Sharks Gameday: New Gotham

Unfortunately I won’t be able to watch tonight’s game (damn damn damn) but I have a good feeling about it.

I’m surprized that Puck Daddy commenters actually have worse Grammar than Spade. I’ve seen bad grammar and spelling, but noone is on Spade’s level

These stats and this kind of analysis is just what we saw against Colorado early on – the Sharks had the edge in numbers but weren’t getting the wins.

I don’t know — this isn’t any 51-17 outshooting margin we’re talking about with Chicago. And I’d expect raw scoring chance counts to favor a team that spends most of the game trailing — that’s the deceptive nature of comebacks, I’d think. Chicago wasn’t nearly as interested in scoring a third-period goal as San Jose was last game.

Can’t wait to hear about how much the Sharks deserve a better fate in G3, too.

In an odd twist of irony, I’ll actually be flying to Chicago this Sunday to spend a few days there — might hurt my blog participation for a bit. The ironic part is that my brother, who lives in Chicago, won’t be there during my visit — he’s working for a client outside of San Jose next week.

It means something, I’m sure, but I can’t decipher it.

Watching these games, I would have to say that it’s fair to say that it’s been pretty even. Even though the Sharks aren’t winning games, game three could go either way. I thought the Sharks made some real dumbass moves in the last game. The Douglas Murray roughing minor was stupid and the Joe Thornton slashing minor in the third was horrible. I don’t know, looked intentional to me. If it was, then that is retarded. Why would you hack a guy in the wrist in the face off circle with a ref standing about 3 feet away and looking at both sticks? That’s just stupid.
It’s been a good series so far though. I agree with you that it’s to early to count the Sharks out now. Although that won’t stop me from making choking sounds throughout the game at the watch party I’m going to which is made up mostly of Sharks fans.

Ha – love how you called out Bourne in this post. I thought the exact same you thought when he wrote trying to compare Crosby to Thornton, when it’s actually Crosby who’s booking tee times right now while Thornton is spotting the most beautiful beard ever in teal.

I also love how he brings up his own hockey accomplishments in every post on PD.

Whatever.

Tonight’s game should be a beauty.

I always liked how the poem “Chicago” by Carl Sandberg started like this:

Hog Butcher for the World,
Tool Maker, Stacker of Wheat,

Calling someone a “Stacker of wheat” is an underrated burn.

He even talks about what a great leader Sidney Crosby is* for channeling his frustrations in the proper ways that benefit his team.

My favorite memory of Crosby in these playoffs was him whining like a little bitch and breaking his stick on the opponents goal post after being out muscled again in the defensive zone. Way to channel that frustration like a leader!

At least Thornton hit another player with his stick.

Milwaukee is sooo much better than Chi-town. They have that awesome Calatrava.

I can only assume he is talking about Crosby taking that dumb boarding penalty in game seven vs. the Canadiens – he really showed his composure and leadership sitting in the box like that.

THIS. I giggled when I read it.

It’s even more confusing when you think that most writers are in love with yesterday’s story. That Crosby snapping thing just happened. What this reveals is that he is even more in love with an older, different narrative. And OMG facts must be ignored because it must fit.

It’s a chicken and the egg question: Has Chicago’s transition game been so effective because San Jose’s forecheck has been so passive or has San Jose’s passive forecheck allowed Chicago to set the tone with their transition game?

This is from Alan Muir’s article on SI. I’m confused: how would a passive forecheck lead to an transitional opportunity for the other team? Isn’t the problem that San Jose’s defensemen have been caught pinching? I’m genuinely wondering.

No leather jacket ceremony?

Uh-oh — a bit kick-y there.

That one should count — Sharks win this postseason’s 5-on-3 excellence award.

It’s starting to look as if the trend going into last game is going to prevail — one of these teams will lose tonight, and it will likely be because they only scored one goal.

So far in this series, one huge discrepancy has been power play shots — San Jose has taken 29; Chicago has taken 2.

Problem is, Sharks have scored on 3 of their 29 man-advantage shots. Meanwhile, Hawks have scored on both of their man-advantage shots.

Uh-oh. Time to find that inner Flyer.

Might be time to warm up the kid-running-into-the-glass video. I’ve been reading all week and was trying to figure out why all the Shark fans were so optimistic going on the road two down and not playing the Avs.

On the advice of my psychiatrist, I’m going to take a break until Sunday. If you don’t hear from me then, please inform my family.

now I know every blogger and commenter here made a case for the sharks not being chokers…and made great cases..and probally correct…but shit someone had to post this….someone…someone with balls of steel…someone who could crush a wooden statue with h is penis…someone who could make a billygoat cry…there is one…man….and that man is me:

I believe this adequately represents how sharks fans feel:

Hi, just wanted to pop in again, I’ve watched games one and three and can agree that there’s no choking in this edition of the Sharks. Anything could have happened in those games. Goaltending and chance seem to have been the deciding factors.

In fact, that’s how the BOS-PHI series started – the first three could have gone either way and Boston won them all. Here’s hoping that losing with a 3-0 lead doesn’t happen exclusively when I don’t want it to.

Its too bad for the Sharks. This is pretty similar to the Wings series but the reverse result. Either team could be up three nothing really but the Hawks are just a little better, their goaltending is a little better and they are getting offence across the board. And the guys who are not scoring, like Hossa, can still contribute away from the puck, unlike Heatley who seems to be either losing his man or getting knocked off the puck.

The usual narrative is going to continue about them being chokers but I think that Chicago is just the better team. Certainly Thorton and Marleau have been excellent.