Why not? It allows him to play center and for the Jets to run 4 lines. The other option is for him to play 3rd line wing. Don't see any likelihood of him being in the top 6, unless there is a rash of injuries.
Opening day roster, this year versus last
- Thread starter peg
- Start date
Why not? It allows him to play center and for the Jets to run 4 lines. The other option is for him to play 3rd line wing. Don't see any likelihood of him being in the top 6, unless there is a rash of injuries.
- Jun 10, 2014
- 57,434
- 29,295
Because Johnson was kept in the AHL (needed or not, we don't know) you assume that Petan needs the same. They are 2 individuals. Also TB's depth influenced Johnson's progress. Petan may or may not need time in the AHL but I think he was quite able to have helped the Jets last year if he hadn't been sent back. He should be that much more able this year. He certainly has a more complete game than Ehlers. The only way Ehlers should beat Petan for an NHL job this year is if the Jets prefer to have him avoid the Q this year.
It could well be that neither Ehlers nor Petan make the roster out of TC this year. Armia might be the one to get a top 9 spot leaving only the 4th line. I still think Copp is a better fit at C there than Petan. Thor is almost certainly 1 wing. The other might be PelHali or a rookie. I haven't seen anyone suggest Kosmo there but it is not unrealistic. He was similar in the A to Lowry the year before. He might be considered a better 4th liner because that is closer to his ceiling in much the same way as Copp is considered a candidate for that line.
There are still a lot of possibilities and most of them at least promise the chance for improvement over last year.
- Jun 10, 2014
- 57,434
- 29,295
You and everybody else but that is not an option. He was drafted out of the Q so it is the NHL or the Q. It might, just barely might be possible for Halifax to agree to it. Somebody would have to pay them quite a lot one way or another to get them to do it. And then we would probably discover that he has to be waived through the entire league first.
- Jun 10, 2014
- 57,434
- 29,295
The problem with putting Petan (or similar players) on the 4th line is that I still don't think PMo gives them 10-12 min/gm. It might be more than last years 4-6 but not that much more. Maybe 6-8 so maybe with special teams Petan could average 9 min/gm. That still could be more beneficial than big mins in the A. Just practicing with the Jets all the time has benefits. But it also contradicts what PMo has said he prefers for rookies.
I think some are trying too hard with these line combinations. We have 3 (presumably) solid LW/C pairs with all the issues at RW. Both Stafford and whichever rookie makes the top 9 need to be sheltered/protected to some degree. Stafford on the 3rd line forces Ehlers to the 1st. That won't do. He is not ready to start out with the toughest matchups so Ehlers gets the 3rd line. Wheeler can play either 1 or 2 but Stafford was bad with Scheif so Stafford gets Ladd-Little. Done.
Ladd-Little-Stafford
Perreault-Scheif-Wheeler
Burmi-Lowry-Ehlers
Ehlers will move up to the top 6 eventually but we have no idea how long that might take. When he does he might play with Scheif, Wheeler with LL and Staff with Lowry. But it might take a couple of years not just a few games.
The 4th line is really the tough one because we have a lot of options that don't sort themselves out very easily. We can assume Thor is on one wing but the rest is a bit of a mystery. I think Copp will be fine at 4 C but maybe not.
I would like to see;
Petan-Copp-Armia
9-10 min/gm + whatever special teams time they can earn but I think that is right up there with the flying pigs.
You should let Maurice know, since Stafford was matched up against the toughest competition out of all the forwards, and 3rd on the team behind Enstrom and Myers.
mcpw
WPG
- Jan 13, 2015
- 10,024
- 2,072
We should let Maurice know a lot of things.
- Drew Stafford is not a LW.
- Mark Stuart should not play PK1.
- Ladd and Little have played better with Wheeler than with anybody else. If you dismantle LLW, you better have a very good reason for it.
- Sending out the fourth line every second shift when up by one goal is a bad idea.
- Adam Lowry has great defensive numbers. There is absolutely no reason to not let him play PK.
- It's possible in today's NHL that a fourth line has good players on it.
- Toby Enstrom isn't that good on the power play.
- To maximize success, don't play Jacob Trouba with Mark Stuart.
- Dustin Byfuglien is not a forward. No, not even when 3 of your forwards are injured.
- Adam Pardy is not a forward. He's also not that great on the penalty kill.
- Do not play Mark Stuart at the end of a close game.
- Playing Mathieu Perreault on the third line is perfectly justified if your second line is Palat-Johnson-Kucherov. In all other scenarios, it is not.
- There's always a better player than Matt Halischuk. Visit some Moose games.
Imagine the success we would have if he knew as much about hockey and coaching as us HF posters
mcpw
WPG
- Jan 13, 2015
- 10,024
- 2,072
Imagine the success we would have if he knew as much about hockey and coaching as us HF posters
Heh
In all seriousness, I like what he's done, and he's a good coach overall. There are just some WTF moments sometimes. Every coach or GM has these. Bob Murray (3rd round pick for Brewer lol) was second in GM of the year voting. Sather (4th+Stempniak for Sheppard+Klingberg, Glass contract) finished third. Noted Tanner Glass-lover Vigneault was a Jack Adams finalist.
Heh
In all seriousness, I like what he's done, and he's a good coach overall. There are just some WTF moments sometimes. Every coach or GM has these. Bob Murray (3rd round pick for Brewer lol) was second in GM of the year voting. Sather (4th+Stempniak for Sheppard+Klingberg, Glass contract) finished third. Noted Tanner Glass-lover Vigneault was a Jack Adams finalist.
That is part of the fun of posting in a fan forum. We all have an audience for our opinions on how things should be done and because none of us have any actual input into anything so we are never to blame.
Sweech
Oh When the Spurs
Until Maurice radically changes how he utilizes the fourth line (which no signs have pointed towards happening) I don't think we'll see prospects or good players like Burmi wasting their time there. I'm basically 99% sure Burmi will be on the wing in our top 9.
Board Bard
Dane-O-Mite
- Jun 7, 2014
- 7,888
- 5,055
jetsforever
Registered User
- Dec 14, 2013
- 27,433
- 23,545
I like your line combos (likely what we'll see) but I'm pretty sure Staff was only bad with Scheif when he was playing LW, not RW. That could allow LLW to reunite.
mcpw
WPG
- Jan 13, 2015
- 10,024
- 2,072
I'm totally in favor of trying LLW, PSS. First line is good (we know that), second line has Perreault, so ot can be good. Change it if it doesn't work. Just no more SSW pls.
Worst possible lineup:
Ladd-Little Burmistrov
Stafford-Scheifele-Wheeler
Perreault-Lowry-Armia
Halischuk-Slater-Ehlers
(Thorburn, Peluso)
Worst possible lineup:
Ladd-Little Burmistrov
Stafford-Scheifele-Wheeler
Perreault-Lowry-Armia
Halischuk-Slater-Ehlers
(Thorburn, Peluso)
No that's not worst possible. Try...
Ladd-Little Burmistrov
Stafford-Scheifele-Wheeler
Perreault-Lowry-Thorburn
Halischuk-Slater-Peluso
I don't buy that. Maurice played his 4th line the way he did because they couldn't handle more minutes. Once we picked up a couple rentals at the TD there was more balance in the line-up. If we had an actual 4th line that could handle 12-13 minutes a night I think you will see a much more balanced use of the 4th line. Burmi to me is a good fit. He is a good possession player but it is very unlikely he improves much on his .3 ppg NHL numbers. Don't see him as a good fit on the wing in the top 6, since he has never demonstrated the scoring ability necessary, but rather he would be a really good fit centering a balanced 4th line that can carry the play and chip in occasionally with offense.
Unless you are aware of any public comments by Maurice where he states how he prefers to have 3 plugs on the 4th line that can only handle 4-5 sheltered minutes a night?
- Jun 10, 2014
- 57,434
- 29,295
I might be misremembering but I think Garret (or other stats guys) showed Stafford poor possession + negative effect on Scheifele (and other linemeates) was not substantially different on one side or the other.
Jets4Life
Registered User
The 4th line usually played under 8:00 a game last year. Not sure how you came to that conclusion.
Buff is fine on offense.
There are lots of sites out there where you can play with the numbers until your heart's content. A lot put Stafford in a better light then he gets portrayed around here.
- Jun 10, 2014
- 57,434
- 29,295
I agree that Burmi could play 4th line and that PMo would use the 4th line more if it was better. My guess is that it would still be less than 10 min/gm though.
The problem with your suggested lineup is not just Burmi at 4C. It is also putting Stafford with Scheifele. Not only do you then have Stafford's shortcomings to deal with but you have degraded Scheifele. Then your 3rd line relies on a Buff trade. Good idea but not likely to happen. Chevy has made it pretty clear he is not interested in trading Buff. The 3rd line could be; Ehlers - Lowry - Armia but that is one very inexperienced line. That then leads to a 4th line of; Hali - Burmi - Thor. That is back to a 5-6 min/gm 4th line.
If your Buff trade happened the rest could be worked out. I hoped Buff would return a 2nd line winger not a 3rd but that is not the key element. The problems come from insisting that Ehlers play in the NHL this year and trying to find the best spot for Stafford. I think Stafford fits best on a 3rd line with 2 good possession players masking his weakness and feeding him the puck to take advantage of his strength which appears to be finish. The fact is though that with the signing of Stafford and Burmi we have 8 top 9 Fs with one spot vacant for a rookie which could be any 1 of Ehlers, Petan, Armia.
We just don't have that need to trade Buff for a top 6 winger anymore. I would still be happy to see that but I think it would fill the vacancy now available to a rookie before it would push Burmi down to the 4th. Burmi centring the 4th line would be fine if he was given decent wingers and the line was used 10 min/gm. That could be done but it goes against what PMo has both said and shown his inclination to be.
I would like to see:
Ladd-Little-Wheeler (still the best Jets 2.0 line)
MP-Scheifele-Ehlers (MP and Scheif were really good together and I don't care how much Stafford was signed for).
X-Lowry-Stafford (X is a middle 6 winger as part of a Buff trade and they won't send Ehlers back to the Q. He will just entrench any bad habits. Ehlers also on the off wing suits his playing style.)
Petan-Burmi-Armia (I know Thor should be there but this is better. Burmi at center allows them to run 4 lines and Armia will be given his shot. No way he doesn't get his chance after being a big part of the Kane/Bogo trade)
Peluso/Thor/ Hali in the A.
There are options there. Ehlers could be on the 3rd and Stafford the 1st. I agree that Ehlers should not be sent back to Halifax but I am not certain that he won't be. Armia is not going to be in the NHL just because he was part of that trade but he probably will be because of ability.
I've left your D untouched but if we trade Buff and get a 2LHD back then Stuart should be traded. If we don't then Stuart should be traded making room for both Chiarot and Morrissey.
We certainly could gain a lot of flexibility with the return for Buff but I honestly do not think it has much chance of happening. By not much I mean a really tiny possibility.
IMO you are overblowing Stafford's negative impact on Schiefele. If you look at team success and goal production Scheifele and Stafford worked really well together. After Stafford joined the team the jets were 15-8-2 and during that time both Scheifele and Stafford scored at a 62 point pace. On top of that Stafford was matched up against the toughest competition of any forward and had the highest percentage of defensive zone starts as any forward. On top of that over 50% of Stafford's shifts ended in the offensive zone. To summarize with Stafford on the team the Jets played at 105 point pace, Stafford and Scheifele both scored at a 60+ point pace. Stafford was given primarily defensive zone starts which ended in the offensive zone, while playing against the toughest competition. IMO part of the reason Stafford was re-signed is because of the chemistry he had with Scheifele.
PhilJets
Winnipeg is Good
It looks like Stafford will be the new whipping boy soon
Stafford and Scheifele with wheeler carried the offense during the stretch when Little went down and Ladd was injured also but playing.
Sometimes we always expect players to all be good 2 way players, doesn't happen. Some are good on offense, some are good on defense, a few are good on both and less are elites.
Stafford is a good signing, especially that he wanted to be here even at just 2 years.
2 more months!
Go Jets go
Stafford and Scheifele with wheeler carried the offense during the stretch when Little went down and Ladd was injured also but playing.
Sometimes we always expect players to all be good 2 way players, doesn't happen. Some are good on offense, some are good on defense, a few are good on both and less are elites.
Stafford is a good signing, especially that he wanted to be here even at just 2 years.
2 more months!
Go Jets go
Sweech
Oh When the Spurs
This is going by what we've seen. We could have iced a better 4th line than we did...but we didn't. Not to mention there's this convenient line riiiiight inbeteen the top 6 and the 4th line that you forgot to mention for Burmistrov. As well as the fact that scoring numbers for now PP players are typically lower as well.
I'm just trying to forewarn you what to expect. We won't see Burmistrov, or any of our other rookie players, bar Lipon or another physical pest on the 4th line. Of that I'm 99% sure. So you can go and make lineups that look like that, but it will be an exercise in vain because that's simply not how PoMo operates.
Why would you need to forewarn me. We are talking about possible hockey lineups in the middle of July when there is a ton of moving parts. I don't really have much invested in where Burmi plays, other then suggesting him as a 4th line center is a good start towards a balanced attack. Also I think you are misreading Maurice a little. I've heard him speak several times where he has talked about the importance of balance throughout the lineup. Given the right pieces that is what I think we will see. I also suggested I see Burmi as a possible fit on the 3rd line wing.
Board Bard
Dane-O-Mite
- Jun 7, 2014
- 7,888
- 5,055
Well, Maurice did say in an interview last season that he wouldn't play a kid just coming into the team on the fourth line. That in itself would rule out guys like Petan and Armia, or any rookie really. IIRC he said that before the Jets picked up Stempniak et al, so the fourth liners at the time were the same toiletful of useless plugs the Jets have had since they came back. It's not much of leap to combine those facts, and his reluctance to use IceCaps options, to arrive at "he prefers to have 3 plugs on the 4th line that can only handle 4-5 sheltered minutes a night," especially if the Jets don't sign a decent UFA or two a la Stemp for that duty.
To Maurice's credit he did play Copp on the fourth line in one game and had nice things to say about him afterward, though that was a meaningless game where a bunch of players sat out.
I guess we'll see.
No coach wants 3 plugs who can't play as his 4th line options. If I remember correctly the comment you are talking about is when Maurice was more commenting that a 3rd line role was a better place for a kid/rookie to enter the lineup rather then a discussion of a 4th line role on the team. And the options in St. Johns were no better then what he had. Not a single one of those forwards available got anything more then NHL minimum 2-way contracts this off season.
I believe Maurice sees the 4th line as a veteran energy type line, but it doesn't mean he wouldn't want a choice of more talented options for it. When he had those options after the TD he used them with the end result of the 4th line was getting more minutes.
