Quote:
Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction
I like keeping Gaudreau and Tkachuk on separate lines mainly because they are both such great playmakers. I think you can get the most out of them by putting them each on a line with two finishers.
|
It’s a very strong argument you make. The only counter arguments I can make are thus.
1. Gaudreau, Tkachuk, Monahan, Lindholm are all good playmakers and finishers. If you take Lindholm or Monahan off the top line and still want to make a super 1st line then you’d replace them with Tkachuk. If you want to have two of them on each line that’s another approach I like too.
2. The most compelling argument for uniting them is that Tkachuk compliments Gaudreau’s weaknesses so well. Tkachuk excels along the boards and in front of the net. Gaudreau struggles mightily in board battles and is too small to be a consistent net front presence. Lindholm does these things as well although not quite at the same level. That’s why I was arguing the ideal line to maximize Gaudreau might be with Lindholm-Tkachuk. Those guys would make so much space for him.
I don’t usually love indulging conspiracy theories but does anyone think Treliving May have been playing the long game with Tkachuk by keeping him with Backlund so long? Tkachuk will get paid but if he had been in Lindholm’s spot he might’ve had 100+ points and the negotiations might’ve been even harder. Will they finally unleash Tkachuk on the top line once he’s locked up longer term?