Are the Sharks the poster child of why you shoudn't rush into a rebuild?

[Wolfman]

Montreal had a quick turn around a couple years ago...so it's happened before. Not having Price last half hurt big time. I think any team can do it with the right moves.

[Iniggywetrust]

Pavelski could quite possibly be the most under rated player in the league. He consistently puts up top line production but is over shadowed by Thornton and Cotoure. To be a good team, you generally need a stud d, a top Center, and an above average goalie. With the addition of Jones, and their depth, they retooled perfectly. Rebuilding is just a statement used by ####ty teams with no depth and a bad draft record.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Less than a year ago, many fans were calling Pittsburgh a seriously flawed team that needed a major overhaul.

To be fair, they've beaten the two easiest teams to get in the East.

They haven't proven anything really yet. The Pens are perennial underachievers.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by nik-

To be fair, they've beaten the two easiest teams to get in the East.

They haven't proven anything really yet. The Pens are perennial underachievers.

Not many people would include the Caps in "the two easiest teams"

Regardless, getting to the 3rd round is rarely a fluke

[Textcritic]

The thing I love about the Sharks current playoffs run is that it helps to put the Flames' own future into perspective. SJ is a good team, but not at all what I would consider a great team, or one of the WC powerhouses, and yet here they are in the third round. Based on their performance this year, Calgary is not all that far off—at all. If the Flames fix their goaltending this summer I could see them next year right where the Sharks are now.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Not many people would include the Caps in "the two easiest teams"

Regardless, getting to the 3rd round is rarely a fluke

god dammit, I was thinking of Tampa's opponents

So yeah, the Pens are doing well this year, but they are underachievers still in my mind.

[H2SO4(aq)]

Thornton continues to somehow be underrated and overlooked. He's an excellent hockey player. I've never seen anyone so good at stick handling and passing in traffic all while keeping his head up. He's sees the ice better than most. He had a couple tough seasons but by and large he's still a top 20 offensive player in the league. I wouldn't mind him getting the Grail this season.

[heep223]

I would love to see Thornton lift the cup.

[afc wimbledon]

I must have banged my head on something and missed the Sharks winning the cup, before I had that accident the Sharks were a team that made the playoffs and then got ****canned before the final.

[Sylvanfan]

If St.Louis wipes the floor with them how will people feel? They have some really good players on the roster. But if they miss out this year I think they could wait a long time for the next opportunity.

Doug Wilson is a good GM, and he knows he needs to retool the team. But he put himself in a position where his players had more power than he did. So he's had to go out and make moves with more of a win now angle.

When Marleau and Thornton leave for nothing and Pavelski is 34 and Burns is 32, with Vlassic and Couture moving to the back end of their prime. Does it look like a championship team or a Minnesota Wild type team?

[d_phaneuf]

I think a key thing being overlooked is luck

their prime was technically 4-5 years ago but they lost to the Hawks and Canucks in the WCFs

they wanted to rebuild, basically put Thornton and Marleau in the bargain bin but couldn't move

stripped Thornton of the captaincy, had their best D man playing 2nd line RW, think their run this year is down to the GM not being able to make the moves he wanted over anything else

[Frank MetaMusil]

Originally Posted by diane_phaneuf

I think a key thing being overlooked is luck

their prime was technically 4-5 years ago but they lost to the Hawks and Canucks in the WCFs

they wanted to rebuild, basically put Thornton and Marleau in the bargain bin but couldn't move

stripped Thornton of the captaincy, had their best D man playing 2nd line RW, think their run this year is down to the GM not being able to make the moves he wanted over anything else

I think the Sharks just have better goaltending, so it's tough to claim luck has a big factor. Niemi allowed the same kind of softie goals when he was their goalie, and you can just tell San Jose isn't worried about fluky shots going in anymore.

The Flames still would have made the playoffs with average goaltending. 11th in shots allowed vs. 30th in goals against is an ugly stat. This Sharks team didn't even make the playoffs last season because Calgary had decent goaltending.

[d_phaneuf]

I dont mean luck in their play

I mean luck in the fact that if they had moved Thornton and Marleau there's little to no chance they are here, if you asked Wilson last summer if he wanted those two to be on the team in September the answer was no

[CaptainYooh]

I don't believe in total re-build ("blow it up!"), as a valid concept. Unless a new team is introduced through an expansion draft, there is no way total re-build is even possible. More often than not, when mentioning re-build, people really mean letting go of all long-term veteran star players in exchange for high picks and good prospects. To project San Jose situation onto Calgary: considering how good Regehr's, Phaneuf's, Iginla's and Bouwmeester's careers have continued after their respective trades out of Calgary and how lousy were the returns to the Flames, the question should be: would Flames have been better off by keeping these players and continuing to build around them? I'd say, absolutely.

[Karl]

Originally Posted by Sylvanfan

If St.Louis wipes the floor with them how will people feel? They have some really good players on the roster. But if they miss out this year I think they could wait a long time for the next opportunity.

Doug Wilson is a good GM, and he knows he needs to retool the team. But he put himself in a position where his players had more power than he did. So he's had to go out and make moves with more of a win now angle.

When Marleau and Thornton leave for nothing and Pavelski is 34 and Burns is 32, with Vlassic and Couture moving to the back end of their prime. Does it look like a championship team or a Minnesota Wild type team?

Burns is 31 & Pavelski will be 32 in July.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brent_Burns

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Pavelski

[Sylvanfan]

So they'll be 33 and 32 when Thornton and Marleau deals expire in 2017. Not exactly the age of core players that teams are winning championships with.

[blankall]

The only time you need to blow it up is if you have nothing coming through the pipeline. The purpose of the blowup is to refill your prospect pool and get solid players.

Yes Marleau and Thornton are passed their prime.

The Sharks, however, have in their prime:

Couture - 27
Pavelski - 31
Vlassic - 29
Burns - 31

That's a great core to work around. On top of that they have a bunch of young depth players. So no, the Sharks do not need to blow things up. People made way to big a deal out of their previous inability to have playoff success. The fact of the matter is that it's just really hard to get far into the playoffs.

I wouldn't even describe what the Sharks have done as a "re-tool". Most of their key players were drafted by them. It's just an example of solid asset management and great drafting.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

I don't believe in total re-build ("blow it up!"), as a valid concept. Unless a new team is introduced through an expansion draft, there is no way total re-build is even possible. More often than not, when mentioning re-build, people really mean letting go of all long-term veteran star players in exchange for high picks and good prospects. To project San Jose situation onto Calgary: considering how good Regehr's, Phaneuf's, Iginla's and Bouwmeester's careers have continued after their respective trades out of Calgary and how lousy were the returns to the Flames, the question should be: would Flames have been better off by keeping these players and continuing to build around them? I'd say, absolutely.

No way. You can't just look at the return we got, you also have to look at the opportunities within the organization it created and the increased draft positioning we received.

For example in 2013, we drafted Monahan. We might have gotten lucky at a lower draft position and ended up with Domi, but most likely we would have ended up with a much worse player.

Although part of Calgary's rebuild can be attributed to luck. Getting Gaudreau and Brodie from later rounds was just lucky.

[Rick M.]

Originally Posted by blankall

No way. You can't just look at the return we got, you also have to look at the opportunities within the organization it created and the increased draft positioning we received.

For example in 2013, we drafted Monahan. We might have gotten lucky at a lower draft position and ended up with Domi, but most likely we would have ended up with a much worse player.

Although part of Calgary's rebuild can be attributed to luck. Getting Gaudreau and Brodie from later rounds was just lucky.

As the saying goes, you have to be lucky to be good. Look at all the late round success Detroit has had, not to mention Dallas getting Benn in the 5th round.

[Calgary4LIfe]

All I think when I see San Jose is a team that has for the most part drafted well, and traded well. It is just stupid luck that they are where they are in having Thornton and Marleau still on the team, but they are for the most part a well-managed organization that drafts and develops well, and usually makes good deals and signings. They are the poster child of how a team should be run (for the most part - every single team makes mistakes).

I think they deserve to be where they are at in the playoffs, and it wouldn't surprise me if they go all the way.

Edit: Also, I don't think there is a team in the NHL that rushes to rebuild. I think every team tries to win now, and most end up getting dragged kicking and screaming into a rebuild because they were poorly managed.