I know we can look at player strengths and weaknesses and put lines together. So, Kessel, being an elite shooter and passer with elite speed will and does find open space, and gets shots away consistently, though seldom gets a tip in or gets any garbage from close to the crease because (historically) he doesn't go there (at least so far). So, his linemate(s) need to battle in the corners along the boards, in dirty areas, and do some physical stuff in order to get and keep the puck and get it to Kessel. This is fine and (kind of) one way to build lines. And of course, some linemates will have more defensive prowess than others and if a player (Kessel) is weak(er) defensively, then, he'll need some complementary players to make up a little for that deficiency on the line. I just think looking at Corsi +/- is one way (very simple yet worth considering) in putting line combos together. It's statistical I know and it might put some players together that maybe don't seem intuitively would be the best match. But, many are often asking what good is Corsi if it just predicts or tells a picture of what happened or should happen. Well, I think it can be used here; OF COURSE, not a be all end all, but it's worth at least trying as part of the things that are considered when putting lines together.
Winnick and Kadri with Bozak really makes sense from a Corsi +/- perspective. At 5on5 Close Kadri (50.9%)and Winnick (52.4%) have the two best Corsis among forwards. This line NEEDS to be left together and given a chance to see what they can do - for 5 or 10 or 20 games!
It just seem so OBVIOUSLY SIMPLE AND EASY to try this - doesn't it?
Almost every game, Kessel/Bozak/JVR have been outshot (outcorsied), sometime as much as 10 or 15 Corsi's per game. Constantly, close to the worst Corsi forwards, game after game after game. Yet, ONE GAME, just ONE MEASLEY GAME together and not even for the entire game, and Winnick/Kadri/Kessel had the best Corsis among all forwards. What are the coaches even looking for? A goal on every shift?
Remember folks we don't have to be constantly searching for production. We've been one of the best producing teams now for 3 or 4 years and currently are (or were) the highest scoring team in the NHL. I don't take this for granted and how hard it is to SCORE - it's incredibly difficult and you don't let elite offensive talent go. But, we have to manage it correctly. We DON'T need more production, we need to give up FEWER GOALS. So, this line of Winnick/Kadri/Kessel, well, it doesn't matter about their TOTAL production (we will get production) but how few they can allow. I would bet money they can be a better possession line than Bozak/Kessel/JVR, and if Kessel becomes a more positive player we WIN BIG time. He doesn't need 40 goals or 50 goals. We need him on a line that can GIVE UP FEWER GOALS, then, the entire team production requirement is less and we become even better defensively and our secondary scoring helps us win games. When we are giving up 4 or 5 goals, secondary scoring is likely not going to matter. When we get our GA/60 down to under 3 and closer to 2, suddenly secondary scoring makes a difference. We HAVE scoring on this team and we have secondary scoring; there may be dry spells and droughts but this team can score (the stats are there in black and white) and if we could cut our goals against down, our secondary scoring becomes more important and contributes more to wins than it does now.
