Marchand - Crosby - Bergeron VS Huberdeau - McDavid - Mackinnon

[psycat]

Line 2 has the 2 best players.

That is true but I think the line would be worse in actual games and we know line 1 got great chemistry.

 

[Gurglesons]

I took them but not quite easily as the 2nd line easily could be as good or better starting right now.

But I went with the proven more versatile commodity here.

I think the big stipulation is playoffs / Olympics for me. Marchand, Crosby and Bergeron are all players that thrive in that environment.

 

[Peiskos]

Marchand-Crosby-Bergeron has been completely unstoppable for Canada for years now.

But Huberdeau-McDavid-MacKinnon has the potential to be just the same. Thankfully we don't really have to choose and these would be the interchangebale #1 and #2 lines respectively for Canada.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Proven>unproven is the real dealbreaker for me here.

The 2nd line obviously has the better players right now, but we've seen the 1st line dominate at the international level. Not to mention that all 3 of those guys are still elite players today

 

[wetcoast]

I think the big stipulation is playoffs / Olympics for me. Marchand, Crosby and Bergeron are all players that thrive in that environment.

Fair enough but it’s not like the second group underperformed in the playoffs compared to the first group.

 

[Gurglesons]

Fair enough but it’s not like the second group underperformed in the playoffs compared to the first group.

the 1st line has like 9 combined Olympic and world championship golds and 4 cups. Largely coming from all players playing a top six role.

 

[wetcoast]

the 1st line has like 9 combined Olympic and world championship golds and 4 cups. Largely coming from all players playing a top six role.

Sure but I took the Op to mean for like right now or going into next season where it’s an open question although I would take the first group.

 

[Lebowski]

I don't think there's a single theoretical line I'd take ahead of Marchand-Crosby-Bergeron as of right now.

They can do everything exceptionally well an they just click together.

 

[Gurglesons]

Sure but I took the Op to mean for like right now or going into next season where it’s an open question although I would take the first group.

I mean, even going into next year I was more impressed by Sid’s playoffs than anyone on L2’s but MacKs.

 

[wetcoast]

I mean, even going into next year I was more impressed by Sid’s playoffs than anyone on L2’s but MacKs.

Fair enough but Mack had the best playoffs of the 6 players listed and McDavid still is the best player in the world with something to prove.

He still drove play and the Jets got a bit lucky with a hot goalie that series.

Well as lucky as a team can get in winning a sweep.

 

[nowhereman]

Call me crazy but I could actually see line 1 win in a head-to-head match-up and shut down line 2, especially if we're talking about playing meaningful games. Line 1 all play such incredibly intelligent, positive impact hockey.

 

[Luigi Lemieux]

Line 2 has more prime level talent but line 1 might be the most perfect line I've ever seen. Perfect balance of elite offense, elite defense, physicality, goal scoring ability, and hockey iq.

 

[Cursed Lemon]

1) Chemistry is almost more important than talent in pro hockey. Marchand-Bergeron-Crosby clearly have that while also happening to be some of the best players in the game.

2) I'd just like everyone to pump their brakes a touch in that Marchand-Bergeron-Crosby has had all of one showcase in a very stupidly-organized tournament. I'd like to see them repeat the same success in the Olympics next year (COUGH COUGH NHL), though I have no reason to believe they won't be successful.

 

[PettersonHughes]

As skilled as the likes of McDavid, Mackinnon and Huberdeau are, I wonder if their speed and individual brilliance might be limited by a team defense (e.g. when the Jets shut down the Oilers they had a defensive zone set up such that they could limit McDavid's touches, and so they might need to take turns attacking with their skating or speed while being kept to the outside).

It's tough to beat a Selke winner, along with a gritty winger who can do pretty much everything, and Sid who's probably underrated defensively too.

 

[b in vancouver]

Line 2 has more prime level talent but line 1 might be the most perfect line I've ever seen. Perfect balance of elite offense, elite defense, physicality, goal scoring ability, and hockey iq.

Crazy to think it was 2004 that we saw Bergeron and Crosby dominate the most star-studded WJC ever. Wow.
As hockey fans I feel like we missed out not seeing these guys play together more. Despite being a Bruins fan it would've been pretty incredible if Crosby, Bergeron and Marchand all signed in Calgary or Nashville or Minnesota or something a half dozen years ago just so we could watch them together for a full season. Then they could go back to the Pens and Bruins.

I take Line 1 for the next year or so. Might be the best line I've seen. As good as line 2 is... they just won't get the puck or be able to use their speed. Line 1 circles like sharks.

 

[Connor McConnor]

As a non-Canadian I'm not looking forward to finding out

Don't worry our 3rd line is probably just Barzal - Point - Stone :S

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

Don't worry our 3rd line is probably just Barzal - Point - Stone :S

going to be fun seeing the insane CAN forward depth vs the insane US defense depth

Jones, McAvoy, Fox, Slavin, Carlson, Werenski, McDonagh, Krug...and Hellebucyk in net

 

[Sweetpotato]

I'd personally rather see Canada go...

Stamkos-McDavid-Stone
Huberdeau-Mackinnon-Point
Marchand-Crosby-Bergeron

But as for the question I'll take the young guns, but just based on chemistry I wouldn't fault anyone for taking the other line.

 

[letsgrowcactus]

This is a fun question. Do they get a few games in before to get ready?

It's really close for me. The first line is already amazing, has proven chemistry plus ton of experience; maybe even more of a "playoff build"...? OTOH, the second line is much younger with even more skill.

Am I a fan or a coach/GM who needs to win?

As a coach, I probably stick with the safer option in line 1. As a fan who just wants to watch hockey, I go with line 2 for the potential of watching something unreal.