Gretzky was the anchor of the oilers run and gun team in the eighties. Aside from Sather, if someone knows the value of letting offensively gifted players do their thing, it's gotta be him. Then we have Pat Quinn who is not known for using an ultra defensive and conservative system. So why not go with a run and gun system and go with the players to maximize the effectiveness of such a system ? Because run and gun hasn't been effective since the early 90ies you will say ? But why is that so ? Because with the expansion, talent has been diluted. Few teams have enough firepower to play that style anymore. And also because there's less and less space on the ice due to clutch and grab. But if one country has the tools to play that kind of system it's Canada, especially on international ice. So here's what I'd do : Nash - Thornton - Gagne Richards - Lecavalier - St-Louis Tanguay - Sakic - Iginla Bertuzzi - Lemieux - Heatley Kariya With Gagne, Iginla, Richards, St-Louis, Sakic and Thornton has possible PKers. Note that aside from the "4th line", all those players have history as lines in international tournaments or back with their NHL team, so chemistry wouldn't be a problem. So if you have that kind of forward lines, why not push it to the extreme and get the fastest most offensive dmen who can get the puck from their own zone to the O zone in the blink of an eye or/and who have enough vision to pass it to forwards who can ? Niedermayer - Pronger Redden - Jovanovski Bouwmeester - Blake Boyle Now maybe some teams would be tempted to play dump and chase against us but Brodeur would be there to buy time for his dmen with his unparalleled stickhandling. Or if we still allow too many scoring chances, we put in a guy like Luongo who's used to have a porous defense in front of him and used to face a lot of rubber (not that I think it's what would happen). People often say that offense is the best defense and that couldn't be more true than with such a line up. No amount of defensive strategies and players could match against the speed, imagination, size, grit and pure talent. Other goalies and dmen would crap their pants seeing all this talent attack them, I couldn't imagine them not being extra nervous and paralyzed by fear. Especially since they're not used to see pure run and gun teams anymore. Yes we would probably allow twice as many goals than we would with a more defensive and balanced roster, but I couldn't imagine this team scoring less than 3-4 goals/game. And with the kind of sick goaltending we'll have, we would be nearly impossible to outscore. Not to mention the fact we have 4 different type of scoring lines, thus 4 options against a given system/team. If one night you need speed, imagination and skill you can go with the Tampa line. If you need big guys to go in front of the net and wreak havoc you go with the Davos line. If you need clutch veterans who can come through in tougher situations you want Sakic and Iginla. Then you have Lemieux's line who'd bring yet something else to the table. You'd have 4 lines who could get hot on a given night and kill the opposition by themselves. No one could possibly get tired and with short shifts the other coach would feel completely useless and helpless. It would be difficult to clutch and grab against them on the bigger ice and even if that were to happen, with international referring and rules, it would lead to PPs after PPs. Now don't tell me it's not going to happen, I know that. What I want to discuss is if the following line up would be a succesful team and if not why ? Why go with a checking line at all ? Why play conservative hockey ? I would also like to know if you think this line up would do better than a more conservative, defensive and balanced one.