2016-'17 Lineup

[pi2000]

Some new-looking lines:

Foligno-O'Reilly-Reinhart

Moulson-Eichel-Okposo

Kane-Larsson-Gionta

Carrier-Grant-Girgensons

Deslauriers

 

I like that 3rd Line

 

:wub:

[TrueBlueGED]

I'm glad Dan is done with Zemgus forever and Moulson gets to weigh Jack down 5 on 5 no matter how many games he does absolutely nothing.

That's about my only issue with those lines. Other than that, I think it works both theoretically and based on play this season. Not exactly what I'd do, but not complaint worthy.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

Some new-looking lines:

Foligno-O'Reilly-Reinhart

Moulson-Eichel-Okposo

Kane-Larsson-Gionta

Carrier-Grant-Girgensons

Deslauriers

 

I like that 3rd Line

 

The third line is good, but why is Foligno on the first line.

 

FIRE DISCO NOW!!

[pi2000]

The third line is good, but why is Foligno on the first line.

 

FIRE DISCO NOW!!

 

Foligno and Reinhart together?  I'm not sure I'd call that our "first line".    Maybe 2nd or 3rd even?

[Sabres Fan in NS]

Foligno and Reinhart together?  I'm not sure I'd call that our "first line".    Maybe 2nd or 3rd even?

 

Right, but with ROR it is our first line.  What a joker this guy is.

[inkman]

Right, but with ROR it is our first line. What a joker this guy is.

Hysterical

[Randall Flagg]

I'd like to get Zemgus off the 4th too, because Foligno always seems to disappear/not work out whenever he gets bumped up, and that seems like a good spot to get Zemgus going. I'd also like to see Zemgus with Jack instead of Moulson. But yeah, these lines are fine, interested to see how they work out.

[TrueBlueGED]

I think we spend too much time fixated on line numbers. I know some have suggest ditching 1-2-3 entirely and instead having a top line, a middle six, and a bottom line. But even that I don't think is a good way to go about it because there's still going to be angst over who is the "top". I also think numbering lines gets people all riled up with things like "Kane isn't a 3rd liner!" and whatnot. To me, especially with Pittsburgh winning the Cup wit the combos they had...there is a top-9 and a 4th line. That's it. Everything within that top-9 should be flexible and able to be moved around based on play/need/chemistry without any annoyance amongst us fans. Would also allow us to discuss Samson at center without "You don't draft a 3rd line center #2 overall!" spoiling the conversation. After all, Phil Kessel was on Pittsburgh's "3rd line" even though he was better than all of the other wingers. Fit and chemistry dictated it, and it wasn't meant in any kind of derogatory sense. 

[pi2000]

Right, but with ROR it is our first line.  What a joker this guy is.

 

Wait, so ROR is immune to anything other than 1st line status?    Umm, OK.   

[Sabres Fan in NS]

Wait, so ROR is immune to anything other than 1st line status?    Umm, OK.   

 

You're joking, right?

 

I could make the argument that he is our only first liner.

[WildCard]

You're joking, right?

 

I could make the argument that he is our only first liner.

Youfould but you'd lose ;)

[qwksndmonster]

The closing of every single politics thread is in and of itself a political statement. Why do the mods get to have a political voice and the board doesn't?

 

Just deleting all the threads isn't moving forward any conversation. There is no waiting period that will elapse when Donald Trump will stop being a polarizing figure. This is the world we live in for the next 4 years.

 

Please stop trying to stop us from talking about the world we live in with people that we care about.

[dudacek]

The line hierarchy that permeates a lot of conversations about lineups is always something that has struck me as odd. Chemistry and matchups should always trump a pecking order. I don't see many coaches embracing the pecking order system.

 

Foligno on line one doesn't mean he's a "first liner" is means he's going to play 10-12 even-strength minutes hopefully creating space and turnovers for two more highly skilled players while Kane adds some more offence puck possession and speed to the shutdown line and Moulson picks up the garbage created by the creativity of Eichel and Okposo.

 

Looks to me like Dan's shooting for some balance with a pair of lines he can match up against the other team's big guns while still offering decent offence, and an offensive line that he can ultilize to get mismatches.

 

It's nice to have enough depth again to allow for these kinds of options.

 

I wish it was Baptiste with Zemgus and Carrier on the energy instead Des.

Edited December 20, 2016 by dudacek

[Doohicksie]

I think we spend too much time fixated on line numbers. I know some have suggest ditching 1-2-3 entirely and instead having a top line, a middle six, and a bottom line. But even that I don't think is a good way to go about it because there's still going to be angst over who is the "top". I also think numbering lines gets people all riled up with things like "Kane isn't a 3rd liner!" and whatnot. To me, especially with Pittsburgh winning the Cup wit the combos they had...there is a top-9 and a 4th line. That's it. Everything within that top-9 should be flexible and able to be moved around based on play/need/chemistry without any annoyance amongst us fans. Would also allow us to discuss Samson at center without "You don't draft a 3rd line center #2 overall!" spoiling the conversation. After all, Phil Kessel was on Pittsburgh's "3rd line" even though he was better than all of the other wingers. Fit and chemistry dictated it, and it wasn't meant in any kind of derogatory sense. 

 

 

I think everyone should get a participation trophy and call it good.

[Huckleberry]

The third line is good, but why is Foligno on the first line.

 

FIRE DISCO NOW!!

 

because, Kane, Carrier, Moulson, girgensons didn't take that spot, now Foligno gets a shot, I can understand it actually.

We really don't have any #1 LW, let alone a top 6 LW.

[Randall Flagg]

because, Kane, Carrier, Moulson, girgensons didn't take that spot, now Foligno gets a shot, I can understand it actually.

We really don't have any #1 LW, let alone a top 6 LW.

I keep coming in here and flipping the LWs around, and I end up hating 2 of the lines no matter what. We reeeeeeally need LW help

[Samson's Flow]

I keep coming in here and flipping the LWs around, and I end up hating 2 of the lines no matter what. We reeeeeeally need LW help

Kane looks like he belongs in the Larsson line. So we need to LWs

[Randall Flagg]

I'd like to get Moulson off of Jack's line now. We know Jack's defensive zone play isn't very good, and Moulson is just too slow to get from point A to point B. Barkov and Jagr (not fast skaters themselves) absolutely feasted on these guys. Zemgus is really the only option on this roster that I see. It needs to be tried. Zemgus looks lost himself at times, but I think he's better there than Matt. Of course, I think that move would make our fourth line more useless than it already is, which sucks.

Would it really have killed us to get Pirri or Stempniak or Grabner in here on a cheap 1-2 year deal? Maybe we tried and they went elsewhere, but I never got the impression from GMTM that he tried

[inkman]

I'd like to get Moulson off of Jack's line now. We know Jack's defensive zone play isn't very good, and Moulson is just too slow to get from point A to point B. Barkov and Jagr (not fast skaters themselves) absolutely feasted on these guys. Zemgus is really the only option on this roster that I see. It needs to be tried. Zemgus looks lost himself at times, but I think he's better there than Matt. Of course, I think that move would make our fourth line more useless than it already is, which sucks.

 

Would it really have killed us to get Pirri or Stempniak or Grabner in here on a cheap 1-2 year deal? Maybe we tried and they went elsewhere, but I never got the impression from GMTM that he tried

Given we were $1.5 million under the cap when the season started, I don't see a lot of options for GMTM.

[Randall Flagg]

Given we were $1.5 million under the cap when the season started, I don't see a lot of options for GMTM.

...this is a cap team?

 

I had no idea they were that close.

 

Thank god the gio/Franson contracts end. Gorges has to be done soon too

[inkman]

...this is a cap team?

 

I had no idea they were that close.

 

Thank god the gio/Franson contracts end. Gorges has to be done soon too

I think the Risto deal put them there. Good thing Gio, Gorges, Fransen, Kane and maybe Ennis will be off the books to pay Jack and Reino. Good thing Snook, Okposo and Risto are all paid with only O'Reilly at or above market value.

[GrassValleyGreg]

I'd like to propose a healthy forward lineup based on a few factors:

 

1) Sam's comfort level at center. Sammy has not had a great sophomore season but he does look more comfortable when playing the pivot. 

 

2) Smart Gio complementing forceful Kane. On more than one occasion Kane forced a bullet pass to Gio in the neutral zone. For any other player, it would have been caught in feet or deflected into a turnover. Gio simply opened up his stick and one-touched it to the off wing. I think these two are perfect complements to one another and Kane has a respect for Gio's game which can go a long way for his commitment and battle.

 

3) Giving Lars some top line minutes. There is little doubt that Lars is one of our best and most consistent players on the ice. His skill is often as evident as his ability to play a two-way game. Putting him with some high-end talent could see him take another step.

 

Note: We are one forward short of serious playoff contender. (Vesey :( )

 

 

Larsson - O'Reilly - Moulson

Foligno - Eichel - Okposo

Kane - Reinhart - Gionta

Girgensons - Grant - Carrier

 

 

Thoughts? What are the negatives?

 

Sorry if this isn't where wishful lineups should go.

[Samson's Flow]

I'd like to propose a healthy forward lineup based on a few factors:

 

1) Sam's comfort level at center. Sammy has not had a great sophomore season but he does look more comfortable when playing the pivot. 

 

2) Smart Gio complementing forceful Kane. On more than one occasion Kane forced a bullet pass to Gio in the neutral zone. For any other player, it would have been caught in feet or deflected into a turnover. Gio simply opened up his stick and one-touched it to the off wing. I think these two are perfect complements to one another and Kane has a respect for Gio's game which can go a long way for his commitment and battle.

 

3) Giving Lars some top line minutes. There is little doubt that Lars is one of our best and most consistent players on the ice. His skill is often as evident as his ability to play a two-way game. Putting him with some high-end talent could see him take another step.

 

Note: We are one forward short of serious playoff contender. (Vesey :( )

 

 

Larsson - O'Reilly - Moulson

Foligno - Eichel - Okposo

Kane - Reinhart - Gionta

Girgensons - Grant - Carrier

 

 

Thoughts? What are the negatives?

 

Sorry if this isn't where wishful lineups should go.

I too was trying to come up with a way to get Reinhart at the Center position with the line combos. I kept getting stuck with crappy wingers and Larsson on the 4th line. I don't really want to break up the Kane-Larsson-Gionta line as they have been playing so well, but I don't hate your idea.

 

the only other out of the box idea I could think of was putting Eichel and ROR on the same line, but that seems silly. Plus we don't want to lose ROR faceoff ability and Jack is growing into being good at faceoffs as well. 

 

All this is moot since Dreadful Dan^TM is not going to keep the same lines for more than a game.

 

To the bold: this is exactly what this thread is for.

[dudacek]

Don't get caught up in what's best for the team today.

Two things:

 

Sam to centre is based on him becoming/helping him become a ROR-level centre , or better.

That's what we drafted him to be, that's what we should be focused on developing him into.

 

I like Larsson, but putting his interests ahead of Sam's is not going to get us to the Stanley Cup.

That said, Larsson, like Sam, is/will be a much better centre than winger.

Edited December 28, 2016 by dudacek

[thewookie1]

For Reinhart to be a center we would have to make a trade for a winger, for instance Girgs for Duclair or else we'd have a strong middle with mostly mediocrity on the wings.

 

For example:

 

Moulson-Eichel-Okposo

Duclair-O'Reilly-Foligno 

Kane-Reinhart-Gionta

Carrier-Larsson-Deslauries/Grant

 

at very least we'd have enough potential scoring to run 3 lines.