Line Combos: Forward line-up: what would you do?

Mortimer Snerd

You kids get off my lawn!
Sponsor
Jun 10, 2014
57,187
28,768
I'm calling it as I see it. If I saw the small events I'd call those. But I still believe that Connor has a higher IQ. Ehlers I believe often gets caught trying to make the fancy play.

Connor is starting to do more this year so you will see more mistakes as the year goes on. Last year he mostly forechecked and cleaned up the junk in front of the net. As he carries the puck more he will become more susceptible to mistakes.

Focusing on a few big events is a thing. We all tend to do it to one extent or another. Garrett has explained it a few times and much better than I can. The thing is that we tend to overweight them because of the way they stand out in our minds.
 

Jack722

Registered User
Mar 3, 2018
816
1,378
I think the objective of constructing a line-up is to maximize effectiveness and improve results, not to reward or punish players.

I'm not convinced that reward and punishment in TOI terms is a good way to motivate players. Maybe sometimes it is.

It seems to me that slumping players should be given more opportunity to work through it, though maybe that's counterintuitive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: QuietContrarian

Adam da bomb

Registered User
May 1, 2016
12,611
9,479
Connor is starting to do more this year so you will see more mistakes as the year goes on. Last year he mostly forechecked and cleaned up the junk in front of the net. As he carries the puck more he will become more susceptible to mistakes.

Focusing on a few big events is a thing. We all tend to do it to one extent or another. Garrett has explained it a few times and much better than I can. The thing is that we tend to overweight them because of the way they stand out in our minds.
Or you will see a smarter player. We both seem to have pretty closed minds about our guys. I think Connor is smarter, you seem to think Ehlers is smarter. Only time will tell. Connor will make mistakes but if he makes fewer costly mistakes is the question. After all, Ehlers mistakes last night were not just glaring one of the two, was also costly.
 

Mortimer Snerd

You kids get off my lawn!
Sponsor
Jun 10, 2014
57,187
28,768
Or you will see a smarter player. We both seem to have pretty closed minds about our guys. I think Connor is smarter, you seem to think Ehlers is smarter. Only time will tell. Connor will make mistakes but if he makes fewer costly mistakes is the question. After all, Ehlers mistakes last night were not just glaring one of the two, was also costly.

Obviously you don't know me. I don't have a closed mind about anything. :laugh: If I see a smarter player, I will see a smarter player. So far I haven't seen enough to reach a conclusion one way or another. That is almost a definition of an open mind.

Being costly is a big part of what makes them stand out in our minds. It was 1 game. It was 2 mistakes. I think the 2nd one was a communication problem, on Scheifele as much as on Ehlers. JMO, but that's how it looked to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: QuietContrarian

Adam da bomb

Registered User
May 1, 2016
12,611
9,479
Obviously you don't know me. I don't have a closed mind about anything. :laugh: If I see a smarter player, I will see a smarter player. So far I haven't seen enough to reach a conclusion one way or another. That is almost a definition of an open mind.

Being costly is a big part of what makes them stand out in our minds. It was 1 game. It was 2 mistakes. I think the 2nd one was a communication problem, on Scheifele as much as on Ehlers. JMO, but that's how it looked to me.
Not sure how Scheif should have made it any clearer that he was heading to the bench. After all he had already been out there for a minute and a half.
 

Mortimer Snerd

You kids get off my lawn!
Sponsor
Jun 10, 2014
57,187
28,768
Not sure how Scheif should have made it any clearer that he was heading to the bench. After all he had already been out there for a minute and a half.

There was a hesitation at both ends.
Ehlers looks Scheif to pass. Hesitates, oh are you going off?
Scheif hesitates. Are you going to pass? Ehlers, are you staying out? OK, here's the puck.

Ehlers still shouldn't have made that pass in spite of the confusion. He needed to be more aware of how long Scheif had been on the ice. But that's 3 on 3 for you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: QuietContrarian

Adam da bomb

Registered User
May 1, 2016
12,611
9,479
There was a hesitation at both ends.
Ehlers looks Scheif to pass. Hesitates, oh are you going off?
Scheif hesitates. Are you going to pass? Ehlers, are you staying out? OK, here's the puck.

Ehlers still shouldn't have made that pass in spite of the confusion. He needed to be more aware of how long Scheif had been on the ice. But that's 3 on 3 for you.
Scheif was double covered as he went straight forward. Just a dumb play.
 

YWGinYYZ

Registered User
Jul 3, 2011
28,480
7,117
Toronto
5v5 TOI averages for the last two games:

Average of TOIOpponent
PlayerCanucksOilersGrand Total
Mark Scheifele14.817.716.2
Kyle Connor14.415.915.1
Patrik Laine13.715.914.8
Brandon Tanev14.115.314.7
Nikolaj Ehlers13.215.614.4
Blake Wheeler14.314.114.2
Andrew Copp13.814.314.0
Adam Lowry13.614.314.0
Bryan Little12.514.313.4
Mathieu Perreault10.06.98.4
Jack Roslovic10.56.38.4
Brendan Lemieux8.96.07.5
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
If we could get the sort of TOI split from the lines that we had against the Canucks, that would be a very positive thing. ELL looked pretty damned good last night.
 
Last edited:

19GoalsInPlayoffs

Registered User
Jan 30, 2017
129
90
Messier-Gretzky-Kurri
Messier-Gretzky-Anderson
Tikkanen-Gretzky-Kurri
Anderson-Gretzky-Kurri
?

Totally OT, but the only line of the above mentinoned in actual use (at 5v5) was Tikkanen-Gretzky-Kurri.

The top2 lines used in the 80s Oilers were practically:
1st:
X-Gretzky-Kurri
2nd:
Messier-X-Anderson, or X-Messier-Anderson

And of course there were some variance on top of that. 99 was double shifted a lot for example.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GNP

Neuf

Leaving HFBoards for now
Dec 17, 2016
6,217
9,290
Weird how yesterday most of the lines looked good but the 5 on 5 production still isn't showing up.
 

Gil Fisher

Registered User
Mar 18, 2012
7,649
4,945
Winnipeg
Are we going to start a "how do we fix the top line" thread? I would, but it seems just a tad too trollish for me.

Wheeler has been on the ice for 1 5v5 GF this year?
 
  • Like
Reactions: GNP

Board Bard

Dane-O-Mite
Jun 7, 2014
7,886
5,054
5v5 TOI averages for the last two games:

Average of TOIOpponent
PlayerCanucksOilersGrand Total
Mark Scheifele14.817.716.2
Kyle Connor14.415.915.1
Patrik Laine13.715.914.8
Brandon Tanev14.115.314.7
Nikolaj Ehlers13.215.614.4
Blake Wheeler14.314.114.2
Andrew Copp13.814.314.0
Adam Lowry13.614.314.0
Bryan Little12.514.313.4
Mathieu Perreault10.06.98.4
Jack Roslovic10.56.38.4
Brendan Lemieux8.96.07.5
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
If we could get the sort of TOI split from the lines that we had against the Canucks, that would be a very positive thing. ELL looked pretty damned good last night.

Wonder if most if not all of the two-minute difference between Wheeler and Scheif is due to Wheeler coming off his shifts earlier this year while Scheifele lags behind. Seen a bunch of times already Tanev jumping on with Scheifele and 55 playing on for a good chunk. Connor's in the middle between Scheif-Wheeler.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hulide

Howard Chuck

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jan 24, 2012
15,274
19,238
Winnipeg
I'm not sure why I even bother, but:

Anderson-Gretzky-Kurri




Actually I wont even bother...


Even further OT, I always remember an interview with a hockey player years ago talking about being on the ice against Tikkanen. I guess his English wasn't that great at least in the heat of the moment, so he would crap talk you all game long, but everyone mostly laughed it off because they had no idea what he was saying. They would just laugh and tell him **** off because they couldn't understand him.
 

Neuf

Leaving HFBoards for now
Dec 17, 2016
6,217
9,290
Are we going to start a "how do we fix the top line" thread? I would, but it seems just a tad too trollish for me.

Wheeler has been on the ice for 1 5v5 GF this year?
Valid concern, though. Top line has 5 ES goals. Lowry line has 4. Little line has 1. Rosie line has 0 .

Pastranak has 6.
 

Halberdier

Registered User
May 14, 2016
4,467
4,980
Valid concern, though. Top line has 5 ES goals. Lowry line has 4. Little line has 1. Rosie line has 0 .

Pastranak has 6.

Top line has exactly 1 (one) 5-on-5 goal for, 3 against. Little's line has now 2 or 3, haven't checked.

Even if you add that empty-netter to "ES" goals, which it isn't, your numbers don't add up.
 

19GoalsInPlayoffs

Registered User
Jan 30, 2017
129
90
I'm not sure why I even bother, but:

Anderson-Gretzky-Kurri

Actually I wont even bother...
That was the variance I talked about. Of course there are clips where the scoring line is Anderson-Gretzky-Kurri. Or Messier-Gretzky-Kurri, or... whatever.

But those were never the so called permanent lines. The combinations were used when you needed totally overwhelm the opponent. Or happened ”accidentally” when the shifts were somehow mixed. With the aforementioned line you got three 50 goal scorers on the ice at the same time. You used that for example at some moments in the playoffs etc.

There were plenty of different players playing the LW (Lumley Callighen, Semenko, Pouzar, Summanen, Krushelnyski, Hunter,...) Of course Anderson and Messier were at several times playing there also, but were NOT the so called permanent solutions. As they had the 2nd line to run.

And trust me, I know this stuff quite well ;).

Not to make this totally OT, Oilers philosophy was to form lines around the two ”dynamic duos”: Gretzky-Kurri, Messier-Anderson. Tikkanen was the needed ”grinder” when playing with 99 and 17. And the dynamics in that line with ”grinder”, great goal scoring playmaker and defensively minded goal scorer was an ideal one. In my opinion.

That philosophy might work also with todays Jets.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GNP

GNP

Here Comes the Jets -look out hockey world !!!
Oct 11, 2016
9,140
12,769
Winnipeg
That was the variance I talked about. Of course there are clips where the scoring line is Anderson-Gretzky-Kurri. Or Messier-Gretzky-Kurri, or... whatever.

But those were never the so called permanent lines. The combinations were used when you needed totally overwhelm the opponent. Or happened ”accidentally” when the shifts were somehow mixed. With the aforementioned line you got three 50 goal scorers on the ice at the same time. You used that for example at some moments in the playoffs etc.

There were plenty of different players playing the LW (Lumley Callighen, Semenko, Pouzar, Summanen, Krushelnyski, Hunter,...) Of course Anderson and Messier were at several times playing there also, but were NOT the so called permanent solutions. As they had the 2nd line to run.

And trust me, I know this stuff quite well ;).

Not to make this totally OT, Oilers philosophy was to form lines around the two ”dynamic duos”: Gretzky-Kurri, Messier-Anderson. Tikkanen was the needed ”grinder” when playing with 99 and 17. And the dynamics in that line with ”grinder”, great goal scoring playmaker and defensively minded goal scorer was an ideal one. In my opinion.

I totally agree with you post 19 goals. I believe what Jep Jep Joo presented was an abberation used on a power play or something urgent-like a line change etc. I've also read that Sather liked to keep the "high scorers" like Gretzky and Messier on separate lines to increase scoring--it only makes sense, to run them on 2 lines.

That philosophy might work also with todays Jets.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

19GoalsInPlayoffs

Registered User
Jan 30, 2017
129
90
I totally agree with you post 19 goals. I believe what Jep Jep Joo presented was an abberation used on a power play or something urgent-like a line change etc. I've also read that Sather liked to keep the "high scorers" like Gretzky and Messier on separate lines to increase scoring--it only makes sense, to run them on 2 lines.

To get the 5v5 production going with this philosophy I’d try the following combos for the first line:

Perrault-Scheifele-Laine
(2nd: Connor/Ehlers-Little-Wheeler)

Perrault-Scheifele-Ehlers/Connor (or switch the wings)
(2nd: Laine-Little-Wheeler)

And bonus:
Lemieux-Scheifele-Laine
(2nd: Ehlers-Little-Wheeler)
(3rd: Connor-Roslovic-Perrault)
+ an awesome 4th...

One thing is certain, the Jets do have some surplus with the 1st/2nd line caliber wingers...
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->