Quote:
Originally Posted by FanIn80
I don't get why people are so focused on Monny's ability to drive the play. He literally plays on a line with probably one of the top three playmakers in the world.
You're right. If he he was better at driving the play then he'd be ranked much higher on the list of "Best Centers in the NHL." Of course, he'd also be playing somewhere else then, because you can't have two guys fighting for the same puck, and the chances of him being a better playmaker than Johnny are slim to none, so we'd just replace him for a different center whose skillset is closer to what Monny's is now...
...BECAUSE THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CENTER POSITION ON JOHNNY'S LINE ARE DIFFERENT THAN THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CENTER POSITION ON MOST OTHER LINES.
For the love of God, people. You can't have an "elite, play-driving #1C" on the same line as Johnny Gaudreau. Instead, you'll just have to settle for the elite, play-FINISHING #1C that we already have.
|
Sorry, but I disagree with you thoroughly and strongly.
Playing on a line with one of the top three playmakers in the world doesn't absolve him of a need for being a strong playmaker. When prepared teams focus on details in containing them, the Gaudreau-Monahan-X line has consistently lacked a counterattack option. It might work for much of the regular season, but when checking gets tight we've seen how easy they are to contain as a unit.
We saw it when Tanev and Edler shut Gaudreau-Monahan-Hudler down for the vast majority of the Canucks series. It wasn't until game 6, when the team was already down multiple goals and Hartley did some blender magic with Ferland while the Canucks completely collapsed in on themselves that that line started producing. Take away game 6 and you have what?
Monahan - 1 PP goal, 1 PP assist in the first five games
Gaudreau - 1 PP goal, 2 PP assists in the first five games
They were shut down at ES. It was a miracle, mostly due to the play of the Stajan and Backlund lines, that we took the lead in that series. Credit to them for their play in game six, no doubt, but it could easily have been too little, too late by then.
The next series wasn't much better
Gaudreau - 1 EV goal, 1 PP goal, 1 EV assist in five games
Monahan - 1 EV goal in five games
the next series was also a case of powerplay foolsgold, they were all goal-less at even strength
Gaudreau - 2 PP assists in four games
Monahan - 4 PP goals, 1 PP assist in four games
this year's series
Gaudreau - 1 EV assist in five games
Monahan - 1 EV goal, 1 EV assists in five games
^^ and that was against an Avs team that barely scraped into the playoffs, who were even rolling a rookie defenseman for half the series.
These are small sample sizes and it's possible it's all just confirmation bias. I get it. I'm not using it as evidence of anything - goal scoring events are highly random as it is (even I would tell you that Gibson robbed them a few times in the 2017 series). But I think when you're talking about your absolute best offensive line, even if the checking is tight, there are certain expectations, no? if Tanev and Edler know how to contain Gaudreau, shouldn't we have another option?
That brings me to your primary tenet - "
you can't have two guys fighting for the same puck".
This is hockey, a necessarily team sport. This isn't Russell Westbrook hogging a basketball for dubious triple doubles. Gaudreau is an elite hockey player. The idea that he's ever had to or ever will need to fight a linemate for the same puck is absolutely WRONG. He's worked with all kinds of players.
Look at one of my favourite Gaudreau goals. He makes a neutral zone breakup, his center Bennett picks up the loose puck, quick pivot and head up to Gaudreau for a quick pass to spark the entry, trails the play to get the drop pass back from Gaudreau, Gaudreau darts to the net for a tapin that relies on Bennett being able to thread the pass through:
Where are they "fighting for the same puck"?
And this is Sam Bennett, who according to CP has no vision, can't use his linemates, isn't a center, etc etc etc etc etc. It's not a former cup winner #1C like Toews or Kopitar or Kuznetsov, guys you are implying wouldn't work with Gaudreau as well as Monahan.
It's reductionist, ridiculous, and revisionist to think Gaudreau wouldn't benefit from a dynamic playmaking center. Did you not see the profound chemistry he had with Auston Matthews back on Team North America? Or with Nathan MacKinnon (though he was playing RW at the time)?
Good lines are able to take what the defense gives them. And I am not convinced the Gaudreau - Monahan combination is capable of that, because they are extremely one-dimensional in their attack. Gaudreau trying to wait out and fake out the defense until Monahan is open, and then Monahan shoots from the slot. Take that away and what really do they have?
You can never have enough playmakers. Especially not when we are talking about the center position - the position on the ice that gets the most space on the ice to actually make plays. Especially not on your top line that sees the other team's best shutdown players over a six, seven game playoff series with the preparation to key in on tendancies. The only time in recent memory that I've seen one playmaker carry a line to the extent that you describe was Evgeni Malkin making something out of nothing. But even that has an asterisk - Malkin
typically played on his team's second line and typically saw secondary coverage. The same applies to Patrick Kane on most of his great playoff runs when not with Toews - the Saad-Toews-Hossa combination took a lot of the serious coverage, so Kane ran wild with the freedom that allowed. That first line was able to continue to produce because they had a very versatile attack.
Any way I look at it, our top line is inherently flawed if they are expecting Gaudreau to do all the work. That extends to Lindholm too, I don't see him as a very dynamic playmaker. I don't think your vision of what a center for Gaudreau needs to do is fair to Gaudreau at all - it's far too simplistic and optimistic.