Naslund/Thornton/Iginla vs. Marchand/Bergeron/Kane

[CanadienShark]

Pretty easily Thornton line.

 

[CanadienShark]

The issue would be that Kane isn't someone that finds soft spots. He is someone that wants the puck. I think Bergeron and Marchand would actually be a deterrent.

I half disagree. He's excellent at finding soft spots. He's also a player that demands the puck. He's very versatile offensively.

 

[LokiDog]

I’ll take the first group, but people overrate pure offensive output. When I look at these two lines, it’s hard not to at least feel there’s a chance the Bergeron line could beat the Thornton line in a game of 3 on 3, or as top line vs top line in a best of 7 series. Again, I’ll still take the first group, but it’s narrower than it seems.

 

[Trap Jesus]

You said heavy lifting. That isn't the same thing as defense...

What do you define heavy lifting as

 

[rotiman187]

1st choice rather easily. No doubt Kane is the most clutch player out of the bunch.

 

[Northern Avs Fan]

People never seem to value line dynamics. Just because players have a reputation of being great doesn't mean their games will necessarily fit together. If you put MacKinnon and Ovechkin on a line, they aren't going to both lead the league in shot attempts still. There's a tradeoff with different roles that players take.

Thornton-Iginla is a natural fit with a playmaker/goal-scorer combo but who's doing the heavy lifting on that line? Marchand and Kane are both adept as elite playmakers and goal-scorers and are incredible in transition and puck carrying in the O-zone, and then Bergeron does all the heavy-lifting. We've already seen Kane and Marchand adapt depending on who their winger is as goal-scorers or playmakers. We've seen similar dynamics for both with Marchand-Bergeron-Pastrnak and Panarin-Anisimov-Kane. You also have built-in chemistry already.

Prime Iginla did plenty of heavy lifting. Dude was a beast.

Both lines mesh well, but line one is crazy good.

Thornton and Iginla is a match made in heaven and Naslund would be an excellent compliment.

 

[Trap Jesus]

Prime Iginla did plenty of heavy lifting. Dude was a beast.

Both lines mesh well, but line one is crazy good.

Thornton and Iginla is a match made in heaven and Naslund would be an excellent compliment.

What are you defining heavy lifting as? I think of it as doing all the little things that put your team in a position to score. Most of that is defense. Thinking that Iginla does that better than Bergeron is absurd, none of these players tilt the ice like he does.

 

[Northern Avs Fan]

What are you defining heavy lifting as? I think of it as doing all the little things that put your team in a position to score. Most of that is defense. Thinking that Iginla does that better than Bergeron is absurd, none of these players tilt the ice like he does.

Oh, sorry, I think maybe we were looking at it in a different way.

I thought you meant more winning puck battles, finishing on the forecheck, and digging pucks out of the corner, that kind of thing.

I agree that Bergeron offers a lot outside of his offensive ability.

 

[Regal]

People never seem to value line dynamics. Just because players have a reputation of being great doesn't mean their games will necessarily fit together. If you put MacKinnon and Ovechkin on a line, they aren't going to both lead the league in shot attempts still. There's a tradeoff with different roles that players take.

Thornton-Iginla is a natural fit with a playmaker/goal-scorer combo but who's doing the heavy lifting on that line? Marchand and Kane are both adept as elite playmakers and goal-scorers and are incredible in transition and puck carrying in the O-zone, and then Bergeron does all the heavy-lifting. We've already seen Kane and Marchand adapt depending on who their winger is as goal-scorers or playmakers. We've seen similar dynamics for both with Marchand-Bergeron-Pastrnak and Panarin-Anisimov-Kane. You also have built-in chemistry already.

Both of them. Particularly Iginla if it's before he turned 30. Just because they're star scorers doesn't mean they both didn't do a lot to gain and maintain possession. They might not be as good at those things as Bergeron, but they don't need to be. Both Iginla and Thornton had similar effects on possession in their peaks and provided more offense. Lots of lines work just fine without a Bergeron type. It's not like we're talking about Kessel type offensive players.

 

[Merrrlin]

Are they going head to head?

If head to head, I will take Bergeron's line.

 

[Trap Jesus]

Another argument for Bergeron from an individual impact level is that (realistically) only Mikko Koivu is more effective at winning one-on-one battles.

"Puck Battle Wins are awarded to the player recovering a loose puck when there is at least one opposing player with a realistic opportunity of recovering it. This can mean there is a battle between two or more opponents prior to or at the time the puck is recovered and this can involve physical contact or stick on stick battles as well."

For this bracket, it features the top 17 players in each division for puck battle win %, with the exception being that there had to be at least 1 participant from each team. The seeding is just a reflection of point production rates, whereas each match-up win is determined solely by which forward wins a greater % of their puck battles.

For Selke candidates, you can objectively say that Bergeron is more effective than:

Couturier (who is objectively the best from the Metro)
Danault (who is a bit inconclusive for his ranking as he lost to Bergeron relatively early, and is better than Huberdeau, Tierney and Paquette)
Cirelli (didn't have a high enough win rate to qualify for this bracket)

And unless you think players like Jankowski and Jarnkrok have better rates than every forward in the Eastern Conference, you can safely assume is better than:

Stone (lost to Jankowski, who lost to Henrique, who lost to Kopitar, who lost to Hertl, who lost to Koivu)
O'Reilly (lost to Jarnkrok, who lost to Lowry, who lost to Koivu)

All these metrics are bearing out how dominant he is at the defensive facets of the game.

Oh, sorry, I think maybe we were looking at it in a different way.

I thought you meant more winning puck battles, finishing on the forecheck, and digging pucks out of the corner, that kind of thing.

I agree that Bergeron offers a lot outside of his offensive ability.

That's part of it as well. We have metrics now that show Bergeron won puck battles at a rate higher than every forward except Mikko Koivu this year. Any kind of unheralded aspect of the game that the other star players don't typically engage in is exactly what Bergeron is known for doing.

 

[Trap Jesus]

Both of them. Particularly Iginla if it's before he turned 30. Just because they're star scorers doesn't mean they both didn't do a lot to gain and maintain possession. They might not be as good at those things as Bergeron, but they don't need to be. Both Iginla and Thornton had similar effects on possession in their peaks and provided more offense. Lots of lines work just fine without a Bergeron type. It's not like we're talking about Kessel type offensive players.

They aren't nearly as effective as Bergeron is with these things. This isn't a matter of "oh yeah they can do these things too" it's a matter of Bergeron doing it better than anyone. If you combine that with Kane and Marchand making high risk plays offensively together, that's a match made in heaven.

 

[Northern Avs Fan]

That's part of it as well. We have metrics now that show Bergeron won puck battles at a rate higher than every forward except Mikko Koivu this year. Any kind of unheralded aspect of the game that the other star players don't typically engage in is exactly what Bergeron is known for doing.

I’m not saying he doesn’t, but everything I mentioned was something Iginla did really effectively for the first 7/8 years of his career.

 

[Regal]

They aren't nearly as effective as Bergeron is with these things. This isn't a matter of "oh yeah they can do these things too" it's a matter of Bergeron doing it better than anyone. If you combine that with Kane and Marchand making high risk plays offensively together, that's a match made in heaven.

Are you suggesting that the best line will always be Bergeron between two offensive players then? Seems a bit much. I think you're overrating how much lose puck recoveries and defensive plays are needed to make a line successful. The underlying numbers for Thornton and Iginla suggest they drive play equally well, with more of a tilt to offense than Bergeron. The line wouldn't be as good defensively, but would be much better offensively. I understand the idea that you can't just put all offensive-only players on one line and expect them to succeed, but this isn't the case here. It really is as simple as "they can do those things too", because they don't need to be done to the extent that Bergeron does them as long as they're done enough that the line stays mostly in the offensive zone. Which is another point that is being left out here. Marchand and Kane are excellent in transition, but are more north-south players than Thornton or Iginla, who would spend more time cycling in the zone. That style of play alone means that there's less need for someone like Bergeron making possession-changing plays, because they're giving up possession less. I mean, the 2nd line would be better if Crosby replaced Bergeron as well, for the sane reasons. He wouldn't do as much as Bergeron defensively or in terms of loose luck recoveries, etc, but he does those things enough to drive possession on the line and his much better offense would make the line better overall. It's the same thinking with Thornton and Iginla.

 

[Trap Jesus]

Are you suggesting that the best line with always be Bergeron between two offensive players then? Seems a bit much. I think you're overrating how much lose puck recoveries and defensive plays are needed to make a line successful. The underlying numbers for Thornton and Iginla suggest they drive play equally well, with more of a tilt to offense than Bergeron. The line wouldn't be as agood defensively, but would be much better offensively. I understand the idea that you can't just put all offensive-only players on one line and expect them to succeed, but this isn't the case here. It really is as simple as "they can do those things too", because they don't need to be done to the extent that Bergeron does them as long as they're done enough that the line stays mostly in the offensive zone. Which is another point that is being left out here. Marchand and Kane are excellent in transition, but are more north-south players than Thornton or Iginla, who would spend more time cycling in the zone. That style of play alone means that there's less need for someone like Bergeron making possession-changing plays, because they're giving up possession less.

No it depends who the players are, but the best defensive center of all time between two singularly focused offensive players is huge, especially considering that he has a knack for getting open in the Ozone and burying his chances. How is there evidence of them driving play as much as Bergeron does? You can look at the possession stats, nobody has driven play as regularly as Bergeron does since the stat was recorded. How do you think players get the opportunity to play in the offensive zone? You need effective defense and transition in order to play in the Ozone more. The 2nd line here has every single area of the game covered to an elite level.

It's not like Marchand and Kane don't give up possession, that's where Bergeron's retrieval would come in handy. Beating players one on one doesn't work all the time.

Marchand and Kane are players that can carry the puck on their own beating players one on one or rely on quick passing, they're very versatile in that regard. In terms of puck protection in the cycle game, that's something Marchand is awesome at with quick turns and his lower center of gravity. You don't have to be 6'4 to protect the puck in the cycle game.

 

[Bluesguru]

Iginla is the deciding factor for me.

 

[Regal]

No it depends who the players are, but the best defensive center of all time between two singularly focused offensive players is huge, especially considering that he has a knack for getting open in the Ozone and burying his chances. How is there evidence of them driving play as much as Bergeron does? You can look at the possession stats, nobody has driven play as regularly as Bergeron does since the stat was recorded. How do you think players get the opportunity to play in the offensive zone? You need effective defense and transition in order to play in the Ozone more. The 2nd line here has every single area of the game covered to an elite level.

It's not like Marchand and Kane don't give up possession, that's where Bergeron's retrieval would come in handy. Beating players one on one doesn't work all the time.

Marchand and Kane are players that can carry the puck on their own beating players one on one or rely on quick passing, they're very versatile in that regard. In terms of puck protection in the cycle game, that's something Marchand is awesome at with quick turns and his lower center of gravity. You don't have to be 6'4 to protect the puck in the cycle game.

Well don't have possession stats for Thornton's Hart or Iginla's Art Ross, but if we just look at 07-08, Thornton had a 57.4% CF% (6.7 rel), a 62% xGF% (7.1 rel), a 65.4% xHDCF% (11.9 rel), and a 66.3% GF% (28.6 rel), and Iginla had a 56.4% CF% (6.3 rel), a 57.4% xGF% (7.6 rel), a 58.2% HDCF% (9.0 rel), and a 62.5% GF% (18.3 rel). They also had RAPM charts that looked like this:


Thornton's possession stats are also among the best in the league since being recorded (since 07-08, Thornton has a 56.9% CF% to Bergeron's 59.0%, and a 55.8 xGF% to 57.7% and that's not including Thornton's peak). Iginla stopped being a possession beast the rest of his career as he got older but was obviously great before that simply by the eye test. Their numbers might not be quite at Bergeron's level, but the difference isn't large. Neither player had any trouble getting the puck into the offensive zone and keeping it there, and they didn't need a Bergeron type to do it.

And the fact that Marchand and Kane are trying to beat players and giving up the puck is kind of my point. Thornton, Iginla and Naslund aren't playing the same style of risky puck possession and therefore don't need someone saving their butts to the same degree. And I know Marchand is good on the cycle game as well, but we're talking about in comparison to Thornton here. I agree that the 2nd line is more versatile in terms of being elite at more facets of the game, but that doesn't always make the better line. Again, it's not as if the 1st line is a bunch of Phil Kessel types. They can do the heavy lifting just fine, while bringing superior offensive ability.

 

[Flames Fanatic]

I have a ton of respect for pretty much every player of the six, but in prime peak? Hard to beat the Thornton line. Head to head maybe changes my mind for the two way play of Marchand/Bergeron.

For the record, I too took heavy lifting as winning the puck battles and whatnot lol.

 

[MrOT]

For peak:
1.Thornton
2.Iginla
3.Kane/Näslund
4.Marchand/Bergeron

Line 1 easily

 

[ahmon]

overall, line 1 has the better players.

But line 2 has proven chemistry. Marchand Bergeron dominates possession. If I'm actually trying to win a game I take line 2.

 

[ESH]

People never seem to value line dynamics. Just because players have a reputation of being great doesn't mean their games will necessarily fit together. If you put MacKinnon and Ovechkin on a line, they aren't going to both lead the league in shot attempts still. There's a tradeoff with different roles that players take.

Thornton-Iginla is a natural fit with a playmaker/goal-scorer combo but who's doing the heavy lifting on that line? Marchand and Kane are both adept as elite playmakers and goal-scorers and are incredible in transition and puck carrying in the O-zone, and then Bergeron does all the heavy-lifting. We've already seen Kane and Marchand adapt depending on who their winger is as goal-scorers or playmakers. We've seen similar dynamics for both with Marchand-Bergeron-Pastrnak and Panarin-Anisimov-Kane. You also have built-in chemistry already.

Iginla did the heavy lifting for his line and team for a large portion of his career

 

[Semoner403]

if you take them at their peaks... easily the Naslund line

agree. But at no point would this be called the “Naslund line”.

 

[Semoner403]

Iginla did the heavy lifting for his line and team for a large portion of his career

his entire career.

Only other guy that could make a claim for any amount of time is kiprusoff. Nobody else was close. Adds to how amazing iginlas legacy in calgary was in a very unfortunate way.

 

[SillyRabbit]

Peak Naslund is about as close as you can get to having a Rocket Richard, Art Ross and Hart Trophy without actually winning any of them.

He was leading the league in goals and points heading into the final game of the season.

Forsberg had a big game and surpassed him in points and also set up Hedjuk for a hat trick which allowed Hedjuk to pass Naslund in goals.

Forsberg snatched away the Art Ross and Hart from Naslund and also gave the Rocket to Hedjuk.

Avalanche also surpassed the Canucks for top spot in the division in that game as well.

But the main point being that the first line is basically three MVP & Art Ross winners players while the second line is just Kane in that category.