Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

Has everyone forgotten about the Amex line?


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
44 replies to this topic

#1 uber_pwnzor

uber_pwnzor

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,451 posts
  • Joined: 07-December 11

Posted 03 July 2012 - 04:49 AM

All you people are crying for a second line playmaker, have you totally forgotten how awesome the Amex line was?

Booth - Kesler - Higgins


<3

#2 DownUndaCanuck

DownUndaCanuck

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,609 posts
  • Joined: 28-July 07

Posted 03 July 2012 - 05:03 AM

Exactly. They didn't need a playmaker on their line. 3 20-goal scorers fits perfectly together, and that was with ongoing injuries and a banged up Kesler.

Kesler notched 50 assists a couple of seasons ago - he CAN be the passer we need him to be, he just needs to get his game back to where it was. Higgins is still capable of a 20 goal season and Booth was on pace for 20+ goals, he could easily hit his 30-goal mark again if Kesler gets back to his good passing.

Basically this line is good for 70 goals, which is great for most 1st lines let alone a 2nd line. Our top line will probably only score 70 too (30 from Daniel, 25 from Burrows, 15 from Henrik) which is a complement to our top-6 and depth.

Considering that we have Raymond (15 goal scorer), Hansen (soon to be 20 goal scorer) and Lapierre (15 goal scorer with 3rd line minutes) putting up 50 goals on our 3rd line, I think we're fine for scoring.
Posted Image

#3 SAnuck

SAnuck

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 130 posts
  • Joined: 24-June 12

Posted 03 July 2012 - 05:22 AM

How can you say we're fine for scoring when it was our 2nd line and a complete lack of scoring which led us to losing. I acknowledge there was clearly a goalie issue and we missed that big shut down defender but there were still issues upfront too.

#4 Rounoush

Rounoush

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,246 posts
  • Joined: 19-October 10

Posted 03 July 2012 - 05:33 AM

The more and more I think about it, the more I want to take a chance on Peter Mueller and sign him here for around $2-3 million. The guy is an extremely gifted playmaker, plays on the right side and is an American so the Amex line could still be the Amex line.

The massive risk in signing him, though, is his recent concussion problems but if we could get him for relatively cheap he would be an excellent addition to the team.

Booth - Kesler - Mueller

What a second line that would be.

Edited by Rounoush, 03 July 2012 - 05:35 AM.

2dgqi51.jpgfcvifc.jpg
Thanks a bunch to khalifawiz501 and Discord for the signatures.


#5 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,473 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 03 July 2012 - 05:36 AM

They were awesome?

HiromiOshimaB.gif


#6 Quaz

Quaz

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 146 posts
  • Joined: 02-September 10

Posted 03 July 2012 - 05:39 AM

I remember hoping it was going to be a great line.

AV had Kesler, Booth and Higgins at his disposal to keep the AMEX
line together and for whatever reason decided it wasn't working?

#7 Industrious1

Industrious1

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,897 posts
  • Joined: 12-May 10

Posted 03 July 2012 - 05:41 AM

When they clicked the Amex line was certainly fun to watch...however injuries kind of derailed things and when they all got back together something was definately missing.

I think with the summer off and more practice together this line can further improve.

#8 dura_mater

dura_mater

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,614 posts
  • Joined: 18-December 08

Posted 03 July 2012 - 05:47 AM

Yes I had forgotten about them. Thanks for the reminder.
"BoKnows53"
My stinky team isn't on top of the Standings anymore Waah waaahh, fire everyone because I say so

- New Era Canucks Fans

#9 Berto91

Berto91

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 787 posts
  • Joined: 23-December 09

Posted 03 July 2012 - 05:54 AM

In theory they should have been amazing, but they really weren't doing as much as they should have done. Hopefully when Kesler comes back and is fully healed, we'll see them produce the way we'd hoped they would have done. Assuming Booth/Higgins are here
100th Post: Friday 2nd July '10 :)

Vintage.Kesler, on 30 September 2010 - 03:30 PM, said:
Lol, tailored for a T-REX.

I'm pretty sure CDC just collectively orgasmed at the thought of CoHo getting recalled lol



#10 Bodee

Bodee

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,257 posts
  • Joined: 26-May 11

Posted 03 July 2012 - 06:08 AM

All you people are crying for a second line playmaker, have you totally forgotten how awesome the Amex line was?

Booth - Kesler - Higgins


<3


Awesome?..............that would NOT be my description...........stop trying to brainwash the gullible.
Kevin.jpg

#11 Bodee

Bodee

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,257 posts
  • Joined: 26-May 11

Posted 03 July 2012 - 06:10 AM

The more and more I think about it, the more I want to take a chance on Peter Mueller and sign him here for around $2-3 million. The guy is an extremely gifted playmaker, plays on the right side and is an American so the Amex line could still be the Amex line.

The massive risk in signing him, though, is his recent concussion problems but if we could get him for relatively cheap he would be an excellent addition to the team.

Booth - Kesler - Mueller

What a second line that would be.


Mike Knuble is a better option imo.
Kevin.jpg

#12 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,967 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 03 July 2012 - 06:12 AM

Exactly. They didn't need a playmaker on their line. 3 20-goal scorers fits perfectly together, and that was with ongoing injuries and a banged up Kesler.

Kesler notched 50 assists a couple of seasons ago - he CAN be the passer we need him to be, he just needs to get his game back to where it was. Higgins is still capable of a 20 goal season and Booth was on pace for 20+ goals, he could easily hit his 30-goal mark again if Kesler gets back to his good passing.

Basically this line is good for 70 goals, which is great for most 1st lines let alone a 2nd line. Our top line will probably only score 70 too (30 from Daniel, 25 from Burrows, 15 from Henrik) which is a complement to our top-6 and depth.

Considering that we have Raymond (15 goal scorer), Hansen (soon to be 20 goal scorer) and Lapierre (15 goal scorer with 3rd line minutes) putting up 50 goals on our 3rd line, I think we're fine for scoring.


Higgins could act as playmaker for the second line and he has enjoyed some success in that spot, but he may well not get a chance to play there. Should the Canucks acquire a big body who can play with the Sedins, then Burroughs will be moved to the 2nd line, and Higgins will be kept on the thrid. And that might just be what's best for the team.

I think you are being a bit optimistic that the third line will be as prolific at scoring as you suggest. Lapierre scored 15 goals once, and that was four years ago. Hansen might score 20 goals one day, assuming he played most of the season with the Sedins. I do not see him doing that on the third line. Raymond has been in a scoring funk for the last couple of years. Is it a co-incidence that he got 25 goals the same year that Kesler was a 50 assist guy? And how has Raymond done (any injuries aside) since Kesler has gone the shoot first route? Maybe he'll get 15 goals this season, but not without a proper playmaker on that line.

So, I suppose what I'm suggesting is that if Higgins does get to play on the second line then it is because the team couldn't get anyone better.

regards,
G.

Edited by Gollumpus, 03 July 2012 - 06:15 AM.

Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#13 RUPERTKBD

RUPERTKBD

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,924 posts
  • Joined: 23-July 04

Posted 03 July 2012 - 06:56 AM

All you people are crying for a second line playmaker, have you totally forgotten how awesome the Amex line was?

Booth - Kesler - Higgins


<3

The AMEX line was a lot of hype that didn't deliver as promised, from what I saw.

As much as I like Higgins, I don't think he was a good fit on the second unit. He's an effective third line guy. If Gillis isn't able to fill that hole in the top six, (especially with Kesler starting the season on the DL) he's going to have to give one of the kids (Schroeder or Jensen) a shot at playing there.
Orland Kurtenbach and Dennis Kearns had just been torched 8-1 by the Habs, but they still took time to come out to meet us, some fellow BC boys who were playing hockey in Montreal. THAT"S what being a Canuck is!

#14 Phamda

Phamda

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,082 posts
  • Joined: 21-June 11

Posted 03 July 2012 - 07:07 AM

The more and more I think about it, the more I want to take a chance on Peter Mueller and sign him here for around $2-3 million. The guy is an extremely gifted playmaker, plays on the right side and is an American so the Amex line could still be the Amex line.

The massive risk in signing him, though, is his recent concussion problems but if we could get him for relatively cheap he would be an excellent addition to the team.

Booth - Kesler - Mueller

What a second line that would be.


Been saying this since the season ended. I knew Murller wasnt gonna be qualified and could be had on the cheap.

#15 keslerian one

keslerian one

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,287 posts
  • Joined: 27-April 11

Posted 03 July 2012 - 07:18 AM

They were great at pinning the other team in the offensive zone. But didn't create many chances together. Hence the reason why we need a playmaker. Plus, Higgins is much more valuable in the third line.

#16 Captain Hindsight

Captain Hindsight

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 549 posts
  • Joined: 06-November 10

Posted 03 July 2012 - 07:19 AM

No other team is shaking in their booties when they hear about the Amex line. Honestly. Did you forget the 2nd line or lack thereof last season?

#17 CanucksFanMike

CanucksFanMike

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,632 posts
  • Joined: 28-September 11

Posted 03 July 2012 - 07:22 AM

I'm thinking of the new and improved AMEX line: D. Booth - R. Kesler - B. Ryan!!!
Posted Image
Credit to -Vintage Canuck-

#18 CoreyPerry

CoreyPerry

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 955 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 10

Posted 03 July 2012 - 07:26 AM

Booth was a complete no show in the playoffs....complete no show
Posted ImagePosted Image
Credit to CanucksBen for Kassian sig

#19 Nino

Nino

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,013 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 03 July 2012 - 07:54 AM

All you people are crying for a second line playmaker, have you totally forgotten how awesome the Amex line was?

Booth - Kesler - Higgins


<3


I think the line was over rated, they worked at the start but dropped off because Ryan is not a good mix with booth.

#20 Quaz

Quaz

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 146 posts
  • Joined: 02-September 10

Posted 03 July 2012 - 08:02 AM

Booth was a complete no show in the playoffs....complete no show


Pretty much anybody that played LA was a no show thanks to Quick

#21 smackyo23

smackyo23

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 438 posts
  • Joined: 19-May 11

Posted 03 July 2012 - 09:11 AM

Kesler for the love of God is not a true centre, stick him on the wing where he belongs and you'll see his numbers go back up. Every time he crosses the blue line on a rush he tries to split two or three defenders and always seems to lose possession instead of passing off.

The Amex line was ineffective at best and a total let down at worst and besides, Higgins plays better on the third line anyway.
Posted Image

#22 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,473 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 03 July 2012 - 09:19 AM

When they clicked the Amex line was certainly fun to watch...however injuries kind of derailed things and when they all got back together something was definately missing.

I think with the summer off and more practice together this line can further improve.


Passing.

HiromiOshimaB.gif


#23 Nino

Nino

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,013 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 03 July 2012 - 09:50 AM

Kesler for the love of God is not a true centre, stick him on the wing where he belongs and you'll see his numbers go back up. Every time he crosses the blue line on a rush he tries to split two or three defenders and always seems to lose possession instead of passing off.

The Amex line was ineffective at best and a total let down at worst and besides, Higgins plays better on the third line anyway.


Yes, yes and yes.

But you missed one point. Kesler is a good defensive third line center but he will not work as a second line offensive center because he will not pass. Use him as a second line winger or third line center.

Edited by Nino, 03 July 2012 - 09:53 AM.


#24 etsen3

etsen3

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,756 posts
  • Joined: 02-July 10

Posted 03 July 2012 - 09:59 AM

I don't think the Amex line was consistent enough to be called awesome. They were awesome at times, but other times they were terrible. It seemed like at times they had blinders on and wouldn't get their heads up to look around. Either we give them more time to gel, or we pick up a Top 6 forward who can move the puck around a bit more. It doesn't have to be an American, there are bigger priorities than keeping a cute nickname for that line. That gives us more depth and allows us to place Higgins on the 3rd line, which became very effective when he was there.

We have the cap space and we still have Luongo. I will be a bit disappointed in MG if he doesn't use the extra money to his advantage, either now or at the trade deadline.

The other option is to hope that Jensen or Kassian can really step up next year and play on the second line, but that's asking too much of a rookie and probably won't work.

Edited by etsen3, 03 July 2012 - 10:05 AM.


#25 Cody9

Cody9

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 924 posts
  • Joined: 20-May 08

Posted 03 July 2012 - 10:09 AM

All you people are crying for a second line playmaker, have you totally forgotten how awesome the Amex line was?

Booth - Kesler - Higgins


<3


THE AMEX line never really was a LINE. For just a short while those three together were OKAY. The problem is: Booth needs to learn how to be on a line. It is NOT about being a one man wrecking crew going 90 miles an hour up the ice and then doing nothing. He needs to learn how to play on a line and until he does that second line simply isn't.

#26 Cody9

Cody9

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 924 posts
  • Joined: 20-May 08

Posted 03 July 2012 - 10:10 AM

Yes, yes and yes.

But you missed one point. Kesler is a good defensive third line center but he will not work as a second line offensive center because he will not pass. Use him as a second line winger or third line center.


What about BOOTH - he passes?

#27 RyanKeslord17

RyanKeslord17

    Canucks First-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,895 posts
  • Joined: 22-January 11

Posted 03 July 2012 - 10:34 AM

We probably forgot about it because they dissapeared in the playoffs.
Posted Image

#28 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 75,336 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 03 July 2012 - 11:05 AM

Shane Doan

kthxbye

307mg00.jpg


#29 TotesMagotes

TotesMagotes

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,319 posts
  • Joined: 29-November 07

Posted 03 July 2012 - 11:24 AM

The amex line didn't really pan out....But yes we remember it, which is exactly why people think we need a 2nd line playmaker.
Posted Image

#30 TotesMagotes

TotesMagotes

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,319 posts
  • Joined: 29-November 07

Posted 03 July 2012 - 11:27 AM

How can you say we're fine for scoring when it was our 2nd line and a complete lack of scoring which led us to losing. I acknowledge there was clearly a goalie issue and we missed that big shut down defender but there were still issues upfront too.


A goalie issue? You mean our two goalies being the best players in that series? Is that the issue you're referencing?

Luongo and Schneider had nothing to do with why they lost.
Posted Image




Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.