The Kelly problem

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: The Kelly problem

    In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:

    $3M a piece on Kelly and Peverley, that they are allowed to work themselves out of this funk.




    I'd be more concerned if they weren't  creating offensive opportunities but they recently have been. Kelly hit 3 posts in recent games and I have no idea how that puck eluded Pev's stick last night in front of a wide open net. They will break out of their funk. I clearly remember all of the bitterness towards Kelly after his first few weeks in Boston. He turned out to be a pretty good player. That much I'm sure of. As far as Pev goes, his skills haven't eroded so I think he just needs to keep his head in the game. I'm not too worried about them yet.

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

    Re: The Kelly problem

    In response to dezaruchi's comment:

    $3M a piece on Kelly and Peverley, that they are allowed to work themselves out of this funk.

    They will break out of their funk. I clearly remember all of the bitterness towards Kelly after his first few weeks in Boston. He turned out to be a pretty good player. That much I'm sure of. As far as Pev goes, his skills haven't eroded so I think he just needs to keep his head in the game. I'm not too worried about them yet.



    Raising hand loudly, guilty.

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from DrCC. Show DrCC's posts

    Re: The Kelly problem

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:

    DrCC - The only problem with the year to year variance in the case of the 4th line is that they play so much less than the third, so an extra goal against or two can make it seem like a huge step change when we're really only talking one goal.  I'm relying on the old thinking here - you know how I love conventional wisdom - that if you're not scoring, you sure as heck better be doing your job defensively.  And they're not.


    Worth noting.  To add some perspective, at current ice-time levels, the 4th line is giving up an extra goal about every 5 games (so not so bad) while the 3rd is scoring a goal less almost every-other game (2.25).  I guess that answers my question.  Given their overall consistency in defensive numbers, I'm not sure we can expect much more out of Peverley and Kelly, defense-wise.  They really ought to be able to improve their offense though - and there are (at last!) some signs of them coming around.  If nothing else, keeping the puck down that end of the ice should help keep their goals-against from inflating.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Drewski5. Show Drewski5's posts

    Re: The Kelly problem

    In response to DrCC's comment:

    I'm not sure which problem is bigger, the un-scoring 3rd or scored-against 4th.



    Wouldnt moving Kelly to the fourth line solve both problems?

    A fourth line of Kelly, Campbell, and Paille would be a very good defensive line and could be used during this rigorous stretch to keep the top 3 lines healthy.

    If Spooner replaces Kelly on the third line, then this should increase the scoring of the third.

     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: The Kelly problem

    $3M a year player on the 4th line is not going to happen.

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

    Re: The Kelly problem

    In response to Drewski5's comment:

    Wouldnt moving Kelly to the fourth line solve both problems?

     

    A fourth line of Kelly, Campbell, and Paille would be a very good defensive line and could be used during this rigorous stretch to keep the top 3 lines healthy.

    If Spooner replaces Kelly on the third line, then this should increase the scoring of the third.



    I think what would happen then is you'd really be creating a 3rd line with Kelly that would never, ever score.  The 4th line might be able to score, but you'd have to pull some of Julien's teeth just to get it out on the ice it would be such a defensive concern. 

    Plus you'd be increasing the ice-time of Campbell and Paille while decreasing that of Peverley.  That doesn't seem like it would be a net gain.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Drewski5. Show Drewski5's posts

    Re: The Kelly problem

    In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:

    $3M a year player on the 4th line is not going to happen.



    We pay Kelly 3M / yr regardless of what line he plays on.

    Its a sunk cost and shouldnt be factored into the decision making.

    However, I agree with you that it could be (eye roll).

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from dezaruchi. Show dezaruchi's posts

    Re: The Kelly problem

    In response to Drewski5's comment:

     

    In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:

     

    $3M a year player on the 4th line is not going to happen.

     



    We pay Kelly 3M / yr regardless of what line he plays on.

     

    Its a sunk cost and shouldnt be factored into the decision making.

    However, I agree with you that it could be (eye roll).

     




    You lost the right to eye roll anyone the minute that Bourque cleared waivers.

     

     

Share