Shareefruck
Registered User
Point taken regarding Sedin's linemates still having a Burrows, although Burrows was nowhere close to a 67 point forward without the luxury of playing with two Sedins. He's always been more of a 45-55 point guy who skyrocketed when with the twins.Complete BS take. Hoglander and Mikheyev are driving the play more than Pettersson? Nonsense. Henrik Sedin played about 19 games without Daniel that year, and he had Burrows (who had 67 points that season) on his line. That is literally the same amount of points as Hoglander and Mikheyev had combined this season. Hoglander and Mikheyev have been complete ghosts in the playoffs so far. The puck dies on their sticks every shift. Hoglander couldn't finish a dime set up from Pettersosn the other night. Btw, Your idea that Hoglander might be better off playing on the 4th line than with an 89 point playmaking center is quite funny. Pettersson's slump has brought out some of the dumbest takes.
In the playoffs, I agree, Hoglander and Mikheyev's play has fallen off a cliff, but they were driving the play in the regular season while Pettersson was playing passive (to a lesser degree Mikheyev, who was very inconsistent-- one day he'd drive the play, the next day he'd be even more passive than Pettersson). Currently, all three are playing poorly and there is no play-driver, period.
The Hoglander point was not even an opinion/take about his play, it's a statement of fact. He didn't join the Pettersson line until some point midway through the season (don't recall the exact date), and his most frequent regular linemates were Lafferty and Aman getting limited minutes on the fourth line up until that point. His totals in that first half (mostly if not entirely without Pettersson): 12 goals, 17 points, +11 in 39 games, which is a 25 goal, 36 point, +23 pace, nearly identical to his final pace.
Playing with Pettersson did not remotely contribute to his offensive break-out, I'm not sure how that can even be disputed. In fact, placing him on Pettersson's line was an attempt to get Pettersson going again. The fact that playing with Pettersson's 89 points didn't remotely improve Hoglander's numbers is very telling.
Edit: Also, during that second half where they played a lot more together, Hoglander's even strength production was very comparable to Pettersson (12g 19p vs. 7g 22p), so it really shouldn't be all that unfathomable that the former was the offensive playdriver on the line (not that point totals necessarily correlate with play-driving in the first place).
Last edited: