Shaggy is very solid defensively, not a problem if he plays 4th line for a bit.
Ideally speaking he is a little higher in the lineup but Rosie played well and has a really high ceiling.
If he is solid defensively then it would have made more sense to have him on wing to Backlund-Coleman instead of Dube(who, IMO, is not solid defensively).
Loved that bit about Coronato saying it was the fastest hockey he's ever played. It goes back to a lot of the things I keep saying about potentially over ripening in the lower leagues, or even just giving some of the "on the cusp" guys a game or two of experience to take back with them to their lower leagues.
Wolf's only NHL exposure has been preseason or game 82 last year, which was a complete nothing game. I know it's a hard trade off, because (especially with a goalie) you're potentially trading 2 points for giving them some valuable exposure... but if you've never experienced the phyiscal and mental speed of NHL hockey in games that matter, I don't know how (again, especially for a goalie) someone can prepare for that.
A player can take a few games and even be sheltered for a time while they adjust - but there's no such thing as sheltering a goalie, or giving them a few games to get their timing up to speed.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to FanIn80 For This Useful Post:
5 on 5 the Flames will roll the lines with whoever is going getting extra ice. Flames depth is their strength IMO
I thought the 4th line looked good last night. I think they finished the night around 7.5 mins, +PP time for Rosie. They weren't exactly rolling 4 lines. Maybe I missed something.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to gvitaly For This Useful Post:
I thought the 4th line looked good last night. I think they finished the night around 7.5 mins, +PP time for Rosie. They weren't exactly rolling 4 lines. Maybe I missed something.
You're correct, 4th line played less than others 5 on 5. To say that team is rolling 4 lines or that forward depth is a strength is overstating it. That 4th line that played last night is made up of a waiver pickup and two players who still need to firmly establish themselves as NHLers. It does have some potential though and it is dirt cheap.
Where the Flames do have depth is in lines 1 to 3, if they can get them all rolling.
You're correct, 4th line played less than others 5 on 5. To say that team is rolling 4 lines or that forward depth is a strength is overstating it. That 4th line that played last night is made up of a waiver pickup and two players who still need to firmly establish themselves as NHLers. It does have some potential though and it is dirt cheap.
I didn't look too closely at their deployment/usage, but from what I saw, I liked very much. It was a home game so hard to assess if they were sheltered much.
Will be interesting to see the line combos when Pelletier comes back from injury and who gets bumped from the top 9.
__________________ It's only game. Why you heff to be mad?
It sure seems like Sharangovich is not impressing Husks. Started off on PP1 and is now not on either unit. Bumped from line 1 to 2 to 4.
Hopefully it’s just an attempt to balance some lines but you’re right… it does seem like Huska is not impressed enough to put him in the top six. Which, if that persists, is too bad since he was traded for a top six forward + a third round pick. If he becomes a fourth line player for this team, it would have been better to get a better pick (like a second round pick if it was available) rather than turning him into a diminished return.
If sharangovich and osterle were the guys he didn't like, it's good to see he's wasting no time making adjustments. I'm sure they'll be given opportunities to work their way into/up the line up again. But I'm glad huska is proactively working to ice the best group he can rather than pushing beffudling experiments well beyond when they stop making sense like his predecessor did.
The Following User Says Thank You to TrentCrimmIndependent For This Useful Post:
Huska sure is a good communicator and articulate speaker. Press conferences must be a lot more enjoyable for the media and I imagine the dressing room must be too. I don't get the impression he's a softie though and he seems to have his own vision. I hope things work out with him. Seems like he could turn into a great coach.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Fan in Exile For This Useful Post:
Hopefully it’s just an attempt to balance some lines but you’re right… it does seem like Huska is not impressed enough to put him in the top six. Which, if that persists, is too bad since he was traded for a top six forward + a third round pick. If he becomes a fourth line player for this team, it would have been better to get a better pick (like a second round pick if it was available) rather than turning him into a diminished return.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It’s always hard to evaluate a trade after the fact. I could see the rationale of the deal particularly when people were suggesting Toffoli wanted 5 or 6 more years and a raise. If people are against Lindholm then I can imagine Re upping Toffoli. He also was a Darryl booster so it may have been better to move on as well. In return they got a younger player with some potential and a draft pick. It wasn’t a steal but seemed fair given the other trades made around that time.
I really want to see Huberdeau-Lindholm-Kadri for a game or two. The rare time they are together they look good. It's our best bet at finding our Gaudreau-Lindholm-Tkachuk caliber line.
Coleman-Backlund-Mangiapane is a competent second line, and they have the pieces to round out a functional bottom 6.
The Following User Says Thank You to kehatch For This Useful Post:
