Line Combos: Coyle vs. Niederreiter

[rynryn]

Yeah but that would be a streaky line. Nino's got tons of skill but sometimes seems to float through games. Coyle has a little skill but skates well, sometimes he's in the right spot sometimes he's lost. Haula is really opportunistic. It would be fun to see.

I'm thinking Vanek-Koivu would need a really good puck carrier on the wing to move the puck through the NZ with some speed and let them set up in the OZ. I don't see Coyle being that guy. Nino? Haula?

i'm just sayin...the way Zucker was playing looked a lot less one dimensional than it'd been in the past here. it was only one game, but if he continues to be willing (and able) to dish the puck, if he recognizes when someone else has a better chance of scoring than he does and feeds them instead of just shooting, he could be that guy.

but i think coyle is just fine moving the puck and protecting it while the other two get set. Zucker has the speed but i'm not sure he could keep it out of enemy hands long enough for TV and MK to find a groove. in a regular season speed game against good teams.

 

[Jarick]

Zucker-Haula-Nino could be a really fun third line. Two of those guys are burners and Nino is average at worst in terms of speed. Nino can shoot and set the table and obviously Zucker has a shot.

 

[rynryn]

i like the idea of haula and zuck trucking in with speed, and nino barreling in with force to pick up the garbage or tie up defenders while the other two go for a second shot.

 

[this providence]

Without getting too far off-topic on this thread, I just don't see the currently projected lines working out all that well. Namely the Koivu line.

Coyle and Vanek aren't going to be too terribly active in the neutral zone, for different reasons. Vanek likes to fly the zone and put pressure on the opposing D by backing them off. He isn't the type who's going to possess the puck much in transition without the support of others. Coyle just isn't a confident or able player carrying the puck in any area of the ice at this stage. Which leaves Koivu to do the bulk of the work coming from what will mostly be deep in the Wild's zone. In theory, I just don't see it working out.

Parise - Koivu - Coyle
Vanek - Granlund - Pominville

Is what I would keep coming back to if they want to keep all the same "top 6" players in tact. Gives each line more balance and allows the players to better feed off each other. That Koivu line can match up with any and put the pressure on in the offensive zone. Pairing Vanek with Granlund and Pominville, who both can find space and utilize it, allows Vanek to do his thing and get to his scoring areas and not be relied upon as much in transition.

That's just me, though...

 

[Vashanesh]

Without getting too far off-topic on this thread, I just don't see the currently projected lines working out all that well. Namely the Koivu line.

Coyle and Vanek aren't going to be too terribly active in the neutral zone, for different reasons. Vanek likes to fly the zone and put pressure on the opposing D by backing them off. He isn't the type who's going to possess the puck much in transition without the support of others. Coyle just isn't a confident or able player carrying the puck in any area of the ice at this stage. Which leaves Koivu to do the bulk of the work coming from what will mostly be deep in the Wild's zone. In theory, I just don't see it working out.

Parise - Koivu - Coyle
Vanek - Granlund - Pominville

Is what I would keep coming back to if they want to keep all the same "top 6" players in tact. Gives each line more balance and allows the players to better feed off each other. That Koivu line can match up with any and put the pressure on in the offensive zone. Pairing Vanek with Granlund and Pominville, who both can find space and utilize it, allows Vanek to do his thing and get to his scoring areas and not be relied upon as much in transition.

That's just me, though...

I think this is the easiest way to have "two top lines".

Koivu's line can handle any matchup the NHL can throw at them (and regularly did), and Granlund's line can prey on secondary matchups. Figure in the supposed chemistry that Vanek and Pommers have? It seems like a no-brainer to me.

 

[Al Lagoon]

Nino is a silky smooth skater, but I think Coyle is faster.

Opinions?

 

[57special]

I wouldn't call Nino silky smooth, but I do agree that Cpyle is faster.

 

[JRJRJRJRJR]

Voted for Nino, but Cooke - Haula - Nino is more dangerous line than Cooke - Haula -Coyle. Does Nino bring THAT much more to Koivu's line than Coyle? I don't know.

I TOTALLY agree.

 

[nickschultzfan]

I'm starting to think Coyle's hockey sense is limited. For all his physical tools, he doesn't seem to get himself into the play unless Wild's system puts him there (i.e. on a dump in).

 

[FVM]

I'm starting to think Coyle's hockey sense is limited. For all his physical tools, he doesn't seem to get himself into the play unless Wild's system puts him there (i.e. on a dump in).

This is my impression as well. I think he can be a good physical glue kind of guy on a line with skill players, or he can be a great 3rd line wing. Just don't see him ever really producing the offensive numbers. It's not a big deal though, now we finally have depth in our forwards.

 

[Jarick]

I'm starting to think Coyle's hockey sense is limited. For all his physical tools, he doesn't seem to get himself into the play unless Wild's system puts him there (i.e. on a dump in).

That's what I said all last year. He doesn't know where to go in the offensive zone. He goes to the net when he should be at the wall and vice versa. When he has the puck he doesn't make moves with it.

Coyle looks like a big grinder with some skill, not a skill guy with size. Nino is a skill guy with size. Not sure why Yeo sees it the other way though.

 

[FVM]

Coyle looks like a big grinder with some skill, not a skill guy with size. Nino is a skill guy with size. Not sure why Yeo sees it the other way though.

I'm 99% sure it's because of intangibles, namely Coyle's perfect work ethic and commitment. In a recent Russo article about Nino Yeo said pretty clearly that Nino had to learn what hard work and commitment really meant on professional level.

Found the quote:

Said Yeo: “Our standards are very high. I think sometimes players that come from elsewhere think that they’re working hard, sometimes they think that they’re committed, and then they come here and they realize there’s another level they can get to. Nino’s an example of that.

“He realized that if he wants to continue to get better and be a real strong player in the NHL, it takes more than just being able to skate and shooting the puck hard. We’ve worked with him on that, and to his credit, he’s bought in. He trained really hard this summer. He looks fantastic.”

edit. Link to article.

 

[ThatGuy22]

I'm 99% sure it's because of intangibles, namely Coyle's perfect work ethic and commitment. In a recent Russo article about Nino Yeo said pretty clearly that Nino had to learn what hard work and commitment really meant on professional level.

Found the quote:


edit. Link to article.

I personally don't care if Nino is only giving 85% of what Coyle gives or whatever Yeo thinks. The production is what matters.

 

[FVM]

I personally don't care if Nino is only giving 85% of what Coyle gives or whatever Yeo thinks. The production is what matters.

I totally agree. I just see Yeo wanting to reward that professionalism in young players. I think results should matter. Pick the guys who give you the best chance to win and put them in the right roles to do so.

 

[rynryn]

i don't agree. then you produce a whiny **** like Havlat who feels entitled to pick his own spot on a roster.

 

[Avder]

i don't agree. then you produce a whiny **** like Havlat who feels entitled to pick his own spot on a roster.

Bingo.

What's needed is something in between those two philosophies.

 

[ThatGuy22]

i don't agree. then you produce a whiny **** like Havlat who feels entitled to pick his own spot on a roster.

I said 85% of Coyle's work, not 15%.

85% of Coyle's work ethic, is likely the average NHLers 100%.

 

[rynryn]

I think Coyle will have a good year regardless of where he is in the lineup. Likewise Nino. Don't really see either one lacking for time in the "top six" as we'll probably see line roulette and different looks for different teams.

 

[Foxlockbox]

I'd probably cast my vote if we were 20 games into the season, for now I just want to see how have they progressed during the summer. I'd hope Nino finally gets his PP and Top 6 atleast on a trial basis.

 

[Jarick]

Ovechkin and Kessel have/had huge question marks for their work ethic. I'd still put them over Coyle on my team.

Bottom line is production. Whatever the outcome of hard work vs talent is will be revealed in net scoring, or at least net scoring chances.

 

[rynryn]

all that great success the Capitals and leafs have had. I'm not even getting into the whole cancer thing because we frankly don't know, but there's a reason why coaches and GMs dislike guys with bad attitudes--be that antagonistic or arrogant or lazy. it sets an example for everyone who DOESNT have the talent and brings down the team.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

I know all of the numbers are in Nino's favor, but isn't there something to be said about allowing him to help elevate the offensive capabilities of the 3rd line (along with Haula)? As long as Coyle isn't a complete anchor to the 2nd line, and he wasn't last year even though some think otherwise; as long as the 3rd line is getting their minutes, I think "spreading the wealth" could have a tremendous positive impact this year.

 

[Jarick]

all that great success the Capitals and leafs have had. I'm not even getting into the whole cancer thing because we frankly don't know, but there's a reason why coaches and GMs dislike guys with bad attitudes--be that antagonistic or arrogant or lazy. it sets an example for everyone who DOESNT have the talent and brings down the team.

So the Leafs and Caps failed to win the Cup because of Kessel and Ovie?

Where are you making the leap that Nino has a bad attitude, is antagonistic, arrogant, or lazy?

 

[57special]

We're lucky to have both. We need their physicality up front. They both need to develop more before we can know who is better/ more suited to our team. Since Haula's blossoming Nino can be on the third line and not suffer as much offensively as he would with Brodziak. An argument could be made that he will get more opportunities there than on the first line.

Nino is a better choice on the second PP, IMO, than Coyle. He is better in front of the net. Coyle might be better in the corners due to his strength.

Coyle need to be more assertive and look for his shot more.

 

[Jarick]

I know all of the numbers are in Nino's favor, but isn't there something to be said about allowing him to help elevate the offensive capabilities of the 3rd line (along with Haula)? As long as Coyle isn't a complete anchor to the 2nd line, and he wasn't last year even though some think otherwise; as long as the 3rd line is getting their minutes, I think "spreading the wealth" could have a tremendous positive impact this year.

Ideally you just want highest net scoring. But I would argue that you want your best players on the ice as much as possible. Unless your 2nd and 3rd lines get equal ice time and relatively similar defensive matchups.

There's an economic cost to moving a skill player down the lineup. We could take it to the extreme to see it easier. If we move Granlund to the 4th line, he would arguably boost 4th line scoring considerably, maybe 10+ goals? But what about that top line? I would argue you would see that line's scoring drop by more than 10 goals, because now you have less talented players getting more ice time and more talented players getting less. Result is a decrease in net scoring.

Another way to look at it is when we look at points per 60 minutes. It's not a surprise the highest scoring players have high points per 60 minutes. If you have a player who has high points per 60 minutes, it's likely that you can move them up the lineup and enjoy that higher scoring productivity.

In other words, points/60 x TOI/game x games played = total points. To boost scoring, get players with better points/60 (like we did in Vanek and Nino) and give the most ice time to the players with the highest points/60.

Two caveats would be small sample size, in which a player had high points/60 due to limited ice time and that would regress to the mean. Another would be an instance of synergy between players that would boost the productivity, and breaking up that chemistry would reduce net scoring. So say you had a player who really did well with Haula, but couldn't figure out how to play with Koivu or Granlund, and scoring goes down.

TL;DR - it's possible Nino is a better scorer on the third line, but I would give the benefit of the doubt to the more productive player and give him more ice time.