vladdy16
Registered User
- Aug 2, 2005
- 2,551
- 375
Just for the record, Nyquist has 3 points in the last 10 games. (not to mention a 3 year trend of declining production prior to this year)
I think being optimistic about Nyquist's capabilities/future is a reasonable position, and agree that demoting him would be a questionable move(as would pairing or two most inexperienced d in the top 4) But that was the fun in the hypothetical for me. Of the established players on our roster, I'm most concerned about Nyquist and Sheahans inability to put their stamp on a roster that should be turning over to players like them.
Our team probably has the lowest gradation of talent between forwards of any team in the league, and we've hit a bit of an injury crunch, so when I was imagining what I'd like to see in the short term, the prestige of line 2 vs 3 or 4 wasn't really a factor.
Depth is the only positive to take out of our forward group, so I tried to put together 4 lines with the traditional/simple role of the RW being the aggressive forechecker capable of slowing the play down, and a talented and responsible LW who can finish. Kind of the antithesis to my least favorite experiment of the year, which was Larkin-Nielson-Nyquist, an overloaded/one dimensional line that did nothing. Also I think we should be looking for ways to limit our miles at center, because depth,experience and durability are severely lacking at that position.
Obviously it shouldn't be ignored that the Vanek-Helm-Nyquist line had great chemistry, so it should be a priority to get Nyquist shifts with Vanek to see if that spark is still there. But more than anything, I'd like to see a bit of a shift away from Griffins style neutral zone speed, to more consistent o-zone time through slower pace and d-man pinches/line holds.
Just my thoughts at this stage of the year, peace y'all
I think being optimistic about Nyquist's capabilities/future is a reasonable position, and agree that demoting him would be a questionable move(as would pairing or two most inexperienced d in the top 4) But that was the fun in the hypothetical for me. Of the established players on our roster, I'm most concerned about Nyquist and Sheahans inability to put their stamp on a roster that should be turning over to players like them.
Our team probably has the lowest gradation of talent between forwards of any team in the league, and we've hit a bit of an injury crunch, so when I was imagining what I'd like to see in the short term, the prestige of line 2 vs 3 or 4 wasn't really a factor.
Depth is the only positive to take out of our forward group, so I tried to put together 4 lines with the traditional/simple role of the RW being the aggressive forechecker capable of slowing the play down, and a talented and responsible LW who can finish. Kind of the antithesis to my least favorite experiment of the year, which was Larkin-Nielson-Nyquist, an overloaded/one dimensional line that did nothing. Also I think we should be looking for ways to limit our miles at center, because depth,experience and durability are severely lacking at that position.
Obviously it shouldn't be ignored that the Vanek-Helm-Nyquist line had great chemistry, so it should be a priority to get Nyquist shifts with Vanek to see if that spark is still there. But more than anything, I'd like to see a bit of a shift away from Griffins style neutral zone speed, to more consistent o-zone time through slower pace and d-man pinches/line holds.
Just my thoughts at this stage of the year, peace y'all
