WiseCanucksFan Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 I see frequent posts suggesting the Canucks should pick up a checking centre like Malhotra, Pahlsson in the past. Well this team no longer has the same kind of makeup as those Canucks teams of the past, personally I don't think it makes any sense to pick up a checking centre. AV used Malhotra in a shutdown role - with wingers like Torres, Higgins, Hansen. In the current makeup of the team, the Kesler line IS the shutdown line. They are already playing tough minutes with defensive zone starts and playing against the top forwards, they are basically the prototypical 3rd line except they can score as well. But because they are an excellent 2-way line they can go minute-for-minute against the opposition's best and end up with 1st line icetime. Meanwhile, guys like Kassian and Booth are not exactly suited to a shutdown type role. I feel Richardson is a misfit on that line, and the same could occur with Goc, Matthias, etc. This isn't really a checking line - rather the personnel on this line are more prototypical 2nd line forwards. The type of center needed here is a playmaking center to play with these guys, not a checking centre. If the Canucks were to trade for a C, it should be a playmaker not a 3rd liner. But with Horvat in the pipeline, it may make more sense to wait it out. Jordan Schroeder when he gets healthy should be given a shot between Kassian and Booth - this is the type of C that is needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
people please Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 I see frequent posts suggesting the Canucks should pick up a checking centre like Malhotra, Pahlsson in the past. Well this team no longer has the same kind of makeup as those Canucks teams of the past, personally I don't think it makes any sense to pick up a checking centre. AV used Malhotra in a shutdown role - with wingers like Torres, Higgins, Hansen. In the current makeup of the team, the Kesler line IS the shutdown line. They are already playing tough minutes with defensive zone starts and playing against the top forwards, they are basically the prototypical 3rd line except they can score as well. But because they are an excellent 2-way line they can go minute-for-minute against the opposition's best and end up with 1st line icetime. Meanwhile, guys like Kassian and Booth are not exactly suited to a shutdown type role. I feel Richardson is a misfit on that line, and the same could occur with Goc, Matthias, etc. This isn't really a checking line - rather the personnel on this line are more prototypical 2nd line forwards. The type of center needed here is a playmaking center to play with these guys, not a checking centre. If the Canucks were to trade for a C, it should be a playmaker not a 3rd liner. But with Horvat in the pipeline, it may make more sense to wait it out. Jordan Schroeder when he gets healthy should be given a shot between Kassian and Booth - this is the type of C that is needed. Don't compare malhotra to pahllson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HC20.0 Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 Don't compare malhotra to pahllson They were both defensive, checking centers who could win faceoffs though. Just one sucked here and the other didn't. But it's a valid comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandro17 Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 So in other words, our second line can act as our 3rd line as it shuts down opponents very well and our third line just needs added scoring due to the second line taking their role. You actually make a good point. +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
riffraff Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 Sterotypical or prototypical? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckster19 Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 Yeah, it will be interesting, if/when Horvat's season is done, to see if he can play between Booth and Kassian, that line has been carrying this team more than the Sedin line lately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cucumber Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 so u want when healthy sedins burrows higgins kesler santorelli booth schroeder kassian weise richardson hansen but torts will change stuff around as we know, we really should try amex line again sedins burrows higgins kesler booth santorelli schroeder kassian weise richardson hansen our depth in the next 1-2 years is so crazy with the likes of horvat, shrinkarek, gaunce, jensen, archibald, corrado ect... coming in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucklehead44 Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 Sterotypical or prototypical? Stereotypical. That said, I think line chemistry is more complex than typecasting players and moving them around like game pieces. I really like Richardson with Kassian and Booth. Despite one really bad shift from Kassian that was our most dangerous, generating 2 goals and multiple scoring chances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sugar baby watermelon Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 Schroeder will most likely play between Kass & Booth when he returns, Richardson is doing really well there but he plays well on the 4th as well, between Weise and Dalpe maybe. Schroeder has pretty good vision on ice and can make some nice heads up passes out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merci Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 Gaunce is our 3rd line center. Horvat is 2nd with Kesler on his RW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DownUndaCanuck Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 Look at San Jose's 3rd line center - Joe Pavelski. He's decent defensively, but offensively he's outscoring almost every team's 1st line center. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
missioncanucksfan Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 Don't compare malhotra to pahllson well Pahlsson has a ring whilst being a huge factor during Duck's run... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB007 Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 Gaunce is our 3rd line center. Horvat is 2nd with Kesler on his RW Which team are you following? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maniwaki Canuck Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 Nice post, OP. Old habits die hard. We have been so used to having terrible depth at centre that we don't realize that the problem is fixed. Even with Schroeder out of the lineup all year, we've been doing fine because Richardson is adequate at 3C, even though he makes most sense at 4C. Dalpe and Welch are almost up to a 4C role, but we're probably not going anywhere in the playoffs if we have to use them there. And with Horvat, Gaunce and Cassels in the pipeline, our centre depth is going to be crazy in years to come. We are going to be subtracting, not adding, in that position. So it's back to the well-worn need for a sniper and a puck-moving defenseman if the opportunities are there. Otherwise, we keep doing it by committee, which isn't the worst thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB007 Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 Look at San Jose's 3rd line center - Joe Pavelski. He's decent defensively, but offensively he's outscoring almost every team's 1st line center. Exactly... this whole stereotypical shutdown 3C thing is overrated. I would rather have 3 defensively responsible scoring lines and leave the 4th to shutdown if it's affordable. I think most people would if they actually think about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 More options on the draw isn't a bad thing. I think at this point you have to consider how a guy fits in. Florida is a loser franchise used to losing and all their top-end vet talent has already been robbed. I think we'd target NYR as a trading partner because Torts has obvious familiarity with their guys and they're a team in flux. Question is who? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frazzy Desjardins Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 Sedin Sedin Burrows Higgins Kesler Santorelli Booth Schroeder Kassian Hansen Richardson Sestito/Weise Hamhuis Tanev Edler Garrison Stanton Bieksa Weber/Corrado Lu Lack Playoff lineup, barring any injuries or trades... I see Edler and Hansen as potential trade bait, packaged with a draft pick or a prospect not named Bo, Hunter, Brendan, or Jordan (or any G prospect) could be very enticing to a lot of teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canada Hockey Place Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 VAN already has a 3rd line C. His name is Mike and he plays on the 2nd line. The option is there. Right now, the coach trusts him more than others so he gives him more minutes. If 2 of Burrows, Hansen, Booth or Kassian can step up, there are tons of options to balance the lines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CookieCrumbs Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 Assuming there are no trades and everybody is healthy, this is the line up I would press for. Sedin - Sedin - Burrows (needs to really step up once he's back to form) Higgins - Kesler - Santorelli Booth - Schroeder - Kassian Weise - Richardson - Hansen Sestito Hamhuis - Tanev Edler - Garrison Stanton - Bieksa Weber Luongo Lack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angry Goose Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 I see frequent posts suggesting the Canucks should pick up a checking centre like Malhotra, Pahlsson in the past. Well this team no longer has the same kind of makeup as those Canucks teams of the past, personally I don't think it makes any sense to pick up a checking centre. AV used Malhotra in a shutdown role - with wingers like Torres, Higgins, Hansen. In the current makeup of the team, the Kesler line IS the shutdown line. They are already playing tough minutes with defensive zone starts and playing against the top forwards, they are basically the prototypical 3rd line except they can score as well. But because they are an excellent 2-way line they can go minute-for-minute against the opposition's best and end up with 1st line icetime. Meanwhile, guys like Kassian and Booth are not exactly suited to a shutdown type role. I feel Richardson is a misfit on that line, and the same could occur with Goc, Matthias, etc. This isn't really a checking line - rather the personnel on this line are more prototypical 2nd line forwards. The type of center needed here is a playmaking center to play with these guys, not a checking centre. If the Canucks were to trade for a C, it should be a playmaker not a 3rd liner. But with Horvat in the pipeline, it may make more sense to wait it out. Jordan Schroeder when he gets healthy should be given a shot between Kassian and Booth - this is the type of C that is needed. agreed. unfortunately with the injuries J.S has suffered this season he is a LONG ways away from being in game shape- it is just an unfortunate circumstance. I'm not sure if J.S is subject to waivers but what would be best for him when he is game ready again is to play in Utica and return hopefully just before the season ends to slot in the 3rd/4th line but that might just be wishful thinking. Richardson has done a pretty good job so far I think. Defensively he is exactly what the 3rd line needs and is decent enough as a 2 way C. And with Horvat coming up I agree the Canucks don't need to trade the farm, but even Horvat might be a year or two away from the NHL, so I'm curious who MG & Co might be looking at for depth at the C position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.