HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > San Jose Sharks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Burns, future forward for life?

View Poll Results: Will burns spend more time on the ice as a forward or as a defenseman next season?
More time on the ice as a forward 30 41.10%
More time on the ice as a defenseman 43 58.90%
Voters: 73. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-15-2013, 01:54 AM
  #76
Pinkfloyd
Registered User
 
Pinkfloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Roseville
Country: United States
Posts: 34,156
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
I see Demers potential being around Gologoski (offense wise) at best. Not exactly a Boyle replacement, but not a bad 2nd unit option. I think it's pretty clear Boyle will not be a shark next season unless Wilson cannot unload him. If that is the case they either need to get super lucky, or move Burns back, I don't see much choice.
I think Demers would make an excellent top unit PP QB. He has that vision and offensive instinct to be at that level. He just needs that opportunity and a little faith from the coaching staff instead of a quick yank when he messes up.

And if Boyle goes, they will probably use Demers in that role as opposed to Burns since Burns isn't much of a play-maker with the puck from the defenseman's stand point. He shows that ability a lot more and a lot better when he's up front.

Pinkfloyd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2013, 10:32 AM
  #77
FeedingFrenzy
Registered User
 
FeedingFrenzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gene Parmesan View Post
Its not easy to find a top line winger or #1 defenseman. Who knows if Burns is even a true #1..he has the tools to be. Burns will most likely be back to defense next year but until then hes a winger and pretty damn good one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by StalockSuperfan View Post
As of tonight: St. Louis, Kunitz, Kane, Ovechkin, Hall, Kessel. That's six. Not "a ton." Six. Out of 30 teams with about 8 wingers on each team. Burns can't keep this up.
This team is more competitive with Burns at F1.. Why cant Burns keep it up?? He plays w/ an AllStar C and is a beast..He finishes the year with a ppg ..Sharks dont need a true #1 on D to compete. With the talent in the pipeline, no reason to move Burns back..Let Demers,Braun,Acolaste,Abeltshauser,Tennyson get playing time, Vlasic and Stu can hold the fort. If Boyle stays another year great, but if we trade him then I'd be ok with trying what we have and bring in a vet D if need be.
The only way Burns goes back to #1 Dman is the youngsters dont pan out in 2/3 years and our crop of F prospects blossom(Hertl,Nieto,Hamilton)..
Thinking 3/4 yrs from now:
Nieto-Juicy-Burns
Hertl-Pavs-hamilton
Stalberg-Shepp-wingles

Our future looks promising


Last edited by FeedingFrenzy: 04-15-2013 at 10:35 AM. Reason: add
FeedingFrenzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2013, 11:22 AM
  #78
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,936
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FeedingFrenzy View Post
This team is more competitive with Burns at F1.. Why cant Burns keep it up?? He plays w/ an AllStar C and is a beast..He finishes the year with a ppg ..Sharks dont need a true #1 on D to compete. With the talent in the pipeline, no reason to move Burns back..Let Demers,Braun,Acolaste,Abeltshauser,Tennyson get playing time, Vlasic and Stu can hold the fort. If Boyle stays another year great, but if we trade him then I'd be ok with trying what we have and bring in a vet D if need be.
The only way Burns goes back to #1 Dman is the youngsters dont pan out in 2/3 years and our crop of F prospects blossom(Hertl,Nieto,Hamilton)..
Thinking 3/4 yrs from now:
Nieto-Juicy-Burns
Hertl-Pavs-hamilton
Stalberg-Shepp-wingles

Our future looks promising
That defense will never win a cup. We are not saying he CAN'T keep it up, we are saying it's unlikely, and not to get to worked up about it.

Remember when Heatley scored a hat-trick his first game? Remember when Cheechoo won the RR? We are just saying to temper your excitement, he PROBABLY won't keep it up long term.

hockeyball is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2013, 12:06 PM
  #79
FeedingFrenzy
Registered User
 
FeedingFrenzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
That defense will never win a cup. We are not saying he CAN'T keep it up, we are saying it's unlikely, and not to get to worked up about it.

Remember when Heatley scored a hat-trick his first game? Remember when Cheechoo won the RR? We are just saying to temper your excitement, he PROBABLY won't keep it up long term.
I tend to be an optimist

Comparing Heaters 3 and Cheechoo RR is kind of silly... If Cheechoo doesnt have all those injury problems maybe he continues to produce at that pace. we'll never know

Heater is and will always be a pure goal scorer.

Again WHY is it unlikely that Burns wouldnt produce a PPG? What exactly is he missing?With a capable LW(Gali/Havlat) to compliment him and JT why not?? Big,strong,fast,great shot,lonnnnng reach,perfect mentality for a PF. All-star C......

FeedingFrenzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2013, 12:11 PM
  #80
Trojan35
Registered User
 
Trojan35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,492
vCash: 500
It's way easier to replace a Thornton wing than it is a top dman. He goes back to D as soon as the Sharks org pulls its head out of its ass, both in terms of forward depth and system.

Trojan35 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2013, 12:18 PM
  #81
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,936
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FeedingFrenzy View Post
I tend to be an optimist

Comparing Heaters 3 and Cheechoo RR is kind of silly... If Cheechoo doesnt have all those injury problems maybe he continues to produce at that pace. we'll never know

Heater is and will always be a pure goal scorer.

Again WHY is it unlikely that Burns wouldnt produce a PPG? What exactly is he missing?With a capable LW(Gali/Havlat) to compliment him and JT why not?? Big,strong,fast,great shot,lonnnnng reach,perfect mentality for a PF. All-star C......
Burns has injury issues too, and the point was that at the time we could have said the same thing about either. With Cheechoo it was injuries (and teams 'figuring him out') and with Heatley it was just a first game honeymoon situation and he petered off quickly after.

Burns certainly COULD do it, he does have the skillset, but that doesn't mean he will. Temper your expectations and then be happy if he beats them, but expecting him to maintain a ppg+ pace for the rest of his career is a pretty risky bet is all. **** happens, small sample size, etc.

Also, I'm not saying he would not make a good career forward in general, just that keeping the pace he's on now is asking a lot.

hockeyball is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2013, 12:36 PM
  #82
Tkachuk4MVP
23 Years of Fail
 
Tkachuk4MVP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 9,467
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
Burns has injury issues too, and the point was that at the time we could have said the same thing about either. With Cheechoo it was injuries (and teams 'figuring him out') and with Heatley it was just a first game honeymoon situation and he petered off quickly after.

Burns certainly COULD do it, he does have the skillset, but that doesn't mean he will. Temper your expectations and then be happy if he beats them, but expecting him to maintain a ppg+ pace for the rest of his career is a pretty risky bet is all. **** happens, small sample size, etc.

Also, I'm not saying he would not make a good career forward in general, just that keeping the pace he's on now is asking a lot.

While I agree that Burns probably won't keep up a PPG pace over a long period of time, the Cheechoo and Heatley comparisons are a little off base because those two have completely different skillsets. They're both primarily goal scorers and average skaters at best (that's being generous), so father time and the injury bug were always going to be less forgiving on them. I'm not expecting the same sort of rapid decline with Burns that took place with Cheech and Heater, dude just had hernia surgery and he's still the fastest skater on the team.

Tkachuk4MVP is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2013, 12:40 PM
  #83
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,936
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tkachuk4MVP View Post
While I agree that Burns probably won't keep up a PPG pace over a long period of time, the Cheechoo and Heatley comparisons are a little off base because those two have completely different skillsets. They're both primarily goal scorers and average skaters at best (that's being generous), so father time and the injury bug were always going to be less forgiving on them. I'm not expecting the same sort of rapid decline with Burns that took place with Cheech and Heater, dude just had hernia surgery and he's still the fastest skater on the team.
Neither am I, I'm just pointing out the rose colored glasses effect. At the time people were jumping all over themselves with excitement. Give it some time, and when he does have a drought it doesn't mean he's fallen off a cliff either.

If Burns does continue to put up the same numbers, you really kind of have to leave him at forward. If he drops back down to something like a .8ppg pace (which would be my guess) then you have a much tougher argument. I would prefer a .6ppg #1 defensemen over a .8ppg winger, if it came to that.

hockeyball is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2013, 12:47 PM
  #84
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
Neither am I, I'm just pointing out the rose colored glasses effect. At the time people were jumping all over themselves with excitement. Give it some time, and when he does have a drought it doesn't mean he's fallen off a cliff either.

If Burns does continue to put up the same numbers, you really kind of have to leave him at forward. If he drops back down to something like a .8ppg pace (which would be my guess) then you have a much tougher argument. I would prefer a .6ppg #1 defensemen over a .8ppg winger, if it came to that.
Has he ever put up a .6ppg as a D-man?

IMO, if you are a defenseman who can skate, transtioning to forward is relatively easily, especially if you have good hockey sense. I would not be surprised if Tennyson, Demers, Boyle, and Braun could all be decent forwards.

OrrNumber4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2013, 01:00 PM
  #85
do0glas
Registered User
 
do0glas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 6,498
vCash: 500
i think his career high is 46? as a d man. not quite .6. and we dont generate a ton of offense from the point in our system, so i wouldnt expect him to do it on the sharks.

is he the best replacement for dan boyle currently on our roster? yes

should he be moved back to d if he is a 65-70 point winger? tough call.

just remember pavelski is the only winger of that caliber in our roster that we could move back up. and we are back to square 1. burns allows pavs to be 3c and we are much better off because of it.

boyle has put up 2 points in the last 5 games. i wonder what someone like demers could do with that ice time or tennyson? as long as they had stuart/vlasic/hannon with them.

like ive said in this thread before. you cant make the decision until after the season. but with our current roster, it has to be this way.

do0glas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2013, 01:18 PM
  #86
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,936
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OrrNumber4 View Post
Has he ever put up a .6ppg as a D-man?

IMO, if you are a defenseman who can skate, transtioning to forward is relatively easily, especially if you have good hockey sense. I would not be surprised if Tennyson, Demers, Boyle, and Braun could all be decent forwards.
He got close one year.

It was just a hypothetical, I wasn't saying he had, just given those two options I take the d-man.

hockeyball is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2013, 01:21 PM
  #87
WTFetus
Moderator
Most popular combo
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 12,142
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OrrNumber4 View Post
IMO, if you are a defenseman who can skate, transtioning to forward is relatively easily, especially if you have good hockey sense. I would not be surprised if Tennyson, Demers, Boyle, and Braun could all be decent forwards.
Speed makes you a bottom-6 player, speed and high-end skill makes you a first liner. What Burns has that those 4 don't have are a mix of speed, size, and power. Those 4 could be 3rd liners, but I wouldn't want them in the Top-6. Boyle, especially in years prior, scored a ton of his goals by sneaking up into the play when the defense wasn't watching. That option won't be open as a winger.

Quote:
Originally Posted by do0glas View Post
is he the best replacement for dan boyle currently on our roster? yes

should he be moved back to d if he is a 65-70 point winger? tough call.
I agree. And Burns wouldn't just be a 65-70 point winger, he'd be a 65-70 point F1. Again, this really depends on the trade market. A #1 D is very hard to find, but a high-end effective F1 is also very hard to find. Which is harder is still up for debate.

WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2013, 01:56 PM
  #88
TheSandman
Registered User
 
TheSandman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: San Jose
Posts: 1,184
vCash: 500
I'm not sold on Burns as a #1D. He has a ton of skill but is a bit of a loose canon and lacks poise. His strengths are skating, shooting, and barreling his way to the net - why not let him use those skills as a forward?

If he dries up and comes back to Earth, then ok. But I don't see why he wouldn't be able to maintain a good scoring pace throughout the year even if it's not PPG.

TheSandman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2013, 02:02 PM
  #89
Tkachuk4MVP
23 Years of Fail
 
Tkachuk4MVP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 9,467
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSandman View Post
I'm not sold on Burns as a #1D. He has a ton of skill but is a bit of a loose canon and lacks poise. His strengths are skating, shooting, and barreling his way to the net - why not let him use those skills as a forward?

If he dries up and comes back to Earth, then ok. But I don't see why he wouldn't be able to maintain a good scoring pace throughout the year even if it's not PPG.

I might agree if he hadn't been our best defenseman by a mile in the only playoff series he's played in for the Sharks. I think he absolutely could be a #1, especially if paired with Pickles in the long term.

Tkachuk4MVP is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2013, 02:16 PM
  #90
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
Speed makes you a bottom-6 player, speed and high-end skill makes you a first liner. What Burns has that those 4 don't have are a mix of speed, size, and power. Those 4 could be 3rd liners, but I wouldn't want them in the Top-6. Boyle, especially in years prior, scored a ton of his goals by sneaking up into the play when the defense wasn't watching. That option won't be open as a winger.



I agree. And Burns wouldn't just be a 65-70 point winger, he'd be a 65-70 point F1. Again, this really depends on the trade market. A #1 D is very hard to find, but a high-end effective F1 is also very hard to find. Which is harder is still up for debate.
True. The Sharks have options here. If they move Boyle, they'd have the cash to spend on another top-6 forward:

Havlat-Thornton-Top6winger
Marleau-Couture-Wingels
Galiardi-Pavelski-Sheppard
McCarthy-Desjardins-Burish

Burns-Irwin
Braun-Vlasic
Demers-Stuart

The defense is not perfect and relies on Braun and Demers stepping up their game, but that isn't a bad lineup. Plus, the Sharks have the capspace to add another tweener like Torres and/or sign someone like Mark Streit.

Or, they can go with what they have and sign someone like Torres:

Torres-Thornton-Havlat
Marleau-Couture-Wingels
Galiardi-Pavelski-Sheppard
McCarthy-Desjardins-Burish

Boyle-Irwin
Burns-Vlasic
Demers-Stuart
Braun

That is an excellent defense and a forward group that could work if things luck out. You have to count on Galiardi, Sheppard, and Wingels stepping up. There is also some flexibility in that lineup; Torres and Wingels look good together, Marleau can play with Thornton, etc. The Sharks have the capspace to add a third-line guy like Miettinen...

OrrNumber4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2013, 02:46 PM
  #91
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,537
vCash: 500
The #1's that carry their teams to the promised land offensively tend to be assist guys rather than goal scorers. There are #1 winners that do it defensively and also have cannons but they tend to need that additional assist guy on the blueline who may not be elite.

Boyle is a bit of a hybrid and Burns is more of a cannon (like Souray, Lubo, etc.). I don't ever see Burns at that elite level of playmaking skills to be the assist guy. Demers is more the assist type although he isn't showing it this year. As examples of hybrids see Ehrhoff and Wiz with Pronger as the premier in that category. For the premier assist guys see Markov and Lidstrom. For a pure cannon see Green (the Caps haven't figured out how to mix and match Green (cannon) and Carlson (assists)).

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2013, 03:10 PM
  #92
Arrch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: NorCal
Country: United States
Posts: 4,373
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OrrNumber4 View Post
True. The Sharks have options here. If they move Boyle, they'd have the cash to spend on another top-6 forward:
We can't sign top-6 players and we shouldn't be trading assets to get one. So the only way to get one is to develop one; Doing that doesn't require nearly as much immediate cap space.

Arrch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2013, 03:29 PM
  #93
AstroDan
Stars, cars, guitars
 
AstroDan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NorCal
Country: United States
Posts: 2,214
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
My point, is, and was always, that Burns is not likely to keep up this pace and expecting him to do so is probably expecting too much. That's it. You two are the ones who took one little phrasing WAY too literally and ran with it.
We, as Sharks fans live to expect too much! (Look at my avatar!)

I agree with you HB. We paid a nice price to get a future #1 D. Not a good winger.
#1 D's are much harder to come by than good, even great wingers., IMHO.

AstroDan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2013, 03:52 PM
  #94
MarleauApologist
fun must be alwalys
 
MarleauApologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: San Francisco, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 7,399
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arrch View Post
We can't sign top-6 players and we shouldn't be trading assets to get one. So the only way to get one is to develop one; Doing that doesn't require nearly as much immediate cap space.
Nieto and Hertl probably aren't ready to play top 6 next year, but then again, nobody thought Couture would score 30 goals in his first season so meh.

I'd like to see us go after Viktor Stalberg and Jaromir Jagr. If we trade Boyle for futures and JT for stuff from the Blues and Perron we save 13 mil cap space, and these guys would only cost us about 8m, which would fit with the decreasing cap, and re-sign Raffi for 2. Then we can run

Stalberg-Couture-Marleau
Havlat-Pavelski-Perron
Jagr-Hertl-Torres
Desjardins-Sheppard-Wingels

Vlasic-Burns
Stuart-Demers
Braun-Irwin

And also fix that prospect pool.

MarleauApologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2013, 05:55 PM
  #95
FeedingFrenzy
Registered User
 
FeedingFrenzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkfloyd View Post
I think Demers would make an excellent top unit PP QB. He has that vision and offensive instinct to be at that level. He just needs that opportunity and a little faith from the coaching staff instead of a quick yank when he messes up.
And if Boyle goes, they will probably use Demers in that role as opposed to Burns since Burns isn't much of a play-maker with the puck from the defenseman's stand point. He shows that ability a lot more and a lot better when he's up front.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
Neither am I, I'm just pointing out the rose colored glasses effect. At the time people were jumping all over themselves with excitement. Give it some time, and when he does have a drought it doesn't mean he's fallen off a cliff either.

If Burns does continue to put up the same numbers, you really kind of have to leave him at forward. If he drops back down to something like a .8ppg pace (which would be my guess) then you have a much tougher argument. I would prefer a .6ppg #1 defensemen over a .8ppg winger, if it came to that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OrrNumber4 View Post
Has he ever put up a .6ppg as a D-man?

IMO, if you are a defenseman who can skate, transtioning to forward is relatively easily, especially if you have good hockey sense. I would not be surprised if Tennyson, Demers, Boyle, and Braun could all be decent forwards.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
Speed makes you a bottom-6 player, speed and high-end skill makes you a first liner. What Burns has that those 4 don't have are a mix of speed, size, and power. Those 4 could be 3rd liners, but I wouldn't want them in the Top-6. Boyle, especially in years prior, scored a ton of his goals by sneaking up into the play when the defense wasn't watching. That option won't be open as a winger.



I agree. And Burns wouldn't just be a 65-70 point winger, he'd be a 65-70 point F1. Again, this really depends on the trade market. A #1 D is very hard to find, but a high-end effective F1 is also very hard to find. Which is harder is still up for debate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSandman View Post
I'm not sold on Burns as a #1D. He has a ton of skill but is a bit of a loose canon and lacks poise. His strengths are skating, shooting, and barreling his way to the net - why not let him use those skills as a forward?

If he dries up and comes back to Earth, then ok. But I don't see why he wouldn't be able to maintain a good scoring pace throughout the year even if it's not PPG.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AstroDan View Post
We, as Sharks fans live to expect too much! (Look at my avatar!)

I agree with you HB. We paid a nice price to get a future #1 D. Not a good winger.
#1 D's are much harder to come by than good, even great wingers., IMHO.
PF-agree

HB-For Burns to do .66ppg at the D spot, we would need to have the wingers to actual score.. Burns at F1 gives him far more chances at scoring close to a ppg.

Orr4- You play Burns at F1 because of our young players coming up. We are the only team in the world who refuses to throw the kids to the wolves.Other teamss do with some success, why cant we? How would a Abeltshauser-Vlasic pairing look for example?

WTF-Sharks have a good young group of Dmen, its not like Brent Burns is all they have. In this situation I feel Burns F1 is more important to the future of this team.

Sandman- I think along those lines as well.

AD- again if our farm system stunk Burns goes back to D.. We have the makings of some good young players.Add the fact Larry Robinson will be sinking his teeth into them, what more could we ask for??

FeedingFrenzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2013, 06:05 PM
  #96
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,936
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FeedingFrenzy View Post
[/B]
HB-For Burns to do .66ppg at the D spot, we would need to have the wingers to actual score.. Burns at F1 gives him far more chances at scoring close to a ppg.
That's not how hockey strategy works. Every player is not Gretzky, they cannot create offense out of thin air all by themselves. In fact there are few players in history that can truly do that (consistently). Everyone else creates offense out of opportunity created by their team-mates the vast majority of the time.

Let's say for instance you decide, for whatever reason, to tell your defensemen to not enter the zone during offensive situations. The opposing team is going to see that your defensemen are not participating in the offensive play and thus are free to cover your 3 forward with their 5 players. You are going to have a VERY hard time scoring in that situation.

The same is true when you have defensemen who are not an offensive threat. The opposing players know this and do not respect those two players, they are free to 'cheat' and not cover the blue line as heavily and focus on the forwards. If you iced a team with nothing but defensive defensemen (with the offensive ability of say Douglas Murray) your forward production would also decrease dramatically.

You must have players that are a potent offensive threat on the point or you are making your forwards jobs way too hard. Boyle provides that, Burns provides that. Even when they are not actively getting points they are providing a huge distraction to the opposing team and creating time and space for the forwards.

That is why a .6ppg defender is more important than a .8ppg forward. Or a .5ppg defender and a .7ppg forward, etc. Defensive points are worth more than forward points, by a fair margin.

hockeyball is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2013, 06:09 PM
  #97
do0glas
Registered User
 
do0glas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 6,498
vCash: 500
i dont even know what type of numbers id look up for something like that. but offensive production from burns at F1 and pavs at 3C seems to have jumped compared to the first half of the season.

although burns wasnt on the blue line very much this season, so maybe its just the impact to this specific roster...not necessarily indicative of a longer term solution.

do0glas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2013, 06:23 PM
  #98
Led Zappa
Tomorrow Today!
 
Led Zappa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,399
vCash: 500
Being able to roll 3 lines instead of 2 is a lot more important than any dman outside of a Pronger, Chara and maybe a couple others.

__________________

Youth Movement! Tally Ho...
Led Zappa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2013, 06:24 PM
  #99
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 17,936
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Led Zappa View Post
Being able to roll 3 lines instead of 2 is a lot more important than any dman outside of a Pronger, Chara and maybe a couple others.
I don't care who your forward group is, if you don't have threats on your blueline your offensive production is going to diminish for your entire group. If we didn't have Boyle we would have serious problems.

hockeyball is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-15-2013, 06:27 PM
  #100
Led Zappa
Tomorrow Today!
 
Led Zappa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,399
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
I don't care who your forward group is, if you don't have threats on your blueline your offensive production is going to diminish for your entire group. If we didn't have Boyle we would have serious problems.
And I don't care how you word it. I stand by what I said. And according to this board we don't even have Boyle right now. We have Boyle lite.

Led Zappa is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:18 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.