Bananas Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 There's a couple reason for why I say this, the obvious one being that we need a legit second line on the ice, which I'll get to in a minute. Another reason I say this is because of the whole predicted injury bug. With a shortened season and no exhibition and tiny training camp, it has been predicted that there is going to be a lot of injury trouble this year. You think the goons don't know that? Split up the Sedins so that they can avoid nasty checking and bruising lines, for the most part, and can be partnered with some tougher players in the event of a scrum or sorts. The last hing we want is a Sedin injury. And of course, the option always remains present if we need to unite them for a shift or two. And they definitely pair up during powerplays, for obvious reasons. I don't really have anything specific as far as lines suggestions go, but maybe something along the lines of.. Burrows - Henrik - Kassian Daniel - Lapierre - Hansen Hansen has had past success with the Sedins, and is one of few players that I believe is going to step it up in the absence of Booth and Kes. And I'm sure we've all heard of Lapierre's 20 extra pounds he put on during lockout. I'm not saying Lapierre and Kassian will necessarily act as enforcers, but likely slight deterrents. This setup allows the Sedins to avoid these lines by 50%, though, which is a good factor at this stage. It also helps and motivates these players to truly step up their game while Booth and Kes are gone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bertuzzi Babe Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 No. Just, no. That is all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 No. Just, no. That is all. Ditto.... Why does this come up every year?!?!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 No. Just, no. That is all. I don't see what's wrong with spreading out the scoring in a shortened season? I see no harm in trying it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bertuzzi Babe Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 I don't see what's wrong with spreading out the scoring in a shortened season? I see no harm in trying it out. We're playing a drastically shortened season. There's no time for fiddle farting around to 'try it out' and see 'what works'.....you go with what does work and do your best to come charging out of the gate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spliced Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 I think you gotta stick to what works in a short season like this. If the other 3 lines play solid D and the defence can stay healthy the Canucks should be able to win enough to get into the playoffs. Sure the Sedins will have to play tough match ups, but there aren't many regular season teams that are effective against them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kumquats Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 Yes let's split them up when we trade them.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
personaltrainer604 Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 Knowing AV's style...I'm sure he will try it..but I doubt it won't be something that sticks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primal Optimist Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 Ditto.... Why does this come up every year?!?!? In previous years I have suggested it for stretches of time when there have been injuries, firstly to balance our offense over the top two lines, secondly because there could come a critical time when you have to separate the saucer from the mother ship, as was my example last year on the subject, and it would be great to know that you had a few weeks of regular season practice at this split of the sedins... ...that being said, those suggestions were back when there was 82 games and easily 30 of them could have been used to tinker around and still make the playoffs with slightly less points..I am not an advocate of it for the short season, but would still not mind seeing the tactic here and there to throw teams off guard from time to time. Would be fun to see a team that has traditionally been able to lock down our top line scramble to have to cover two top lines. That is all. Again, not a fan of the idea this 48 game run to the playoffs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mancaesar Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 My thoughts were "No. No. Just....no." even before I read the first reply. Really? So you want to give opposing checkers just one target per shift? When they play together, at least the other team has to worry about whom to cover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
timberz21 Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 No but I wouldn't mind putting Burrows on the 2nd line and move a Kassian,Schroeder,Hansen, hell try Rodin. Burrows proved thats he isn't producing only because of the Sedins and would have a more experienced player on the second line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
**Pavel4Life** Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 They are 100% more effective on the same line. Always have been, always will be. End of topic/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueliner1955 Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 in order of vancouver to play and win games they have to score score score need more goals from every 1 not win game by 1-0 these kinda goals wont win you a cup work thru this injury prone short season and quit posting things about luongo if he traded this year or soon let it be the media just quit writing about it just looking at toronto what can they get from them to help vancouver not much philadelphia has a lot but dont think they will give up much . edmonton and chiacgo why trade a goalie to these if you help them out. spliting the twins up how is this going to help prolly less scoring every 1 needs to score so win win win Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthMelvin Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 I remember when we just had Henrik in the line up and we failed...it took Daniel to come back early off of Concussion leave to even score lol....with that...... NO! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 I get a kick out of this - it seems to come up every year. The Sedins have always been far more effective together. Their chemistry is their greatest asset. Splitting them up has NEVER worked for the better. This isn't going to change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanucksSayEh Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 I think it could be worth a shot. Currently we have ample supporting players to make 2 lines with them apart, not so much if they stick together. They will still have the powerplay together. We have the goaltending and defense to back em up. It also gives support to the younger players and guys playing over their pay grade in the top 6. Kassian, Hansen and Raymond could all benefit from a Sedin. It's also good practice just in case one of them should be injured down the road. Last year AV had no idea what to do and started mixing lines together that had never been tried.....In a playoff elimination game! They are both still elite in their own right. Burrows-Hank-Hansen Daniel-Lappy-Raymond Higgy-Schroeder-Kassian Weise-Manny-Volpatti ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neutral-Zoned Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 Hilarious! So many cdc'ers who keep saying "We tried splitting them up, it didn't work. End of story!" Really? We NEVER really gave them that much time apart... EVER. A smattering here and there, that is all. When they were injured though, Henrik did really well with Daniel out, and vice-versa. So with these things in mind, I just don't understand the arguement for NOT splitting them up while line 2 is injury-riddled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucks-4-Life Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 LOL....OP, you read my mind. I was logging on just to post this thread. I agree with you completely. Lets face it, without Kesler in the line-up, we don't have a legit secondary scoring threat. We can move Daniel down to the 2nd line to even things out. They can reunite the Sedins on the Powerplay as well as some odd shifts throughout the game. This will give the opposing coach tons of trouble. Even Strength: Burrows - Hank - Kassian Danny - Schroeder - Higgins Powerplay: Danny - Hank- Kassian Burrows - Schroeder - Higgins PS: Too bad Jensen decided to stay in Europe. With the injury to Booth, he could have had some nice top 6 minutes. I wonder if he is considering coming over? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pwnstar Posted January 16, 2013 Share Posted January 16, 2013 I think we need two more threads on this subject Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.