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

[Ruthervin]

Hm. So, Miller is going to be used in the higher leverage defensive role?

Based on those lines, I think management/coaching is going to try and give the nod to the
Dickinson-Lazar-Joshua line for those defensive assignments........maybe similar to what Pittsburgh was doing with Bluegar and Reese in terms of getting their 4th line to take on the toughest defensive assignments. Those other three lines we have all look geared to produce some offence. Pearson will act as the defensive conscience for Miller and Boeser (i.e. arguably our two worst defensive forwards). Garland-Horvat-Podkolzin will likely be expected to get in on the forecheck and dominate down low while Kuzemko-Pettersson-Mikheyev will be the skill, speed, and grit line in which most of our offence will be expected to come from. Will be interesting to see if the strategy works. Either way, better than whatever "oral agreement" that Green and Petan had from last pre-season.

 

[McDavid is too whiny]

Either way, better than whatever "oral agreement" that Green and Petan had from last pre-season.

What’s this about?

 

[biturbo19]

Based on training camp and BB's comments, here is your opening night roster

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

OEL-Hughes
Myers-Dekeyeser
Rathbone-Schenn
Dermott-Poolman

Not sure how the defence will shape up yet

On a separate note, looks like Hoglander is lining up with Aman and Karlsson which makes me think he is starting in the AHL if he doesn't impress.

Looking at this...it's still a kind of peculiar "roll 3 scoring lines" sort of approach, without a lot of clearly defined deployment roles.


But i am starting to come around on it. The biggest thing to me though, is Pearson-Miller-Boeser...like, who is the setup man there? It's just three triggermen basically. Which worries me, because when Miller tries to masquerade as a "playmaker" is when he gets kinda disastrously poor defensively. Making absolutely bizarre no-hope cross-seam passes for no good reason.

Mikheyev with Petterson i don't necessarily love, but it does make sense in terms of promoting some "pace" in Petey's game, and Kuzmenko could be good there if he can think the game offensively on Pettersson's level.

Garland-Horvat-Podkolzin is a weird line, but i think it's one that you could trust to hold their own defensively. They're also all guys who can work the puck in deep and generate offense that way. I just would've leaned more toward Horvat with Mikheyev as a duo who can generate offense off the rush, where Horvat is at his best 5v5.



Sucks to see Hoglander kinda relegated to "spare" duty. But i get it. He's not really a fit on a Lazar-Dickinson sort of 4th line. He could be an "energy player" on the right sort of 4th line, but it looks like they're going in a different direction there, and he doesn't have the demonstrated chops defensively to hack it in those sort of minutes.

 

[Hoglander]

Looking at this...it's still a kind of peculiar "roll 3 scoring lines" sort of approach, without a lot of clearly defined deployment roles.


But i am starting to come around on it. The biggest thing to me though, is Pearson-Miller-Boeser...like, who is the setup man there? It's just three triggermen basically. Which worries me, because when Miller tries to masquerade as a "playmaker" is when he gets kinda disastrously poor defensively. Making absolutely bizarre no-hope cross-seam passes for no good reason.

Mikheyev with Petterson i don't necessarily love, but it does make sense in terms of promoting some "pace" in Petey's game, and Kuzmenko could be good there if he can think the game offensively on Pettersson's level.

Garland-Horvat-Podkolzin is a weird line, but i think it's one that you could trust to hold their own defensively. They're also all guys who can work the puck in deep and generate offense that way. I just would've leaned more toward Horvat with Mikheyev as a duo who can generate offense off the rush, where Horvat is at his best 5v5.



Sucks to see Hoglander kinda relegated to "spare" duty. But i get it. He's not really a fit on a Lazar-Dickinson sort of 4th line. He could be an "energy player" on the right sort of 4th line, but it looks like they're going in a different direction there, and he doesn't have the demonstrated chops defensively to hack it in those sort of minutes.

Very easily, Miller.

He makes the odd ill-advised pass/poor turnover (I think the poor defense is more when he sort of gives up on a play and stops skating), but it's not going to stop him from being a playmaker... he was actually 6th in the entire league in assists last season (5th among forwards).

 

[biturbo19]

Very easily, Miller.

He makes the odd ill-advised pass/poor turnover (I think the poor defense is more when he sort of gives up on a play and stops skating), but it's not going to stop him from being a playmaker... he was actually 6th in the entire league in assists last season (5th among forwards).

I just don't see it. He's great at making those little bump plays and give 'n goes to put guys in position to score. Getting the puck under control on the wall and moving it to a high danger area. That's where those assists mostly come from. It's what makes him so valuable to this Canucks group, especially on the powerplay. But when he fancies himself a real "playmaker", is when he consistently seems to make his most boneheaded plays. He doesn't have the nuance of someone like Pettersson to control and manipulate those passing lanes to make it all work. Just throwing pucks to who knows where...right through/into a defender.


He's much better when he stays within himself as a more North-South sort of player.

 

[Hoglander]

I just don't see it. He's great at making those little bump plays and give 'n goes to put guys in position to score. Getting the puck under control on the wall and moving it to a high danger area. That's where those assists mostly come from. It's what makes him so valuable to this Canucks group, especially on the powerplay. But when he fancies himself a real "playmaker", is when he consistently seems to make his most boneheaded plays. He doesn't have the nuance of someone like Pettersson to control and manipulate those passing lanes to make it all work. Just throwing pucks to who knows where...right through/into a defender.


He's much better when he stays within himself as a more North-South sort of player.

Then I guess it'll be more of a straight forward get-r-done style of scoring line, instead of a flashy, dipsy-doodle one. I'm not really sure what you're expecting here... aside from arguably EP, what forward would you prefer to have the puck on their stick? Maybe Garland, but it would make sense for each of those 3 to be the playmaker on their own separate lines, no? Unless we're bringing Hank out of retirement, JT is easily one of our best options.

 

[mriswith]

I'd prefer to see Pearson on the 4th line and Hog in the top 9 instead for development reasons.

We know what we're going to get with Pearson and it won't take long for an injury to bring him back into the top 9 whereas Hog needs the minutes to develop and we know from last year that it's important to let Hoglander ride his preseason momentum. Probably won't happen, but I can wish.

 

[Get North]

I'd prefer to see Pearson on the 4th line and Hog in the top 9 instead for development reasons.

We know what we're going to get with Pearson and it won't take long for an injury to bring him back into the top 9 whereas Hog needs the minutes to develop and we know from last year that it's important to let Hoglander ride his preseason momentum. Probably won't happen, but I can wish.

Hoglander hasn't proved how dangerous he is from distance. He had 10 NHL goals, most were in the crease/net area. Not much of a sniper like Miller, Pettersson or Boeser. Very easily somebody like Kuzmenko or Mikheyev can prove to be a better fit with similar attributes. It doesn't mean we have to trade him, but it's not just Tanner Pearson who's above Hoglander in the depth chart.

We have Joshua, Lazar and Dickinson on the 4th line who don't have much pedigree in the league. There's probably 7 bonafide consistent quality NHL forwards on this roster. We're hoping to have a talented top 9, but I haven't seen any games yet.

I also hope Pearson is on the 4th line, but somebody has to replace him. He plays PK minutes too, which young kid wants to take those minutes?

 

[andora]

Kuzmenko and boeser are to play the brett hull type roles.. while kuzmenko can work the wall those guys are going to focus on finding soft spots for quick pass shoots or capitalizing on being the trailer.

Its where you use hughs as well.. hughes on the ice with millers line, hjghes and miller carry it in boeser the trailer / miller person work the wall boeser the soft spot

Pettersson and mikheyev can carry kuzmenko will trail / kuz and mikheyev can work the wall and petfersson can soft spot

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

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.

it's been a long time since bae - bo - boe, but i thought horvat and boeser worked well together.

but thinking back on that line way back when, i also wonder whether playing with two play-pushers like horvat and mikheyev will force boeser to play more quickly and on instinct, vs being hopelessly lost in his head.

agree though that podkolzin might give you more on a mikheyev/horvat line, while providing a decent approximation of boeser's one shot scoring potential.

 

[Shareefruck]

it's been a long time since bae - bo - boe, but i thought horvat and boeser worked well together.

but thinking back on that line way back when, i also wonder whether playing with two play-pushers like horvat and mikheyev will force boeser to play more quickly and on instinct, vs being hopelessly lost in his head.

agree though that podkolzin might give you more on a mikheyev/horvat line, while providing a decent approximation of boeser's one shot scoring potential.

I more or less agree. I think Horvat - Boeser works as well, but I still think it's sub-optimal... and a bit compromised by Horvat and Boeser both being better shooters than they are passers but still pretty decent passers.

Also, I just feel that Boeser's a guy who, if the stars align, he doesn't play lazy, and he plays with the right players, can approach 40 goals. I doubt he can approach that with Horvat, even though he can still have a good year with him.

 

[biturbo19]

it's been a long time since bae - bo - boe, but i thought horvat and boeser worked well together.

but thinking back on that line way back when, i also wonder whether playing with two play-pushers like horvat and mikheyev will force boeser to play more quickly and on instinct, vs being hopelessly lost in his head.

agree though that podkolzin might give you more on a mikheyev/horvat line, while providing a decent approximation of boeser's one shot scoring potential.

I more or less agree. I think Horvat - Boeser works as well, but I still think it's sub-optimal... and a bit compromised by Horvat and Boeser both being better shooters than they are passers but still pretty decent passers.

Also, I just feel that Boeser's a guy who, if the stars align, he doesn't play lazy, and he plays with the right players, can approach 40 goals. I doubt he can approach that with Horvat, even though he can still have a good year with him.

Yeah. There was a time where Horvat-Boeser worked, and showed some chemistry.

I'm just not sure about the deployment anymore. Horvat at that point, was not at all the "defensive center" he was billed as. He was a trainwreck defensively and mostly got caved in with that responsibility when it was put on him. He was the go-to "offensive guy" for this sad team at the time. He's evolved into something a lot closer to what he was supposed to be since then though. Boeser on the other hand, has not really evolved beyond the 1-dimensional goal-scorer he was supposed to be. Offensively, he may have even regressed from that point, and defensively and all-around game hasn't developed to round things out.

I'm not sure how that works in 2022. But it still might be better than trying to make Miller the setup guy for the pure goal scorer. I really just think Boeser is a guy you have to staple to Pettersson's wing, to really maximize what he's capable of. It's why that contract is...a potential liability. It's why it's hard to invest big in guys like Boeser. They can be gamebreakers scoring goals, but they're also really dependent on other players to support them.