Why can't we split the second line?

[Vegan Knight]

They were really great in the postseason. They have scored goals on the power play this season. Not so much 5v5 but they haven't played bad.

However, Pacioretty-Stastny-Stone are three of our top four earners (Fleury is the other) and they are three of our most senior players, and our star players and leaders at forward. Stone is our best forward, Stastny may be our best center at the moment, and Pacioretty may be our best goal scorer.

Stone is viewed as our future captain and one of the league's best wingers, Pacioretty was a captain and Stastny has worn letters throughout his career.

Why do they need to be glued together to produce and help the team? Shouldn't our most expensive players (the players paid the most to play the best regardless the situation) be spread through the forward group to help other players and give the team three dangerous lines? The third line has been a definite and glaring weakness.

Pacioretty produced well in the past with supposedly inferior help. I can't tell you how many people told me that Stone was a forward who would make those around him better. Well, we have Eakin who could use a helping hand to play better. Glass could too. Pacioretty and Stastny should not.

This isn't uncommon on successful teams. Crosby and Malkin have routinely elevated players they played with, (Kessel, when acquired, was put with Bonino and Hagelin instead of one of them!) why shouldn't we expect our highest paid stars to do the same?

Click to read more...

 

[theslatcher]

If Tuch wasn't coming back for most likely our next game it'd be a problem worth solving. Considering it looks like he's back I don't see why you need to stir the pot for stirring's sake.

 

[GKG18]

It's a good point, but the rationale is that you want to maximize the effectiveness of their minutes as opposed to the players who are making less (and in the case of Glass still developing). This is 'win now' mentality at its best.

 

[CupInSIX]

Putting a top 6 forward on the 3rd line is exactly what they've been doing with Glass, and now Tuch.
Sitting Pirri & promoting Nosek/Carrier has paid off as well (plus Zykovs lack of production kind of took care of itself ).

 

[Vegan Knight]

Putting a top 6 forward on the 3rd line is exactly what they've been doing with Glass, and now Tuch.
Sitting Pirri & promoting Nosek/Carrier has paid off as well (plus Zykovs lack of production kind of took care of itself ).

It isn't only about putting top 6 forwards on the third line. If you think of Tuch and Glass as top 6 already then two of them have to be on the third line.

It's about our team leaders shouldering more responsibility to help lead the team. We are paying those three more than anyone else, it shouldn't be unreasonable to expect them to help with the production of another forward and to continue to produce even without all of our very top guys on the same line. That was a not insignificant selling point everyone made about Stone.

We are paying Stone 9.5M, that is enough that we should be able to stick him with Stastny and Eakin and see him elevate Eakin's offensive contribution. That is why he has been given that amount of money. In a cap era you need that to happen in order to win.

Pacioretty makes 7M and should be able to do damage on a line with Glass and Tuch. We wouldn't be throwing them on the ice with scrubs, just distributing our most dangerous players and veteran leaders more around the lineup.

 

[CupInSIX]

It isn't only about putting top 6 forwards on the third line. If you think of Tuch and Glass as top 6 already then two of them have to be on the third line.

It's about our team leaders shouldering more responsibility to help lead the team. We are paying those three more than anyone else, it shouldn't be unreasonable to expect them to help with the production of another forward and to continue to produce even without all of our very top guys on the same line. That was a not insignificant selling point everyone made about Stone.

We are paying Stone 9.5M, that is enough that we should be able to stick him with Stastny and Eakin and see him elevate Eakin's offensive contribution. That is why he has been given that amount of money. In a cap era you need that to happen in order to win.

Pacioretty makes 7M and should be able to do damage on a line with Glass and Tuch. We wouldn't be throwing them on the ice with scrubs, just distributing our most dangerous players and veteran leaders more around the lineup.

Next year, when they roll 3 very strong lines. But they've already tried Stone with Eakin against Philly & Chicago and they stunk. Right now there's a stronger argument to be made to play your most expensive skaters on your top 2 lines because you're paying them so much. Patches & Stone have good chemistry, so might as well stick with Stastny or Glass centering them.

Plus Stone is already mentoring Krebs and he had been really helpful to Glass in camp.

 

[HanSolo]

Just move Eakin to the wing.

Marchy-Billy-Smitty
Patchy-Pauly-Stoney
Eak-y-Glassy-Tuchsy
Willy-Nosey-Reavesy

I just solved hockey

 

[HanSolo]

Jokes aside, unless we want to just say f*** you to Cody Glass as a future top 6 center, at some point Stastny's gonna need to be taken off that line. Unless our master plan to develop our future top 6 center is to park him on the third line in his sophomore year and wait for Stastny's contract to expire. As I'm typing this out I'm realizing that's very possible.

 

[BattleBorn]

Jokes aside, unless we want to just say **** you to Cody Glass as a future top 6 center, at some point Stastny's gonna need to be taken off that line. Unless our master plan to develop our future top 6 center is to park him on the third line in his sophomore year and wait for Stastny's contract to expire. As I'm typing this out I'm realizing that's very possible.

Possible and probably likely. It’s not like he’s a superstar, he’s a future top six guy that was a top six pick.

Hockey gets so caught up in draft position and it’s really weird how it works. Why can’t he just be a solid NHL guy that can be a top six guy instead of a Top Six dude that has to be a top six dude ASAP because he was our top 10 draft pick?

 

[Vegan Knight]

Next year, when they roll 3 very strong lines. But they've already tried Stone with Eakin against Philly & Chicago and they stunk. Right now there's a stronger argument to be made to play your most expensive skaters on your top 2 lines because you're paying them so much. Patches & Stone have good chemistry, so might as well stick with Stastny or Glass centering them.

Plus Stone is already mentoring Krebs and he had been really helpful to Glass in camp.

I don't think playing Stone and Eakin at center with Pirri, wasn't it? Is the same as playing Stone with Stastny at center and Eakin on the wing. And parts of two games is not a big enough sample to say it doesn't mesh well.

I have seen this so many times going back through the cap era where teams stack two lines and it almost never works in the playoffs. Teams focus on those lines and tell the third line to beat them and it doesn't happen, not surprising as those lines usually didn't produce throughout the season. Even when those top lines have superstars. And we don't have the defense to cover that.

I was very positive about this team going into the season and fully drank the kool aid we were the top 3 or 5 Cup favorites but now, I'm looking at the team and I see a team decidedly more middling than that. Finding a way to pull Glass and Eakin, and now Tuch, into good productivity helps to restoring that.

 

[Vegan Knight]

Possible and probably likely. It’s not like he’s a superstar, he’s a future top six guy that was a top six pick.

Hockey gets so caught up in draft position and it’s really weird how it works. Why can’t he just be a solid NHL guy that can be a top six guy instead of a Top Six dude that has to be a top six dude ASAP because he was our top 10 draft pick?

If early on you set his ceiling at solid top six dude, can't be surprised when you don't develop a superstar.

 

[sabresfan65]

If early on you set his ceiling at solid top six dude, can't be surprised when you don't develop a superstar.

Where I set his ceiling only affects what I think about his career. It has no affect on what he actually becomes. If I set his ceiling as a top 6 dude and he becomes a top 6 dude, he met my expectations. If he becomes more great, if he is fringe top 9, Bust!! Mark Messier played 4 YEARS as a winger at the beginning of his career. Must be just another top 6 dude!!

 

[Vegas07]

Makes sense but there is also some risk to it as spreading out your good players could mean a team has zero effective lines instead of one or two. And playing your best players with weaker players can help the weaker players, but can limit the production of your best players.

And as time goes by I’m getting more pessimistic about Eakin. He didn’t need to play with Stone to be productive last season so what’s going on with him? I thought he made an immediate impact when he came back from injury a year ago.

 

[Vegan Knight]

Where I set his ceiling only affects what I think about his career. It has no affect on what he actually becomes. If I set his ceiling as a top 6 dude and he becomes a top 6 dude, he met my expectations. If he becomes more great, if he is fringe top 9, Bust!! Mark Messier played 4 YEARS as a winger at the beginning of his career. Must be just another top 6 dude!!

The you referred to was the team, not the fanbase. If they set him up to be a solid top six dude, he more than likely will become that than a superstar.

I also think there can be very little comparison to development in the early 80's to the late 2010's and there are probably more examples of centers failing to get back at center after starting on the wing than successes.

Glass looked as good as Stastny with that line in his first four games in the NHL. There were good and bad games, just as that line has had with Stastny. I'm not convinced it's such a better option this season, apart from face offs.

They have equal production 5v5 in four games as opposed to nine (and one of those was Fowler shooting it in his own net), and play on the same successful power play unit, which would not change anyway.

 

[HanSolo]

Possible and probably likely. It’s not like he’s a superstar, he’s a future top six guy that was a top six pick.

Hockey gets so caught up in draft position and it’s really weird how it works. Why can’t he just be a solid NHL guy that can be a top six guy instead of a Top Six dude that has to be a top six dude ASAP because he was our top 10 draft pick?

He absolutely can be better than your run of the mill top 6 guy. His hockey IQ and playmaking are well above average. His passing even today is better than a majority of the NHL's. I don't know where in this 2 year time frame you threw up your hands and decided he can't be a superstar but I firmly disagree that that's not a possibility for him. He's certainly not gonna be a McDavid, Crosby, Ovechkin but are we retconning what superstar means to just encompass the select few generational talents in any given era?

Also, no offense, but relating high expectations for him to the fact that he was a top ten pick is an incredibly superficial take on the general view of Cody both from our own fanbase and the hockey community generally. Most people prior to this season considered Glass to be a top 5 prospect not playing in the NHL today.

I'm with you that just because Glass is promising that doesn't mean Stastny should be demoted no questions asked, my biggest present concern with his place on the team is to let him center the third line and earn his way up. But all this about he was a 6th overall pick so we shouldn't expect him to be a superstar is a pretty bizarre take. Like what are you trying to say? That only top 3 picks become superstars cause that is just demonstrably not true. As for Glass, most pundits view him as a future first line player. And I'd say my own impression with the eye test shows a guy with at least that much potential if not more, but I'm not a professional talent analyst. But then again neither are you. And as such, you and I being amateur at best analysts, I question where and how you came to the conclusion that Cody can't be a superstar.

Is it cause he didn't jump into the NHL and start scoring like a star right out of the draft? Didn't stop Getzlaf, Perry (took these two 5 post draft years to hit superstar levels) Marchand, Kucherov, Erik Karlsson, Brent Burns, Mark Schiefele, etc. There's a reason this team wouldn't trade Glass as part of a package for Karlsson, and it's not because he doesn't have any superstar potential.

 

[HanSolo]

If early on you set his ceiling at solid top six dude, can't be surprised when you don't develop a superstar.

Just sort of strikes me as attempting to preempt any future complaints about Glass' development if he doesn't end up meeting his potential.

 

[BattleBorn]

He absolutely can be better than your run of the mill top 6 guy. His hockey IQ and playmaking are well above average. His passing even today is better than a majority of the NHL's. I don't know where in this 2 year time frame you threw up your hands and decided he can't be a superstar but I firmly disagree that that's not a possibility for him. He's certainly not gonna be a McDavid, Crosby, Ovechkin but are we retconning what superstar means to just encompass the select few generational talents in any given era?

Also, no offense, but relating high expectations for him to the fact that he was a top ten pick is an incredibly superficial take on the general view of Cody both from our own fanbase and the hockey community generally. Most people prior to this season considered Glass to be a top 5 prospect not playing in the NHL today.

I'm with you that just because Glass is promising that doesn't mean Stastny should be demoted no questions asked, my biggest present concern with his place on the team is to let him center the third line and earn his way up. But all this about he was a 6th overall pick so we shouldn't expect him to be a superstar is a pretty bizarre take. Like what are you trying to say? That only top 3 picks become superstars cause that is just demonstrably not true. As for Glass, most pundits view him as a future first line player. And I'd say my own impression with the eye test shows a guy with at least that much potential if not more, but I'm not a professional talent analyst. But then again neither are you. And as such, you and I being amateur at best analysts, I question where and how you came to the conclusion that Cody can't be a superstar.

Is it cause he didn't jump into the NHL and start scoring like a star right out of the draft? Didn't stop Getzlaf, Perry (took these two 5 post draft years to hit superstar levels) Marchand, Kucherov, Erik Karlsson, Brent Burns, Mark Schiefele, etc. There's a reason this team wouldn't trade Glass as part of a package for Karlsson, and it's not because he doesn't have any superstar potential.

I guess our disagreement in this discussion is the definition of a superstar. Talent rises to the top, we know that as a team more than most. If he's a solid, legit superstar, he'll take a spot. Trying to force him into the spot seems like a mistake to me. He's the third or fourth best center on the Knights, and I feel like he's playing in the right spot now and I don't know why it's an issue that he's playing where he is. Who in the top six is he a better player than? Same with Tuch. He's my favorite, but I think he's solidly on the third line unless we want to pretend Smith isn't good.

 

[Vegan Knight]

Just sort of strikes me as attempting to preempt any future complaints about Glass' development if he doesn't end up meeting his potential.

Questionable deployment has derailed or hindered enough prospects that it is a common enough thing to worry about without the goal being a structure for a future excuse. That's a bit of an uncharitable interpretation in assigning motive.

Regardless of Glass in the future, Glass in the now looked as comfortable as Stastny has on that line in his first four games in the league.

There hasn't been more production from that line in over twice the games. Even if you want to say there were issues in games 3 and 4, Stastny centering that line has not caused it to go games without continued issues. And Eakin certainly hasn't played well enough to justify his name in permanent marker on the 3C.

I think my concern isn't just for the future of the team, or the development path of a prospect, but the now also. Glass is more talented already, possibly than anyone else we have but certainly more than Eakin, we should be putting that in a better opportunity to succeed.

 

[HanSolo]

I guess our disagreement in this discussion is the definition of a superstar. Talent rises to the top, we know that as a team more than most. If he's a solid, legit superstar, he'll take a spot. Trying to force him into the spot seems like a mistake to me. He's the third or fourth best center on the Knights, and I feel like he's playing in the right spot now and I don't know why it's an issue that he's playing where he is. Who in the top six is he a better player than? Same with Tuch. He's my favorite, but I think he's solidly on the third line unless we want to pretend Smith isn't good.

Well this is a different debate. I don't agree that Glass should be gifted a top 6 spot on merit alone either. The only reason I might be in favor of it is his style of play and talent level synchronizes best when Stone and Pacioretty are on the ice. Meaning he looked the best when he was on the second line and since being taken off he looks his best when with his powerplay unit. He never built great synergy with Eakin and Pirri. But like I said that's more of a "maybe that could work in terms of lineup flow but it would come at Stastny's expense.

I'm also a believer that generally speaking a player should be awarded what he's earned. Glass should be no exception. But as far as "he's where he should be" goes, I can agree if we're just talking what line he deserves to be on. I don't think a top prospect should be developed in his off position (in this case the wing) especially if he hasn't developed any chemistry with his third line mates. But I've been arguing for either a move of Eakin to the wing or a Glass AHL send down which is a whole different matter.

Either way the concern I raised about the remainder of Stastny's contract is if Glass continues to develop on the wing with players he doesn't have chemistry, I don't know how he's supposed to prove that he's a better center than Stastny and/or Karlsson. This is part of why I keep complaining about his being developed on the wing.

 

[HanSolo]

Questionable deployment has derailed or hindered enough prospects that it is a common enough thing to worry about without the goal being a structure for a future excuse. That's a bit of an uncharitable interpretation in assigning motive.

Regardless of Glass in the future, Glass in the now looked as comfortable as Stastny has on that line in his first four games in the league.

There hasn't been more production from that line in over twice the games. Even if you want to say there were issues in games 3 and 4, Stastny centering that line has not caused it to go games without continued issues. And Eakin certainly hasn't played well enough to justify his name in permanent marker on the 3C.

I think my concern isn't just for the future of the team, or the development path of a prospect, but the now also. Glass is more talented already, possibly than anyone else we have but certainly more than Eakin, we should be putting that in a better opportunity to succeed.

I couldn't really follow the narrative structure all that well but I'll certainly agree that Eakin has really shown f*** all this year. Let him play center in penalty killing situations and give the 5 on 5 spot to the guy that should be getting developed in the C position. Offensively speaking, Eakin hasn't been much better than a guy like Pirri. Glass gets him the puck and then it just dies on his stick save for 1 or 2 shots a game that smoke the goalie pad or crest.

Either way I don't think it's realistic to knock Stastny off the 2C spot for Glass' sake. If Turk didn't care about Cody's chemistry with Stone and Patches then, he's not gonna care now.

 

[Vegan Knight]

I couldn't really follow the narrative structure all that well but I'll certainly agree that Eakin has really shown **** all this year. Let him play center in penalty killing situations and give the 5 on 5 spot to the guy that should be getting developed in the C position. Offensively speaking, Eakin hasn't been much better than a guy like Pirri. Glass gets him the puck and then it just dies on his stick save for 1 or 2 shots a game that smoke the goalie pad or crest.

Either way I don't think it's realistic to knock Stastny off the 2C spot for Glass' sake. If Turk didn't care about Cody's chemistry with Stone and Patches then, he's not gonna care now.

I think it's been interpreted that I'm talking about getting Stastny off the second line, preferably that isn't what I would want.

I think a better way to put my argument is that the possible second line players have been: Pacioretty, Stone, Stastny and Glass. My point is you have 4 players (2 centers and 2 wingers) simply split them evenly across two lines any way.

Stop throwing 1 of them (Stastny or Glass) by themselves to fend with what they can.

Eakin-Stastny-Stone
Pacioretty-Glass-Tuch
Or
Pacioretty-Stastny-Tuch
Eakin-Glass-Stone

 

[hangman005]

My contribution to this thread is.... Does everyone remember last season when the 2nd line was constantly getting injured lol.