Roster Building/Team Building/Future Trade/Drafting thread. | Page 74 | HFBoards - NHL Message Board and Forum for National Hockey League
Toggle sidebar

Roster Building/Team Building/Future Trade/Drafting thread.

If this team once again fails to proceed very far in the playoffs, what would you want them to do?

  • Do nothing, run it back

    Votes: 15 10.1%

  • Make changes to the offense, top 6 forward, better bottom six, but keep the core

    Votes: 10 6.7%

  • Make changes to the offense, including moving core players

    Votes: 57 38.3%

  • Make changes to the defense

    Votes: 10 6.7%

  • Do a retool, including moving core players

    Votes: 72 48.3%

  • Ban the guy who keeps making jinx prediction posts.

    Votes: 18 12.1%
  • Total voters
    149
4thline said:
The problem with Domi at 1RW is the same as (one of) the reasons we've rarely seen Nylander there, a defensive liability on the line neuters the coaches ability to wholly trust and use their Selke level 1C in defensive and matchup situations.
Click to expand...
We aren't losing in the playoffs because of the top line's defensive limitations.

We are losing because we don't score enough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mmalady, hamzarocks, The Management and 1 other person
SprDaVE said:
Knies and McMann are up there in skating speed I think, at least the latter.

I'm a sucker for speed. It's clearly not everything but I would be very interested in just targetting that a lot more. Especially on the backend where it's very slow... I think Benoit has been our fastest skater there.

And then put a Tanev and maybe Jeannot down the lines, and I think the skating speed of this team is widely upgraded to be able to forecheck better.
Click to expand...

Krebs is above average speed as well.

Laughton Krebs Jeannot/Sherwood gives you some decent speed, a real C, and physicality.

Laughton is better as a winger than a C.
 
Fogelhund said:
Krebs is above average as well.

Laughton Krebs Jeannot/Sherwood gives you some decent speed, a real C, and physicality.

Laughton is better as a winger than a C.
Click to expand...
Laughton is a nice chess piece to have, especially at his contract because similar to what someone said above. If you run Domi as RW1 and you need a dzone faceoff late game and want matthews out there, you can throw Laughton on his wing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TML Dynasty and Fogelhund
TheGreenTBer said:
We aren't losing in the playoffs because of the top line's defensive limitations.

We are losing because we don't score enough.
Click to expand...
It's easy enough to trade 1 problem for another.

Create defensive limitations on the 1st line then you can no longer use them the same situationally (or they get scored on more in the same usage). Shift their usage to shield their limitations, that usage needs to go somewhere -> another line needs to be able to handle more. Similarly the need to replace Marner's pk minutes.

The dominos of roster configuration need to be considered.
 
4thline said:
It's easy enough to trade 1 problem for another.

Create defensive limitations on the 1st line then you can no longer use them the same situationally (or they get scored on more in the same usage). Shift their usage to shield their limitations, that usage needs to go somewhere -> another line needs to be able to handle more. Similarly the need to replace Marner's pk minutes.

The dominos of roster configuration need to be considered.
Click to expand...
I don't necessarily disagree but how many 1st lines in the league don't have defensive limitations to some extent? 1st lines are supposed to outscore their problems first and foremost. We don't pay AM34 to be a defensive specialist. We didn't pay Marner to be a defensive specialist. Play off the puck is important, no denying that, but if you are allocating huge money to forwards their primary job is to produce and if they aren't producing then we need to rebalance the roster.
 
TheGreenTBer said:
I don't necessarily disagree but how many 1st lines in the league don't have defensive limitations to some extent? 1st lines are supposed to outscore their problems first and foremost. We don't pay AM34 to be a defensive specialist. We didn't pay Marner to be a defensive specialist. Play off the puck is important, no denying that, but if you are allocating huge money to forwards their primary job is to produce and if they aren't producing then we need to rebalance the roster.
Click to expand...
If you're going to keep on deploying Matthews line as the match up/shut down line. You better make line 2 and 3 an absolute f***ing wagon offensively.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mmalady and WillNy29
Tony Romo said:
If you're going to keep on deploying Matthews line as the match up/shut down line. You better make line 2 and 3 an absolute f***ing wagon offensively.
Click to expand...
No one near Matthews' cap hit tier is deployed as a shutdown ANYTHING except maybe Barkov and that's because Florida has the depth to get away with that.

If Matthews is our matchup C we are f***ed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mmalady and Tony Romo
TheGreenTBer said:
No one near Matthews' cap hit tier is deployed as a shutdown ANYTHING except maybe Barkov and that's because Florida has the depth to get away with that.

If Matthews is our matchup C we are f***ed.
Click to expand...
Exactly, and even then. Floridas second line is Verhaeghe - Bennett - Tkachuk, the third line also scores.

If you're going to deploy Matthews as the shutdown C, you better surround him with cheaper players than what we did with Marner and soon to be Matthew Knies
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheGreenTBer
Tony Romo said:
Exactly, and even then. Floridas second line is Verhaeghe - Bennett - Tkachuk, the third line also scores.

If you're going to deploy Matthews as the shutdown C, you better surround him with cheaper players than what we did with Marner and soon to be Matthew Knies
Click to expand...
I wonder why we couldn't surround Matthews with more depth over the years

OH WAIT
 
TheGreenTBer said:
I wonder why we couldn't surround Matthews with more depth over the years

OH WAIT
Click to expand...
I mean, last year they did it pretty well. There was no reason they couldn't have done something similar.

Bertuzzi - Matthews - Domi.

Put Marner on a different line and hope he can drive offence. They just decided to play 24m in forwards as also the shutdown line.

Oh well, that's in the past. Time to do it differently in the future.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ashs, WillNy29 and hockeynorth
TheGreenTBer said:
No one near Matthews' cap hit tier is deployed as a shutdown ANYTHING except maybe Barkov and that's because Florida has the depth to get away with that.

If Matthews is our matchup C we are f***ed.
Click to expand...
his d zone starts were f***ed something like 60% done starts versus all of his peers who were in the complete opposite direction. You're asking for trouble if you're having your top line center do that and then have no one else on your team be able to score.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mmalady and TheGreenTBer
WillNy29 said:
his d zone starts were f***ed something like 60% done starts versus all of his peers who were in the complete opposite direction. You're asking for trouble if you're having your top line center do that and then have no one else on your team be able to score.
Click to expand...
The stat I saw earlier in the playoffs was at least 25% difference between him, Mackinnon and Mcdavid. Both were at 75%. Tkachuk I believe was around 64%
 
  • Like
Reactions: WillNy29
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

  • ... and 6 more.
    • Total: 43 (members: 34, guests: 9)

    Latest posts

    Ad

    Ad

    Top Bottom