View Single Post
Old 12-13-2013, 09:17 AM   #1011
thefoss1957
Franchise Player
 
thefoss1957's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Chicago Native relocated to the stinking desert of Utah
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeteMoss View Post
Regarding the Blackhawks/Pens vs Kings/Bruins model. The Blackhawks/Pens model works if you're willing to be extremely terrible (or get incredibly lucky with the lottery in Pitttsburgh's case) and get high picks for a few years. The Pens have Malkin/Crosby, Hawks have Toews/Kane drafted in top 2.
Pete...Only Kane was "top 2"...The first #1 pick in 'Hawk history...Toews was #3...and I submit, as good as these two are, it is the gems in round 2 and up that they've developed, along with getting complimentary FAs that fit the style of play they've installed, AND the total depth in that, even if the 3rd or 4th line is caught out on the ice what would normally seem to be a disadvantageous match-up, all are competent enough in the 200 ft. game to not be outmatched so badly...even the guys on line 4 can get a respectable cycle going against other team's best. This was true of both Cup winning rosters...Q seems to like to match particular lines, but still can and often does have 4 lines rolled in all situations, with some degree of comfort.

The quotes I saw of Burke's, about wanting "Black and Blue", reminded me of Sutter hockey...and both our teams had only limited success with THAT style...and the forward roster for that was the old Two "scoring" lines, one "checking" line, and a 4th line of specialists (PK guys, enforcers, etc.)...easier to match up against, and liable to be exploited when the lesser lines are caught out.
__________________
"If the wine's not good enough for the cook, the wine's not good enough for the dish!" - Julia Child (goddess of the kitchen)
thefoss1957 is offline   Reply With Quote