Thirty One
Safe is safe.
- Dec 28, 2003
- 28,981
- 24,354
Around the NHL: Part XXII
- Thread starter Krams
- Start date
- Status
Inferno
Registered User
That's playing torts 6 goalie system...that's very different. I'd agree with that.
The Moore Boyle dorsett line was great because they controlled the play when they're on the ice... Not many 4th lines can do that. It's a freak thing. Most teams play 4 line hockey because they want to play 4 line hockey.. not because they should play 4 line hockey. If you've got a 4th line that can play their entire shift in the offensive zone despite giving them brutal zone starts like the Boyle line... Then sure. But the other 999 times out of 1000 I'd rather roll 3 lines in the playoffs.
I agree. Forcing the fourth line is a recipe for disaster. If you have a great fourth line, then by all means, roll four lines (not really, but use the fourth line at least).
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
It's a perfectly valid position to believe that, though I think it should at least be acknowledged that the last 7 Cup winners have each had either 11 or 12 regular forwards at or over the 10 minute mark at even strength. Just for reference, what we think of as the ultimate 4-line Rangers team of that era, 13-14, had 11. 5 of those teams didn't have the top guy average over 17 minutes. The other two were both Chicago, who had both Kane and Toews do it one year, and Kane do it the next. But you don't have 11 or 12 guys over 10 minutes at ES if you're not running 4 lines. You don't have Sidney Crosby getting under 17 minutes per night if you're not running 4 lines.
I think there's definitely some evidence that teams should play 4 line hockey. I'm not sure that it's because of the quality of play that 4th line is providing, but maybe it's more that you're making certain your top guys are able to maximize the time they do get, because they're fresher even if only slightly.
And to the point @nyr2k2 just made about using a good 4th line if you've got it... maybe it's a common trait of Cup winners that they have that good 4th line.
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
Also, the 2012 Rangers were a team with hyper-defined roles that no one seemed to be able to step out of. I consider them to have had good forward depth, because their top-9 was very strong. They rode that, the top-4 D, Lundqvist, and the 6-goalie system to the 1st seed in the East. When the playoffs rolled around, Brad Richards was really the only top-9 guy who looked like himself... and Dubinsky also got hurt... no one was able to step out of their hyper-defined role to contribute offensively in another way. The other three factors that helped them in the regular season carried them to the ECF, but that top-4 D also ended up succumbing to the fact that there were only 5 NHL defensemen on the roster, so they couldn't stay fresh themselves... especially in that system. Essentially, attrition due to fatigue is what took them down in the end.
It's kind of a weird thing. That team's forward depth was both partially responsible for their regular season success and their post-season demise. Which I guess goes to the point @Amazing Kreiderman was making.
It's kind of a weird thing. That team's forward depth was both partially responsible for their regular season success and their post-season demise. Which I guess goes to the point @Amazing Kreiderman was making.
Irishguy42
Mr. Preachy
Just play Mika/Panarin/Fox/ADA 30 minutes a night and you win.
Amazing Kreiderman
Registered User
- Apr 11, 2011
- 44,854
- 40,364
Because if I didn't someone would have complained I only split up the forwards
FultonReed
derailer of threads
- May 30, 2013
- 42,901
- 18,250
Gaborik also had a messed up shoulder didn't he
and Dubinsky was out half the playoffs
Blue Blooded
Most people rejected his message
The 2011-12 Rangers was a not very talented team that somehow found a way to consistently win hockey games on sheer willpower alone, not surprised they burnt out eventually. Even the 2015-16 Rangers probably had a better roster.
I hated that team lol. Its between them and the 09-10 team as my least favorite Ranger teams since the 04 lockout. The 18-19 team would be right there with them if they hadn't hit the lottery.
The 16-17 team I feel like was our last hurrah. The 15-16 was extremely disappointing.
Blue Blooded
Most people rejected his message
The 09-10 Rangers were a mess to start the season but I found the playoff-push group pretty likeable. The Prust-Anisimov-Shelley line was both hilarious and genuinely great.
romba
Registered User
True. I’d argue though that play style was the biggest factor in the playoffs exhaustion, against higher level competition. Most of that core either played under Torts 6 goalie system, or AV man-2-man-chase in the D zone. Both are tough over a grueling season, even more so in the playoffs.
romba
Registered User
Islanders come to mind as a current team having an excellent 4th line when healthy
Roo Returns
Skjeikspeare No More
The game is a 4 line game nowadays. You need depth. The top 9 will not play all 82 games and the playoffs. If you treat your 4th line correctly, they will be able to fill in to top 9 roles and also eventually help replace top 9ers who need to be traded due to cap.
To me the perfect 4th line is a mix of vets who know how to play the game the right way and can mentor the kids, and young players who are relatively new to the org but have a useful skill either as a PKer, PPer, or faceoff guy.
The 4th line is also there for specialty situations to allow the top 9 to rest for crunchtime.
I don't believe having a guy like Haley as a regular 4th liner benefits an organization in any way. He can't PK, he can't PP, he can't take faceoffs, and he can't cycle well. What's his use other than to come in once every 6 or 7 games and hit a few people?
I used this analogy with my friend/coworker the other day (she's from a futbol country and doesn't know much about hockey but she got it). At any job you first join at a junior/entry level, you have assignments and then slowly pick something up, start shadowing someone, and then get a little more involved. You then begin to interact with management even just being Cc'd and then eventually after the first few months, you can email them directly or work on situations with them, and actually lead projects especially if your manager is on vacation or unavailable. It helps everyone. Same deal with a 4th line. Get your sea legs in and learn the system, then PK a little, 2nd PP, and eventually protect leads/getting some shifts with the top 9.
To me the perfect 4th line is a mix of vets who know how to play the game the right way and can mentor the kids, and young players who are relatively new to the org but have a useful skill either as a PKer, PPer, or faceoff guy.
The 4th line is also there for specialty situations to allow the top 9 to rest for crunchtime.
I don't believe having a guy like Haley as a regular 4th liner benefits an organization in any way. He can't PK, he can't PP, he can't take faceoffs, and he can't cycle well. What's his use other than to come in once every 6 or 7 games and hit a few people?
I used this analogy with my friend/coworker the other day (she's from a futbol country and doesn't know much about hockey but she got it). At any job you first join at a junior/entry level, you have assignments and then slowly pick something up, start shadowing someone, and then get a little more involved. You then begin to interact with management even just being Cc'd and then eventually after the first few months, you can email them directly or work on situations with them, and actually lead projects especially if your manager is on vacation or unavailable. It helps everyone. Same deal with a 4th line. Get your sea legs in and learn the system, then PK a little, 2nd PP, and eventually protect leads/getting some shifts with the top 9.
I was pretty dark with the Rangers between 2014 to 2016, Tampa knocking them out seemed only fitting since their rejected players (Callahan, Strålman, and Boyle) helped knock them out. I hated MSL being here from day one. I know they got close, and was happy for the team, but felt 2014, they had no business being that close. They were on their way to another 1st round exit, then the MSL incident, and then the whole Price incident as well. I dunno.
With that said, love our roster now, and have a few favorites I really can root for, but its still too early I feel to be that cup contender, although if they surprise people this year and get into even the 2nd round (Semi-Finals), I will be really looking forward next year with a lot of hope.
playoff price is a sieve. They would have probably won in 4/5 if he stayed healthy.
the comeback against Pittsburgh really started with the return of Kreider. He was huge for the rangers during that run.
they made it to the ECF 3 times in 4 years. They had every bit of business being there.
Why do you not care for the 2015-16 team? Was never a fan of that roster, and was all for the Brassard trade. Saw so much potential in Mika.
Last edited:
Roo Returns
Skjeikspeare No More
The 2015-16 team was like a Healthy's Choices Chicken Parm. It was a diet bland version of the previous two seasons. Other than Lindberg scoring all those goals early on and the introduction of Mr. Skjeikspeare, that team was so average. Remember the whole theme here was "how did this group get to 100 points?"
If someone told me that season with that roster would be summed up by an about to retire Dan Boyle cursing out Larry Brooks, I would've probably not even blinked.
That team sucked and was carried into a playoff spot via an incredible start by Hank. This was year 3 of AV so the AV effect had gotten its chance to completely infect the team. The decision to self rent Yandle even though it was clear that this team was going no where (plus adding E.Staal) is still one of the more baffling things that this FO has done. How much of that came from ownership? I don't know, but the one good thing that came out of this season was that it did become a catalyst for the change that started in 2018. That massive sell off almost started in 2016 (and it should have) but instead of a huge BOOM in one offseason, they kind of took things apart organically over the next few years, which in hindsight may have been the right decision. Mika for Brassard happened after that season concluded, but depending on who you listen to they were very, very, VERY close on moving both McDonagh (this has been confirmed by several people) and Stepan on draft day (who would get moved a year later.)
Roo Returns
Skjeikspeare No More
It's so weird to me that Sareela, Duclair, and JT Miller have been traded a combined like 8x already in their young careers.
Boyle cursing out Brooks was likely one of the highlights of that season. Lol. But yeah you felt change was coming. A rebuild was on the horizon.
Amazing Kreiderman
Registered User
- Apr 11, 2011
- 44,854
- 40,364
That locker room interview is in my top-5 hockey moments of all time
The Islanders currently have two terrific fourth lines.
- Status
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
HC Dynamo Pardubice @ Ocelari Trinec - Pardubice leads series 3-2Wagers: 1Staked: $15.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Tappara Tampere @ Pelicans Lahti - Tappara leads series 2-1Wagers: 1Staked: $15.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Eisbaren Berlin @ Pinguins Bremerhaven - Eisbaren Berlin leads series 3-1Wagers: 1Staked: $15.00Event closes- Updated: