Line Combos: Canucks Line-Up Discussion (Assuming No More Trades)

[Shareefruck]

Both Jamie Dodd and Thomas Drance separately agreed they wanted to see a line of Mikheyev - Pettersson - Boeser.

I think that's one of the worst line combos imagineable, personally (consisting of good players, anyways).

Boeser is a complementary player with a relatively lazy game that relies on smart and sustained give-and-go offensive play, bouncing off well with other smart and creative players, whereas Mikheyev has tunnel-vision and attacks in straight-line spurts/waves-- when a line is getting organized in the offensive zone, the play frequently dies on his stick otherwise.

It's similar to playing Mason Raymond or David Booth or Brandon Sutter with the Sedins. Just a complete mismatch in styles and the way they think the game. Even if it can be productive through sheer will, it's using everyone about as sub-optimally as possible.

 

[credulous]

I think that's one of the worst line combos imagineable, personally (consisting of good players, anyways).

Boeser plays a relatively lazy game that relies on smart and sustained give-and-go offensive play, whereas Mikheyev has tunnel-vision and attacks in straight-line spurts-- the play frequently dies on his stick otherwise.

It's similar to playing Mason Raymond or David Booth with the Sedins. Just a complete mismatch in styles and the way they think the game. Even if it can be productive through sheer will, it's using everyone about as sub-optimally as possible.

people have this weird idea that you can compensate for a player's deficiencies by putting them with someone who is strong in that area. you see it all the time when people talk about how quinn hughes needs a defensively oriented partner. playing mikheyev with boeser just means one of them is always going to be out of position in transition. either mikheyev will end up deep unsupported or boeser will trail the play. mikheyev pettersson podkolzin is a line where the players compliment each other much better. a puck dominant wing like miller (if played there) or kuzmenko is a much better match for boeser

 

[Shareefruck]

people have this weird idea that you can compensate for a player's deficiencies by putting them with someone who is strong in that area. you see it all the time when people talk about how quinn hughes needs a defensively oriented partner. playing mikheyev with boeser just means one of them is always going to be out of position in transition. either mikheyev will end up deep unsupported or boeser will trail the play. mikheyev pettersson podkolzin is a line where the players compliment each other much better. a puck dominant wing like miller (if played there) or kuzmenko is a much better match for boeser

Yeah, I think it often works the other way around-- a line having a strong unified identity where everyone is on the same wavelength can add a lot.

Even Pettersson - Mikheyev, I'm not too crazy about for similar reasons (although parts of Pettersson's strengths work with him, it would be a total waste of Pettersson's creativity, IMO).

I prefer Mikheyev with Horvat. A defensively aware pure rushing and net driving line, almost, that is directly difficult to handle. Similar to keeping Raymond with Kesler.

 

[credulous]

Yeah, I think it often works the other way around-- a line having a strong unified identity where everyone is on the same wavelength can add a lot.

Even Pettersson - Mikheyev, I'm not too crazy about for similar reasons (although parts of Pettersson's strengths work with him, it would be a total waste of Pettersson's creativity, IMO).

I prefer Mikheyev with Horvat. A defensively aware pure rushing and net driving line, almost. Run it the way that awesome Raymond - Kesler - Grabner line was run.

i'm not actually suggesting mikheyev pettersson is a good combo just illustrating that you get more out of players that compliment one another than players that cover for each other. mikheyev can't slow down to impart some of his speed to boeser. mikheyev can just slow down

 

[Shareefruck]

i'm not actually suggesting mikheyev pettersson is a good combo just illustrating that you get more out of players that compliment one another than players that cover for each other. mikheyev can't slow down to impart some of his speed to boeser. mikheyev can just slow down

Yep, I'm agreeing for the most part, just with that Pettersson caveat.

But yeah, Boeser and Mikheyev are polar opposite mismatches with virtually nothing complementary, both in terms of pace, style, and hockey sense. Ideally, more than any other two strong players, they should always be on separate lines, IMO.

I do feel that Hughes works best with a defensively strong partner, though (or did, anyways-- that can all change with another year of defensive evolution in his game).

 

[MS]

Yeah, I think it often works the other way around-- a line having a strong unified identity where everyone is on the same wavelength can add a lot.

Even Pettersson - Mikheyev, I'm not too crazy about for similar reasons (although parts of Pettersson's strengths work with him, it would be a total waste of Pettersson's creativity, IMO).

I prefer Mikheyev with Horvat. A defensively aware pure rushing and net driving line, almost, that is directly difficult to handle. Similar to keeping Raymond with Kesler.

Mikheyev is the team's top defensive winger, and it's just common sense to put him with the team's highest-leverage C which would be Horvat. Doubly so since their play styles seem to be a pretty good match.

 

[Vector]

Mikheyev is the team's top defensive winger, and it's just common sense to put him with the team's highest-leverage C which would be Horvat. Doubly so since their play styles seem to be a pretty good match.

Very curious, if they go with those two, who the third player is. Playmaker? High pace guy? Ol’ Yeller (Pearson)?

 

[rypper]

Very curious, if they go with those two, who the third player is. Playmaker? High pace guy? Ol’ Yeller (Pearson)?

My heart says Garland but it'll probably be Pearson.

 

[McDavid is too whiny]

Very curious, if they go with those two, who the third player is. Playmaker? High pace guy? Ol’ Yeller (Pearson)?

I would like to see Kuzmenko with Bo and Mikhayev. They can do all the heavy lifting while he is relied on strictly for the purposes of pimping.

 

[Wandering Cynic]

My opening night roster. Top 9 has a lot of optional items which is great.

Kuzmenko Miller Boeser
Mikheyev Pettersson Garland
Pearson Horvat Podkolzin
Hoglander Lazar Dickinson
Joshua

Hughes Schenn
OEL Myers
Rathbone Poolman
Dermott

Demko
Martin

Kuzmenko-EP-Boeser
Garland-Miller-Podkolzin
Mikheyev-Horvat-Pearson
Hoglander-Lazar-Dickinson
Joshua

OEL-Myers
Hughes-Schenn
Rathbone-Dermott
Poolman

Demko
Martin

 

[Peter Griffin]

Pearson-Miller-Garland
Mikeheyev-Pettersson-Boeser
Podkolzin-Horvat-Kuzmenko

Let's go.

OEL - Myers
Hughes - Schenn
Dermott - Poolman

Let’s go…..get 2 more top 4 d-men?

 

[topched88]

Pearson plays LW does he not?

I always assumed it would be Mikeheyev - horvat - Garland

I feel its a safe bet Horvats LW will either be Mikeheyv or Pearson. The comment of trying garland on the left is a little bit different. It solves about as many problems as hughes going on the right side. I dont get it.

Id like to see:

Kuzmenko - Pettersson - Boeser
Hoglander - Miller - Garland
Mikeheyev - Horvat - Podkolzin
Pearson - Lazar - Dickinson

Hughes - Schenn
OEL - Myers
Dermott/Rathbone - Poolman

 

[Peen]

My heart says Garland but it'll probably be Pearson.

I wonder if they actually

Pearson plays LW does he not?

I always assumed it would be Mikeheyev - horvat - Garland

I feel its a safe bet Horvats LW will either be Mikeheyv or Pearson. The comment of trying garland on the left is a little bit different. It solves about as many problems as hughes going on the right side. I dont get it.

Id like to see:

Kuzmenko - Pettersson - Boeser
Hoglander - Miller - Garland
Mikeheyev - Horvat - Podkolzin
Pearson - Lazar - Dickinson

Hughes - Schenn
OEL - Myers
Dermott/Rathbone - Poolman

The assumption would be that Mikheyev plays the right side if garland is switching over.

I would be very surprised if Mikheyev isn't playing with Horvat. I think it's 50/50 whether Pearson gets strapped there or gets strapped as cover for JT because they played well together. But then you run into the question of which other winger should be used on the high leverage line.

Outside shot they go with Podkolzin maybe?

 

[topched88]

I wonder if they actually

The assumption would be that Mikheyev plays the right side if garland is switching over.

I would be very surprised if Mikheyev isn't playing with Horvat. I think it's 50/50 whether Pearson gets strapped there or gets strapped as cover for JT because they played well together. But then you run into the question of which other winger should be used on the high leverage line.

Outside shot they go with Podkolzin maybe?

I assume if Pearson goes with miller it will be Boeser on the RW

 

[VanillaCoke]

My heart says Garland but it'll probably be Pearson.

Garland the better option but nowhere decent to put Pearson without Bo, Kuzmenko is the 3rd option imo and I can see them all rotating.

 

[biturbo19]

Yeah, I think it often works the other way around-- a line having a strong unified identity where everyone is on the same wavelength can add a lot.

Even Pettersson - Mikheyev, I'm not too crazy about for similar reasons (although parts of Pettersson's strengths work with him, it would be a total waste of Pettersson's creativity, IMO).

I prefer Mikheyev with Horvat. A defensively aware pure rushing and net driving line, almost, that is directly difficult to handle. Similar to keeping Raymond with Kesler.

Yeah. When it comes to chemistry, you never really know until it hits the ice. Sometimes weird stuff happens. But on paper at least, everything about Mikheyev's game just screams "perfect winger for Horvat". They both have that same sort of mentality and approach to attacking offensively. Just attacking with speed, power, and directness. It's a very "direct" and "abrupt" sort of offensive mode. He's also obviously a good match for more of a "defensive line" with Horvat.


In the same sense, i feel like if you want to get the most out of Boeser, he should really be stapled to Pettersson. The only one who really has that vision to create and set up the shooting opportunities he needs to be successful. The same sort of "slow the game down to our speed" approach offensively. Guys you really want to put in offensive zone situations as much as possible.


Then i think you have Miller-Garland as that third "duo" to anchor a line. They work great together. Again, they have a very aligned approach to generating offense. It's all about cycling around, winning those battles down low to control the puck and getting to the net area. Garland's playmaking skew works really well with Miller's game. There's just a lot of synergy there.



So you've got your "3 Scoring Lines" each 2/3rds settled. The other wingers can just sorta float between them. See what works. Use those "extra wingers" to swap around and spark things if it gets stale. The 4th line shouldn't really see much even strength ice, but it's a fine place to stash some PKers and whoever isn't going well, or in the doghouse for a stretch.



???-Pettersson-Boeser
???-Miller-Garland
???-Horvat-Mikheyev
?#?#?#?#?#?#?#?#?#?


As a starting point: Podkolzin makes a lot of sense as a starting point with Petey/Brock as a sort of yeoman doing the spadework. Pearson makes sense as a sort of big body filler who plays a somewhat similar down low possession game pretty well with JT/Garland. That just leaves the Bo/Ilya duo, where i still honestly think Hoglander could be a good fit. But Kuzmenko is a total wildcard to me, and might end up taking that spot. But i think these are mostly the guys you shuffled around to try to give a line a bit of a spark or a different look/approach to shake things up a bit if/when it goes stale.

 

[LickTheEnvelope]

Yeah, I think it often works the other way around-- a line having a strong unified identity where everyone is on the same wavelength can add a lot.

Even Pettersson - Mikheyev, I'm not too crazy about for similar reasons (although parts of Pettersson's strengths work with him, it would be a total waste of Pettersson's creativity, IMO).

I prefer Mikheyev with Horvat. A defensively aware pure rushing and net driving line, almost, that is directly difficult to handle. Similar to keeping Raymond with Kesler.

Basically how I feel. Something like Mikheyev - Horvat - Podkolzin would be an absolute nightmare to play against.

 

[drivier]

Pearson Miller Garland
Kuzmenko Pettersson Boeser
Mikheyev Horvat Podkolzin
Dickinson Lazar Hoglander
Joshua

Hughes Schenn
OEL Myers
Rathbone Dermott

Demko
Martin

This is largely as I see it.

But, can someone explain to me why so many line-ups with Dickinson or Joshua and not Lockwood?

For me, I want Lockwood's footspeed and truculence. And a 4th line of he Lazar and Hoglander makes me giddy. I accept the down-side... PK takes a hit. But, surprised so many people exclude Lockwood. Makes me think I'm missing something.

 

[VanillaCoke]

Garland - Pettersson - Boeser
Pearson - Miller - Mikheyev
Kuzmenko - Horvat - Podkolzin
Hog - Lazer/Dick - Joshua

Probably what I'd go with, although the top 9 wingers are all likely to be interchangeable.

 

[logan5]

I'm almost certain that Pettersson will have Podkolzin on his wing to start the season. If Kuzmenko is a larger version of Garland, then I would want Kuz playing Pettersson's other wing. The combination of both Podz and Pettersson taking their game to the next level would elevate the Canucks into contention for the Pacific. I'm betting big that is what is going to happen.

I'll add if Kuzmenko doesn't work out, put Hoglander in his spot (Pearson back with Horvat) as that trio had the best analytics for Pettersson line mates.

Kuzmenko Pettersson Podkolzin
Garland Miller Boeser
Hoglander Horvat Mikheyev
Pearson Lazar Dickinson

I predicted last year the Canucks would be a 103 point team, and I was mostly correct as they played above that pace for the majority of the season, so I will double down on that, and then some...

108 points!!!

 

[Shareefruck]

Very curious, if they go with those two, who the third player is. Playmaker? High pace guy? Ol’ Yeller (Pearson)?

Both Podkolzin or Garland would fit like a glove, but they're also probably more strongly needed on the scoring lines (let's face it, they fit perfectly everywhere). Pearson might be the default choice because everyone else sucks defensively and he can play a simple game.

Personally, I think Hoglander could potentially be a great fit there and evolve his defensive game in that role (sort of like Hansen on that Burrows - Kesler line in his first year, although Hoglander's a lot worse defensively). I think that would be my preference if he plays well enough. That line could be a forechecking menace, IMO.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Boeser is a complementary player with a relatively lazy game that relies on smart and sustained give-and-go offensive play, bouncing off well with other smart and creative players, whereas Mikheyev has tunnel-vision and attacks in straight-line spurts/waves-- when a line is getting organized in the offensive zone, the play frequently dies on his stick otherwise.

playing mikheyev with boeser just means one of them is always going to be out of position in transition. either mikheyev will end up deep unsupported or boeser will trail the play. mikheyev pettersson podkolzin is a line where the players compliment each other much better.

I prefer Mikheyev with Horvat. A defensively aware pure rushing and net driving line, almost, that is directly difficult to handle.

But yeah, Boeser and Mikheyev are polar opposite mismatches with virtually nothing complementary, both in terms of pace, style, and hockey sense. Ideally, more than any other two strong players, they should always be on separate lines, IMO.

Mikheyev is the team's top defensive winger, and it's just common sense to put him with the team's highest-leverage C which would be Horvat. Doubly so since their play styles seem to be a pretty good match.

Very curious, if they go with those two, who the third player is. Playmaker? High pace guy? Ol’ Yeller (Pearson)?

ok so i agree you can’t put mikheyev, petey, and boeser together. it makes no sense.

but if you put mikheyev with horvat, i think boeser works. you have two guys that push play, and mikheyev also will go and get the puck. that leaves boeser as the sneaky guy that no one is paying attention to.

you don’t need boeser to do anything he is no good at: he doesn’t retrieve the puck, he doesn’t forecheck, he doesn’t carry the puck.

he can just be wide open to either onetime humdingers off easy passes or with his underrated playmaking vision keep the puck moving to one of the hardworking guys who won’t have stopped moving their feet after the puck went to boeser.

that leaves

pod petey hog
kuz jtm garland

and hopefully we can flip pearson at the deadline

 

[Shareefruck]

Yeah. When it comes to chemistry, you never really know until it hits the ice. Sometimes weird stuff happens. But on paper at least, everything about Mikheyev's game just screams "perfect winger for Horvat". They both have that same sort of mentality and approach to attacking offensively. Just attacking with speed, power, and directness. It's a very "direct" and "abrupt" sort of offensive mode. He's also obviously a good match for more of a "defensive line" with Horvat.


In the same sense, i feel like if you want to get the most out of Boeser, he should really be stapled to Pettersson. The only one who really has that vision to create and set up the shooting opportunities he needs to be successful. The same sort of "slow the game down to our speed" approach offensively. Guys you really want to put in offensive zone situations as much as possible.


Then i think you have Miller-Garland as that third "duo" to anchor a line. They work great together. Again, they have a very aligned approach to generating offense. It's all about cycling around, winning those battles down low to control the puck and getting to the net area. Garland's playmaking skew works really well with Miller's game. There's just a lot of synergy there.



So you've got your "3 Scoring Lines" each 2/3rds settled. The other wingers can just sorta float between them. See what works. Use those "extra wingers" to swap around and spark things if it gets stale. The 4th line shouldn't really see much even strength ice, but it's a fine place to stash some PKers and whoever isn't going well, or in the doghouse for a stretch.



???-Pettersson-Boeser
???-Miller-Garland
???-Horvat-Mikheyev
?#?#?#?#?#?#?#?#?#?


As a starting point: Podkolzin makes a lot of sense as a starting point with Petey/Brock as a sort of yeoman doing the spadework. Pearson makes sense as a sort of big body filler who plays a somewhat similar down low possession game pretty well with JT/Garland. That just leaves the Bo/Ilya duo, where i still honestly think Hoglander could be a good fit. But Kuzmenko is a total wildcard to me, and might end up taking that spot. But i think these are mostly the guys you shuffled around to try to give a line a bit of a spark or a different look/approach to shake things up a bit if/when it goes stale.

My only concern with stapling Boeser to Pettersson is that his tendency to float/slow down the pace might bring back negative effects on Pettersson's mental attitude/bad habits. Stylistically they do mix well though, and if you can be 100% confident that he's back and you never have to worry about him anymore, I think that would make sense.

I think I would staple Podkolzin to Pettersson instead. Keep him honest while also keeping up with his hockey sense. Their strengths and weaknesses rub off on each other well, IMO. I think Podkolzin becomes a better offensive player and Pettersson becomes more consistent star if you keep them together.

 

[Shareefruck]

ok so i agree you can’t put mikheyev, petey, and boeser together. it makes no sense.

but if you put mikheyev with horvat, i think boeser works. you have two guys that push play, and mikheyev also will go and get the puck. that leaves boeser as the sneaky guy that no one is paying attention to.

you don’t need boeser to do anything he is no good at: he doesn’t retrieve the puck, he doesn’t forecheck, he doesn’t carry the puck.

he can just be wide open to either onetime humdingers off easy passes or with his underrated playmaking vision keep the puck moving to one of the hardworking guys who won’t have stopped moving their feet after the puck went to boeser.

that leaves

pod petey hog
kuz jtm garland

and hopefully we can flip pearson at the deadline

I think a Mikheyev - Pettersson - Boeser line is about the same as a Mikheyev - Horvat - Boeser line in terms of mismatch, personally. Both have two guys that fit and one guy way out of place.

With the latter, you can say that Boeser doesn't need to worry about keeping up, he just needs to get open, but the only guy who realistically consistently gets him the puck is Horvat (only an "okay" passer), which limits the line's options and wastes Boeser's goal-scoring abilities, IMO.

Similarly, with the former, you can say that Mikheyev doesn't need to worry about touching the puck except on breakaways, he just needs to forecheck and retrieve the puck for the two creative guys, but that still leaves long periods of time where he's somewhat useless in the offensive zone.

It's not that neither can work, but it does seem sub-optimal to me. Pearson could probably play a similar role to Boeser while be a better north-south stylistic match, and Podkolzin could probably play a similar role to Mikheyev while being a stronger thinker, shooter and passer offensively.

 

[biturbo19]

My only concern with stapling Boeser to Pettersson is that his tendency to float/slow down the pace might bring back negative effects on Pettersson's mental attitude/bad habits. Stylistically they do mix well though, and if you can be 100% confident that he's back and you never have to worry about him anymore, I think that would make sense.

I think I would staple Podkolzin to Pettersson instead. Keep him honest while also keeping up with his hockey sense. Their strengths and weaknesses rub off on each other well, IMO. I think Podkolzin becomes a better offensive player and Pettersson becomes more consistent star if you keep them together.

Honestly, maybe just do both. Boeser and Podkolzin as the spadework guy, and to keep the pace and intensity of that line up. If it works well, maybe that's a trio you can lock in, instead of just a duo. Let the rest float accordingly among the other pair of duos.

Hoglander seems like he could bring some pace and intensity too though. Kuzmenko, honestly who knows, but possibly. I think Pearson would be a bad fit with Pettersson+Boeser, but that's pretty obvious and i'm not sure how much more you can really glean from things.