Stastny/ROR: Either, Neither, or Both?

[AslanRH]

This argument that 3 big lines can't/wont work is reminding me of the argument that a team that passes more than rushes can't win the Superbowl.

I understand that it would be tough to buck historical trends, but I'm not ready to say it can't work.

 

[bromando]

As I said above, I didn't mean to imply it will ruin his development. It will hurt him while you're shuffling him around, not necessarily for his whole career.

The problem is that the idea to "try" MacKinnon on the wing in order to be more top heavy is a false reality if you resign Stastny. Re-signing Stastny is a long term plan. You'll either be keeping MacKinnon on the wing long term, shuffling him around long term, or keeping in in a three offensive center approach long term. None of which are a good idea IMO.

The last line of what I said may have been confusing. When I said someone's gotta go in that top six, I meant Staz has gotta be traded. Mackinnon on the wing isn't the worst idea to me, if it works. But really, if ROR works really well on the wing this year, you trade Staz and put Mack in 2nd C role for the future. Ba-da-bing. Otherwise, I'd rather see Mack move to wing and ROR back to C and see how it works. Any way you do it, there will be trial and error. Problem is that having ROR on the third line is also a false reality as you put it. Resigning ROR is also a long term plan and you don't put him on the third line with his skill set and cost.

 

[bromando]

This argument that 3 big lines can't/wont work is reminding me of the argument that a team that passes more than rushes can't win the Superbowl.

I understand that it would be tough to buck historical trends, but I'm not ready to say it can't work.

I just think it's a financial thing more than anything. Sure three lines could work, but then you have way less money for D/G once you pay up for Stas, ROR, and Mack (in three years). Well, unless the cap goes way up. That's why the Penguins traded Staal.

 

[cgf]

This argument that 3 big lines can't/wont work is reminding me of the argument that a team that passes more than rushes can't win the Superbowl.

I understand that it would be tough to buck historical trends, but I'm not ready to say it can't work.

Or that you can't win the a major trophy like the WC, EC or CL playing without a striker. When special conglomerations of talent come together tactical innovation is possible. This Avs forward core could be that tactical evolution that creates even more of a competitive advantage than just our pure talent does.

 

[Foppa2118]

The last line of what I said may have been confusing. When I said someone's gotta go in that top six, I meant Staz has gotta be traded. Mackinnon on the wing isn't the worst idea to me, if it works. But really, if ROR works really well on the wing this year, you trade Staz and put Mack in 2nd C role for the future. Ba-da-bing. Otherwise, I'd rather see Mack move to wing and ROR back to C and see how it works. Any way you do it, there will be trial and error. Problem is that having ROR on the third line is also a false reality as you put it. Resigning ROR is also a long term plan and you don't put him on the third line with his skill set and cost.

I see, then we agree more or less on the three center idea being a bad one, but not on MacKinnon at wing, or that O'Reilly should play in the lesser 3rd line role.

I just think O'Reilly's ceilling isn't that much higher than what he's shown offensively, while MacKinnon's is much higher. O'Reilly also contributes way more in the 3rd line role than a guy like MacKinnon or Stastny.

You can play O'Reilly in that lesser role like you can play Drury in that lesser role. MacKinnon needs to be played in that top offensive role like Duchene and Sakic do because they are more skilled pure offensive players.

I also don't see the point in even "trying" MacKinnon on wing. That's not where you want him to play. Just leave him in the role you want him to play.

 

[cgf]

I just think it's a financial thing more than anything. Sure three lines could work, but then you have way less money for D/G once you pay up for Stas, ROR, and Mack (in three years). Well, unless the cap goes way up. That's why the Penguins traded Staal.

I think having Dutchy and Landy locked up for as cheap as they are, with a rising cap makes it financially feasible right now, especially if we could lock both Staz and radar into 5 year 23-28 million dollar deals on their next contracts. Add Parenteau on the steal he's signed to and it becomes all the more feasible while still giving us 8 mill to spend on FA next year, after handing out some raises to Downie, McG, Barrie and elliott.

 

[Nihiliste]

I agree that the 3 center approach doesn't work long term. If the three lines are performing as well as we'd hope given the centers we're using in those spots, then the wingers are going to cost too much to retain. More likely, one center gets poor linemates and a decreased role and doesn't play to his potential.

Ideally I would have liked to have moved Stastny when he wasn't a pending UFA and potentially had a little more value but what can you do.

I think there's a reason why no team except Pittsburgh in the Staal era had success rolling three lines -- Crosby and Malkin are good enough that they haven't needed to spend on great wingers. Not to mention Staal was content with playing a lesser role and I don't see evidence that O'reilly is going to want to do the same.

It makes no sense to have a team with 4 top 6 centers in a cap era when in reality balance is through the roster is much more important. Look at Boston, LA, Chicago etc., they run with a more traditional top 6/bottom 6 setup. I mean Chicago made it work with Michal freaking Handzus centering the second line because they had such good depth and balance throughout the roster with everyone playing a specified role.

 

[AvsRobin]

What Miller for Stastny rumours are Dater talking about? Have I missed anything?

 

[JoemAvs]

What Miller for Stastny rumours are Dater talking about? Have I missed anything?

Read the main board.
Josh Rimer tweeted it. Eklund had it at the beginning of thursday.
Dater just did somewhat legitimize it.

Gosh. If we really do that every ounce of excitement will be crushed.

If they really trade Stastny for Miller , I will really freak.

But I really would not rule it out with Roy in charge and him being a fan of Miller.

Will set the team back for years if true...

 

[AslanRH]

Maximizing talent is fine, but Boston and LA both won with 6-8 "centers" in their lineup. Boston may not have been getting all that Seguin could offer, but they got what they needed from him. As long as the pieces fit together like Michal freaking Handzus playing 2C, if the end result is a cup, I'll take it.

I also believe strongly that Stastny will accept eventually taking a lesser role at either left wing or as the "3rd" center if it means getting to compete for a cup with the team he's been a part of all these years. Just does not seem to me like a guy who will leave for another team for an extra 1-1.25m per year deal if he can start making the playoffs with the Avs.

 

[ColoradoSportsFan]

That trade proposal makes no sense.

 

[AvsRobin]

That trade proposal makes no sense.

Except that Stastny is the obvious piece to trade and Roy really likes Miller. But I wouldnt get Miller when we have Varly.

 

[Foppa2118]

Maximizing talent is fine, but Boston and LA both won with 6-8 "centers" in their lineup. Boston may not have been getting all that Seguin could offer, but they got what they needed from him. As long as the pieces fit together like Michal freaking Handzus playing 2C, if the end result is a cup, I'll take it.

I also believe strongly that Stastny will accept eventually taking a lesser role at either left wing or as the "3rd" center if it means getting to compete for a cup with the team he's been a part of all these years. Just does not seem to me like a guy who will leave for another team for an extra 1-1.25m per year deal if he can start making the playoffs with the Avs.

I'm not sure where you got the 6-8 number from or how they are comparable to players that play a highly skilled based game like Duchene and MacKinnon. Neither team really has comparable players that rely as heavily on their talent as Duchene and MacKinnon. They have a less pure skill based well rounded game like Stastny and O'Reilly. They are more versatile this way.

Carter was closest to them on LA and he's more of a one dimensional sniper that puts up very few assists. Seguin was the closest on Boston and he struggled on the wing, and in a lesser center role and has since been traded.

They also both have structured a more traditional lineup rather than a three offensive line approach. LA shifts Carter and occasional Richards to the wing with Stoll as their 3rd line center. Boston shifted the struggling Seguin back and forth between wing and 3rd line center, but when they had success they used Kelly or Cambell as their 3rd line center.

Both scenarios make the case for not going with a three offensive line approach, or shifting a guy like Duchene or MacKinnon to the wing.

Edit: OT but I just noticed your name here is AslanRH with an L. This whole time I thought it was Asian with an I. It would really blow my mind though if you were still in fact Asian.

 

[Foppa2118]

moved to trade thread

 

[AslanRH]

I'm not sure where you got the 6-8 number from or how they are comparable to players that play a highly skilled based game like Duchene and MacKinnon. Neither team really has comparable players that rely as heavily on their talent as Duchene and MacKinnon. They have a less pure skill based well rounded game like Stastny and O'Reilly. They are more versatile this way.

Carter was closest to them on LA and he's more of a one dimensional sniper that puts up very few assists. Seguin was the closest on Boston and he struggled on the wing, and in a lesser center role and has since been traded.

They also both have structured a more traditional lineup rather than a three offensive line approach. LA shifts Carter and occasional Richards to the wing with Stoll as their 3rd line center. Boston shifted the struggling Seguin back and forth between wing and 3rd line center, but when they had success they used Kelly or Cambell as their 3rd line center.

Both scenarios make the case for not going with a three offensive line approach, or shifting a guy like Duchene or MacKinnon to the wing.

Edit: OT but I just noticed your name here is AslanRH with an L. This whole time I thought it was Asian with an I. It would really blow my mind though if you were still in fact Asian.

Not Asian, at least that I know of.

I just meant that since the Avs have the ability to secure all the talent they currently have, and likely not getting the equivelent talent back in a 1 for 1 trade, I'm ok if it means playing Stastny and ROR as 3C or wingers if that is what can be done to win. Trading 1 talented player often risks bringing back less talented piece(s).

I also think MacKinnon could be tried at RW because his overall talent will likely make him great-elite there as well (to be fair, I've read opinions on both sides that his shot etc would translate well at wing though)

Stastny/ROR-Dutch-PAP
Lando-ROR/Stastny-MacKinnon or Mac in the middle with Lando and Stastny/ROR
Tanguay-Sgar?-Downie/McGinn

could be a dominating top 9 more in the mold of those teams you mentioned if the Avs can find a combination that works.

Trading Stastny and/or ROR too soon could backfire especially with
-Downie can't stay healthy, gets traded or is not resigned this year.
-Tangs (if he performs well this year) will likely only play out his next 3 years before he becomes either a year to year player or expendable/replaceable (like Hejduk this year)
-McGinn could end up being a piece moved for defensive help.
Our forward strength could quickly return to average if we move our "surplus" talent out too soon. Locking Stastny and ROR up for 5-6@ 5-5.5m (if they will sign for that) should still keep them where they will have value as moveable assets for later if need be.

 

[Freudian]

I agree that the 3 center approach doesn't work long term. If the three lines are performing as well as we'd hope given the centers we're using in those spots, then the wingers are going to cost too much to retain. More likely, one center gets poor linemates and a decreased role and doesn't play to his potential.

Ideally I would have liked to have moved Stastny when he wasn't a pending UFA and potentially had a little more value but what can you do.

I think there's a reason why no team except Pittsburgh in the Staal era had success rolling three lines -- Crosby and Malkin are good enough that they haven't needed to spend on great wingers. Not to mention Staal was content with playing a lesser role and I don't see evidence that O'reilly is going to want to do the same.

It makes no sense to have a team with 4 top 6 centers in a cap era when in reality balance is through the roster is much more important. Look at Boston, LA, Chicago etc., they run with a more traditional top 6/bottom 6 setup. I mean Chicago made it work with Michal freaking Handzus centering the second line because they had such good depth and balance throughout the roster with everyone playing a specified role.

Kings do have three top two centers in Kopitar, Richards and Carter. They just use one as winger.

Boston have done the same with Krejci, Bergeron and Savard/Seguin.

I'm not sure either Stastny or O'Reilly is particularly suited to playing on the wing though. MacKinnon should be able to do it but that's not something Avs want to explore this year.