Injury Report: 2013-2014 Injury News Pt. II (2/25: Staal still dealing with back spasms)

  • Thread starter Thread starter *Bob Richards*
  • Start date Start date
  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
I think, for some posters, its about being able to call fan favorites like Kreider and Zuccarello "1st liners" rather than whats best for the team.

Whats best for the team is a healthy Nash getting big minutes on the 1st line.

If Nash is in the lineup and you keep Kreider and MZA together it guarantees that they are, at best, on the 2nd line.

So that makes sense... how?

That's about as logical as thinking some fans want them moved around the lineup just so they might fail.
 
If Nash is in the lineup and you keep Kreider and MZA together it guarantees that they are, at best, on the 2nd line.

So that makes sense... how?

That's about as logical as thinking some fans want them moved around the lineup just so they might fail.

I think the notion that Kreider and Zuccarello are some sort of killer combination that shouldn't be broken up is a bit crazy. A myth.

I'd much rather see what Kreider can do with Nash.
 
With the Kreider - Stepan - Zuccarello line getting stale, now is the time to experiment.

With Nash back

Zuccarello - Brassard - Nash
Richards - Stepan - Krieder
Hagelin - Moore - Callahan
Pyatt- Boyle - Dorsett

Spare - Pouliot

Moore has always been a third line center in his career. Callahan and Hagelin both play a third line game but have second line skill. Richards moving to the wing will help his game. The biggest variable will be Brassard and if he can find his game back. Pyatt is good where he would be in this lineup, a fourth line LW.
 
I think the notion that Kreider and Zuccarello are some sort of killer combination that shouldn't be broken up is a bit crazy. A myth.

I'd much rather see what Kreider can do with Nash.

Its not a myth. It's a straw man argument. Saying they "couldn't" or "shouldn't" be broken up is significantly different than pointing out what should be very obvious to anyone: there are other options and they should be explored first. Especially when you have players that have played top line minutes and have been struggling.

Nash played well with Hagelin last season over an extended period. Richards was moved back to the LW last game and I think he is a possibility.

Its not ridiculous to think AV wants to spread some of the speed throughout the top 3 lines.

For the record I think the way Kreider is playing he would be a killer combination with almost any player on the team. The same, IMO, can't be said for Zuccarello.
 
He's going to get hit regardless, what are we going to do? Sit him against the more physical teams? Nash wants to play he's a big boy he understands the risk. Can't be worried about that stuff, just gotta play and help win games.
 
He's going to get hit regardless, what are we going to do? Sit him against the more physical teams? Nash wants to play he's a big boy he understands the risk. Can't be worried about that stuff, just gotta play and help win games.
The odds of getting a concussion increase at least 85% when playing Boston, though.
 
I think the notion that Kreider and Zuccarello are some sort of killer combination that shouldn't be broken up is a bit crazy. A myth.

I'd much rather see what Kreider can do with Nash.

The problem is that it seems like you think Nash will automatically make that line better. Just because he's a better player doesn't mean he's a better fit for that line. Plus that line doing well, why not create depth and have 2 or 3 dangerous lines?
 
Mid-December came way too quick...

That means I have exams next week!!

You+can+t+dump+spiderman...prom+s+tomorrow+_c61fb0d0f44f518bba48f72d39845679.png
 
The problem is that it seems like you think Nash will automatically make that line better. Just because he's a better player doesn't mean he's a better fit for that line. Plus that line doing well, why not create depth and have 2 or 3 dangerous lines?

You can go either way when Nash first comes back. Im definitely not opposed to putting Nash on the 3rd line to start to see if he can get Brassard going. But sooner or later, Nash will be on the 1st line getting big minutes.

But perhaps more importantly, I don't view that Kreider-Stepan-Zuccarello line as something thats so dangerous that you cant break them up.
 
You can go either way when Nash first comes back. Im definitely not opposed to putting Nash on the 3rd line to start to see if he can get Brassard going. But sooner or later, Nash will be on the 1st line getting big minutes.

But perhaps more importantly, I don't view that Kreider-Stepan-Zuccarello line as something thats so dangerous that you cant break them up.
The line has a crazy lack of finish so I agree

Nash replacing either Kreider or Zuccarello would only help
 
The line has a crazy lack of finish so I agree

Nash replacing either Kreider or Zuccarello would only help

I will concede that I've thought about that. If it's Nash getting chances and not those 3 he likely has a higher success rate. That said, Nash looked exactly like Kreider does early last season.
 
I'd like Nash to start on a line with Brassard... mostly because I think he's going to need to get his timing and conditioning back up to full. Let him work it out there and on the powerplay. If he happens to get Brassard going offensively in the meantime, that's just an added benefit.

I've also thought about playing him on the left with Richards-Callahan and putting Hagelin onto the line with Brassard, since Hags has a tendency to get players going on his line.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad