Sens
Registered User
- Jan 7, 2016
- 6,086
- 2,550
Dudes playing for another 5x5 deal
He’ll be motivated to produce
He’ll be motivated to produce
I think he'll get 16. Didn't Dan Girardi play roughly that? A little more special teams time, but I think it'll come out in the wash.You think Shattenkirk will hit 40+ points playing, what we are all assuming right now, <14 minutes a night, with maybe 1-1:30 PP TOI?
Personally think you are reaching more than we are. But tis is the nature of the forums. I would be ecstatic if you are right though and will happily eat crow.
I’d guess Sergachev would be the odd man out then. Can’t see Cernak playing bottom 2 minutes unless he hits a sophomore slump.Who actually thinks he'll be under 14 a night? He'll be likely 17 pretty consistently, he'll be top four easily.
No its actually a non news thing unless you have a real dispise of that player like I do.Worth a shot I guess. Ive seen mixed responses to it. We will see. If he doesnt work out its not the end of the world.
Sergachev and Cernak will be shifted around to play matchups. You'll likely see more points out of Sergy with more favorable matchups and OZ start % climbing. Cernak will be used like a better version of Girardi. Both will be utilized more when... well, someone gets crippled around Christmas as usual.I’d guess Sergachev would be the odd man out then. Can’t see Cernak playing bottom 2 minutes unless he hits a sophomore slump.
If Cernak continues playing as well as he did last year, I can't see him getting less or equal time as Serg. I think Cernak jumped him, and it'll be a battle between Shattenkirk and Sergachev for time.Sergachev and Cernak will be shifted around to play matchups. You'll likely see more points out of Sergy with more favorable matchups and OZ start % climbing. Cernak will be used like a better version of Girardi. Both will be utilized more when... well, someone gets crippled around Christmas as usual.
You think Shattenkirk will hit 40+ points playing, what we are all assuming right now, <14 minutes a night, with maybe 1-1:30 PP TOI?
Personally think you are reaching more than we are. But tis is the nature of the forums. I would be ecstatic if you are right though and will happily eat crow.
Hard to say, but conservatively, I would expect Shattenkirk to play 17 minutes per game with 55% offensive zone starts. You look at combinations and he fits like a glove next to McDonagh, and that will come with a lot of minutes.
Again, I want to highlight that his expected +/- was actually positive. His xGF% on one of the worst offensive teams in the league, shows a player that held his own defensively while generating a lot of chances which weren't capitalized on. The opposite should be true here.
Who actually thinks he'll be under 14 a night? He'll be likely 17 pretty consistently, he'll be top four easily.
“You know how Sergachev wants his chance, and now he’s probably rolling his eyes,” Engblom said. “‘What does this mean? Am I off (the power play)?’ He very well could be. Shattenkirk is a really good QB on the PP and once he gets in synch with the guys, he knows how to pass, and I would think that Stamkos and Kucherov are really going to like him. He knows how to create offensive chances on the power play.
“He and Sergachev will fight it out for power-play time. Who knows? They may have three forwards and it could be Shattenkirk and Hedman on the top PP or could be Sergachev and Shattenkirk on the second power-play unit. You don’t have to have just one defenseman.”
I like the idea of Surge and Shattenkirk both in the second unit. Both have proven to be capable with the man advantage.Interesting statement from Brian Engblom in Joe Smith's recent Athletic article (behind paywall, sorry).
Kevin Shattenkirk is 'pissed off,' and that could end up...
This is ridiculous. Our powerplay was the best the league has seen in years. Hedman struggled to make that pass to Stamkos in 2014, not anymore.
I said explored. For the simple fact it would be better having a right hand shooter passing the puck to stamkos.
It isn’t ridiculous to “explore” and you watch it will be done at some point
This is how I see it shaking out. I don't think they want to split McD and Cernak and I don't think Hedman-Serge is a great long term pairing. Neither is Shattenkirk-Coburn, IMO.I really don't see us messing with PP1 unless it goes stale.
That said, I'm starting to wonder about Hedman - Shattenkirk. They wouldn't have the big D assignments anyway, so long as McDonagh - Cernak (McCernagh?) stays effective in a shutdown role. Gives Shattenkirk a babysitter while putting him in a position to succeed.
Hedman - Shattenkirk
McDonagh - Cernak
Coburn - Sergachev
I know it puts our best breakout passers together, but they'd be awfully hard to defend pushing plays up to Kucherov or Point or Stamkos.
This is how I see it shaking out. I don't think they want to split McD and Cernak and I don't think Hedman-Serge is a great long term pairing. Neither is Shattenkirk-Coburn, IMO.
I go back and forth between wanting Hedman paired with someone he can babysit, or paired with someone reliable so he can work his magic in the offensive zone while maybe giving up just a touch of the shutdown responsibility.I really don't see us messing with PP1 unless it goes stale.
That said, I'm starting to wonder about Hedman - Shattenkirk. They wouldn't have the big D assignments anyway, so long as McDonagh - Cernak (McCernagh?) stays effective in a shutdown role. Gives Shattenkirk a babysitter while putting him in a position to succeed.
Hedman - Shattenkirk
McDonagh - Cernak
Coburn - Sergachev
I know it puts our best breakout passers together, but they'd be awfully hard to defend pushing plays up to Kucherov or Point or Stamkos.