Speculation: Roster Building Thread: Part XL

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
Lemuiex is nothing more than a 4th line player. Team needs to build up forward depth so it doesn't have to play guys like him on the 3rd line

I think that the team needs more players like Lemieux , rather than less. Gorton targeted him in a deal and I do not see him moving.

The issue with Buchnevich's next contract is that it comes after next year. Gorton has not shown that he likes to allow pending UFAs like him go for nothing. Which is why I believe that he gets dealt sooner rather than later.
Buch will be an RFA after his current deal is up
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kendo
I think that the team needs more players like Lemieux , rather than less. Gorton targeted him in a deal and I do not see him moving.

The issue with Buchnevich's next contract is that it comes after next year. Gorton has not shown that he likes to allow pending UFAs like him go for nothing. Which is why I believe that he gets dealt sooner rather than later.

You...do know Buch is going to be an RFA when his contract ends, right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kendo
Lemuiex is nothing more than a 4th line player. Team needs to build up forward depth so it doesn't have to play guys like him on the 3rd line


Buch will be an RFA after his current deal is up

I don’t agree that Lemieux is nothing more than a 4th liner. I think that’s a very archaic way of looking at roster composition and I think Lemieux is a guy you can plug in anywhere in your lineup and he isn’t going to hurt you. He’s not a black hole offensively by any means and while he’s never going to put up really big numbers, he adds a spark, and a different element wherever he plays. It isn’t about not having to play guys like Lemieux above the 4th line. It’s about not having to build your bottom six out of options like McKegg, Haley, Smith, Howden, Digiuseppe and having no quality depth. I have no problems with Lemieux playing stretches of time on ANY of our lines. I think he has enough talent to not be an anchor to any of them and brings something different to the table. In the right situation, where he compliments a line he has chemistry with, I could see Lemieux putting up 40+ points one day. Imagine him just forechecking his ass off and going to the net and being a pain in the ass in Fast’s spot on the bread line? Guy does not drag a line down. He’s a utility player, IMO.
 
I don’t agree that Lemieux is nothing more than a 4th liner. I think that’s a very archaic way of looking at roster composition and I think Lemieux is a guy you can plug in anywhere in your lineup and he isn’t going to hurt you. He’s not a black hole offensively by any means and while he’s never going to put up really big numbers, he adds a spark, and a different element wherever he plays. It isn’t about not having to play guys like Lemieux above the 4th line. It’s about not having to build your bottom six out of options like McKegg, Haley, Smith, Howden, Digiuseppe and having no quality depth. I have no problems with Lemieux playing stretches of time on ANY of our lines. I think he has enough talent to not be an anchor to any of them and brings something different to the table. In the right situation, where he compliments a line he has chemistry with, I could see Lemieux putting up 40+ points one day. Imagine him just forechecking his ass off and going to the net and being a pain in the ass in Fast’s spot on the bread line? Guy does not drag a line down. He’s a utility player, IMO.
This is correct. He’s a capable player with an edge. He’s not Tanner Glass. You keep him around and use him where needed.
 
I think that the team needs more players like Lemieux , rather than less. Gorton targeted him in a deal and I do not see him moving.

The issue with Buchnevich's next contract is that it comes after next year. Gorton has not shown that he likes to allow pending UFAs like him go for nothing. Which is why I believe that he gets dealt sooner rather than later.

Buch will be an RFA.

Edit- beat to the punch
 
I don’t agree that Lemieux is nothing more than a 4th liner. I think that’s a very archaic way of looking at roster composition and I think Lemieux is a guy you can plug in anywhere in your lineup and he isn’t going to hurt you. He’s not a black hole offensively by any means and while he’s never going to put up really big numbers, he adds a spark, and a different element wherever he plays. It isn’t about not having to play guys like Lemieux above the 4th line. It’s about not having to build your bottom six out of options like McKegg, Haley, Smith, Howden, Digiuseppe and having no quality depth. I have no problems with Lemieux playing stretches of time on ANY of our lines. I think he has enough talent to not be an anchor to any of them and brings something different to the table. In the right situation, where he compliments a line he has chemistry with, I could see Lemieux putting up 40+ points one day. Imagine him just forechecking his ass off and going to the net and being a pain in the ass in Fast’s spot on the bread line? Guy does not drag a line down. He’s a utility player, IMO.
I disagree with pretty much everything you said here aside from the fact that plays a different style of game haha

He can play on any line in the same sense that any player can play any line for a period of time. Doesn't mean it's a good idea. And I feel comfortable saying he will never put up 40 points

Which is fine by the way, I don't think it's a slight to say he's a 4th line player :dunno:

If you had to play him on the 3rd line for a prolonged period, I don't think it's the end of the world. But it an ideal situation, he would be on the 4th line
 
I actually think Lemieux will age a bit better than many are forecasting. He’s smart, doesn’t really lose his cool. And though he takes a beating, he just appears to me to take it very well. To put it bluntly, I think he has a hard head.
I agree. He's got hands and goes to dirty areas of the ice. Can and does bring the fight to the other team. There is value here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: egelband
I disagree with pretty much everything you said here aside from the fact that plays a different style of game haha

He can play on any line in the same sense that any player can play any line for a period of time. Doesn't mean it's a good idea. And I feel comfortable saying he will never put up 40 points

Which is fine by the way, I don't think it's a slight to say he's a 4th line player :dunno:

If you had to play him on the 3rd line for a prolonged period, I don't think it's the end of the world. But it an ideal situation, he would be on the 4th line


This guy probably looks like a guy who should ideally be on the 4th line, no?

Year 1: 82 games, 10 points (3 goals)
Year 2: 67 games, 17 points (4 goals)
Year 3: 82 games, 23 points (7 goals)
Year 4: 82 games, 19 points (7 goals)
Year 5: 78 games, 35 points (14 goals)

That’s Tom Wilson. Next two years were 20+ goal, 40+ points in 60 some odd games each. I’m not comparing the two or saying he CAN produce like Tom Wilson, but after Wilson’s first few years in the league, what would you have thought his upside was? Turns out if you play him with Backstrom/Ovechkin/Oshie/Kuznetsov his game translates to something a lot more than it would if he was playing on the third or fourth line.

Brendan Lemieux:

Year 1: 9 games, 1 point (1 goal)
Year 2: 63 games, 17 points (12 goals)
Year 3: 59 games, 18 points (6 goals)/25 point pace


Is it really outrageous that with 18 points in 59 games in just his second NHL season he could have a few 35-40 point seasons in him? Wilson didn’t hit double digit goals in a season until his 5th year in the league. Lemieux did it in his first (full - not gonna count the 9 game stint) season.

Lemieux is being undersold here. In fact, if you take year 2 and 3 from both players and adjust Lemieux’s pace for the games that didn’t get played, they’re almost identical. Wilson had 17 points, only 4 goals, in 67 games his second year. Lemieux had 17 points, 12 of them goals, in 63 games his “second” year. The following year Wilson had 23 points, 7 goals, in 82 games. Lemieux was on pace for 25 points over 82 games and already had 6 goals through 59. He has talent, he was a relatively high draft pick, and honestly I think he could very well be our Wilson if he played opposite Panarin. Would Quinn ever try it? Probably not, but I don’t think it’s outrageous at all to think he could score 15-20 goals and 35-40 points on that line next year.

First 3 NHL seasons:

Wilson: 231 games, 14 goals, 50 points.
Average of 4.97 goals and 17.75 points per 82.

Lemieux: 131 games, 19 goals, 36 points.
Average of 11.89 goals and 22.53 points per 82.
 
Last edited:
Yep. Which is why Strome needs to go
Maybe he will. Because I do not buy into the "anyone can do it" argument, I do not believe that it is a slam dunk move that management will do. They have a player who meshes very well with their best player and allows the coaching staff to deploy two top lines. That is what the Strome - Panarin combination was and that was with Fast as the other wing. I do not believe that if you simply plug in anyone into Strome's spot that it would mean a replication of the success that those two had. Which is not to say that I believe that Panarin would fall off a cliff, but nor do I believe that a line with someone in Strome's place would be guaranteed success.

Chytil has not shown that he is ready for such a role. And simply bringing some UFA in and paying him a good amount of money on a long term deal is not necessarily a risk worth taking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LokiDog
Maybe he will. Because I do not buy into the "anyone can do it" argument, I do not believe that it is a slam dunk move that management will do. They have a player who meshes very well with their best player and allows the coaching staff to deploy two top lines. That is what the Strome - Panarin combination was and that was with Fast as the other wing. I do not believe that if you simply plug in anyone into Strome's spot that it would mean a replication of the success that those two had. Which is not to say that I believe that Panarin would fall off a cliff, but nor do I believe that a line with someone in Strome's place would be guaranteed success.

Chytil has not shown that he is ready for such a role. And simply bringing some UFA in and paying him a good amount of money on a long term deal is not necessarily a risk worth taking.

DeAngelo> Buch > Strome

Losing Buch because we overpaid a mediocre player is beyond silly. Trade Strome for what we can get, while we still can.
 
That’s Tom Wilson. Next two years were 20+ goal, 40+ points in 60 some odd games each. I’m not comparing the two or saying he CAN produce like Tom Wilson, but after Wilson’s first few years in the league, what would you have thought his upside was? Turns out if you play him with Backstrom/Ovechkin/Oshie/Kuznetsov his game translates to something a lot more than it would if he was playing on the third or fourth line.
I think that Lemieux is a lot more talented than Wilson. There is much more upside in him. He also spells Kreider on PP2 and plays the net front game. There is no reason as to why he cannot be a 15 goal, 20 assist guy. That's 35 points right there. With a few more steps forward, it is not inconceivable that he gets to 40.

He plays a different game than Wilson. But long term, I think that he can be a more effective player, albeit in a different way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LokiDog
I think that Lemieux is a lot more talented than Wilson. There is much more upside in him. He also spells Kreider on PP2 and plays the net front game. There is no reason as to why he cannot be a 15 goal, 20 assist guy. That's 35 points right there. With a few more steps forward, it is not inconceivable that he gets to 40.

He plays a different game than Wilson. But long term, I think that he can be a more effective player, albeit in a different way.

I agree. I’d love to see him given a chance in Fast’s spot across from bread to see what he did.
 
DeAngelo> Buch > Strome

Losing Buch because we overpaid a mediocre player is beyond silly. Trade Strome for what we can get, while we still can.
Playing with Panarin, Strome was going to 70 points. Heck playing without Panarin, he was looking like a 45 point player. That is hardly simply mediocre.

And again, it cannot be understated what playing Panarin on one line and Kreider & ZBad on another does for a game plan.
 
I disagree with pretty much everything you said here aside from the fact that plays a different style of game haha

He can play on any line in the same sense that any player can play any line for a period of time. Doesn't mean it's a good idea. And I feel comfortable saying he will never put up 40 points

Which is fine by the way, I don't think it's a slight to say he's a 4th line player :dunno:

If you had to play him on the 3rd line for a prolonged period, I don't think it's the end of the world. But it an ideal situation, he would be on the 4th line
Yeah, can't count your chickens before they hatch yet that egg is fast a-crack... Ba rs...But yeah, and you can't compare him to Fast because if Fast's talent matched his reads, anticipation and knowledge of the game, you'd have one of the best Swedes in NHL history. He can still be good, but not as good as Fast defensively, few are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheDirtyH
I said a few times over the year that I thought Lemieux just wasn't that good. I appreciate his effort and his dedication to standing up for his teammates, but beyond that, he was pretty "meh". Like he skates okay, I think he sucks with the puck on his stick, he's pretty decent in front and in the corners. He tries so hard to agitate that he makes himself less effective because he so frequently ends up on his ass and out of the play because he's looking to draw a penalty--a fact not lost on NHL officiating, apparently, as he didn't seem to get many calls this season.

Even if he were to somehow end up becoming a 40-50 point guy like Tom Wilson, he still wouldn't be Tom Wilson. Wilson is one of the best open-ice hitters in the game (when his hits aren't dirty), and is one of the very few "feared" players remaining in my estimation. Wilson is an absolute bull who can impose his will on other players. Lemieux is a strong, tough guy, but plays more of that pest role. He's reliant on retaliatory actions whereas Wilson just does what he wants, physically, and impacts things even if he's not drawing penalties. The other thing is, while yeah, Wilson plays with some of the best players in the game and HOFers and all that, he has the ability to do so. You can't just stick anyone in Wilson's position and expect them to be able to hang.

Anyway, he doesn't need to be Tom Wilson to be successful. I would just like to see him focus more on playing hockey instead of chasing guys around, chirping, and ending up sliding on his ass while the play heads the other direction. I think if he refines his game in front of the net (where he isn't as good as he could be), he's probably good for 15 goals and 10-15 assists on an average season with a couple years touching 40.
 
This guy probably looks like a guy who should ideally be on the 4th line, no?

Year 1: 82 games, 10 points (3 goals)
Year 2: 67 games, 17 points (4 goals)
Year 3: 82 games, 23 points (7 goals)
Year 4: 82 games, 19 points (7 goals)
Year 5: 78 games, 35 points (14 goals)

That’s Tom Wilson. Next two years were 20+ goal, 40+ points in 60 some odd games each. I’m not comparing the two or saying he CAN produce like Tom Wilson, but after Wilson’s first few years in the league, what would you have thought his upside was? Turns out if you play him with Backstrom/Ovechkin/Oshie/Kuznetsov his game translates to something a lot more than it would if he was playing on the third or fourth line.

Brendan Lemieux:

Year 1: 9 games, 1 point (1 goal)
Year 2: 63 games, 17 points (12 goals)
Year 3: 59 games, 18 points (6 goals)/25 point pace


Is it really outrageous that with 18 points in 59 games in just his second NHL season he could have a few 35-40 point seasons in him? Wilson didn’t hit double digit goals in a season until his 5th year in the league. Lemieux did it in his first (full - not gonna count the 9 game stint) season.

Lemieux is being undersold here. In fact, if you take year 2 and 3 from both players and adjust Lemieux’s pace for the games that didn’t get played, they’re almost identical. Wilson had 17 points, only 4 goals, in 67 games his second year. Lemieux had 17 points, 12 of them goals, in 63 games his “second” year. The following year Wilson had 23 points, 7 goals, in 82 games. Lemieux was on pace for 25 points over 82 games and already had 6 goals through 59. He has talent, he was a relatively high draft pick, and honestly I think he could very well be our Wilson if he played opposite Panarin. Would Quinn ever try it? Probably not, but I don’t think it’s outrageous at all to think he could score 15-20 goals and 35-40 points on that line next year.

First 3 NHL seasons:

Wilson: 231 games, 14 goals, 50 points.
Average of 4.97 goals and 17.75 points per 82.

Lemieux: 131 games, 19 goals, 36 points.
Average of 11.89 goals and 22.53 points per 82.

Please dont take this the wrong way. I usually agree with most of your posts:) But Tom Wilson played his first season when he was nineteen. Brendan Lemeuix was two years older. If Lemeuix follows Wilsons path, he will be much closer to UFA when he hit full strides. And that is something the organisation have to consider.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LokiDog
Is it really outrageous that with 18 points in 59 games in just his second NHL season he could have a few 35-40 point seasons in him? Wilson didn’t hit double digit goals in a season until his 5th year in the league. Lemieux did it in his first (full - not gonna count the 9 game stint) season.

Lemieux is being undersold here. In fact, if you take year 2 and 3 from both players and adjust Lemieux’s pace for the games that didn’t get played, they’re almost identical. Wilson had 17 points, only 4 goals, in 67 games his second year. Lemieux had 17 points, 12 of them goals, in 63 games his “second” year. The following year Wilson had 23 points, 7 goals, in 82 games. Lemieux was on pace for 25 points over 82 games and already had 6 goals through 59. He has talent, he was a relatively high draft pick, and honestly I think he could very well be our Wilson if he played opposite Panarin. Would Quinn ever try it? Probably not, but I don’t think it’s outrageous at all to think he could score 15-20 goals and 35-40 points on that line next year.
Do I think it's outrageous to say he may hit those bolded point totals at one point? No
Do I personally believe that will actually happen though? Also no

I also think it's probably not wise to compare Lemieux to Wilson. They play hard, but Wilson is on another level, in terms of metrics and his actual style of play. Comparing the two is only setting people up for disappointment.

It seems to me the style in which Lemieux plays leads some to have higher expectations than they should. If Lemieux played a slightly different style of his current game, I'm not sure we'd be having this discussion haha
 
  • Like
Reactions: nyr2k2
Please dont take this the wrong way. I usually agree with most of your posts:) But Tom Wilson played his first season when he was nineteen. Brendan Lemeuix was two years older. If Lemeuix follows Wilsons path, he will be much closer to UFA when he hit full strides. And that is something the organisation have to consider.

I understand that Wilson was 2 years younger when he broke into the league. It also took him 5 years to hit double digit goals. I’m simply talking to the notion that Lemieux is “nothing but a fourth liner” and not directly trying to compare the two. I think he has far more utility and potential than he’s being given credit for.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ETTER DE
Do I think it's outrageous to say he may hit those bolded point totals at one point? No
Do I personally believe that will actually happen though? Also no

I also think it's probably not wise to compare Lemieux to Wilson. They play hard, but Wilson is on another level, in terms of metrics and his actual style of play. Comparing the two is only setting people up for disappointment.

It seems to me the style in which Lemieux plays leads some to have higher expectations than they should. If Lemieux played a slightly different style of his current game, I'm not sure we'd be having this discussion haha


I actually said in the post that the idea isn’t so much to compare them as players. It’s that Wilson took 5 years to become anything more than a 7 goal 20 point player in this league. Before that he was just physical and most people probably would have said he was nothing but a fourth liner or a guy you certainly don’t want anywhere near your top six. Fast forward to years 6 and 7 in the league for him and he’s pacing for 45-50 points and 20+ goals a year. Lemieux has had a similar, if not slightly better start to his career, has a similar draft pedigree and while not a direct comparison because he doesn’t have the size and strength to be as imposing and dominant as Wilson, also has the edge to his game that he could find himself useful *in a similar situation* as Wilson, where he compliments a high skill duo by being physical, being in front of the net and causing chaos/creating space. However the comparison is more along the metrics of Wilson certainly didn’t look like anything but a checking guy through 4-5 years in this league.
 
  • Like
Reactions: egelband
I said a few times over the year that I thought Lemieux just wasn't that good. I appreciate his effort and his dedication to standing up for his teammates, but beyond that, he was pretty "meh". Like he skates okay, I think he sucks with the puck on his stick, he's pretty decent in front and in the corners. He tries so hard to agitate that he makes himself less effective because he so frequently ends up on his ass and out of the play because he's looking to draw a penalty--a fact not lost on NHL officiating, apparently, as he didn't seem to get many calls this season.

Even if he were to somehow end up becoming a 40-50 point guy like Tom Wilson, he still wouldn't be Tom Wilson. Wilson is one of the best open-ice hitters in the game (when his hits aren't dirty), and is one of the very few "feared" players remaining in my estimation. Wilson is an absolute bull who can impose his will on other players. Lemieux is a strong, tough guy, but plays more of that pest role. He's reliant on retaliatory actions whereas Wilson just does what he wants, physically, and impacts things even if he's not drawing penalties. The other thing is, while yeah, Wilson plays with some of the best players in the game and HOFers and all that, he has the ability to do so. You can't just stick anyone in Wilson's position and expect them to be able to hang.

Anyway, he doesn't need to be Tom Wilson to be successful. I would just like to see him focus more on playing hockey instead of chasing guys around, chirping, and ending up sliding on his ass while the play heads the other direction. I think if he refines his game in front of the net (where he isn't as good as he could be), he's probably good for 15 goals and 10-15 assists on an average season with a couple years touching 40.
Agreed on pretty much all accounts.

“He isn’t a black hole offensively”. To be honest, that’s kind of exactly what he is :dunno:
 
I actually said in the post that the idea isn’t so much to compare them as players. It’s that Wilson took 5 years to become anything more than a 7 goal 20 point player in this league. Before that he was just physical and most people probably would have said he was nothing but a fourth liner or a guy you certainly don’t want anywhere near your top six. Fast forward to years 6 and 7 in the league for him and he’s pacing for 45-50 points and 20+ goals a year. Lemieux has had a similar, if not slightly better start to his career, has a similar draft pedigree and while not a direct comparison because he doesn’t have the size and strength to be as imposing and dominant as Wilson, also has the edge to his game that he could find himself useful *in a similar situation* as Wilson, where he compliments a high skill duo by being physical, being in front of the net and causing chaos/creating space. However the comparison is more along the metrics of Wilson certainly didn’t look like anything but a checking guy through 4-5 years in this league.
I tend to be more on the pessimistic side of the scale when it comes to projecting player development. I won't be complaining if Lemieux turns into a 40 point player. But I also won't be complaining if he is nothing more than a good 4th liner, because that's all I expect of him

Maybe if they stuck him on a line with Panarin, he'd turn into that guy, but I'm not holding my breath.

I just don't see the upside there, I've been saying this since the day he was acquired. But I'll be more than happy to be proven wrong should he turn into something more because it would benefit the team.
 
I said a few times over the year that I thought Lemieux just wasn't that good. I appreciate his effort and his dedication to standing up for his teammates, but beyond that, he was pretty "meh". Like he skates okay, I think he sucks with the puck on his stick, he's pretty decent in front and in the corners. He tries so hard to agitate that he makes himself less effective because he so frequently ends up on his ass and out of the play because he's looking to draw a penalty--a fact not lost on NHL officiating, apparently, as he didn't seem to get many calls this season.

Even if he were to somehow end up becoming a 40-50 point guy like Tom Wilson, he still wouldn't be Tom Wilson. Wilson is one of the best open-ice hitters in the game (when his hits aren't dirty), and is one of the very few "feared" players remaining in my estimation. Wilson is an absolute bull who can impose his will on other players. Lemieux is a strong, tough guy, but plays more of that pest role. He's reliant on retaliatory actions whereas Wilson just does what he wants, physically, and impacts things even if he's not drawing penalties. The other thing is, while yeah, Wilson plays with some of the best players in the game and HOFers and all that, he has the ability to do so. You can't just stick anyone in Wilson's position and expect them to be able to hang.

Anyway, he doesn't need to be Tom Wilson to be successful. I would just like to see him focus more on playing hockey instead of chasing guys around, chirping, and ending up sliding on his ass while the play heads the other direction. I think if he refines his game in front of the net (where he isn't as good as he could be), he's probably good for 15 goals and 10-15 assists on an average season with a couple years touching 40.
I agree with your assessment of him offensively but you're kinda underselling his effectiveness at drawing penalties. He's actually 4th at penalties drawn per 60 for forwards this year but he also takes a lot. For guys with high PIM counts he's quite good at what he does but I feel like he started to slip there the last few months (IIRC he had a huge positive penalty differential at the halfway mark and it really slipped as he went on). But yeah, Lemieux is fun and effective when he's on but he's dog shit when he's not and tbh he can be really embarrassing when he's not lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: nyr2k2
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Ad