What your trying to describe is just the 14-15 season. Because TT only played 3 regular season games and no playoff games in in 13-14. Even in 14-15 TT only played in 34 NHL games (he spent half the season in the AHL).
No, Bickell-Shaw-TT was an example of the Hawks using a bottom six line of offensive spare parts and successfully giving them easy minutes despite a Toews/Kane top six also trying to get offensively favorable TOI.
I forgot about Sharp playing his way out of the top six that season and anchoring their third line. Kruger was 9th in ESTOI/60 the two years prior and 7th in total ESTOI (not per-game) in the 2015 playoffs (because they were more willing to sit the dudes orbiting the bottom six for a game or three despite them playing more than Marcus on a per-game basis).
The line you describe of TT/Shaw/Bickell and others was their 3rd line during the season. Kruger and his line were getting roughly 1min a night less. Which doesn't jive with what Jame argued. In the playoffs TT was on a line for much of it with Vermette/Sharp. Thats not an offensively stacked line thats inept defensively. Its a very good two way line with a kid on it (TT).
Okay, but when that line was comprised of worse ES players, like Bickell-Shaw-Stalberg in 2013, Kruger was 9th in ESTOI/60. So basically, when the "offensive spare parts line" had some legit bodies in it they played slightly more (while getting hella OZS against the lowest QoC), and when it was more challenged ES players, they played slightly less. My point about the Blackhawks is way less about minutes distribution and way more about how they are a real life example of the opportunity/matchup strategy that Jame is outlining.
Again, I forgot about Patrick Sharp on their third line that year. Kruger was a fourth liner who got double shifted for defense each of the previous two seasons and the Blackhawks organization has pretty clearly valued his willingness to play a thankless role from the second Cup season through now.
That line along with the Kruger and Toews lines got defensive matchups. Who get more ice time of the Vermette/Kruger lines was usually based on which was the better matchup on any given night in the playoffs. So its fluctuated throughout the playoffs. But neither line could be described as, nor were they used as, an offensive matchup line in the way Jame is describing the Moulson/Girgs/Ennis line.
Sharp-Vermette-TT were 10th, 12th and
13th in QoC by TOI in the 2015 playoffs. The only Chicago forwards with more offensive zone starts were the Kane line. What Chicago did with forward opportunity distribution in 2/3rds of their Cups is
literally exactly Jame's blueprint.
Not to mention if an unestablished kid, like TT was at the time, was ever on line getting the least amount of ES ice time. It wouldn't be nearly the big deal that Ennis on a line like that would be. Nor would it it be parallel situation.
Ennis is coming off a bunch of concussions, bought into being the offensive spark of an elite team's fourth line on Team Canada, and would play his way up the lineup, especially in down-a-goal situations if he was providing hyper-efficient offense from a depth role. Those same dudes don't have to play those minutes for 82 games, the role just needs to exist on our team as a safe space for out-of-form offensive forwards.
I don't know if you got the "stacked fourth line" verbiage from a post of mine or Jame's, but I've always tried to describe that type of fourth/depth line setup as a "spare parts" line, not as some type of huge competitive advantage.
I would also point out that your description of their d-zone deployment is somewhat irrelevant to proving whether or not they had an offensively stacked 4th line.
It matches up with QoC too, plus their staff and front office valuing Kruger as a defensive specialist despite minutes/opportunity.
