Wanless Posted January 28, 2021 Share Posted January 28, 2021 Why change a good thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrow 1983 Posted January 28, 2021 Author Share Posted January 28, 2021 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Wanless said: Why change a good thing? because the Canucks beat a bad team in a bad way there is more holes in their game than swiss cheese Edited January 28, 2021 by Arrow 1983 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrow 1983 Posted January 28, 2021 Author Share Posted January 28, 2021 (edited) This poll Surprises me maybe if he was younger or a second round draft pick with more name recognition I'm feeling a little dishearten and disappointed right now Edited January 28, 2021 by Arrow 1983 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil_314 Posted January 28, 2021 Share Posted January 28, 2021 55 minutes ago, Arrow 1983 said: His work ethic and hot streak with Horvat might, but we won't know till it is tried. We all got to remember this Ott we are playing not the other 5 teams in the division. Try it next game against Ott a team you know you can beat it is time to experiment now not when the team is down 3-2 to a better team I think the opposite (sort of). It would be easy to beat up on a weak team like Ottawa and bump him up the lineup so he'd score a couple (much like Juolevi did in garbage time last game), but you can really test where he is if, say Pearson has an off night, we swap Motte up when he's doing well to see whether his game holds up against legit top-six competition. It's easy enough say to put a prime Chris Higgins on a 2nd line role against a weak team but he worked better on the 3rd line as a strong bottom-6 presence, and I think a similar case can be said for Motte. What's more, I don't see anything wrong with letting him feast on weaker lines, so that there's scoring depth. As another old saying goes, don't put all your eggs in one basket and we're lucky to have him on a batch against weaker competition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whalespray Posted January 28, 2021 Share Posted January 28, 2021 I voted no. Not because I dont believe in Motte but because I do. I see flashes of Alex Burrows in him. He needs more time honing his craft in the trenches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrow 1983 Posted January 28, 2021 Author Share Posted January 28, 2021 1 minute ago, Phil_314 said: I think the opposite (sort of). It would be easy to beat up on a weak team like Ottawa and bump him up the lineup so he'd score a couple (much like Juolevi did in garbage time last game), but you can really test where he is if, say Pearson has an off night, we swap Motte up when he's doing well to see whether his game holds up against legit top-six competition. It's easy enough say to put a prime Chris Higgins on a 2nd line role against a weak team but he worked better on the 3rd line as a strong bottom-6 presence, and I think a similar case can be said for Motte. What's more, I don't see anything wrong with letting him feast on weaker lines, so that there's scoring depth. As another old saying goes, don't put all your eggs in one basket and we're lucky to have him on a batch against weaker competition. For me it is not all about his scoring Motte works hard ever game battles for pucks, back checks you name it he does it, these are the attributions that limits shots, gain puck possession and create score opportunities, he does this against weak teams and the better teams every night Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrow 1983 Posted January 28, 2021 Author Share Posted January 28, 2021 3 minutes ago, Whalespray said: I voted no. Not because I dont believe in Motte but because I do. I see flashes of Alex Burrows in him. He needs more time honing his craft in the trenches. Horvat's line is the best trenches to hone his craft Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toyotasfan Posted January 28, 2021 Share Posted January 28, 2021 You need that energy guy in the bottom 6 , he has a role and does it well. Don’t fix it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GB5 Posted January 28, 2021 Share Posted January 28, 2021 I think Motte is cut out to be a bottom 6 guy who can slot in the top 6 from time to time, He benefits from not having to face the top checkers on a nightly basis and thrives as a role player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrow 1983 Posted January 28, 2021 Author Share Posted January 28, 2021 Just now, Toyotasfan said: You need that energy guy in the bottom 6 , he has a role and does it well. Don’t fix it. You need McEwen and Roussel guys in your bottom 6 giving that energy The Energy Motte gives is different he needs to be lined up with Horvat In a top 6 matchup line against the best players in the league like #14 was Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrow 1983 Posted January 28, 2021 Author Share Posted January 28, 2021 1 minute ago, GarthButcher5 said: I think Motte is cut out to be a bottom 6 guy who can slot in the top 6 from time to time, He benefits from not having to face the top checkers on a nightly basis and thrives as a role player. People could have said the same about #14 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrow 1983 Posted January 28, 2021 Author Share Posted January 28, 2021 (edited) There is 2 different types of energy those that bang and crash and those that get the structure of the game Horvat doesn't make a good bottom 6 guy he is a great #2 center Motte isn't a bottom 6 guy he is a match up guy who can keep up with the best in the game Has no one really noticed his speed Edited January 28, 2021 by Arrow 1983 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil_314 Posted January 28, 2021 Share Posted January 28, 2021 2 minutes ago, Arrow 1983 said: For me it is not all about his scoring Motte works hard ever game battles for pucks, back checks you name it he does it, these are the attributions that limits shots, gain puck possession and create score opportunities, he does this against weak teams and the better teams every night It's true that he scored against the Sens' second line twice (Tierney and Brown are probably below-average second liners, and Stutzle's still learning the ropes) but I think a 4th line needs a play-driver like him to counteract the offensive void that guys like Beagle create (all face-offs and effort but no offensive potential). Why not let him remain a valuable role player? No need to deplete the 4th line to give him more opportunity when we know he's a depth weapon available (plus we don't know the effects of exposing him against legit top-6 quality players). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrow 1983 Posted January 28, 2021 Author Share Posted January 28, 2021 Just now, Phil_314 said: It's true that he scored against the Sens' second line twice (Tierney and Brown are probably below-average second liners, and Stutzle's still learning the ropes) but I think a 4th line needs a play-driver like him to counteract the offensive void that guys like Beagle create (all face-offs and effort but no offensive potential). Why not let him remain a valuable role player? No need to deplete the 4th line to give him more opportunity when we know he's a depth weapon available (plus we don't know the effects of exposing him against legit top-6 quality players). Are you saying Pearson would deplete the 4th line Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrow 1983 Posted January 28, 2021 Author Share Posted January 28, 2021 4 minutes ago, Arrow 1983 said: There is 2 different types of energy those that bang and crash and those that get the structure of the game Horvat doesn't make a good bottom 6 guy he is a great #2 center Motte isn't a bottom 6 guy he is a match up guy who can keep up with the best in the game Has no one really noticed his speed 1 minute ago, Phil_314 said: It's true that he scored against the Sens' second line twice (Tierney and Brown are probably below-average second liners, and Stutzle's still learning the ropes) but I think a 4th line needs a play-driver like him to counteract the offensive void that guys like Beagle create (all face-offs and effort but no offensive potential). Why not let him remain a valuable role player? No need to deplete the 4th line to give him more opportunity when we know he's a depth weapon available (plus we don't know the effects of exposing him against legit top-6 quality players). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil_314 Posted January 28, 2021 Share Posted January 28, 2021 Just now, Arrow 1983 said: Are you saying Pearson would deplete the 4th line I'm saying Pearson wouldn't end up on the 4th line (at worst he'd probably be a 3rd line guy), it'd probably be something expensive, heavy and slow like Roussel - Beagle - Sutter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arrow 1983 Posted January 28, 2021 Author Share Posted January 28, 2021 2 minutes ago, Phil_314 said: I'm saying Pearson wouldn't end up on the 4th line (at worst he'd probably be a 3rd line guy), it'd probably be something expensive, heavy and slow like Roussel - Beagle - Sutter. What I'd like to see is Pearson Beagle Sutter as third line 13-15 mins Roussel Gaud Virtanen or Change a winger for McEwen 8-10 mins 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil_314 Posted January 28, 2021 Share Posted January 28, 2021 21 minutes ago, Arrow 1983 said: What I'd like to see is Pearson Beagle Sutter as third line 13-15 mins Roussel Gaud Virtanen or Change a winger for McEwen 8-10 mins That's a terrible looking 3rd line, not going to lie. Even if you want a defensive/ shutdown unit, Pearson's offense is going to crater hard because of Beagle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRAZY_4_NAZZY Posted January 28, 2021 Share Posted January 28, 2021 Motte plays well with his limited minutes because he makes the most out of those minutes. He excels in his role, don't change it, let him continue to excel in a role where he fits best, trusted energy role player who can be very good defensively. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FaninMex Posted January 28, 2021 Share Posted January 28, 2021 2 hours ago, Arrow 1983 said: From last season's playoffs to the first 9 games this season is Motte becoming a top 6 forward??? Lets look at it, 5 goals in the first 9 games If Pearson is a top 6 forward is Motte not better Motte's Determination resembles Horvats, actually I go as far as saying Motte is to our winger's as Horvat is to our centers And most importantly wouldn't a line of Motte Horvat and Hoglander look pretty good All in all IMHO it is time to promote Motte and demote Pearson. Pearson might work better against weaker competition Why ruin a great 4th line that is running hot? Beagle said once that it is nice to have steady line mates. Rooster Beagle Motte play the same game and have great chemistry. Don't change it. In fact, all our forward lines have good chemistry. Lotto line Pearson Horvat Hog are clicking Mac Sutter Virt look good. I see Mac and Virt throwing some good hits and forechecking hard. Leave it alone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now