Line Combos: Is there a logical reason...

[billybudd]

Show me where I said stick 3 players who play the game exactly the same way together and make a line. I'm not sure if you are intentionally being obtuse or not but your arguments are really weird.

Give me a break. What they need are good hockey players to play with them. There isn't one formula to make a line work.

Why does putting Bennett with Crosby automatically mean that Bennett controls the line and Sid hides in the corner? I really can't tell if you are being serious?

Bennett doesn't have to be a sniper to play well with Sid. Sid may be an elite passer, but he's also an elite goal scorer. Why can't Bennett set up Sid?

I don't know anything about video game hockey and its categories, but, despite what you seem to believe, players do have roles on their line, and this is putting Bennett in Sid's.

 

[billybudd]

THERE ARE NOT 3 STATIC ROLES ON A LINE. How hard is this to understand?

It's impossible to understand because there are specific roles on just about every line (though static is always the wrong word in hockey).

 

[Shady Machine]

What I was saying is just because Bennett replaces Dupuis, doesn't mean he has to play the way Dupuis plays for the line to be successful. Maybe it means Kunitz' role changes to something closer to what he had on Malkin's line. All I know is that Bennett has assets that will help a Crosby line. You obviously think Crosby only plays well with this set formula. I think you are wrong.

I think we will just have to agree to disagree and move on.

 

[mpp9]

I'm reading this as Sid can't play with a forward with playmaking qualities. Even if said forward plays a 200 ft game and goes to the net and wins battles along the wall.

 

[IcedCapp]

Sid can only play with a winger whose first option is to enter the zone and immediately fire an 80-ft slap shot that goes high-and-wide, rings around the boards, and ends any chance at zone time before it starts.

All while being in a 2-on-1 situation.

 

[Ugene Magic]

What I was saying is just because Bennett replaces Dupuis, doesn't mean he has to play the way Dupuis plays for the line to be successful. Maybe it means Kunitz' role changes to something closer to what he had on Malkin's line. All I know is that Bennett has assets that will help a Crosby line. You obviously think Crosby only plays well with this set formula. I think you are wrong.

I think we will just have to agree to disagree and move on.

The biggest reason for Dupuis on Sids line is for security to allow both Kunitz and Crosby persue the puck while Dupuis plays the role of the F-3. Now not each offensive zone entry works out that way, but that's Dupuis's role. The defensive side of the puck.


Who's the F-3 for Kunitz, Crosby, Bennett?

The way everyone is talking it's certainly not Bennett. Someone has to be it. Kunitz is supposed to be retreiving the puck, and that leaves Sid doing it. Needless to say, not a lot of you will like Bennett playing the F-3 role. Kunitz and Sid won't be playing it for more than covering when pinches are made.

 

[billybudd]

I'm reading this as Sid can't play with a forward with playmaking qualities. Even if said forward plays a 200 ft game and goes to the net and wins battles along the wall.

Bennett doesn't score from the paint reliably. Hasn't on any level.

Edit: except possibly the BCHL, which is like scoring in Mens league.

Edit #2: I'm not saying that Sid can't play with a guy who can pass. I'm saying he can't play with a guy who can pass but can't score.

Edit #3: And I'm aware that Dupuis isn't much of a scorer. He's still put up better goal scoring numbers than Bennett at every level. Swapping one for the other is a lateral move at best, so why do it?

 

[Shady Machine]

The biggest reason for Dupuis on Sids line is for security to allow both Kunitz and Crosby persue the puck while Dupuis plays the role of the F-3. Now not each offensive zone entry works out that way, but that's Dupuis's role. The defensive side of the puck.


Who's the F-3 for Kunitz, Crosby, Bennett?

The way everyone is talking it's certainly not Bennett. Someone has to be it. Kunitz is supposed to be retreiving the puck, and that leaves Sid doing it. Needless to say, not a lot of you will like Bennett playing the F-3 role. Kunitz and Sid won't be playing it for more than covering when pinches are made.

Who was the F3 in the KMN line? After all, Kunitz was the puck retriever. I'm just tired of these weird excuses to keep the KCD line together. What's the harm in trying something different?

Also, if there's one thing Bennett has shown, it's that he is responsible at both ends of the ice. Let Kunitz and Crosby play the fast breaks and Bennett is the F3 in those situations. It's not that complicated.

 

[mpp9]

Bennett doesn't score from the paint reliably. Hasn't on any level.

Edit: except possibly the BCHL, which is like scoring in Mens league.

So Sid, a former 50 goal guy, and Kunitz, one of the highest scoring forwards in 2013, couldn't possibly benefit from someone whose game is based around hockey sense and deft playmaking.

That line needs a playmaking element more than it needs Dupuis.

 

[Shady Machine]

Bennett doesn't score from the paint reliably. Hasn't on any level.

Edit: except possibly the BCHL, which is like scoring in Mens league.

Edit #2: I'm not saying that Sid can't play with a guy who can pass. I'm saying he can't play with a guy who can pass but can't score.

Edit #3: And I'm aware that Dupuis isn't much of a scorer. He's still put up better goal scoring numbers than Bennett at every level.

Just curious, what is your opinion of Bennett and his role on the team? I think that's where the disconnect is here.

 

[Waffle Fries]

There has not been a single strong argument in this thread as to why Bennett shouldn't play with Sid. Not a single one.

 

[mpp9]

The biggest reason for Dupuis on Sids line is for security to allow both Kunitz and Crosby persue the puck while Dupuis plays the role of the F-3. Now not each offensive zone entry works out that way, but that's Dupuis's role. The defensive side of the puck.


Who's the F-3 for Kunitz, Crosby, Bennett?

The way everyone is talking it's certainly not Bennett. Someone has to be it. Kunitz is supposed to be retreiving the puck, and that leaves Sid doing it. Needless to say, not a lot of you will like Bennett playing the F-3 role. Kunitz and Sid won't be playing it for more than covering when pinches are made.

Aside from the fact the F-3 is all situational, Bennett has earned his NHL ice time b/c he's well beyond his years in terms of defensive play. So yeah, I don't have a problem if he's up high. He's got hockey sense galore to play that position well.

Again, what Dupuis does with hustle, Bennett can do with positioning, hockey sense and god given talent.

 

[Ally22]

So Sid, a former 50 goal guy, and Kunitz, one of the highest scoring forwards in 2013, couldn't possibly benefit from someone whose game is based around hockey sense and deft playmaking.

That line needs a playmaking element more than it needs Dupuis.

100% this. Also maybe someone who can receive passes/doesn't let chances die on their stick I also think a Dupuis on the 3rd line is way more valuable to this team than a Dupuis on the 1st.

 

[mpp9]

Bennett doesn't score from the paint reliably. Hasn't on any level.

Edit: except possibly the BCHL, which is like scoring in Mens league.

Edit #2: I'm not saying that Sid can't play with a guy who can pass. I'm saying he can't play with a guy who can pass but can't score.

Edit #3: And I'm aware that Dupuis isn't much of a scorer. He's still put up better goal scoring numbers than Bennett at every level. Swapping one for the other is a lateral move at best, so why do it?

Dupes as 2 goals on the season. Not exactly a great argument for not putting Beau on Sid's line.

 

[billybudd]

So Sid, a former 50 goal guy, and Kunitz, one of the highest scoring forwards in 2013, couldn't possibly benefit from someone whose game is based around hockey sense and deft playmaking.

That line needs a playmaking element more than it needs Dupuis.

It does? The line has the sport's best passer on it.

 

[billybudd]

Aside from the fact the F-3 is all situational, Bennett has earned his NHL ice time b/c of he's well beyond his years in terms of defensive play. So yeah, I don't have a problem if he's up high. He's got hockey sense galore to play that position well.

Again, what Dupuis does with hustle, Bennett can do with positioning, hockey sense and god given talent.

So I'll ask again, how is putting Bennett in Dupuis role anything other than a lateral move?

 

[Waffle Fries]

It does? The line has the sport's best passer on it.

Yes, it does. The line may have the sport's best passer on it, but he's also the only one on the line who can actually make a pass.

 

[Shady Machine]

It does? The line has the sport's best passer on it.

Again, you aren't getting it. There isn't some rule that says "Each line shalt only have one playmaker, one goal scorer, and one grinder".

 

[IcedCapp]

that line needs a finisher more than it needs a play-maker.

It needs a play-maker more than it needs a grinder who is neither a play-maker nor a finisher.

 

[Shady Machine]

So I'll ask again, how is putting Bennett in Dupuis role anything other than a lateral move?

Because Bennett has better offensive instincts and upside than Dupuis. Also, Dupuis produces fairly consistently regardless of what line he is on (last year's crazy offensive production being the outlier). So Dupuis' production will likely hover around 40-50 points with Sutter while Bennett's will increase substantially. So there's a net gain there. Plus, it makes the team deeper.

And if it doesn't work, as you predict, we can just move it back.

 

[billybudd]

Just curious, what is your opinion of Bennett and his role on the team? I think that's where the disconnect is here.

He's a playmaking two way wing. As to where he fits?

With Malkin and Jokinen, he's got a natural fit. Jokinen isn't about to retrieve pucks and Geno probably shouldn't be doing that alone. Malkin is also not in any sort of rational location in the offensive zone, so it requires a guy with good vision to get the puck back to him (with Sid, you can just fire it in his general direction along the boards and he'll get possession).

I'd try him with Malkin and Neal, when Neal gets back, put Malkin a bit higher in the hopes that his long range threat comes back, but I can't say if that would work or not.

Last option would be to put him next to Sutter and see if he can coax any secondary scoring out of that line, while backfilling some of Cooke's lost reliable two-way play.

 

[Waffle Fries]

Last option would be to put him next to Sutter and see if he can coax any secondary scoring out of that line, while backfilling some of Cooke's lost reliable two-way play.

You know who could coax some secondary scoring while backfilling some of Cooke's lost reliable two-way play? Pascal Dupuis.

That is literally the exact role he should be filling on this team.

 

[Shady Machine]

So why should Geno be retrieving pucks and not Sid? I just think there is a lot of inconsistency in your thinking here. That said, I think Bennett would work well with Geno and Neal. Long term though, I'd prefer him with Crosby, unless Megnatron is the real deal then I'm fine with him there instead.

 

[billybudd]

Because Bennett has better offensive instincts and upside than Dupuis. Also, Dupuis produces fairly consistently regardless of what line he is on (last year's crazy offensive production being the outlier). So Dupuis' production will likely hover around 40-50 points with Sutter while Bennett's will increase substantially. So there's a net gain there. Plus, it makes the team deeper.

And if it doesn't work, as you predict, we can just move it back.

Let's put something in perspective--Bennett shoots at about 8% in his career. He generates about a shot per game, even when he's playing with a guy as great at finding you as Malkin. Dupuis generates 2 shots per game without Sid, more with.

For him to match Dupuis goal production, he'd need to shoot at about 20-25% on an 82 game season (edit: or more than double the number of shots he takes). That's not happening. And if it does happen, it's not happening twice.

 

[billybudd]

You know who could coax some secondary scoring while backfilling some of Cooke's lost reliable two-way play? Pascal Dupuis.

That is literally the exact role he should be filling on this team.

But why? You want to move a guy out of his role on the first line to put another guy to do the same thing, but score less often. This makes no sense.