needs to be looked in to. Kesler and Booth need a playmaker who can keep up with their speed. In the preseason we learned that Schroeder is as competent as Hodgson playing in a game with pros. Hes more defensively responsible than Hodgson and has just as much skill. Why not try it a few games this season?
If Shroeder actually made the team... that's a DIRTY DIRTY lineup.
Pinizzotto's shoulder still bothering him. According to Steve himself!
stevepinizzotto Steve Pinizzotto
Love the fan support!! To answer your question - my shoulder isn't healing like I want it to. Still working on it. #magicwandanyone
[edit]metric beat me to it.
[edit2] According to AV, good chance Salo will practice tomorrow and see how he feels. Not sure about Burrows, with back [injury] you never know. source: CDC
needs to be looked in to. Kesler and Booth need a playmaker who can keep up with their speed. In the preseason we learned that Schroeder is as competent as Hodgson playing in a game with pros. Hes more defensively responsible than Hodgson and has just as much skill. Why not try it a few games this season?
I think we are going to get there. Not to jinx anybody, but some of the core group are slower this season and they are going to be easier targets. Injuries will pile up and we'll see some Schroeder, I bet.
Schroeder does seem closer to being NHL ready this year. I'd love for him to get a look on the team, but that means Weise/Volpatti both have to go through waivers or (knock on wood) get injured.
Surprised that the team didn't call up Schroeder or Sweatt since Burrows is out. Ebbett is a decent player but it would've been nice to give one of those two guys some NHL experience.
Surprised that the team didn't call up Schroeder or Sweatt since Burrows is out. Ebbett is a decent player but it would've been nice to give one of those two guys some NHL experience.
Yeah, I believe AV was quite happy with Schroeder's defense during pre-season... I thought that would've warranted a shot by now with Burrows out.
Cool to hear that Raymond is practicing with the Canucks as of today. I hope he'll make some good progress and come back with that speed he had. I think he can play anywhere in our lineup, and I look forward to having him back.
Raymond is back to no contact. What's with the medical staff and Raymond? First they pick him up off the ice with a serious back injury and now this.
I still cringe when I watch the replay of him skating off the ice under his own steam and then being helped by a couple of players to the dressing room. I coached youth soccer and even we had drilled into us that you never do that!
I don't the problem is Booth being a PF. The problem is his lack of overall hockey sense and his below average passing skills. Those 2 deficiencies hold him back from being a good partner for Kesler IMO. Otherwise he has a lot of qualities you'd want from someone next to Kesler. He's fast, plays hard, goes in tough areas and has a good shot.
Unfortunately due to Kesler's game, he needs someone who will react better next to him - and for that hockey sense and passing skills are important. Something I don't think he needs as much next to Hodgson and the style of game he brings.
The argument was: What does Kes need most: PF vs. Playmaker. Many sided with the idea of the former. But now that it doesn't look like Booth will mesh with Kesler, it seems playmaking skill was what was missing.
Booth does _some_ things important to Kesler's game, but not the most important thing: pass. It's clear that this is the most important quality required. Which would make the people yearning for simply a PF to ride shotgun, wrong in their assessments.
Kesler needs, and has always needed a playmaker. Booth's addition and subsequent issues only illustrate this further. In other words, the PF vs. PLY argument is being made clear with what we are seeing happen between Booth and Kesler.
The argument was: What does Kes need most: PF vs. Playmaker. Many sided with the idea of the former. But now that it doesn't look like Booth will mesh with Kesler, it seems playmaking skill was what was missing.
Booth does _some_ things important to Kesler's game, but not the most important thing: pass. It's clear that this is the most important quality required. Which would make the people yearning for simply a PF to ride shotgun, wrong in their assessments.
Kesler needs, and has always needed a playmaker. Booth's addition and subsequent issues only illustrate this further. In other words, the PF vs. PLY argument is being made clear with what we are seeing happen between Booth and Kesler.
That's way too simplistic.
Not all PF have below average passing and hockey sense. If Booth had decent passing skills and saw the ice better, he'd an excellent fit next to Kesler - and there are a lot of PFs that do - like Horton, Neal, Backes, etc... In fact comparing all top-6 PFs in the league, Booth has to be among the worst when it comes to passing and overall hockey sense. IMO a PF with better puck skills would be a better fit next to Kesler than a playmaker with no physical presence. Maybe the best fit next to him is a guy like Clowe - who brings both an above average passing/playmaking ability and above average size/physical presence.
The problem with Booth is that he's a limited player. His size, speed and shooting make him a top-6 type player, but his overall puck skills and hockey sense make him better suited for the bottom-6.
Not all PF have below average passing and hockey sense. If Booth had decent passing skills and saw the ice better, he'd an excellent fit next to Kesler - and there are a lot of PFs that do - like Horton, Neal, Backes, etc... In fact comparing all top-6 PFs in the league, Booth has to be among the worst when it comes to passing and overall hockey sense. IMO a PF with better puck skills would be a better fit next to Kesler than a playmaker with no physical presence. Maybe the best fit next to him is a guy like Clowe - who brings both an above average passing/playmaking ability and above average size/physical presence.
The problem with Booth is that he's a limited player. His size, speed and shooting make him a top-6 type player, but his overall puck skills and hockey sense make him better suited for the bottom-6.
That goal he scored the other night makes me want to wait a bit longer before making that kind of determination. The truth is, guys that are in that continual 20 to 30 goal range have long dry spells (like Sammy, like Macey) and that is just part of the package. Booth may not score a ton, but like Raymond, Booth's speed may create chances for other players. And we may have a top nine that could score if they are all healthy at the same time. Gets back to the kind of team Gillis was promoting two years ago with three defensively responsible scoring lines.
Not all PF have below average passing and hockey sense. If Booth had decent passing skills and saw the ice better, he'd an excellent fit next to Kesler - and there are a lot of PFs that do - like Horton, Neal, Backes, etc... In fact comparing all top-6 PFs in the league, Booth has to be among the worst when it comes to passing and overall hockey sense. IMO a PF with better puck skills would be a better fit next to Kesler than a playmaker with no physical presence. Maybe the best fit next to him is a guy like Clowe - who brings both an above average passing/playmaking ability and above average size/physical presence.
The problem with Booth is that he's a limited player. His size, speed and shooting make him a top-6 type player, but his overall puck skills and hockey sense make him better suited for the bottom-6.
I find the PF/dangler-passer debate moot. We need both, we don't have either in the top 6 and arguably anywhere. Obviously for the 2nd line you wouldn't get be getting superstars, but ideally you'd want good player
Clowe-type would fill a big hole. We don't have a true PF. I don't think Booth is mean/agressive enough.
Eberle-type. We could also use a play maker who can carry the puck and make some shifty moves. Again we don't have one anywhere in the line up who can consistently embarass a Dman (or win us a SO), it'd be another dimension to the team that other teams would need to defend against. Doesn't have to be a huge guy just shifty and smart. I'm impressed with Hodgson but I don't think his hands (which are good) or his feet are fast.
A Clowe-Kesler-Eberle would add not 1 but 2 new dimensions to the team (obviously not suggesting those players since they aren't available but the idea is there).
I find the PF/dangler-passer debate moot. We need both, we don't have either in the top 6 and arguably anywhere. Obviously for the 2nd line you wouldn't get be getting superstars, but ideally you'd want good player
Clowe-type would fill a big hole. We don't have a true PF. I don't think Booth is mean/agressive enough.
Eberle-type. We could also use a play maker who can carry the puck and make some shifty moves. Again we don't have one anywhere in the line up who can consistently embarass a Dman (or win us a SO), it'd be another dimension to the team that other teams would need to defend against. Doesn't have to be a huge guy just shifty and smart. I'm impressed with Hodgson but I don't think his hands (which are good) or his feet are fast.
A Clowe-Kesler-Eberle would add not 1 but 2 new dimensions to the team (obviously not suggesting those players since they aren't available but the idea is there).
I fully believe that if we acquired Clowe all we would hear is "He doesn't have the foot speed or skill to keep up with Kesler" just... be happy, there is no BIG HOLE on the second line.
I'm wondering if we'll see Raymond get a conditioning stint in the AHL like Salo did last year, and hopefully help get his confidence back. I'm still shocked they'd even let him get off the ice like that in Game 6... why not err on the side of caution regardless of how sure you were? Seriously.
I fully believe that if we acquired Clowe all we would hear is "He doesn't have the foot speed or skill to keep up with Kesler" just... be happy, there is no BIG HOLE on the second line.
That's 2 guys that average 50+ points per year and are solid defensively (as much as we complained about Samuelsson). You can argue they are injured and that's your "big hole" if you want, but otherwise Booth has yet to prove he's as good as either and at nearly twice the cap hit.
That's 2 guys that average 50+ points per year and are solid defensively (as much as we complained about Samuelsson). You can argue they are injured and that's your "big hole" if you want, but otherwise Booth has yet to prove he's as good as either and at nearly twice the cap hit.
we have a ton of potential second line wingers (Raymond, Hodgson, Booth, Hansen, Higgins, even Lappy) We can bank on at least 2 of these guys stepping up at any given time. Of course it would be nice to have a first liner on the second line or upgrade the position but it is HARDLY a "hole"
needs to be looked in to. Kesler and Booth need a playmaker who can keep up with their speed. In the preseason we learned that Schroeder is as competent as Hodgson playing in a game with pros. Hes more defensively responsible than Hodgson and has just as much skill. Why not try it a few games this season?
Maybe in a year or two, but not yet.
I think the idea that Kesler and Booth need a fast playmaker is completely untrue. There are MANY lines where you have fast wingers and a slow center and they work well together. The wingers can push defenders back allowing their centerman more space. With Hodgsons 1 timer, that could be effective.
Booth-Hodgson-Kesler
I really want them to try this, I imagine they will eventually. Two fast wingers for Cody to hit with break away passes and create space for him.
Here on HF we over analyze chemistry too much. Sometimes things that should work don't work, and sometimes things that shouldn't work end up working to perfection. Burrows with the Sedins for example. I'm still liking the Booth-Kesler-Hodgson line too, I think they need more time to gel. You have a guy coming fresh into our system, a guy recovering from serious offseason surgery, and a rookie playing together on a line. I see flashes from these guys, so I'd like to see if they can get the kinks worked out.
I've read bloggers saying because Raymond is back in practice he'll be back in a couple of weeks. I think Gillis is far more correct in what he is saying given the injury Raymond had. Raymond needs to get into practice and start doing hockey "stuff" at a high intensity level. But it isn't to get his timing back , it will be to get his back strengthened and use to doing those things again. Only once they think the back is strong enough will the even consider the schedule for him to receive contact and get back into games.
I would imagine Raymond is still looking more at a 6 week time frame and that may be at the low side of things. There should be no rush to get him into the lineup and with this injury it truly is better safe than sorry.
I've read bloggers saying because Raymond is back in practice he'll be back in a couple of weeks. I think Gillis is far more correct in what he is saying given the injury Raymond had. Raymond needs to get into practice and start doing hockey "stuff" at a high intensity level. But it isn't to get his timing back , it will be to get his back strengthened and use to doing those things again. Only once they think the back is strong enough will the even consider the schedule for him to receive contact and get back into games.
I would imagine Raymond is still looking more at a 6 week time frame and that may be at the low side of things. There should be no rush to get him into the lineup and with this injury it truly is better safe than sorry.
This makes a lot more sense. Raymond's not coming back from some kind of sprain or relatively minor injury. Dude broke a damn vertebra. Take your time with him since he's not a huge upgrade on anyone we have at this time.
