Thread: Larry Brooks: Jody Shelley update
View Single Post
Old
06-21-2010, 03:25 PM
  #36
wolfgaze
Interesting Cat
 
wolfgaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chariot View Post
For real...

Prust Anisimov Shelley should be the 4th line. I know Artem is projected higher than the 4th line but those guys had chemistry. CHEMISTRY the elusive ingredient for the Rangers. It can be contagious and it has to start somewhere. Like a seed. The Rangers were a different team when Prust and Shelley arrived. Good mojo.
I don't agree.... AA will be deserving of more playing time in his sophomore season and Prust & Shelley should not be given comparable playing time as they are career 4th liners.... AA should be playing with more talented wingers and refining his game with skilled players.... The fact that this line had our best/only chemistry among our forward lines is testament to how poor our chemistry was throughout the line-up, not how great Prust - AA - Shelley line really was.... They stood out because the other lines were so disjointed....

I definitely won't be happy if those guys continue playing together but it doesn't look like it'll happen because I remember reading a quote from I believe Torts that acknowledged that line would not remain intact in the future....

Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyGuy1985 View Post
I agree ^. If Anisimov has chemistry with them, let them play. So what if his stock might be higher.
Because AA is the only member of that line that should be getting higher than 4th line minutes and if you keep that line together you are reducing the minutes of other forwards on the team who are playing in their appropriate roles....

Should a forward like Callahan/MZA/Dubinsky get reduced minutes on one of our top 3 forward lines because Prust - AA - Shelley have good chemistry?


Last edited by wolfgaze: 06-21-2010 at 04:41 PM.
wolfgaze is offline   Reply With Quote