View Single Post
12-27-2013, 11:20 PM
Damaged Goods
Registered User
Damaged Goods's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,028
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by GoneFullHolmgren View Post
Hartnell hasnt been playing well enough to be handed a top line spot. i dont care what he did last year. or the year before. this year he has been crap. he had his chance and he didnt play well. the top line is clicking right now. is Raffl the reason? probably not, but its working and there is little to no reason to break it up just to hope you can get Hartnell going
Scroll up. I said I would like to see Schenn get a shot on that line. The debate was about who is the odd man out of the top-9. For me Raffl is the 10th forward, so let's not set our lineup expectations according to minuscule sample sizes and superstition.

From the day Michael Raffl was was born until December 12, 2013, he was never projected as anything more than a bottom-6 NHL winger (if that). Then he had one good week of offensive hockey on the top line. I'm glad he did. But rationally, I don't see how that's enough to push him ahead of any of our previous top-9 wingers. So now that they're all healthy, give him back the checking role that he's been doing a fine job at all year.

Originally Posted by Striiker View Post
I don't care about stats or upsides or any of that, they don't tell the whole story. Hartnell has been absolutely terrible the last two seasons and there is zero reason for him to be in the top 9 over people who are playing better just because of what a spreadsheet shows you.

I also never said that Raffl's talent cemented him in the top 9, I said he's deserves to be there over Hartnell. He's played far better on the top line and you can call it a coincidence but the top line has been on fire since the second he was placed on it. I absolutely think that much more to do with the fact that Hartnell was taken off than that Raffl was put on, but the fact is it's working right now so switching it would be stupid.
And your unsubstantiated "say so" means nothing to me either. You should re-read the post you quoted. It's about putting Schenn on the 1st line and Hartnell on the 2nd. Have a nice day.

Last edited by Damaged Goods: 12-27-2013 at 11:26 PM.
Damaged Goods is offline   Reply With Quote