Chris Kelly

[Minny Shinny]

Matt, this has always been about Kelly pulling that line down. Don't try to cloud the subject because your argument is weak. Two thirds of that line are producing. One isn't. I've shown you the numbers, it's not my issue if you fail to believe. He's been bad for two years now. Even compared to his usual out put. Even if you added in the last two years to his PPG, that's still .38. Is that not significantly higher than the .26 from last year or the .29 from this one? The numbers show he's dropped off. Watching him, you can see even his defense is starting to slip. I've given you all the numbers but you're so far into it, you can't accept it even though (to borrow a phrase from you) it's concrete proof.

I know what the numbers are and am fully cognizant of the concept that numbers measuring offensive statistical output are not going to favor an argument for Kelly. Why? He doesn't make his optimum impact in an offensive game. Add to that...if we're going to use his PPG statistics to compare to those of his linemates, then you're right, he's going to look like the weak link....until you consider that unlike his linemates who get PP time (and as such have the opportunity to bolster their PPG stats), Kelly gets zero PP time and rather specializes on the PK unit (which, last I checked, is kinda good) and doesn't serve to bolster his PPG stats. That's not rocket science.

There's a reason I singled you out to have this discussion. I pretty clearly recall you mentioning in another thread something akin to this....

I don't put much stock in stats in general because you can make them say anything you want and position them to back up any point. It's even worse with advanced stats because those are attempts to boil down something like performance into one all encompassing number.

....which is why specifically I asked you to tell me what you were seeing. I know the stats, and I agree with what you said above about stats. They tell a picture but not the whole picture and one can skew stats to support their argument. You say his defense is slipping. Tell me what that looks like (and yes, the PIT game was awful. Terribad. One game does not a trend make. If we go by the PIT game then Torey Krug is a better player that Sidney Crosby after Krug undressed him on the GWG). I'm looking for examples indicating a trend, not one game, because me, I don't base my opinions on one game. I wanted your eye test and asked twice for it. That's all I want.

For the record, I bumped this because he made 3 monumentally bad defensive plays in the last 30 seconds of a game, and it ultimately cost them the win in regulation, and gave one of their toughest opponents a gift point that they didn't dserve. So I thought it was relevant, especially since his defenders keep talking about how great he is on defense.

It was perfectly relevant and as I've stated a few times in this thread, he is absolutely deserving of criticism. I don't know how many times I can repeat that. To parallel a conversation (and only for an example because I don't want to "cross the streams, so to speak) Seguin did nothing last night in Dallas' win....but a lackluster performance in yesterday's game doesn't take away the good things he's done in Dallas to start the season. Right? Right. So that's why I want to know what else you're seeing that indicates a trend in his defensive decline.

Kelly's brain fart aside, Boychuk getting embarrassed on the second PIT goal certainly didn't help, no? Space-time continuum and all that stuff. Kelly played a big role in letting that point slip away, but laying it entirely at his feet doesn't really fit in with my concept of team play over a 60 minute game. Lots of things that happened during that game could've cost them the win in regulation, so that's not exactly the most compelling argument in a game that's played by a team.

 

[Minny Shinny]

I've shown you the numbers. Maybe you can tell me how his production being less than half of what his linemates are means Kelly is producing? No need to be passive aggressive and respond to another poster when you're really directing that to me. I still love you like a perverted brother from another mother, but you're flat out wrong here. Kelly's game has been off for two season now. Even compared to his time that predates his days in Boston. It's okay. It's just reality.

Again, I do not measure production by statistics alone (and neither do you, I thought) and explained why in the previous post. You put out there that he wasn't producing at all. I say that he's centering a line with guys that are producing, therefore he is offering something to the final product. Why look for a zebra when there's a horse in the room? I fail to buy the assertion that Kelly has NOTHING to do with his linemates' success, and in order to support that, I have to watch what he's doing and provide examples. Smith's goal against Carolina doesn't happen if Kelly's not in front of the net setting the pick and screening Ward and the defender. Dude isn't off in the corner picking his nose. He's creating space in shooting lanes by playing in front of the net, setting screens. He's responsibly occupying the center of the ice to allow those wings the opportunity to push forward and set themselves up for the opportunity to make plays in the offensive zone. Those are the things I am seeing. If people want to get on me because I don't always use stats to support my argument that's fine. I'll own that. That comes from my own perspective of playing the game and knowing what qualities a successful hockey player brings that are never successfully measured by numbers. That's not changing about me and never will.

As far as the two seasons, that's a stretch, eh? One lockout shortened season where the entire quality of the play in the league suffered and he had a significant injury...and the first 23 games of this season. That's reality. I'm not ready to hang the guy after that. If he keeps having defensive lapses on a consistent basis like the one he had against PIT, then I'll sit here at the end of the season 60 some games from now (which will then actually be two seasons) and eat whatever crow people wanna serve up. However, considering that I see a significant share of people (ahem, Kelly fanboys/apologists because it's one or the other, naturally) who are pretty pleased with what the third line is doing (and recognize that they're doing it as a unit), I'm not exactly sweating that.

At the end of this (and after reading through the thread Dom resurrected; it was my first read as I literally checked out of this place for about 7 months) I have no designs to change your mind because your mind was made up about a year and a half ago. That's fine. I'm not going to call you 'flat out wrong' because you've got your opinion. I'm going to tell you that you're flat out wrong for calling me flat out wrong because let's face it, neither of us is really 'wrong.' We value different things in a player. I value a player like Kelly because that's the kind of player I was. I was never mistaken for Adam Banks because I was Charlie Conway pre-Gordon Bombay but I dang well understand the value that guy brings to the team. It can't always be measured in clean, little, easy to quantify statistics. You sometimes have to see it, not just read it. That's a big part of the pro-Kelly argument. People can hate it and that's fine, but it doesn't make it wrong. I could say that a guy that's fashioned one of the top teams in the league sees it in this player, but I'm not even gonna have that discussion here because that goes elsewhere and I know your feelings about it.

Finally...the passive aggressive thing? Child please Ocho Cinco-style. You can think that was directed at you but my response to MMB's general statement of the state of things in this thread was agreeing with the general state of things in this thread. Meanwhile, you spent an entire day prancing around here, emoticoning and responding to every post but mine until I literally had to repeat myself....and you still avoided the questions I was hoping you would answer.

You missed it in my edit, but as I've described to you concretely what I've seen that indicates Kelly is playing well, I'd ask that you define concretely what it is you're seeing that leads you to your opinion that he's not worthy of a spot on the third line.

.......

Are you going to sit here and tell me that Jay Pandolfo and Chris Bourque were serviceable NHL players last year?

...and now can apparently add another question...what is it that you claim you see that leads you to believe that Kelly is the reason that line isn't producing? (which is sort of funny because that line IS producing...so not sure what people are expecting.)

I can be accused of a lot of things, but passive aggressive ain't one of them brother-man, and I think you know that.

Love ya.

Mean it.

 

[LSCII]

I know what the numbers are and am fully cognizant of the concept that numbers measuring offensive statistical output are not going to favor an argument for Kelly. Why? He doesn't make his optimum impact in an offensive game. Add to that...if we're going to use his PPG statistics to compare to those of his linemates, then you're right, he's going to look like the weak link....until you consider that unlike his linemates who get PP time (and as such have the opportunity to bolster their PPG stats), Kelly gets zero PP time and rather specializes on the PK unit (which, last I checked, is kinda good) and doesn't serve to bolster his PPG stats. That's not rocket science.

There's a reason I singled you out to have this discussion. I pretty clearly recall you mentioning in another thread something akin to this....



....which is why specifically I asked you to tell me what you were seeing. I know the stats, and I agree with what you said above about stats. They tell a picture but not the whole picture and one can skew stats to support their argument. You say his defense is slipping. Tell me what that looks like (and yes, the PIT game was awful. Terribad. One game does not a trend make. If we go by the PIT game then Torey Krug is a better player that Sidney Crosby after Krug undressed him on the GWG). I'm looking for examples indicating a trend, not one game, because me, I don't base my opinions on one game. I wanted your eye test and asked twice for it. That's all I want.



It was perfectly relevant and as I've stated a few times in this thread, he is absolutely deserving of criticism. I don't know how many times I can repeat that. To parallel a conversation (and only for an example because I don't want to "cross the streams, so to speak) Seguin did nothing last night in Dallas' win....but a lackluster performance in yesterday's game doesn't take away the good things he's done in Dallas to start the season. Right? Right. So that's why I want to know what else you're seeing that indicates a trend in his defensive decline.

Kelly's brain fart aside, Boychuk getting embarrassed on the second PIT goal certainly didn't help, no? Space-time continuum and all that stuff. Kelly played a big role in letting that point slip away, but laying it entirely at his feet doesn't really fit in with my concept of team play over a 60 minute game. Lots of things that happened during that game could've cost them the win in regulation, so that's not exactly the most compelling argument in a game that's played by a team.

What I see from Kelly is a player who perpetually is cheating back on defense, instead of jumping up in the play. I see a guy who worries more about getting burned than playing the game the way it should be. He's tentative. He's focused on defense, and it's at the expense of his line mates. His skating has also seemed to drop off and he looks slow. At the end of the day, I'm not saying there isn't a spot for him on this team. There is. It's just not on the 3rd line.

 

[LSCII]

"Horton has a no trade clause"

Oh I miss being reminded of that every thread that Horton would never leave

Classic trip down memory lane. My first post after the numbers were announced was this:

He's coming off a career year in both goals and points. I don't see him replicating it, so I wouldn't pay him over what I said. Just don't see a guy who puts up 13-15 goals a year suddenly a consistent 20 goal scorer 8 years into his career. He is what he is. A good depth player, but not a guy who should be getting $3Mill or above.

It's hilarious to me that I was pretty sure I thought they had overpaid and over extended for this deal, and here we are 3 years later, and I'm absolutely sure of it. That deal is a dog. It was bad then, and it's even worse now that he looks to have lost a step.

 

[DominicT]

Classic trip down memory lane. My first post after the numbers were announced was this:



It's hilarious to me that I was pretty sure I thought they had overpaid and over extended for this deal, and here we are 3 years later, and I'm absolutely sure of it. That deal is a dog. It was bad then, and it's even worse now that he looks to have lost a step.

I read that entire thread last night when I looked it up Lonnie.

I'll admit, you certainly have stuck to your guns.

I enjoy reading this thread ( I got nothing better to do ) and will say both you guys make valid points. If I were sitting on the fence with this and my opinion had to be swayed by one of your arguments. don't know which way I'd lean.

Luckily, I'm not sitting on the fence

 

[LSCII]

I read that entire thread last night when I looked it up Lonnie.

I'll admit, you certainly have stuck to your guns.

I enjoy reading this thread ( I got nothing better to do ) and will say both you guys make valid points. If I were sitting on the fence with this and my opinion had to be swayed by one of your arguments. don't know which way I'd lean.

Luckily, I'm not sitting on the fence

He's a solid player and there is certainly a role for him on this team. I have never liked his contract because of the dollars and especially the NTC piece of it. Given a choice between moving Kelly or Peverley, I would have moved Kelly. I'd have taken Peverley mainly because I think Pevs had the ability to slot in multiple spots, while Kelly is what you see. Defense first, second, and third. Nothing wrong with that either, just not what this team needs, IMO, if they want to roll 3 scoring lines. If given a choice right now of Kelly or Campbell for the 4th line, and I'd take Kelly every day of the week.

 

[Glove Malfunction]

What I see from Kelly is a player who perpetually is cheating back on defense, instead of jumping up in the play. I see a guy who worries more about getting burned than playing the game the way it should be. He's tentative. He's focused on defense, and it's at the expense of his line mates. His skating has also seemed to drop off and he looks slow. At the end of the day, I'm not saying there isn't a spot for him on this team. There is. It's just not on the 3rd line.

I guess that's one of the interesting things about fans - they see different things. I will give you that Kelly's focused on his defense (Monday's game aside), but to my eye, he's skating better than he has in the past two seasons - including before his injury last year. A couple of games, I've been surprised when I saw it was Kelly skating well and getting hard to a puck. He just looks faster to me. Let's just say I disagree with your assessment on Kelly and the third line.

 

[LSCII]

I guess that's one of the interesting things about fans - they see different things. I will give you that Kelly's focused on his defense (Monday's game aside), but to my eye, he's skating better than he has in the past two seasons - including before his injury last year. A couple of games, I've been surprised when I saw it was Kelly skating well and getting hard to a puck. He just looks faster to me. Let's just say I disagree with your assessment on Kelly and the third line.

No worries man. If you want to be wrong, you can be wrong...

I just look at how well Smith and Soderberg are playing and I see Kelly not on par with them. If they had someone more akin to the players they are, I think that line would be a huge match up problem for other teams.

 

[Glove Malfunction]

No worries man. If you want to be wrong, you can be wrong...

I just look at how well Smith and Soderberg are playing and I see Kelly not on par with them. If they had someone more akin to the players they are, I think that line would be a huge match up problem for other teams.

That's a fair point of view, but it's only one way to look at it. You could also look at it as Smith and Soderberg being second line players, who, because of the Bruins depth, are playing on the third line. Do you see another center in the Bruins' system who is akin to the players they are? I don't.

You said you'd rather have Kelly than Campbell for the 4th line, and that's fair, although I wouldn't make that switch because of the chemistry of the Merlot Line, and the complementary pieces each player brings to the line. What you didn't say (or maybe you did and I missed it) was who you'd plug into the 3rd line center spot. Is there someone you think would make the line better with a simple 1 for 1 swap with Kelly?

 

[LSCII]

That's a fair point of view, but it's only one way to look at it. You could also look at it as Smith and Soderberg being second line players, who, because of the Bruins depth, are playing on the third line. Do you see another center in the Bruins' system who is akin to the players they are? I don't.

You said you'd rather have Kelly than Campbell for the 4th line, and that's fair, although I wouldn't make that switch because of the chemistry of the Merlot Line, and the complementary pieces each player brings to the line. What you didn't say (or maybe you did and I missed it) was who you'd plug into the 3rd line center spot. Is there someone you think would make the line better with a simple 1 for 1 swap with Kelly?

Spooner. Easily. Far more skilled offensively than Kelly, far more of a complimentary fit for Soderberg and Smith too, IMO. It's sink or swim time. We can't continually hold guys down that are obviously ready for the NHL just because we have Chris freaking Kelly playing a spot he's ill suited for. If you have guys that would be top 6 on most other teams, you can't saddle them with a defensive specialist just because you made a bad signing or two. Re-upping Kelly and Campbell when they did was bad not only because of the time commitment, but because of the dollars. You can find guys to fill their roles for fractions of the money you spent to retain them. More importantly, you don't impede the development of the glut of young guys they have because they overextended on role players. It's why I wasn't a fan of the deal when it happened then, and I'm still not.

 

[Minny Shinny]

What I see from Kelly is a player who perpetually is cheating back on defense, instead of jumping up in the play. I see a guy who worries more about getting burned than playing the game the way it should be. He's tentative. He's focused on defense, and it's at the expense of his line mates. His skating has also seemed to drop off and he looks slow. At the end of the day, I'm not saying there isn't a spot for him on this team. There is. It's just not on the 3rd line.

Thank you. That's what I was looking for.

You see a guy worried about getting burned so he sits back instead of jumping up into the play. I see a cautious, cerebral player who wants to survey the ice ahead of him and try to proactively identify potential problem areas from the opposing team, then after assessing that, figures out where he needs to go in order to both hold the zone but also be in the place that supports his linemates for the best two-way result.

I'm not sure where focusing on defense is "playing the game the way it should be" but understand that's a subjective thing based on the type of game you prefer. I think you're wrong because to me, that's a vital part of a complete hockey player. You and I have different philosophies. Different strokes.

You say his speed's dropped off. I disagree with that more than the other two combined. It's evident to my eye that he's skating faster and more confidently.

It is what it is. You're just a shade more wrong than I.

Kumbaya and all that ****.

 

[Minny Shinny]

I read that entire thread last night when I looked it up Lonnie.

I'll admit, you certainly have stuck to your guns.

I enjoy reading this thread ( I got nothing better to do ) and will say both you guys make valid points. If I were sitting on the fence with this and my opinion had to be swayed by one of your arguments. don't know which way I'd lean.

Luckily, I'm not sitting on the fence

*Translation; Lonnie's a pain in the ass, and a good one at that.


As much as I strongly disagree with his assessment, it's at least one of the more entertaining discussions I've had here and just boils down to the idea that two people can watch the same game and based on what they value, see two completely different things.

The world and it's opposite poles can indeed co-exist in this societal experiment known as HFboards. Who knew?

 

[qc]

Smith and Soderberg are currently putting up numbers that you'd see out of 2nd line wingers. Kelly is under-producing (offensively) even for a 3rd line role. Because of this, Kelly's ppg % is going to look even worse when compared to his line mates, who are currently over-achieving/producing.. based on their expectations. That being said, I can't assume that the 3rd line will be even more productive if we just throw Spooner in. It doesn't always work that way. Too much offensive talent on a particular line can sometimes backfire.

I think Kelly needs to pick it up offensively, but I don't think dropping him and scratching Soupy is the solution. And this is coming from a Spooner fan. I prefer to keep things as is, until we start seeing a slump for the bottom 2 lines (who are playing spectacular right now). If it reaches the point where Kelly is "holding back" his wingers, then I'll get on board with mixing it up. But right now, Kelly should still be out there with those 2. His offensive production is an issue, but I worry that demoting him may lead to new leaks springing up elsewhere.

I see both sides of the debate and there are good points from both, and I don't have a dog in the fight. I just want to see some patience (which is what I am seeing from the FO/coaches), and I'm not convinced that the 3rd line (who're overachieving offensively, as a unit) needs to be tweaked.

Of course if we lose tonight and they look bad, I'll be more inclined to support the idea.

 

[LSCII]

*Translation; Lonnie's a pain in the ass, and a good one at that.


As much as I strongly disagree with his assessment, it's at least one of the more entertaining discussions I've had here and just boils down to the idea that two people can watch the same game and based on what they value, see two completely different things.

The world and it's opposite poles can indeed co-exist in this societal experiment known as HFboards. Who knew?

It's true, I stick to what I'm good at.

 

[MTaylorJ1]

It's true, I stick to what I'm good at.

You could very well be the board's Brad Marchand. Do you have a tattoo that says HF Boards Chanpian?

 

[Glove Malfunction]

Spooner. Easily. Far more skilled offensively than Kelly, far more of a complimentary fit for Soderberg and Smith too, IMO. It's sink or swim time. We can't continually hold guys down that are obviously ready for the NHL just because we have Chris freaking Kelly playing a spot he's ill suited for. If you have guys that would be top 6 on most other teams, you can't saddle them with a defensive specialist just because you made a bad signing or two. Re-upping Kelly and Campbell when they did was bad not only because of the time commitment, but because of the dollars. You can find guys to fill their roles for fractions of the money you spent to retain them. More importantly, you don't impede the development of the glut of young guys they have because they overextended on role players. It's why I wasn't a fan of the deal when it happened then, and I'm still not.

So what you're REALLY saying is that you don't like Kelly's contract? That seems to be a big factor in how you're assessing him as a hockey player. I'm not a big fan of the contract either, especially the NMC, but that doesn't cloud my assessment of him as a player.

As for Spooner, I can agree that offensively, he's a much better fit for Soderberg and Smith. I think you really lose a lot defensively with that line, and whether we like it or not, we know that Julien is always going to place a premium on defensive structure. I still think you're wrong about Kelly being ill-suited for the third line. Like SoM said, a shade more wrong than me.

 

[MTaylorJ1]

So what you're REALLY saying is that you don't like Kelly's contract? That seems to be a big factor in how you're assessing him as a hockey player. I'm not a big fan of the contract either, especially the NMC, but that doesn't cloud my assessment of him as a player.

As for Spooner, I can agree that offensively, he's a much better fit for Soderberg and Smith. I think you really lose a lot defensively with that line, and whether we like it or not, we know that Julien is always going to place a premium on defensive structure. I still think you're wrong about Kelly being ill-suited for the third line. Like SoM said, a shade more wrong than me.

I wouldn't say the Wheeler-Krejci-Ryder line was all that defensively sound, they were really really good in 08-09. To me that's your ideal 3rd line, especially if you can roll out a 4th line that can double as a shutdown defensive line. I'm not even sure I'd be advocating for a huge cut in Kelly's ice time to be honest.

He'd play with Paille-Campbell in heavy defensive usage situations, even taking the burden off of Bergeron from time to time. Kelly would get any non-icing defensive zone face off with the 3rd line as well.

Allows you to turn the 3rd line into an additional scoring line, while developing Spooner at the NHL level which he's ready for. Gives him 55-60 games (where you can afford to put him on the 9th floor from time to time) to make NHL mistakes to determine his readiness for the playoffs. Doesn't work, no harm no foul. You have the team you're rolling out there now which is a good one. Allows the 3rd line to help take more of the scoring burden off the top 2. Forces other coaches to mind their d pairings more.

 

[KnightofBoston]

I completely support mt's line of thinking

 

[Glove Malfunction]

I wouldn't say the Wheeler-Krejci-Ryder line was all that defensively sound, they were really really good in 08-09. To me that's your ideal 3rd line, especially if you can roll out a 4th line that can double as a shutdown defensive line. I'm not even sure I'd be advocating for a huge cut in Kelly's ice time to be honest.

He'd play with Paille-Campbell in heavy defensive usage situations, even taking the burden off of Bergeron from time to time. Kelly would get any non-icing defensive zone face off with the 3rd line as well.

Allows you to turn the 3rd line into an additional scoring line, while developing Spooner at the NHL level which he's ready for. Gives him 55-60 games (where you can afford to put him on the 9th floor from time to time) to make NHL mistakes to determine his readiness for the playoffs. Doesn't work, no harm no foul. You have the team you're rolling out there now which is a good one. Allows the 3rd line to help take more of the scoring burden off the top 2. Forces other coaches to mind their d pairings more.

You make some very good points, and they're hard to argue, since they (on paper) seem to make the team a better one. None of these arguments say anything about Kelly not being fit for the 3rd line. In fact they count on Kelly being a defensive stalwart (which I have more faith in that some). I don't really have a problem with that.

Now Lonnie, THAT'S how to be passive aggressive!

 

[LSCII]

Thank you. That's what I was looking for.

You see a guy worried about getting burned so he sits back instead of jumping up into the play. I see a cautious, cerebral player who wants to survey the ice ahead of him and try to proactively identify potential problem areas from the opposing team, then after assessing that, figures out where he needs to go in order to both hold the zone but also be in the place that supports his linemates for the best two-way result.

I'm not sure where focusing on defense is "playing the game the way it should be" but understand that's a subjective thing based on the type of game you prefer. I think you're wrong because to me, that's a vital part of a complete hockey player. You and I have different philosophies. Different strokes.

You say his speed's dropped off. I disagree with that more than the other two combined. It's evident to my eye that he's skating faster and more confidently.

It is what it is. You're just a shade more wrong than I.

Kumbaya and all that ****.

I'm not looking at his speed year over year. I'm looking at it collectively. I'm sure the answer will be centered around his leg injury, but at the end of the day, he looks noticeably slower than when he first came here. You can split hairs and say he looks better than last year, but looking slightly better than he did last year, when he looked terrible, means exactly what in this case??? It's basically saying he sucks, but just not as much as last year.

 

[MTaylorJ1]

You make some very good points, and they're hard to argue, since they (on paper) seem to make the team a better one. None of these arguments say anything about Kelly not being fit for the 3rd line. In fact they count on Kelly being a defensive stalwart (which I have more faith in that some). I don't really have a problem with that.

Now Lonnie, THAT'S how to be passive aggressive!

Well to be fair, 99% of my recent posting history involved the phrase.... "Producing like Gregory Campbell." I think that's enough to say you aren't fit for a 3rd line role on a Cup Contender. Well, provided you don't want to have to count on Tuukka Rask standing on his head every May/June, and just be merely awesome.

 

[Artemis]

Thank you. That's what I was looking for.

You see a guy worried about getting burned so he sits back instead of jumping up into the play. I see a cautious, cerebral player who wants to survey the ice ahead of him and try to proactively identify potential problem areas from the opposing team, then after assessing that, figures out where he needs to go in order to both hold the zone but also be in the place that supports his linemates for the best two-way result.

I'm not sure where focusing on defense is "playing the game the way it should be" but understand that's a subjective thing based on the type of game you prefer. I think you're wrong because to me, that's a vital part of a complete hockey player. You and I have different philosophies. Different strokes.

You say his speed's dropped off. I disagree with that more than the other two combined. It's evident to my eye that he's skating faster and more confidently.

It is what it is. You're just a shade more wrong than I.

Kumbaya and all that ****.

The problem is, Kelly can play a solid game - spark a perfect PK, get his stick in passing lanes, screen a goalie for a Smith or Krug goal, prevent several neutral zone turnovers, etc. - and he won't get credit because none of it will show up on the stat sheet. So people who want to run him down will always be "right" - his stats aren't there, he won't make the highlight reels, and "I didn't see him do anything." So it may be an entertaining argument, but it's a fruitless one.

 

[LSCII]

So what you're REALLY saying is that you don't like Kelly's contract? That seems to be a big factor in how you're assessing him as a hockey player. I'm not a big fan of the contract either, especially the NMC, but that doesn't cloud my assessment of him as a player.

As for Spooner, I can agree that offensively, he's a much better fit for Soderberg and Smith. I think you really lose a lot defensively with that line, and whether we like it or not, we know that Julien is always going to place a premium on defensive structure. I still think you're wrong about Kelly being ill-suited for the third line. Like SoM said, a shade more wrong than me.

No, the contract is only reflective of how grossly overpaid he is for what he actually is. Two very separate subjects. The reason the contract is a problem is that they overpaid for a bottom six guy, when cheaper alternatives could have been had that wouldn't have been long term deals, thus blocking the young guys they have coming up. His skill as a player during the contract has also dropped off, which compounds the bad deal even further.

So there are two parts to this discussion. The contract, and his play during that extension. Both are bad, and they're intertwined, but it's an amalgamation of each that make it unpalatable. However, it's his play that I have issue with for the third line. If he was on the 4th line instead of Campbell, I could at least live with his overpayment.

 

[LSCII]

The problem is, Kelly can play a solid game - spark a perfect PK, get his stick in passing lanes, screen a goalie for a Smith or Krug goal, prevent several neutral zone turnovers, etc. - and he won't get credit because none of it will show up on the stat sheet. So people who want to run him down will always be "right" - his stats aren't there, he won't make the highlight reels, and "I didn't see him do anything." So it may be an entertaining argument, but it's a fruitless one.

The problem is that you lack any objectivity when discussing players and evaluating their games, because whatever the front office or Claude wants, you back 100%. You also seem to think everything is a personal attack on the guy, when it's not. I see Kelly being a step late consistently in the offensive zone over the last two years, and you interpret that as me wanting to run him out of town. I don't want him gone from the team, but I do want him off the third line. That's a very big distinction you seem to be constantly missing.

 

[LSCII]

You could very well be the board's Brad Marchand. Do you have a tattoo that says HF Boards Chanpian?

No, but I think I just found my next tattoo...