Is the 2 scoring lines 2 checking lines formula outdated?

[6 Karlsson 5]

i just want 4 lines that outscore the other teams 4 lines (over large samples). I don't care if you label my lines offensive, defensive, 1st, 2nd, 3rd, top 6, top 9, etc; all those labels are irrelevant.

 

[Dr Quincy]

It's not outdated, but it's not the only way to construct a team. In fact, there is no one way to construct a team.

What is outdated is the notion that your team HAS to be build this way. I hate when I see people say "Oh that guy isn't good enough to be a top 6 player, but can't play on the 3rd or 4th line".

I call BS on that. A player either helps a team win or he doesn't. A player who has replacement level defense but better than replacement level offense can help your team on the 4th line as much as a player who has replacement level offense but better than replacement level defense.

 

[Kshahdoo]

This.

The Broadstreet Bullies came along and dominated before the more skilled Habs teams started dominating again.

Likewise the league shifted for a bit to the "heavy" Kings model and speed and skill style game replaced it at the top (Pens) a few years later.

Interestingly, the Caps had this hybrid thing going away where they played this gritty, nasty game while utterly destroying teams with a lethal PP.

Sports are absolutely cyclical as you note. Eventually a team of bullies will be on top again soon replaced by a speed/skill kind of game.

It will only happen, if they make rinks bigger. Otherwise, the league will keep holding big nasty guys back, becuase of concussion protocol and like.

 

[OVrocks]

Nowadays, you need to have 4 lines that can score. I can’t think of any recent team that won the cup without offensive contributions from the bottom 6.

 

[Martin Skoula]

It will only happen, if they make rinks bigger. Otherwise, the league will keep holding big nasty guys back, becuase of concussion protocol and like.

Nasty, maybe, but big heavy guys will be in and out of popularity cyclically.

The current trend depends on how much guys like Raymond/Afinogenov/Wellwood cost. If you can get them for under 3 million (adjusted for inflation), it makes more sense to stack your bottom 6 with guys like them and just outscore the other team's bottom-6. Once teams start catching on and demand for them goes up, their contracts get higher and it tips the scales back to your grittier defensive forwards.

It falls apart when you can get one good gritty defensive guy but have to put 3rd/4th line tweeners on his wings because you spent 4+ mil on him. Same with one good offensive guy stuck with 2 soft AHL scorers.

Obviously ELCs change things, as well as the type of star talent you have on the team. It's easier to fill out the rest of the lineup if you have a versatile Bergeron/Kopitar type leading the way instead of one-dimensional guys like Stamkos where you need to get top penalty killers and defensive matchup guys.

 

[CanadianPensFan1]

I don't think its outdated but it appears that, in the current environment, skill ui and down the line up seems to be winning out.

Now this isn't to say that if a GM built a team with the 2 and 2 formula, that it CANT work. I'm sure it could. Just need the right players.

 

[JTmillerForA1stLOL]

Having 4 lines of scoring two way forwards would probably prove difficult to fit within the cap.

 

[sting101]

A lot of team became bigger/stronger and a few teams gained an advantage by going smaller and quicker. That trend will probably continue until a tipping point in 10/15 years when the league is smaller/quicker on average and a bigger checking team starts throwing their weight around and wrecking the smaller teams.

Sports are cyclical.

It wont take 10-15yrs.

If i missed something didnt the Caps just win with Brooks Orpik, Devante Smith-Pelley and Tom Wilson wrecking people. You need balance and obviously enough top end skill to be able to score.

Having enough size and strength to wear teams down will always be a mode of creating an advantage. So can a vastly superior goaltender. So can having a big speed advantage or like Vegas a intensity and work rate second to none.

As far as the OP's question. Gone are the days of a knuckle dragging 4th line and that's been for a long time already. I mean long enough that the Red Wings with Draper Maltby and McCarty were playing effectively. So 90's

Typically it's a top scoring line that gets the bulk of the Offensive zone starts. In a perfect world you also have a line that takes the bulk of the defensive zone starts and then its a couple lines with a decent balance that can find success at 5v5 without being sheltered and have enough versatility to provide secondary scoring as well as responsible defensive play

It really depends on the type of depth the team has and who is best suited for that defensive zone starts role.

Scoring 1 - Scoring 2 - Checking - Energy line .....is how i see it with typically Scoring 1 getting top minutes followed by the checking line and Scoring 2 basically in the same ballpark depending on personell and the Energy line getting the least minutes and responsibility.

 

[Hennessy]

I think any coach would want as many threats as possible. Make match-ups impossible. That said, it isn't as easy as just filling all 4 lines with scoring forwards. You seem to be under the impression that a scoring line is just scoring. A lot of speed and skill. Fact is, most of those lines in the league feature at least one skater out of that mold who not only enables his linemates, but also benefits from their speed. Some grit on that line.
But it is not just a 2+1 thing. You want to have a 4th line that can give your scoring a rest and to shut down the other teams' lines. You might have 4 scoring lines, but can they defend against the other teams' top line? Probably not.
A few Cup teams have had incredible lines up and down. Balanced and dangerous. It is why they won the Cup. But that is as much a degree of luck as it is planning. And it was also easier with no cap.