View Single Post
03-21-2007, 07:07 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,400
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by thinkwild View Post
Well yes, he’s played there a few times, including many games on pp’s and a couple 5 on 3’s. He’s had opportunities to step up, but he hasn’t produced as much as eaves or McAmmond there yet. But if you are looking for excuses for Comrie, he has also been playing through injury apparently. Comrie has some excuses I agree
Okay, but playing there on the PP is not the same as playing on the line 5-on-5. Also, I don't think I'm looking for or making excuses for Comrie in thinking his good play of late has earned him a fair shot.
Originally Posted by thinkwild
As you say, the line didn’t look good with him on it. You can say it 3 times and click your heels, but Kelly has produced there and Comrie hasn’t had games with that line where all of us have afterwards said, wow he really clicks there, lets leave him there. Even those pulling for Comrie,, are generally hoping to give him some more time there hoping he will finally show something. But he hasn’t yet. Its late in the year now. But he will also have equal opportunity to demonstrate his chemistry on the top line just like eaves, mcammond, kelly, neil and alfie of course. All of whom have shown real chemistry on that line at times so far in their limited opportunities.
For starters, Neil was TERRIBLE on that line. Secondly, Sapyrkin and McAmmond are the only guys that I'd say have had "limited" opportunities on the top line.

I also can't remember Kelly ever significantly producing on the top line -- even Murray would say "that isn't his job there," and later on in this post, you said that people should appreciate everything he brings outside of points -- so what does this prove? No, I didn't think he was an ideal fit there, and yes, it was partially because there was a long stretch when he would flub golden scoring opportunity after golden scoring opportunity, and from a scoring line, that gets frustrating. Feeling that way and appreciating the skill set he does have are not mutually exclusive. I don't judge anyone by the scoresheet alone.

And I don't understand why any of this even matters, to be honest with you. I'm not attacking Kelly here, or pitting him against Comrie. I don't even prefer Comrie on the top line in the long run; I just think he should get as fair a look as the other people you listed.
Originally Posted by thinkwild
That’s ok, you can disagree, i don’t expect everyone to be man enough to admit they were wrong. But facts are Kelly’s simple style worked excellently with alfie and heater, making them a top line in the league. To suggest otherwise simply means logic has left you as a friend.

And Kelly brought Spezza and heater out of their slump and looked real good there which is something we havent been able to say about Comrie yet, much as I wish we could.
Heh, I wish you could disagree with me without belittling my opinion.

If you look again at what you quoted, I specifically said that I thought his style worked very well with Heatley and Alfredsson in that time period. (And it would be grossly unfair to Heatley and Alfie's amazing play during that stretch to suggest that that was all Kelly, just as it would be grossly unfair to Kelly to suggest that he had no part in it.) I just don't believe it works the same way on wing with Heatley and Spezza, which is a completely different thing. Hell, even the Heatley-Kelly-Alfie line has lost most of the magic by the time Spezza came back, which, if I recall correctly, was part of the reason that Spezza and Heatley were reunited.

Honestly, while it may well have happened, I don't recall Kelly bringing Spezza and Heatley out of a slump so I can't comment on that.
Originally Posted by thinkwild
I know you don’t want him to be top 6, your biases are ingrained you have much bashing saying otherwise to protect. But Kelly’s not top 6, he has just shown some chemistry to be able to do it temporarily if the team needs a shakeup.


Yes, this is exactly what Galley and them were talking about when they said most fans were unable to appreciate why coaches all like Kelly, and put him in those situations, and vote him first star when he gets no goals or points. Many cant appreciate him until he gets points on the scoreboard. As is increasingly becoming clear, it is not Murray that overrates him, it is you that cannot properly evaluate him.
. . . What? If you think that preferring him in a certain role is the same thing as bashing him, then I have no idea what to say. Believe it or not, my opinions aren't based on biases or trying to prove myself right in spite of any logic that might stand in my way. I'm happy to eat crow about anything about which I've been wrong -- Kelly included.

To sum up: I'm happy to see him playing well. I simply think he's better in certain places in the lineup than he is in others, just like pretty much everyone else in the lineup. Spezza's my favourite player, and I'm sure I'd find him godawful on a checking line, because that isn't his strength. I prefer Kelly on a line like his current one to being on a scoring line. I fail to see how wanting him to perform at his maximum comfort level to his maximum abilities is so insulting. This is not The World v. Kelly here.

Anyway, this was a nice thread, so now I will return it to its regularly scheduled appreciation.

Last edited by hockeycountry: 03-21-2007 at 07:13 PM.
hockeycountry is offline   Reply With Quote