So you're basically saying that we need a "trigger" like MPS to replace Hemsky on the 2nd line? All the while moving Hemsky to a line where HE can be the "trigger", instead of utilizing his elite passing skills on the line with Yakupov, who is pretty much the proven "trigger" already. OK, if you say so. Also, you're suggesting placing Hemsky on the Oilers checking line, the line that will be attempting to shut down other team's top lines. Yeah, I can see his scoring opportunities flourishing right now.
The Oilers have to use Hemsky's skill set to full advantage...that being the setup guy for someone who can score goals, like Yakupov.
Thank you for the chance to clarify what I meant.No,I am saying that We need both Yakupov and Gagner to be triggermen on the 2nd line,and if we put Hemsky there his dominating o-zone entry ability which is elite in the NHL will make those two players unable to present a double-headed pure scoring threat.Hemsky needs the puck all the time in a possesion scenario to be so effective and this means he will constntly be owning the disc and looping into the zone to hit a trailer coming in.
We dont need a copper and blue streak that gets so deep in the o-zone all alone with no support who refuses or cant by proxy of his moves shoot the puck on the way in.This converts to much of our puck possesion time into Hemsky possesion time and forces his linemates to be pylons who can take and hold real estate in the middle or in front of the net as they wait for his behind the net passes to squirt out.
We dont really need Hemskys o-zone entry as bad as we used to ,we have skilled players like Yakupov,Gagner and MPS who can gain the zone themselves with much better puck distribution.We already know Hemsky is elite at breaking in down the wall---but so what,if you break into the o-zone on a rush and only get a rushing shot off 10% of the time and then only convert on a from behind the net pass 10% of the time which forces your linemates to be absolutely predictable when they are smallish skilled players instead of beefy netront guys you are in a way wasting those possesions .If the o-zone is gained in a controlled transition --it can be high or low speed-it allows us to bring our support men in as upspeed players and we can involve then in the play immediatly--this gives us control of momentum and most importantly a superior shot at recovering the rebound for a second shot.
I am saying that I think MPS can offer us the right combo of size and speed and o-zone entry versatility ,he can mix it up with his entry tactics more than Hemsky.
When NHL defenses see Hemmer coming down the wing they all immediatly know what to do because he challenges them with pure speed,he forces them into a one on one battle where he wins more than he loses.He may gain the zone more than not but by the time he does defences have reacted and adjusted and hemmer linemates are just getting into the o-zone behind him at the same time,this forces his linemates to be working in a congested and very dangerous area in the middle and in front of the net,most dangerous because with hemmers consistant timeing the d-men arent quite set as he makes his passes meaning they still have some momentum on their side which they can convert to serious hits on our forwards trying to position to recieve a cup Hemskys purple kool-aid.
We do not have the big brutes to put with hemmer that can take the middle or hold the front of the net,and hemmers style was developed when we did have a few guys like that and anyone smaller lived and died by Hemmers timing and one pass.We need to plan for shots that leave rebounds and for that rebound recovery to take place that will give us second and sometimes third shot opportunitys.This means we want our people to have time to come in in supportive roles at the proper time to do this job.If hemmer was a shooter the dynamic wouldnt be like this but if Hemmer was a shootier and stayed in the lanes on his way in he would not gain the o-zone nearly so many times successfully .Hemsky sacrifices shooting lanes and opportunitys off the rush so he can make a high percentage zone entry,this only works for us is we have the types of players with him that can dominate the middle as they come in behind him or they can hold the front of the net waiting as he dipsy doodles and wastes time.For past references Wayne Gretzky who specialised playing from behind the net where hemmer lives,did not rush the puck the entire length of the ice to get to behind the net to make a pass back out,he worked his way into that spot by making shots and showing offensive threats all over the place until he could slip behind there ,often in puck pursuit recovering a rebound from a shot.
I am not in any way saying that if we pitted MPS and hemmer head to head in a skills contest that Hemmer would lose although I would take you up on the bet to illustrate just how much closer they are in all offensive areas then you think,simply because when we are done with offense and MPS is right behind Hemmer I will take note as we turn to look at defense and MPSs overall package surpasses Hemmers in on-ice allround value to our 2nd line.
Who says the 3rd line needs to be focused primarily on shutting down anyone???Our 3rd line should be as offensively catalysed as our 1st and 2nd lines are as should be our 4th line,we are an OFFENSIVE team,a dynamic offensive team,we are not a split-personality anymore we have made a Mission statement towards offense and we need to stop thinking off of our back foot.Less skilled and system committed players are always defending when they face superior skill and system committment on the ice no matter what line they are on.Hemsky makes the 3rd line an offensive line because his special skill can do that for us.Hemmer speed is NHL elite,so he matches up against or dominates even 1st line opposition with regularity.
Hemskys speed makes him a threat from everywhere every minute he is on the ice,his speed is elite and his ability to use it is renowned.He will score his type of goals from any line with any number of minutes,I think we are at the heart of the matter now--we dont need Hemmer to score those types of goals from the second line anymore--his style eats up to much possesion time with to little return---we dont need Hemmers passing skills we need his scoring skills--and the team cant hide his weaknesses anymore,our depth and talent level is exposing those weaknesses.Hemmer needs to score simply because this team doesnt need a designated disher who is catalysed by puck possesion --we need possesion by committe-- as we arent built from the ground up to play that traditional style,we do not and will not have the slow huge beasts that we need in the middle and front of the net to support Hemmers passes --it is what it is.We are manned up to play a possesion/transition game ,but this type of style incorporates many tactics none of which are this level of individual puck possesion by one player that results in no or a late shot.We need controlled transitions that allow us to use ALL of the skill we now have,the days of the Oilers being a one trick pony are over,but it seems our Ponies like Hemmer and Whitney and Smyth and Horcs our fastbreak days holdovers are not going into the night quietly.They will go or we will not be a winning team--our old methods were flawed more than our personell was the entire time.And the development of so many one dimensional players over so many years supports this statement.
Once this team suffers the same illness we experienced last year when we spiralled due to reverting back to this old Oilers methodology--only after an appropriate number of losses will we REVISIT this same argument again and only then will these adjustments I am mentioning be made,under DURESS and in a reactive manner as opposed to a pro-active manner.One way or another this team will need to better utilise its assets across the board or we will not find the wins we need.I dont make the assumption our players of the past were just not skilled enough,I feel the system was flawed for over ten years,our recent influx of skill and talent is wondeful but if we gravitate back to that one dimensional fastbreak style we are doomed to meiocrity talent and skill or not,Winning teams win with a winning system,not with loads of skill that is mismanaged.I dont want to put the horse before th cart here,we havent seen what Ralph has planned yet,until we actually see the system he will use we are working in the dark and basing all our analysis off of last years realitys and this years hopes,we need something more concrete like a ten game report before we can gain much from our guesses here.