Peat
Registered User
- Jun 14, 2016
- 30,768
- 26,226
Why put him with two shooters then?
Because every other line was set and McCann got the leftovers in the hope it'd come together.
Why put him with two shooters then?
Well i guess it's the only option they had vs putting Marleau @ C which i'm not opposed to.
PIT just isn't at the point where FLA was at where McCann moved to permanent LW.
Because every other line was set and McCann got the leftovers in the hope it'd come together.
McCann never played LW there. He has always been a center. TBH, I think the reality is you put Tanev and Hornqvist with McCann and let Bleuger deal with Marleau and ZAR.
If we beat Habs we meet those Flyers again in round 1. We need to take these playoffs seriously after that joke last playoffs.McCann's not a playmaker. He's a shooter.
Why he never worked out at C for FLA.
I will say this about the game going on right now. PHI's trap is much better than MTL's with better D behind it. And of course better F's with PHI too.
You know i could be wrong and it was actually Bjugs who they finally considered a winger vs a center after exhausting efforts with him @ C.
Either way McCann is not a playmaker and should be a winger too.
Well i guess it's the only option they had vs putting Marleau @ C which i'm not opposed to.
PIT just isn't at the point where FLA was at where McCann moved to permanent LW.
Which is what I mean about Sully getting too cute with BART. I think that is going to be our true downfall forward wise this post season.
You might be right but I'm not sure I see much of a solution. Blueger's the only real playmaker there and while McCann-Blueger-Hornqvist is an intriguing line it just transfers the problem. Don't agree that giving McCann Tanev would make things better. Tanev might be more willing to circle the net and hold the puck but it still boils down to a line that'll create most of its chances from turnovers and going straight to the net. Just hope that they're very good at it.
It was a mistake to trade for Patrick Marleau.
Even worse than the price we paid, is knowing that because he's a vet, he will be gifted a spot in the lineup that should go to someone else. My wonder is now how much that will help or hurt us. Probably not much hurt...but that doesn't make it right.
I think weighing down our fastest center with our least agile wingers is certainly odd.
I don’t think he’s good enough at wing either...he doesn’t think the game well enough offensively to get in position to use his shot...if he’s best as a bottom 6 wing, he’s not worth paying imo for the Pens...we have ERod and Lafferty and Poulin who could play there for cheaper, not to mention Simon...McCann’s value is in his scoring goals if he’s not a center, and if he can’t do that well enough compared to those others, then there’s no reason to sink money into him
McCann never played LW there. He has always been a center. TBH, I think the reality is you put Tanev and Hornqvist with McCann and let Bleuger deal with Marleau and ZAR.
Marleau's considerably more agile than ZAR. In any case, I think there's a reasonable balance of sorts there on the line, with Hornqvist and Marleau adding some board play and around the net presence McCann doesn't do so much of, and prefer spreading around the fast players.
Thing about McCann is he flashes ability at both. He's got all the tools but not much of a toolbox. Sticking him with a guy who covers for that (Kahun) or finally building the full toolbox would result in a great player, one we'd struggle to get elsewise. I've suggested moving him and I wouldn't be mad about it, but equally if the team want to believe in that final step of development, that's fine by me. The Dread Pirate Rutherford can always trade him in the morning.
He’s played LW here. McCann-crosby-Guentzel least happened. I think it’s a consistency problem with him more than anything and there’s a bit of the Sutter problem. People can say he’s more of a winger because he’s not a playmaker and his shot is great, but they’ll also see him on the wing and say he’s a centre because he needs to dictate things. He’s a bit of an in betweener and wildly inconsistent. Unless something clicks I’m not sure there’s much to be done.
Marleau needs to be the primary playmaker on that line, though. McCann won’t do it consistently.
He should be one of the hardest working just for the fact he's never won a cup before and here is his 1 and probably last chance.It was a mistake to trade for Patrick Marleau.
Even worse than the price we paid, is knowing that because he's a vet, he will be gifted a spot in the lineup that should go to someone else. My wonder is now how much that will help or hurt us. Probably not much hurt...but that doesn't make it right.
right now, that toolbox hasn't really brought what we need to win a Cup...if I’m Sully, I’d seriously think hard about playing ERod for him...that line with Horny and Marleau (and we know neither of them are going anywhere) might be better with ERod on it...that or move Blueger up to 3C
Tbh I'm not sure Rodrigues particularly moves the needle, particularly as you have to rebuild the chemistry all over again, and who knows when McCann saves us by ripping one from range that most of our guys wouldn't have got?
To me this seems a bit hyper-critical. I'm not in love with either player or line but a bit more time doesn't seem unjustified, neither seems a complete barrier to success if they're a little quiet, and the options aren't that compelling either.