I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!

    XYZ is a great # line player.

    Look at the time on ice, folks.  Look at the skill distributed across all three lines.

    Presently, the Bruins DO NOT HAVE a first, second or third line, traditionally speaking.

    They have Krejci, Bergeron and Kelly Lines and the fourth line.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from huntbri. Show huntbri's posts

    Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!

    Agreed.  They have 3 good lines and if there is any extra ice, it should and will likely be given to the line or lines that are playing better on that given night.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from BsLegion. Show BsLegion's posts

    Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!

    Agree.  Been saying this for a while

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!

    Thats exactly what I said in another post, think it was bobforte's real stupid post. No really true #1 line. you'll see alot of switching player a and player b...and really, who cares as long as they win.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from scooter244. Show scooter244's posts

    Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!

    We got three, why not shoot for four while we have the cap space?

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from JWensink. Show JWensink's posts

    Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!

    In Response to I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!:
    [QUOTE]XYZ is a great # line player. Look at the time on ice, folks.  Look at the skill distributed across all three lines. Presently, the Bruins DO NOT HAVE a first, second or third line, traditionally speaking. They have Krejci, Bergeron and Kelly Lines and the fourth line.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]


    no doubt that these combos present more skill across the board - good idea
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from scooter244. Show scooter244's posts

    Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!

    In Response to Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM! : Here's your four: Marchand       Bergeron        Horton Lucic               Kelly            Seguin Pouliot            Krejci            Iginla Caron            Campbell       Peverley Can Campbell make this a better line than our current fourth line?  Maybe it would be worth it.  If not, the fourth line can be  Sauve-Peverley-Caron. Normally I would say the slight bit you might gain in offense is not worth what you lose in physicality, but I'm not seeing good enough play from our fourth line this year.  So this might be the year I'd try it.
    Posted by mattc355[/QUOTE]

    How did you acquire Iginla?  Looks like straight up for Paille and Thornton.  Good trade!
    We do need help on the wing to make 4 lines.  Truthfully there is barely enough wing talent for 3. 
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!

    In Response to Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM! : How did you acquire IginlaLooks like straight up for Paille and Thornton.  Good trade! We do need help on the wing to make 4 lines.  Truthfully there is barely enough wing talent for 3. 
    Posted by scooter244[/QUOTE]
    ......and Hamill.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from scooter244. Show scooter244's posts

    Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!

    In Response to Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM! : ......and Hamill.
    Posted by dezaruchi[/QUOTE]

    Maybe, especially after this week.  Sell high!!
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from bogie6. Show bogie6's posts

    Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!

    Claude has really started something with his line combinations of defense plus offense. the 4th line presents more of a problem because the other lines are performing better. Paille and Campbell are still viable, but an infusion of skill would help everyone.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from 50belowzero. Show 50belowzero's posts

    Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!

    I really like this B's team as constituted. Their early season record notwithstanding, i think they will come together in the not too distant future and get on a roll. They have speed , skill, toughness, versatility, youth and a good defence. Once the new parts become a little more cohesive everything will be fine. If at some point a player is needed i'm sure PC will do what it takes as witnessed by last years moves. Bring on the Habs!!
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from scooter244. Show scooter244's posts

    Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!

    In Response to Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!:
    [QUOTE]We might not need Iginla.  I would try this first: Peverley       Krejci        Horton Lucic            Kelly         Seguin Marchand    Bergeron      Caron Paille          Campell     Thornton This is more balanced.  Currently, Krejci is kind of getting the short end of the stick.
    Posted by mattc355[/QUOTE]

    The major flaw with this is that you still have Paille and Thornton playing.  Campbell is serviceable.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!

    In Response to Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM! : The major flaw with this is that you still have Paille and Thornton playing.  Campbell is serviceable.
    Posted by scooter244[/QUOTE]

    What's wrong with Paille?  He's a fourth line player who is fantastic at killing penalties.


     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Fletcher1. Show Fletcher1's posts

    Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!

    The 4th line should always be a role playing line, that doesn't take a lot of minutes from the scoring lines.  If you have 4 lines that get even minutes, then your best players are getting some seriously reduced ice time.

    I like the Bruins system of 3 scoring lines which can acquire more ice time in each game by being better than the other two scoring lines.  Competition for ice time and PP time in each game.  Great balance there and very diificult for other teams to defend.

    The 4th line however, should be there for the occasional energy shift, penalty killing specialists, hitting, and rough stuff.  In a close game, they should play just 5-7  minutes.  In a lopsided game, they see more ice time, to rest the scoring lines and deal with the 3rd period nonsense most lopsided games have.  Campbell, Paille, and Thronton are pretty good at these roles -- no need to try to spead scorers into the 4th line.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from scooter244. Show scooter244's posts

    Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!

    In Response to Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM! : What's wrong with Paille?  He's a fourth line player who is fantastic at killing penalties.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]

    He can't shoot the puck past the goalie and into the net. 
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from scooter244. Show scooter244's posts

    Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!

    In Response to Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!:
    [QUOTE]The 4th line should always be a role playing line, that doesn't take a lot of minutes from the scoring lines.  If you have 4 lines that get even minutes, then your best players are getting some seriously reduced ice time. I like the Bruins system of 3 scoring lines which can acquire more ice time in each game by being better than the other two scoring lines.  Competition for ice time and PP time in each game.  Great balance there and very diificult for other teams to defend. The 4th line however, should be there for the occasional energy shift, penalty killing specialists, hitting, and rough stuff.  In a close game, they should play just 5-7  minutes.  In a lopsided game, they see more ice time, to rest the scoring lines and deal with the 3rd period nonsense most lopsided games have.  Campbell, Paille, and Thronton are pretty good at these roles -- no need to try to spead scorers into the 4th line.
    Posted by Fletcher1[/QUOTE]

    I can find you three guys in a local beer league that can do that. The AHL is chalk full of guys like that.  That is setting the bar way too low.  Nothing wrong with spreading out the ice time.  Never a bad idea.  Do you really think it is detrimental to Horton to play 2-3 less minutes a game?  If you need the goals he plays more.  If you can get scoring production out of the low minute guys how can you not be better off? The only reason not to do it is the salary cap. For this year anyway we don't have to worry about that.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!

    In Response to Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM! : What you say is true.  But we're already spreading the ice time over three lines more than most teams do.  Therefore it isn't necessary to have a fourth line that plays more minutes.  If our top three lines were playing even less than they are right now, it might actually be detrimental to them. We're one player short of having an epically stacked top three lines.  To use the cap space we have in hopes of improving the fourth line slightly would be a total waste.  And the typical ultra-conservative thing that Chiarelli would do unfortunately.
    Posted by mattc355[/QUOTE]
    Everyone and their dog wondered if PC wasn't overly aggressive when he acquired Kaberle and Kelly at the time. He then made a trade for Peverly that was anything but conservative. The fact that PC isn't willing to revamp the lineup every time a future UFA sniper comes available doesn't mean he's being conservative. It means he's doing good buisiness.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from JWensink. Show JWensink's posts

    Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!

    In Response to Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM! : What you say is true.  But we're already spreading the ice time over three lines more than most teams do.  Therefore it isn't necessary to have a fourth line that plays more minutes.  If our top three lines were playing even less than they are right now, it might actually be detrimental to them. We're one player short of having an epically stacked top three lines.  To use the cap space we have in hopes of improving the fourth line slightly would be a total waste.  And the typical ultra-conservative thing that Chiarelli would do unfortunately.
    Posted by mattc355[/QUOTE]

    One more strong wing would be sick -
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from thefly8. Show thefly8's posts

    Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!

    Good point, I think this is the reason the PP is so bad.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from scooter244. Show scooter244's posts

    Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!

    In Response to Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM! : What you say is true.  But we're already spreading the ice time over three lines more than most teams do.  Therefore it isn't necessary to have a fourth line that plays more minutes.  If our top three lines were playing even less than they are right now, it might actually be detrimental to them. We're one player short of having an epically stacked top three lines.  To use the cap space we have in hopes of improving the fourth line slightly would be a total waste.  And the typical ultra-conservative thing that Chiarelli would do unfortunately.
    Posted by mattc355[/QUOTE]

    Agree with this, partially.  The first priority is to improve the wing on the scoring lines.  This leads to a trickle down to the fourth line.  Somebody like Thornton get's bumped out the bottom.  We see somebody with a little more scoring take his place. 
    Where I disagree is calling improving the fourth line's scoring ability a total waste.  It could be extremely valuable against a equally deep team come post season.  Not everybody is going to score all the time. They all go through mini-slumps and dry spells. You can never have too much scoring. 
    If you use Savard's cap space you have over 8 million to work with.  I think we can have our cake and eat it too. 
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from BlueChip99. Show BlueChip99's posts

    Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!

    In Response to Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM! : Maybe, especially after this week.  Sell high!!
    Posted by scooter244[/QUOTE]
    You know, according to the law of supply and demand, buy low and "sell high" is widespread and it's fine like that. But for the Pro. it's a utopia and the fastest way to finish mowed. The real way is much better...
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!

    In Response to Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM! : He can't shoot the puck past the goalie and into the net. 
    Posted by scooter244[/QUOTE]

    That's not his job.  Are you going to rip Lucic for being terrible on the penalty kill?
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!

    In Response to Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM! : Do you really think it is detrimental to Horton to play 2-3 less minutes a game? 
    Posted by scooter244[/QUOTE]

    In one game, it won't matter.  Over the course of the season, if we say 2.5 minutes per game, it's 3 hours and 41 minutes.  Yes, I think having Nathan Horton on the ice for an extra 3 hours and 41 minutes is detrimental.


     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from scooter244. Show scooter244's posts

    Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!

    In Response to Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM! : That's not his job.  Are you going to rip Lucic for being terrible on the penalty kill?
    Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]

    No, because he never does it.  Paille, on the other hand finds himself, on occasion, in front of the net with the puck on his stick.  It ends badly.   We have plenty of guys who can kill penalties. 
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from scooter244. Show scooter244's posts

    Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!

    In Response to Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM!:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: I'm on the first line. No! I AM! NO I AM! : In one game, it won't matter.  Over the course of the season, if we say 2.5 minutes per game, it's 3 hours and 41 minutes.  Yes, I think having Nathan Horton on the ice for an extra 3 hours and 41 minutes is detrimental.
    Posted by Not-A-Shot[/QUOTE]

    Yes, he'll be 3 hours less tired my way.  Ready to burn those extra minutes, I mean hours, in the playoffs 
     

Share