GDT: 10/3/19 - 7:00PM EDT - Florida vs Tampa Bay

DFC

Registered User
Sep 26, 2013
46,842
22,681
NB
So 2 points is nice, but we looked like ass 5 on 5. Top line was useless. Second line was legit really good. Third line had its moments (Joseph drew the first penalty that led to the 6 on 5 goal and they generally had a good amount of jump). I didn't love the fourth line as a unit - thought they didn't actually have any meaningful zone time/moments (as a line), but were basically out there to kill out a shift. I don't like that idea for a fourth line, but I'm hoping Paquette coming back will change its effectiveness since Smith was pretty awful.

All of our goals basically came with the man advantage. Kucherov was 6 on 5. Shattenkirk was before the Panthers player came back in the play. Palat's goal was on the PP, and Maroon's goal was as the penalty door was opening. On one hand - having a great PP is great! On the other - no 5 on 5 offense is not.

PK was solid. Vasi was great. We allowed way too many odd man rushes. Shattenkirk had good and bad moments. Sergachev I thought was mostly very good, and Coburn was great. Cernak had a rough night for him. Hedman was Hedman.

So long as we're top-loading, we're gonna struggle 5v5 when the big guns don't play well. Usually all of our lines are a little better than the "typical" line (2nd, 3rd, whatever), but that's not really the case when we don't have at least one elite player on the 2nd line.
 

The Macho King

Back* to Back** World Champion
Jun 22, 2011
48,607
28,846
So long as we're top-loading, we're gonna struggle 5v5 when the big guns don't play well. Usually all of our lines are a little better than the "typical" line (2nd, 3rd, whatever), but that's not really the case when we don't have at least one elite player on the 2nd line.
I don't think that makes sense when our best 5 on 5 line was our second. Loading up the top line is nominally to *help* five on five, but Johnson is so ineffective at distributing the puck that it really drags them down. Kucherov will make three bad plays in a game and still end up creating more offense, so I'm not worried about him, but Stamkos and Johnson may as well have not played last night even strength.

I don't really know how to solve that. Johnson just isn't a C anymore - he can't distribute the puck for shit. Point back and Johnson to the third line is probably the answer, but then I worry about the third line's effectiveness if he's on the pivot.
 

JoVel

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jan 23, 2017
19,181
26,365
Kuch played like ass and should have had 3 points. Crazy how that works with him.
Seriously, some of the best games in his career he's been held pointless but he has numerous games where he's been among our worst players but has put up 3 or 4 points.
 

DFC

Registered User
Sep 26, 2013
46,842
22,681
NB
I don't think that makes sense when our best 5 on 5 line was our second. Loading up the top line is nominally to *help* five on five, but Johnson is so ineffective at distributing the puck that it really drags them down. Kucherov will make three bad plays in a game and still end up creating more offense, so I'm not worried about him, but Stamkos and Johnson may as well have not played last night even strength.

I don't really know how to solve that. Johnson just isn't a C anymore - he can't distribute the puck for ****. Point back and Johnson to the third line is probably the answer, but then I worry about the third line's effectiveness if he's on the pivot.

Yeah, but the second line is like a 2nd line. When your 2nd line has Stamkos on it...

I'm not against loading up the top line, particularly once Point gets back, because he should be able to distribute the puck enough to the other two to keep them effective. I'm just saying, on nights where they're "off," we might not be great 5v5, even if our 2nd line is good.
 

DFC

Registered User
Sep 26, 2013
46,842
22,681
NB
Seriously, some of the best games in his career he's been held pointless but he has numerous games where he's been among our worst players but has put up 3 or 4 points.

He's so good at that instantaneous play where he turns something into nothing, that a couple of split seconds are all it takes for him to put up two points, not even pedestrian points, while he can be awful the rest of the time. Last year he went a ppg to start the season and it was some of the worst hockey we've ever seen from him. You'd never know it by looking at his points, because he gets them one way or the other.
 

Sky04

Registered User
Jan 8, 2009
28,955
17,898
I don't think that makes sense when our best 5 on 5 line was our second. Loading up the top line is nominally to *help* five on five, but Johnson is so ineffective at distributing the puck that it really drags them down. Kucherov will make three bad plays in a game and still end up creating more offense, so I'm not worried about him, but Stamkos and Johnson may as well have not played last night even strength.

I don't really know how to solve that. Johnson just isn't a C anymore - he can't distribute the puck for ****. Point back and Johnson to the third line is probably the answer, but then I worry about the third line's effectiveness if he's on the pivot.

If that ain't the truth.

Another thing though, why is Johnson centering the line? He's been exclusively playing wing the last 2 seasons while Stamkos is a natural center. The line just didn't make sense, it's no wonder they generated nothing.

I thought they were moving Stamkos to wing to try and get Cirelli into the top-6 but moving him on wing out of position to play with Kucherov anyways was weird. 5v5 lines were ass and the 5v5 offense was ass, probably some correlation there.
 
Last edited:

Hoek

Legendary Poster A
May 12, 2003
11,382
8,704
Tampa, FL
Yeah, I'm not disagreeing. I watch the games for entertainment but I'm not going to be emotionally invested in them until April unless we go full 2016-17.
I think the difference for me now is I'm not gonna be thumping my chest over our record at all. And I can't see us getting away with much smack talk. The regular season is just about taking care of business beyond enjoying the individual goals and wins.
 

Lightning1995

Registered User
May 16, 2016
3,970
1,540
Hey it’s two points

Vassy was great. Unfortunately he needed to be. Sloppy.

Teams will still trap the Lightning in the playoffs. Dump, chase and wait for the Lightning mistakes because they will be coming. We know what happens, this high flying offense will disappear. And it will be a grind.

Shatty is a nice add but Stralls fit better, solid defensively. Obviously couldn’t afford him.

A healthy Palat plus Maroon may be able to help when It matters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TeslaCoilFan

Whoshattenkirkshoes

Registered User
Aug 11, 2014
3,818
1,620
I don't think that makes sense when our best 5 on 5 line was our second. Loading up the top line is nominally to *help* five on five, but Johnson is so ineffective at distributing the puck that it really drags them down. Kucherov will make three bad plays in a game and still end up creating more offense, so I'm not worried about him, but Stamkos and Johnson may as well have not played last night even strength.

I don't really know how to solve that. Johnson just isn't a C anymore - he can't distribute the puck for ****. Point back and Johnson to the third line is probably the answer, but then I worry about the third line's effectiveness if he's on the pivot.
Agree 100 percent. I think the only way to solve this is to put stamkos back at C
 

Whoshattenkirkshoes

Registered User
Aug 11, 2014
3,818
1,620
Hey it’s two points

Vassy was great. Unfortunately he needed to be. Sloppy.

Teams will still trap the Lightning in the playoffs. Dump, chase and wait for the Lightning mistakes because they will be coming. We know what happens, this high flying offense will disappear. And it will be a grind.

Shatty is a nice add but Stralls fit better, solid defensively. Obviously couldn’t afford him.

A healthy Palat plus Maroon may be able to help when It matters.

K what’s with everybody being negative on Shattenkirk? He’s better then Stralls. It’s like everyone who said Cernak wouldn’t stick...
 

Sky04

Registered User
Jan 8, 2009
28,955
17,898
K what’s with everybody being negative on Shattenkirk? He’s better then Stralls. It’s like everyone who said Cernak wouldn’t stick...

lol, why did one just out price himself on a top team and signed a multi year deal as a lucrative UFA while the other was bought out on a mediocre team because they'd rather pay him to be off the team than to actually play?
 
Last edited:

These Are The Days

Oh no! We suck again!!
May 17, 2014
34,119
19,684
Tampa Bay
I don't think that makes sense when our best 5 on 5 line was our second. Loading up the top line is nominally to *help* five on five, but Johnson is so ineffective at distributing the puck that it really drags them down. Kucherov will make three bad plays in a game and still end up creating more offense, so I'm not worried about him, but Stamkos and Johnson may as well have not played last night even strength.

I don't really know how to solve that. Johnson just isn't a C anymore - he can't distribute the puck for ****. Point back and Johnson to the third line is probably the answer, but then I worry about the third line's effectiveness if he's on the pivot.

Dead on brother.

Johnson's not only got trouble with distributing and overall vision but it's the fact that he's benefitted so much from a move to wing that it makes no sense for him to ever play center for us again. It has allowed him to simplify his game in the sense that he's not going to have the puck for a long period of time in the middle of the ice and risk getting manhandled and dispossessed. So much of the reason the fabled TKO line failed as quickly as it succeeded was teams keying in on Johnson combined with the fact he was too bulky at the time. But these days put him on wing and you can get "less is more" spontaneous offense that's better suited to the fact he's quick and shifty and he can finish plays in a hurry or won't be asked to make them for long. Provided that Palat doesn't suck anymore I'm almost tempted to see how he does with Johnson again because they always played their best hockey together but that's a project for later in the season.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Whoshattenkirkshoes

ccman68

Registered User
Dec 9, 2017
4,108
4,383
lol, why did one just out price himself on a top team and signed a multi year deal as a lucrative UFA while the other was bought out on a mediocre team because they'd rather pay him to be off the team than to actually play?

Stralman is living off his reputation and did the smart thing going after money. Doesn’t change the fact that he just isn’t very good anymore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Whoshattenkirkshoes

TeslaCoilFan

Slightly Elite Fan
Mar 17, 2017
6,593
4,764
West of the Moon
Stralman is living off his reputation and did the smart thing going after money. Doesn’t change the fact that he just isn’t very good anymore.

He. Was. Injured. Last. Season. And. Is. Mostly. Healed. Now. :facepalm:

If you watched the game, he looked a whole lot like Classic Strålman and was playing great until the 3rd period when he seemed to tire a bit. But then, he himself admitted that his conditioning after his May surgery isn't quite back up to 100% yet due to rehabbing during the early part of the summer. Panther fans have been quite leery of him due to his poor performance last season and the high AAV of his contract (despite it only being for 3 years). After watching him last night, very few are complaining. :P

Since stats can be fun, here's some for Stråls and Shatty last night. Yes, it is a small sample size.
Data from Sean Tierney, MoneyPuck.com and NaturalStatTrick.com.

Strålman alone - 79.2 CF%, 89.3 xGF%
Shattenkirk alone - 43.75 CF%, 49.3 xGF%

Strålman with Weegar - 84 CF%
Shattenkirk with Hedman - 45 CF%

Sergachev and Coburn was actually the best defensive pairing for us with a CF% of 67.5% o_O

Right now, Strålman has the 16th best Corsi Differential in the League among those with a min. 10 min TOI. Of course, it's just one game. ;)

Looking at naturalstattrick.com data about CF% with/without, Strålman made every Panther player better by a significant amount when he was on the ice with them. Shattenkirk was pretty much a wash with/without teammates.

The Panthers out-attempted the Bolts 14-3 when Stråls was on the ice. And after a game in which the Panthers lost 5 to 2, Strålman was the ONLY one on his team with a positive +/- with a +1 despite playing nearly 20 minutes.

Finally, I do believe that Shattenkirk is definitely better offensively than Strålman, but the now-healthy Stråls kicks his butt defensively. :cool:
 

Sky04

Registered User
Jan 8, 2009
28,955
17,898
He. Was. Injured. Last. Season. And. Is. Mostly. Healed. Now. :facepalm:

If you watched the game, he looked a whole lot like Classic Strålman and was playing great until the 3rd period when he seemed to tire a bit. But then, he himself admitted that his conditioning after his May surgery isn't quite back up to 100% yet due to rehabbing during the early part of the summer. Panther fans have been quite leery of him due to his poor performance last season and the high AAV of his contract (despite it only being for 3 years). After watching him last night, very few are complaining. :P

Since stats can be fun, here's some for Stråls and Shatty last night. Yes, it is a small sample size.
Data from Sean Tierney, MoneyPuck.com and NaturalStatTrick.com.

Strålman alone - 79.2 CF%, 89.3 xGF%
Shattenkirk alone - 43.75 CF%, 49.3 xGF%

Strålman with Weegar - 84 CF%
Shattenkirk with Hedman - 45 CF%

Sergachev and Coburn was actually the best defensive pairing for us with a CF% of 67.5% o_O

Right now, Strålman has the 16th best Corsi Differential in the League among those with a min. 10 min TOI. Of course, it's just one game. ;)

Looking at naturalstattrick.com data about CF% with/without, Strålman made every Panther player better by a significant amount when he was on the ice with them. Shattenkirk was pretty much a wash with/without teammates.

The Panthers out-attempted the Bolts 14-3 when Stråls was on the ice. And after a game in which the Panthers lost 5 to 2, Strålman was the ONLY one on his team with a positive +/- with a +1 despite playing nearly 20 minutes.

Finally, I do believe that Shattenkirk is definitely better offensively than Strålman, but the now-healthy Stråls kicks his butt defensively. :cool:

Shayne Gostisbehere or Ryan McDonagh, I know which defenseman I'd want.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Macho Man

ccman68

Registered User
Dec 9, 2017
4,108
4,383
He. Was. Injured. Last. Season. And. Is. Mostly. Healed. Now. :facepalm:

If you watched the game, he looked a whole lot like Classic Strålman and was playing great until the 3rd period when he seemed to tire a bit. But then, he himself admitted that his conditioning after his May surgery isn't quite back up to 100% yet due to rehabbing during the early part of the summer. Panther fans have been quite leery of him due to his poor performance last season and the high AAV of his contract (despite it only being for 3 years). After watching him last night, very few are complaining. :P

Since stats can be fun, here's some for Stråls and Shatty last night. Yes, it is a small sample size.
Data from Sean Tierney, MoneyPuck.com and NaturalStatTrick.com.

Strålman alone - 79.2 CF%, 89.3 xGF%
Shattenkirk alone - 43.75 CF%, 49.3 xGF%

Strålman with Weegar - 84 CF%
Shattenkirk with Hedman - 45 CF%

Sergachev and Coburn was actually the best defensive pairing for us with a CF% of 67.5% o_O

Right now, Strålman has the 16th best Corsi Differential in the League among those with a min. 10 min TOI. Of course, it's just one game. ;)

Looking at naturalstattrick.com data about CF% with/without, Strålman made every Panther player better by a significant amount when he was on the ice with them. Shattenkirk was pretty much a wash with/without teammates.

The Panthers out-attempted the Bolts 14-3 when Stråls was on the ice. And after a game in which the Panthers lost 5 to 2, Strålman was the ONLY one on his team with a positive +/- with a +1 despite playing nearly 20 minutes.

Finally, I do believe that Shattenkirk is definitely better offensively than Strålman, but the now-healthy Stråls kicks his butt defensively. :cool:

Stralman has been slowly falling off for years so I don’t really care about the injury. Maybe he can be a bit better than last year but I’m still not expecting much and one game sure as hell isn’t changing my mind.

But yes Stralman might be better than Shattenkirk we’ll just have to wait and see.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Whoshattenkirkshoes

Whoshattenkirkshoes

Registered User
Aug 11, 2014
3,818
1,620
lol, why did one just out price himself on a top team and signed a multi year deal as a lucrative UFA while the other was bought out on a mediocre team because they'd rather pay him to be off the team than to actually play?

Strals is a good d man, but his time has come. He was a non factor last year.

Shattenkirk got bought out simply for cap reasons. You wait and see the kind of year he has here. Everyone will be pleasantly surprised.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->