Thread: Prospect Info: Mikael Granlund V
View Single Post
02-18-2013, 06:31 PM
Circulartheory's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Country: Hong Kong
Posts: 5,510
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Henri M View Post
I did not say that. I said the firstline has been lackluster, not that everyone on it is.
... so you mean Heatley? You could just say that instead of being so dramatic.

Anyways, I agree that Heatley isn't the best first liner, but Granlund has yet to show me that he can survive the bigger and stronger defensemen.

Parise's and Koivu's game is all about the board play, the grind, and the tenacity. I personally think Granlund will slow those guys down because he is having trouble along the boards. He is getting better, but not ready to play against opposing top pairings.

I wouldn't mind seeing Granlund a bit of taste, but will definitely not scream for it be a concrete decision.

I honestly wish Granlund would solidify his 2nd line position. But the introduction of Zucker has that in jeopardy. I want to see if Zucker can keep it up, because if he can, I think Granlund's best bet is in the AHL.

Originally Posted by Henri M View Post
Neither did I say Zucker is nothing special, but I said his performance was good, but outside his goal I did not see anything that great.
... can someone be special but do nothing great outside a goal? I'm confused.

Originally Posted by Henri M View Post
Yes, Larsson did nothing, more or less.
Larsson was very solid, broke up numerous plays along the boards by tying up opponents or battling for the puck. Very reliable, strong all-round skater. Still need works in the offensive zone but made several great defensive plays.

Originally Posted by Henri M View Post
I would love to see Granlund on the firstline, I do not think he would be a bigger defensive liability than Heatley based on his game.
Like I said earlier, Granlund is still adjusting, slowly but surely.

But he is anything but ready for a consistent pairing with the Koivu-Parise duo. Again, he is still adjusting to the smaller rinks. His main problems is about board play, quick feet, drive hard. All of these problems will be present whether his winger be Parise or Rupp.

The only problem is, if he played on the first line, he'll play against top defensive pairings, and top offensive forwards. At this point of his career, I don't trust him nearly enough to be comfortable with him being a regular 1st line player.

At least on the 2nd line, he'll have less talented defenseman matched up against him, but he still struggled. He is getting better, but not there yet.

Originally Posted by Henri M View Post
There seems to be a huge amount of bi-polarisme on these boards; we lose everyone is screaming bloody murder (not litteraly everyone), and when we win then we should "not change what works".
Last nights game did IMO not work. Did no one notice that the Wild sucked for atleast half of the game?
I don't think majority screamed bloody murder. I think most of us were frustrated because after all the linetinkering (Coyle auditioning for 1st line, Granlund to the 4th line etc.), we still will look dead and we relied only on the 1st line.

The 2nd line wouldn't click. Our bottom six players were as energetic as we wanted them to be. We were a one line team, with a struggling one line.

But even against the Red Wings, when we were trailing 2-0, there was a noticeable jump in their play. Zucker really gave that 2nd line some speed and tenacity on the forecheck and the 3rd line had numerous chances.

We started to look like a team with four lines. That is what is so promising.

Originally Posted by Henri M View Post
Had it not been for the Red Wings having a major collapse, and Mrazek not being able to cover his five hole, we would not have won, maybe not even gotten one single goal.
Yes, because our win was all, 100% Red Wings fault. Not because of a good battle by Parise to create a rebound for Heatley. Not because Zucker skated with all he could to create his own scoring chance. Not because Granlund and Mitchell fought for the puck.

Yes, teams do collapse. But they collapse because the other team is outworking them. They collapse under pressure and during puck battles. They collapse because the other team is doing something that forces them to adjust their play, sometimes for the worse.

Originally Posted by Henri M View Post
I'm not saying that every aspect of the last game was bad, but it had enough of the bad and the ugly to warrent changes.
If that is your opinion, I don't think I can say anything else. But I thought the 2nd line was great, fast and tenacious. 3rd line look very solid defensively with a number of scoring opportunities; can't really ask for anything more.

1st line starting to click and produce again. Granlund looks like he's picking up the physical part of the game nicely.

Just a game that is full of great signs.

Circulartheory is offline