Two dudes blogging and podcasting about the San Jose Sharks, straight from sunny California.

post Episode 85 – Two D Gone Means Bad Times

February 3rd, 2010, 8:34 am

Filed under: podcast — Written by Mike

After things have been going so well for the Sharks, they lose two of their top four defensemen, and lose in a disappointing fashion to both Chicago and Detroit.  The Dudes talk about what it all means, break down the blockbuster trades in the NHL of the past week, and still leave enough time for listener email.  Also, make sure to weigh in on the new poll question after you listen.


8 Comments to “Episode 85 – Two D Gone Means Bad Times”

  1. WingsFanInSharkLand says:

    I paid those two guys to sit in front of you. They had to miss half the game so that they could come get their drink tickets from me and so that I could explain the basic rules of hockey to them and some history between the teams. Sounds like they did their job. They had specific instructions to spill beer on Mike if he was in his Matt Carle jersey. Did it happen? No? Damn.

    Doug is now 0 for 2 on paying up on his bets. The Claude Lemieux jersey was the first fail.

    • Mike says:

      That Matt Carle jersey has been permanently retired, unless I whip out the seam ripper and spend a dozen hours taking the numbers and letters off.

      • WingsFanInSharkLand says:

        Just take the name off. I once saw a jersey with the name “Ricchoo” on it. I forget what number was on the back, but it was meant to be a cross between Ricci and Cheechoo. You could do the same with the two Joes. It’s #18, right? THORTELSKI? OK, bad idea. What you should do is take listener suggestions on what to do with the jersey. Best idea wins a DOH shirt (but not the jersey).

  2. Patrick says:

    Yikes, “dirty welsher” is killing “greedy bastard.” Is the lone G.B. vote from Doug himself?

    Seriously though, you guys nailed another podcast. Thanks for the continued great content.

    I go back and forth on the last two games. On the one hand, a point out of Chicago was pretty good considering the first 10 minutes. And if not for a totally boneheaded delay of game penalty by Blake (seriously, that was maybe the worst one of those I’ve ever seen), and a terrible boarding call on Clowe, that’s a different game against Detroit last night.

    On the other hand, enough is enough with losing to the Wings and Hawks. I don’t want to have to talk myself into the lame arguments above anymore.

    If we can learn anything from the last two Wings games, it’s that next time those teams meet Heatley will score three goals to start the game, and then Detroit will come back to win 4-3.

  3. Patrick says:

    And I know this is beating a dead horse, but does Nabokov have to play SO much? It’s bad enough in a normal year, but he’s also playing Olympic hockey this season? Trot Greiss out there once in a while.

  4. Tom says:

    My take on the bet is it was a push… you were both right. The intention of the bet was that Demers would play OVER leach… no one considered if Boyle was out and they both played. I’d call it a push. Either both buy beers for each other or no one does…

  5. Mr. Plank says:

    Good podcast guys. Agreed that LA would be nuts to pick up Kovy as a rental.

  6. Adam says:


    Always an enjoyable podcast. One thing caught my attention:

    The “incomplete” grade because of missing players for the last Detroit game is a little generous. No question, Boyle and Vlasic are huge losses. But, it’s not like Detroit has been playing with a full roster in all these games, either. And they’re still winning, and winning pretty convincingly.

    In the January 4-1 loss, Detroit played with Franzen, Holmstrom, Kronwall, Ericsson, and Leino. That was totally disheartening. Guys that have missed games in the 3 Detroit tilts this year: Franzen (3x), Ericsson (2x), Leino (2x), Kronwall, Holmstrom, and Filppula. For San Jose, it’s been Pavelski, Malhotra, Boyle, and Vlasic.

    I realize hand-wringing over a handful of selected games is pretty myopic, especially whenever you take a macro look at the Sharks — last 10 games, the entire season overall, etc. However, talking about the President’s Trophy last year — whenever they would lose a big game, it was always, “look at our record overall!” — and how it was just a (historically) bad first round match-up and a hot goalie and an injured Marleau, etc after getting bounced by Anaheim was also “big picture” perspective, if you will. It’s like we know they’re good and a good team over 82 games. That’s indisputable. But, there are also “show me” games during the regular season, aren’t there? We all know which games these are. How is it that Detroit is *always* stepping up their game against SJ? And Chicago? Before this year, Anaheim fell into that category, too.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.