game tonight is going to take the series. There’s no way that the Sharks lose a game 7 back at the tank if they take this one from the Ducks in Anaheim.
Second, the Ducks have had just about everything go their way this series. It just seems like every 50/50 bounce of the puck is going to the Ducks, and putting them in situations where they can capitalize. To their credit, they haven’t missed opportunities while the Sharks have. You would figure that eventually some breaks would go to the Sharks, but it hasn’t happened yet and it may not happen tonight.
Third, the Sharks have to start playing quality third periods; case in point being Saturday’s game. They dominated, just absolutely dominated, the first 40 minutes of the game, and then gave away the third period. They came out of the intermission looking hesitant, like they wanted to hold onto the lead rather than put their foot on the Ducks throat. And, not surprisingly, they gave up two goals in about 5 minutes of play. It’s great that they won in overtime, but I really thought that they had the opportunity to go into Anaheim tonight with some serious momentum. If the Sharks come out hesitant tonight then they’re pretty much screwed.
Fourth, what happened to the power play? The Sharks are starting to generate some points in the recent games, but out power play has been terrible for most of the series. Terrible to the point where, on some power plays, they can’t even hold it in the zone, let alone generate some good scoring opportunities.
So that’s pretty much where I’m at with the Sharks this post season. I’ve been screaming at the T.V. way too much, and I’m starting to scare my dog and girlfriend. A lot of what I’ve been pissed off about is the VS coverage of the series. I didn’t get to see most of the first game of the series because VS was covering a bonus game into overtime. I kind of understood that, but at the same time the Sharks game was starting during the intermission before the overtime period, yet they didn’t provide any coverage. That’s just an embarrassment. Plus, I’m sick of the announcers just fawning over the Ducks the entire game. They can’t get enough of them. Try some even handed broadcasting without rooting for the 8th seeded team for 60 minutes.
My prediction for tonight: the Sharks wake up and realize they’re the better team and they play like it for 60 minutes. Sharks 3 Anaheim 2.
First tonight’s game decides the series for both teams. Obviously, the Sharks need to win or their done, but whoever wins the game tonight is going to take the series. There’s no way that the Sharks lose a game 7 back at the tank if they take this one from the Ducks in Anaheim.
Second, the Ducks have had just about everything go their way this series. It just seems like every 50/50 bounce of the puck is going to the Ducks, and putting them in situations where they can capitalize. To their credit, they haven’t missed opportunities while the Sharks have. You would figure that eventually some breaks would go to the Sharks, but it hasn’t happened yet and it may not happen tonight.
Third, the Sharks have to start playing quality third periods; case in point being Saturday’s game. They dominated, just absolutely dominated, the first 40 minutes of the game, and then gave away the third period. They came out of the intermission looking hesitant, like they wanted to hold onto the lead rather than put their foot on the Ducks throat. And, not surprisingly, they gave up two goals in about 5 minutes of play. It’s great that they won in overtime, but I really thought that they had the opportunity to go into Anaheim tonight with some serious momentum. If the Sharks come out hesitant tonight then they’re pretty much screwed.
Fourth, what happened to the power play? The Sharks are starting to generate some points in the recent games, but out power play has been terrible for most of the series. Terrible to the point where, on some power plays, they can’t even hold it in the zone, let alone generate some good scoring opportunities.
So that’s pretty much where I’m at with the Sharks this post season. I’ve been screaming at the T.V. way too much, and I’m starting to scare my dog and girlfriend. A lot of what I’ve been pissed off about is the VS coverage of the series. I didn’t get to see most of the first game of the series because VS was covering a bonus game into overtime. I kind of understood that, but at the same time the Sharks game was starting during the intermission before the overtime period, yet they didn’t provide any coverage. That’s just an embarrassment. Plus, I’m sick of the announcers just fawning over the Ducks the entire game. They can’t get enough of them. Try some even handed broadcasting without rooting for the 8th seeded team for 60 minutes.
My prediction for tonight: the Sharks wake up and realize they’re the better team and they play like it for 60 minutes. Sharks 3 Anaheim 2.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)