Joe Thornton says GM Doug Wilson "needs to stop lying, shut his mouth."

[burn_this_city]

Thornton to me is defined by the playoff "missing" milk carton pic that's floated around for years.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

That's such a nonsense reputation though.

[burn_this_city]

Is it? He's a career -27 in the playoffs. His biggest knock has always been that he never elevates his game when it matters the most.

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpos...&postcount=106

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Is it? He's a career -27 in the playoffs. His biggest knock has always been that he never elevates his game when it matters the most.

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpos...&postcount=106

I view Thornton and the sharks the way I see the Sedins and Vancouver, any of them might end up on a cup winning team but none of them are able to win a cup.
And in Thorntons case I think he's worse, the Sedins were always slow and soft, and yet they did somehow manage to make it to a final, Thornton has all the attributes a cup winner should have and yet couldn't be arsed to take his team all the way. You really can't see it as anything else a lack of drive on his part

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by dino7c

I didn't think Wilson said anything that bad...Sorry Joe you didn't get it done, its a results based business

I wouldn't view this as anything less than a tactical move on Wilson's part.

What better way to get these guys to waive the NTC's than by completely pissing them off in public. This was not an accidental slip of the mouth by the GM.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Is it? He's a career -27 in the playoffs. His biggest knock has always been that he never elevates his game when it matters the most.

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpos...&postcount=106

You look at all his playoff stats and the only one you post is -27? That doesn't tell close to the whole story.

2005-06: 9 points in 11 games.
06-07: 11 points in 11 games.
07-08: 10 points in 13 games.
08-09: 5 points in 6 games.
09-10: 12 points in 15 games.
10-11: 17 points in 18 games.
11-12: 5 points in 5 games.
12-13: 10 points in 11 games.
13-14: 3 points in 7 games.

He's a 0.79 PPG player in the playoffs. On the flipside, he is 'the guy' on that team and they've never won. It hasn't always been his fault, but he's the best player and he hasn't elevated, as you've said.

The league never learns this very important lesson. If your aging, 34/35 year old star player didn't win a championship when he was 'the guy' and 28 years old, he's probably not going to carry you with 7 extra years of wear and tear on his body. Thornton needs a new role, a new team, a whole bunch of new, if he ever hopes to cash one in.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Is it? He's a career -27 in the playoffs. His biggest knock has always been that he never elevates his game when it matters the most.

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpos...&postcount=106

Most players don't elevate their games in the playoffs when you actually look at it.

Marleau was the one who actually disappeared for a long time in San Jose and somehow skated by without backlash. Thornton always caught the flak. Since then Marleau has had a couple decent years of playoffs and as a result the focus on Thornton is worse.

It's an undeserved reputation imo.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

If Thornton plays exactly the same and the Sharks win a cup, which could easily have happened based on elevated play from their goalies and d-corps (not to mention fewer injuries), he'd be looked at as a great playoff performer. Similarly, a couple of finals losses and Toews is the guy who just can't win the big one (seriously his playoff stats were awful for an extended period). People talked about Datsyuk like this before the Wings won in 08.

He's one guy on a team that happens not to have gotten it done. Every year good teams lose in the playoffs and it's NEVER one guy's fault. Reputations for guys being bad in the postseason are rarely true and it's usually a matter of "this guy is an important player on a pretty good team that lost".

[neo45]

It's a deserved reputation. He played awful in every big game at the Olympics. He also went an entire series without a point in Boston when he was their star player

[taco.vidal]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

I view Thornton and the sharks the way I see the Sedins and Vancouver, any of them might end up on a cup winning team but none of them are able to win a cup.

Like Jarome Iginla!

[sketchyt]

Originally Posted by neo45

It's a deserved reputation. He played awful in every big game at the Olympics. He also went an entire series without a point in Boston when he was their star player

This is exactly where he got his reputation. However, what was under-reported after he got thrown under the bus was that he played with torn rib cartilage. He basically couldn't move and shouldn't have been out there.

He's been average to decent in most playoffs outside of that disaster.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by taco.vidal

Like Jarome Iginla!

No, Iginla did his part but never had the complete team around him. I see that as the difference between him and Thornton, Thormton has had everything put in place around him, a perennial playoff contending team, decent goaltending, it may be unfair but in the end you look at him and can't help thinking he didn't provide the leadership to get out of the second round.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by sketchyt

This is exactly where he got his reputation. However, what was under-reported after he got thrown under the bus was that he played with torn rib cartilage. He basically couldn't move and shouldn't have been out there.

He's been average to decent in most playoffs outside of that disaster.

Average to decent doesn't win cups.

[Dime_On_Flames]

I had huge respect for Thornton and his commitment after that series in the playoffs when he played with broken ribs. That's gotta be one of the worst injuries to sustain. I'd rather break my arm then suffer broken ribs ever again.

Mad respect!!

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

No, Iginla did his part but never had the complete team around him. I see that as the difference between him and Thornton, Thormton has had everything put in place around him, a perennial playoff contending team, decent goaltending, it may be unfair but in the end you look at him and can't help thinking he didn't provide the leadership to get out of the second round.

You could make the same argument about Thornton. While people complain Iginla never got his No 1 C (he was "stuck" with Langkow, play makers like Huselius and Tanguay) who did Thornton get? Setoguchi and Cheechoo... and look at their stats with and without Thornton.

[Badgers Nose]

Devils advocate: Maybe he plays at 100% all the time where the average player plays 90% and dials it to 100% in the playoffs.

The 110% cliche is for idiots.

All I know is that there isn't enough data in the public domain to say he is not a hard worker or that he has no heart.

[Badgers Nose]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

No, Iginla did his part but never had the complete team around him. I see that as the difference between him and Thornton, Thormton has had everything put in place around him, a perennial playoff contending team, decent goaltending, it may be unfair but in the end you look at him and can't help thinking he didn't provide the leadership to get out of the second round.

Selective memory? I am usually an Iggy apologist but keep in mind that at one time he had kipper, regehr, phaneuf, bouw playing behind him and the much vaunted on CP jokinen as his centre.

Also, Iggy played like ass in game seven. The best player that night was Conroy. By your reasoning whether or not he was injured is irrelevant.

[FanIn80]

"No Show" Joe
Regular season (per game): [G 0.28] [A 0.70] [P 0.98] [S 1.99] [% 14.1]
Playoffs (per game): [G 0.18] [A 0.57] [P 0.75] [S 2.19] [% 8.3]

[Phanuthier]

Originally Posted by Badgers Nose

Selective memory? I am usually an Iggy apologist but keep in mind that at one time he had kipper, regehr, phaneuf, bouw playing behind him and the much vaunted on CP jokinen as his centre.

Also, Iggy played like ass in game seven. The best player that night was Conroy. By your reasoning whether or not he was injured is irrelevant.

+1

I hate the people always say we had nobody, nobody was brought into help Iginla, etc etc. It makes it sound like we were a one-player team that was nothing without Iginla, its actually quite insulting.

If anything, we rode on Kiprusoffs back through regular season and many of playoffs, he was easily the MVP in my eyes throughout all those playoff years. But besides those 2 guys, we have a all-star defense (Regehr, Bouw, Phaneuf before he sucked), we brought in Sarich, Gio in his last year. At forward, we had one of the most consistent, 2-way centers in the league in Langkow. Huselius and Tanguay might not have been centers, but they were among the best playmakers in the league (Tanguay actually led the league in scoring one year before he got injured). Scoring was never a problem for this team, often times we'd show up for 5 minutes a game but we'd have more then enough firepower make up for being completely invisible for the other 55 minutes. It was always "Jerkyl and Hyde" for anyone that wants to go back to threads from those years. We were a pretty damn good team..... really annoying the people don't remember that.

[GoJetsGo]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

+1

I hate the people always say we had nobody, nobody was brought into help Iginla, etc etc. It makes it sound like we were a one-player team that was nothing without Iginla, its actually quite insulting.

You have always been one of the harshest Iginla critics. Hard to take what you say seriously when this is taken into account.

The fact Iginla never had a true No. 1 centre was the biggest mistake this franchise made from 2004 onward. It is not entirely inaccurate to suggest those were some very uneven teams when we were completely relying on a RW to carry the load.