is it just me, or are they getting waaaaaaaaaaay too much ice time? im still not sure how renney justifies playing them 12-15 minutes a game. and tonight especially where dubinsky's line scored both goals and still only had 6:30 in ice time where hollweg and orr both had over 12 minutes. it just blows my mind, and this isn't the first time renney has done this.
i wonder though what its going to take for renney to see it. how many games is it going to cost us? with the way we are scoring now we can't afford to lose 12-15 even strength minutes where its pretty much guaranteed that we won't score.
there the only ones who come to play EVERY night. They are always up to the challenge and can shut down top lines (most of the time). I call them the Borrweggety line (B-orr-wegg-e-ty)
Though they were still a very responsible unit before, they have not been getting scored on much (if at all) in the past month. They're probably a + or even line in that time despite being matched up against the top lines often. They have been an excellent defensive unit.
Whats costing us games is not the HBO lines; its the crappy defense when the other lines are out there.
That being said, if the 3rd line continues playing well and plays defensive for 60 minutes every night, then they'll obviously start to get more ice time at HBO's expense I'm sure.
The problem with the 3rd line is that they are more of a defensive liability. Prucha and Dawes are smaller and get pushed around despite their effort. I like the DDP <BANG> line and hope they do get more ice time. I've been calling for Prucha to get more for a while now and with the way Dubi and Dawes are playing, they should get at least 10 mins if not 12-15. The problem is when the first two lines are each getting close to 20, that only leaves 20 for the 3rd/4th lines which is 10 a piece. When Betts & co get 12, it only leaves 8 for DDP <BANG>.
Though they were still a very responsible unit before, they have not been getting scored on much (if at all) in the past month. They're probably a + or even line in that time despite being matched up against the top lines often. They have been an excellent defensive unit.
Whats costing us games is not the HBO lines; its the crappy defense when the other lines are out there.
That being said, if the 3rd line continues playing well and plays defensive for 60 minutes every night, then they'll obviously start to get more ice time at HBO's expense I'm sure.
They have been on the ice for TWO GOALS over the last 15 game and given who they have played against that is fantastic even if they were on ice for only THREE Ranger goals...And this line really started playing well when Hollweg came back from hos benching....Still, as many have said, the way the DDP line is playing it deserves more ice time..At the expense of who is the question....No way HBO should get over 10-12 and on most nights they should get less, so thery are the likely and reasonable candidate...Unless the top two lines are stinking up the joint and we really need defense
Let's get serious here folks...there have been stretches over the past few weeks where the Betts line has been BY FAR the best line on the Rangers...let alone hardest working. So no, I do not have a problem with the ice time they have been getting. They deserve it.
My gripe is with how little ice time the Dubinsky line is getting. That line NEEDS more ice time. They can flat out play.
They have been on the ice for TWO GOALS over the last 15 game and given who they have played against that is fantastic even if they were on ice for only THREE Ranger goals...And this line really started playing well when Hollweg came back from hos benching....Still, as many have said, the way the DDP line is playing it deserves more ice time..At the expense of who is the question....No way HBO should get over 10-12 and on most nights they should get less, so thery are the likely and reasonable candidate...Unless the top two lines are stinking up the joint and we really need defense
What about penalties?
Do you know how many times they've taken them as opposed to drawing them?
to be exact, it's been at least 3 goals (they were on the ice for Tucker's goal in Toronto but ended up even).
Well, if you are that sure, then who am I to argue?....Still, I count two goals against when they were on the ice..1 against TOR and 1 against Montreal
Do you know how many times they've taken them as opposed to drawing them?
It can be a significant statistic.
No, I don't ..but we know that Hollweg took that moronic major and a few other penalties.Ditto for Orr....Still, I don;t think that diminshes the good job they have done, especially cosidering the minmal penalties they take going against top lines.....And they have drew a couple also...As well as all the other Rangers that have taken dumb penalties--ranging from Jagr to Hossa to Drury to Dubinsky to whoever......I know they are not a great line, get too much ice some times and I also think there will come a time where they begin to wilt defensively (unless Orr is replaced), but they have done a great job for the Rangers.
So, they've drawn 30 penalties, while commiting 37.
As of January 3rd, 2008, anyway..
Your counting misconducts and fights which doesn't even make sense (especially counting misconducts). Besides that Hollweg major and very few select other moments, I dont recall them making us shorthanded very often.
Your counting misconducts and fights which doesn't even make sense (especially counting misconducts). Besides that Hollweg major and very few select other moments, I dont recall them making us shorthanded very often.
I got it straight from a list that someone else made, I just answered the question. He didn't ask for non-fights. And I don't believe any of those are misconducts. So....
(B-orr-wegg-e-ty)
