Novacain
Registered User
- Feb 24, 2012
- 4,367
- 4,895
Were you one of those guys who thought the Blues were better off with Sobotka on the first line last year instead of the third? Because this is the same sort of idea, except you're doing it with with two groups of top six quality players instead of one and the guys you're moving up haven't shown the ability to produce at even at Sobotka's level. And that's assuming we're getting the 40 point version of Maroon instead of the 20 point version.
Personally, I don't see the point of putting clearly inferior players on higher lines and playing your best players fewer minutes when you can roll 3 much higher quality lines without doing that.
You can modestly expect the top three lines to play 52 minutes a game if you want them to (18 minutes for the most used line, and 17 minutes for the other two)...and you can probably stretch that even more if you want. If your position is that the Blues are a better team having guys like Barbashev and Soshnikov play closer to 15 minutes a game than 10 minutes, and about as much as you're playing someone like Steen, then I suppose we'll just have to agree to disagree and see which way the Blues ultimately choose to go.
First off, just throwing good players together doesn't always result in great results. You have to try to find logical fits and plug in players with guys that make sense. When Tarasenko was with Schenn and Schwartz, he was almost a complete passenger on that line because Schwartz and Schenn dominated the puck so much. I never have been a big advocate of them on the same line because I think Tarasenko is better served leading a line then being the extra guy on it, which he clearly was there. Pairing him with Bozak, who is a strong passer and faceoff guy that could set him up on the offensive side, and Maroon who can help screen shots for him could be more beneficial then just throwing him on a top line.
Also, Maroon has never been "the 20 point version of Maroon". That guy doesn't exist. Maroon's point totals to games played.
13-14: 64 games played, 29 points
14-15: 71 games played, 34 points
15-16: 72 games played, 27 points
16-17: 81 games played, 42 points
17-18: 74 games played, 43 points.
Basically, he's been about a 40 point per 82 games played or pace player for 4 of his 5 seasons, and the one he wasn't (when he had an awful run on the Ducks only getting 11 minutes per game before a great stretch with Edmonton). As long as he's been given solid ice time, he's been a 40 point player.
Also, Maroon is better then Sobotka. Sobotka had one year were he was a legitimately good top 9 player. Maroon has had multiple. Comparing the two isn't doing Maroon justice, especially the soft version of Sobotka we had last year.
And yes, we could stretch our top 3 lines to 52 minutes a game. My question to you is "Why do that when we can be just as good of a team only playing them 48?" The more time we can keep them off the ice while still being a really good team means there is less of a chance of injury for them, and a higher chance they have something more to give us later in the season. Keep in mind, the goal with this team is no longer get in the playoffs. If we don't make the playoffs next year something went abysmally wrong now. The goal, to me, has to be the last team left in the Central and see were we get from there. And the fresher our legs are for that run, the better.