I'm still confused how you think I ignore stats completely...
My lines and why?
OK, without the time to look at rosters and stats
Line 1(first addressed line, not necessarily our top line)Matthias-Bergenheim-Kopecky/Howden.
Three(4) guys that all seem to have the same problem with finishing, but because they are all energy guys, show good cycling, and drive toward nets- they have ugly/garbage goals written all over them.
Line 2 (The Huberdeau line) Huberdeau-Goc-Barch Huber with the hands, Goc is good for everything, and Barch is toughness with some ability. I would see Goc and Barch doing most of the grind work to feed Huber where he is (be it the slot, in front, circles) and other two follow by going to appropriate open side and the other in front of the net. Another line I could see cycling well together.
Line 3 (Barkov line) Trocheck-Barkov-Bjugstad I would like to see this used as an attempt to replicate a Zetterberg-Datsyuk-Holmstrom line respectively. Get that 6'6 motherflucker in front of the damn net, and stay there(going behind the net for retrieval when need be).
Line 4 Ready? .....(Flash-Gomeiss-Versteeg) self explanatory!
If line 4, being my most unsure/unsolid line wouldn't work, Winchester, Versteeg, Flash, Gomez, Upshall, and Boyes are great to trade bait or interchangeable until something works as they are all perfect for a team that could use them. We just have better fits IMO. Like Winchester in for Barch easily depending on who we play or who's hotter, etc..
I do not forget that we have Rocco coming in a matter of months.
Campbell-Petro/Robak/Racine (From what I've seen, I think Racine is a hidden gem)
Guds-Kuli
Petro/Robak/Racine-Weaver
Timmy
Markstrom
I truly think we have the talent, and we have logical possiblities that haven't been tried. I obviously can't guarantee and bet my nuts they'd work-but I can easily imagine them to work better than what has been thrown together. This is just what I'd try
first.