Line Combos: 2019/2020 Lineup

Sensinitis

Registered User
Aug 5, 2012
15,934
5,526
I think Anisimov has an slight edge on Tierney.

I can see them using Pageau as second line centre and on the PP to pad his stats and show him off so they can trade him in February.

Why's that? Anisimov is in the twilight of his career. Tierney has outscored him the past two seasons and is entering his prime. If he wasn't so unlucky and snakebitten he would have hit 50 points least season.

Unless your point is that the team will want to give Anisimov offensive opportunity to increase his value, then I dunno why he would have an edge.
 

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,738
30,922
Why's that? Anisimov is in the twilight of his career. Tierney has outscored him the past two seasons and is entering his prime. If he wasn't so unlucky and snakebitten he would have hit 50 points least season.

Unless your point is that the team will want to give Anisimov offensive opportunity to increase his value, then I dunno why he would have an edge.
How was Tierney snake bit?

I mean, i agree that he likely has the edge over Anisimov but i don't see Tierney matching last years pts totals any time soon
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cosmix

stempniaksen

Registered User
Oct 12, 2008
11,036
4,316
How was Tierney snake bit?

He posted the 2nd worst shooting percentage of his career, so I guess it could be argued he was semi snakebit in that regard?

The guy is the furthest thing from a scorer though, so even if he shot at his normal percentage it would only account for another few goals.

Agree that he likely never sees better production than last year though (at least in Ottawa with this roster).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sensinitis

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,738
30,922
He posted the 2nd worst shooting percentage of his career, so I guess it could be argued he was semi snakebit in that regard?

The guy is the furthest thing from a scorer though, so even if he shot at his normal percentage it would only account for another few goals.

Agree that he likely never sees better production than last year though (at least in Ottawa with this roster).
He also had the highest on ice sh% of his career leading to "more assists than Stonetm" Tierney being labeled as snakebitten doesn't make sense at all imo.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stempniaksen

Qward

Because! That's why!
Jul 23, 2010
18,938
5,902
Behind you, look out
Forgive me if I am wrong, but wasnt AA essential Chicagos #2 centre? Tierney started as #2 behind Duchene but dropped down as White got better and had to compete with Pageau.
 

Sensinitis

Registered User
Aug 5, 2012
15,934
5,526
How was Tierney snake bit?

I mean, i agree that he likely has the edge over Anisimov but i don't see Tierney matching last years pts totals any time soon

In addition to stempniaksen's post that complements mine, you didn't notice that about Tierney?

He had SO many chances in close in which he either barely missed the net, hit the post, or got absolutely robbed. I know that happens to lots of players, but out of all our roster forwards last season, I particularly noticed this with Tierney. If you're just looking at stats and percentages they may tell a different story, but I'm more old school and that's what my eyes told me this season.

Just my 2 cents.
 

stempniaksen

Registered User
Oct 12, 2008
11,036
4,316
Forgive me if I am wrong, but wasnt AA essential Chicagos #2 centre? Tierney started as #2 behind Duchene but dropped down as White got better and had to compete with Pageau.

He was until the Schmaltz/Strome trade, but finished the year as the teams 3C.
 

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,738
30,922
In addition to stempniaksen's post that complements mine, you didn't notice that about Tierney?

He had SO many chances in close in which he either barely missed the net, hit the post, or got absolutely robbed. I know that happens to lots of players, but out of all our roster forwards last season, I particularly noticed this with Tierney. If you're just looking at stats and percentages they may tell a different story, but I'm more old school and that's what my eyes told me this season.

Just my 2 cents.
Well, i didn't just look at stats and i came away with a very different impression of his play.

I found he created precious little offence and was frankly always surprised by how many pts he had.

To each their own I guess...
 

Sensinitis

Registered User
Aug 5, 2012
15,934
5,526
Well, i didn't just look at stats and i came away with a very different impression of his play.

I found he created precious little offence and was frankly always surprised by how many pts he had.

To each their own I guess...

Do you think that Tierney has good vision and IQ ?
 

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,738
30,922
Do you think that Tierney has good vision and IQ ?
Relative to who?

Relative to 2nd line centers I would say no. Relative to 3rd line centers i would say yes.

I don't think he is terrible like some here, i just think he overachieved
 

Sensinitis

Registered User
Aug 5, 2012
15,934
5,526
Relative to who?

Relative to 2nd line centers I would say no. Relative to 3rd line centers i would say yes.

I don't think he is terrible like some here, i just think he overachieved

I mean objectively, relative to players around the league all skillsets included.

Would you say he has below average, average, above average vision and IQ ?
 

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,738
30,922
I mean objectively, relative to players around the league all skillsets included.

Would you say he has below average, average, above average vision and IQ ?

And here i thought you wanted my subjective opinions, thanks for clearing that up...

I basically just did that by saying no for 2nd liners and yes for 3rd. Imo he is somewhere between slightly below to slightly above average. He is certainly not well above or well below average.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cosmix

Sensinitis

Registered User
Aug 5, 2012
15,934
5,526
And here i thought you wanter my subjective opinions, thanks for clearing that up...
I basically just did that by saying no for 2nd liners and yes for 3rd. Imo he is somewhere between slightly below to slightly above average. He is certainly not well above or well below average.

Why so sassy? :laugh: You were comparing him to 2nd liners and 3rd liners, I wanted a general assessment of his vision. Now I have it, though I don't quite understand it.

"Somewhere between slightly below to slightly above average". Is that not... average? Just trying to clear that up.
 

Cosmix

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 24, 2011
17,856
6,464
Ottawa
And here i thought you wanted my subjective opinions, thanks for clearing that up...

I basically just did that by saying no for 2nd liners and yes for 3rd. Imo he is somewhere between slightly below to slightly above average. He is certainly not well above or well below average.

Tierney appears to me to be a good third line Center. Pageau about the same. Anisimov is about the same too but may get more minutes and PP time which will increase his points.

Our GM traded away our first and second line Centers (Zibanejad, Turris, Duchene, and Brassard). The on-ice product will reflect that next season. Good for the budget and rebuild (tank).
 

MatchesMalone

Formerly Innocent Bystander
Aug 29, 2010
1,612
1,071
As others have mentioned, Tierney's individual shooting% was lower than his career average last year (by ~4%), but his on-ice shooting% was high (by a couple %).

His deployment was also drastically more difficult in Ottawa. He was buried beneath all the star centers in San Jose, so while his quality of linemates was weaker than in Ottawa, his quality of competition was that much weaker still. While he did see powerplay time and significant minutes with Stone and Tkachuk, he played a lot more with Boedker, Ryan, Paajarvi and Balcers.

Based on the ol' eye test, it seemed to me that his hockey IQ is very good, and that he recognizes he isn't a high-end skilled player, so in the offensive zone he was always much more inclined to just make a smart, simple play to keep the offensive zone possession alive, rather than trying to make a play on net. This had a lot to do with his low shooting%, and it also had a lot to do with Boucher loving him and leaning on him so much.

Personally, I'd have liked to see him take a little bit more initiative offensively, but he was given a role by the coach and executed it to perfection. And really, that's exactly what is so great about him. He's a soldier - a team guy first, going back to his junior days playing for a powerhouse team in London, he was there for all three years of the dynasty, and started in a checking role then worked his way up, and was named captain and put up 40 goals and 80+ points when he was counted on as a 19 year old.

Then he came into an offensively anemic Worcester team and was immediately counted on to provide offense as a 20 year old. He did not disappoint, with 29 points in 29 games. In San Jose he played the checking role he was needed to play behind their star offensive centers.

I wouldn't say he was snake-bitten last year, but it was his first time given any sort of offensive responsibility at the NHL level, and he came through while still putting defense first. I would assume he'll be spending this summer working on offensive skills, and he still has room to grow in that regard.

Depending on how the new coach uses him, he should be somewhere in the 45 point range again this year, and I don't think we should be surprised to see him take a other step forward with his offense.
 

Micklebot

Moderator
Apr 27, 2010
53,738
30,922
Why so sassy? :laugh: You were comparing him to 2nd liners and 3rd liners, I wanted a general assessment of his vision. Now I have it, though I don't quite understand it.

"Somewhere between slightly below to slightly above average". Is that not... average? Just trying to clear that up.
It is a range where he falls that includes average because to be more precise would require me to go on a deep dive into the entire league which i don't have the time or desire to do.
 

Sensinitis

Registered User
Aug 5, 2012
15,934
5,526
It is a range where he falls that includes average because to be more precise would require me to go on a deep dive into the entire league which i don't have the time or desire to do.

I don't quite understand your method of evaluation this. It doesn't take me hours to realize that it's pretty obvious that he has above average vision and IQ. He makes very smart plays both offensively and defensively, and sees things that many players do not. He is limited in other areas such as his shot which is pretty weak and inaccurate, and size most notably. That is why he hasn't reached that next level offensively, imo. So I guess we should agree to disagree because we have differing views.
 

Peptic Balcers

Registered User
May 1, 2010
1,586
1,283
Ottawa, Canada
And here i thought you wanted my subjective opinions, thanks for clearing that up...

I basically just did that by saying no for 2nd liners and yes for 3rd. Imo he is somewhere between slightly below to slightly above average. He is certainly not well above or well below average.

to be fair, assessing a players vision/IQ is largely subjective
 

MatchesMalone

Formerly Innocent Bystander
Aug 29, 2010
1,612
1,071
to be fair, assessing a players vision/IQ is largely subjective

I would disagree. As with many things, sure there are going to be a lot of different opinions, but that doesn't mean all are equally valid. Some are more accurate than others. If Sidney Crosby says a guy has great hockey IQ, I'm gonna take that to the bank.

If Fishy Rick from the bar down the street from me says a player has great hockey IQ, I'm gonna take that with a grain of salt.
 

EasyMoneySniper

Registered User
Jul 5, 2019
45
39
I would disagree. As with many things, sure there are going to be a lot of different opinions, but that doesn't mean all are equally valid. Some are more accurate than others. If Sidney Crosby says a guy has great hockey IQ, I'm gonna take that to the bank.

If Fishy Rick from the bar down the street from me says a player has great hockey IQ, I'm gonna take that with a grain of salt.
Do you take comments from Gretzky to the bank as well?
 

stempniaksen

Registered User
Oct 12, 2008
11,036
4,316
I would disagree. As with many things, sure there are going to be a lot of different opinions, but that doesn't mean all are equally valid. Some are more accurate than others. If Sidney Crosby says a guy has great hockey IQ, I'm gonna take that to the bank.

If Fishy Rick from the bar down the street from me says a player has great hockey IQ, I'm gonna take that with a grain of salt.

I'm not 100% in disagreement with your take, but appeals to authority can be dangerous. That's how you end up with Gretzky helping to run the Coyotes into the ground.

Fishy Rick may deserve more credit than you're willing to give him :laugh:
 

Peptic Balcers

Registered User
May 1, 2010
1,586
1,283
Ottawa, Canada
I would disagree. As with many things, sure there are going to be a lot of different opinions, but that doesn't mean all are equally valid. Some are more accurate than others. If Sidney Crosby says a guy has great hockey IQ, I'm gonna take that to the bank.

If Fishy Rick from the bar down the street from me says a player has great hockey IQ, I'm gonna take that with a grain of salt.

objective is typically measurable/quantifiable while subjective is perception/feeling/opinion.

when walking about someone's hockey IQ, its typically your opinion or how you perceive the player to see the game.

if you attempt to measure hockey IQ/vision, cool. then you can objectively say someone has better hockey IQ/vision. But if you're giving your opinion, its your subjective analysis
 

MatchesMalone

Formerly Innocent Bystander
Aug 29, 2010
1,612
1,071
Points taken, but still the post-modern, post-structuralist take of a Lyotard or (to the extreme case) Ranciere - the collapse of a Grand Narrative, and everybody's opinion is equally valid - is more harmful, because it leads to the collapse of truth that we're beginning to see unfold everywhere.
 

MatchesMalone

Formerly Innocent Bystander
Aug 29, 2010
1,612
1,071
objective is typically measurable/quantifiable while subjective is perception/feeling/opinion.

when walking about someone's hockey IQ, its typically your opinion or how you perceive the player to see the game.

if you attempt to measure hockey IQ/vision, cool. then you can objectively say someone has better hockey IQ/vision. But if you're giving your opinion, its your subjective analysis

Ok, but there is still a more-right and more-wrong analysis, right? Even if one's opinion is a "subjective analysis", each one will fit somewhere on the spectrum of objective truth, whether or not we are able to know what that objective truth is.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad