Tkachuk and Lindholm as co-1C

[Jiri Hrdina]

I think sometimes gifs don't help a conversation, but in this case it was a simple visual to make the point. He could have written out "I think you are trying to put a square peg in a round hole and it won't work" but the gif communicates the same point.
Nothing wrong with it.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

I'm just trying to stimulate discussion. A smarmy gif isn't that. You are just as condescending as anyone on this board, it's funny you bring that up.

At least I do it regarding things I know something about

It was just a gif, not sure how it was smarmy.

Square peg, round hole. Like trying a natural LW as your #1 C. Why not just put Lindholm there instead? Why would he share duties when he's an actual center and one of our best 2-way players?

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Premise: It's impossible to win without a #1C
Problem: We don't have a #1 C
Solution: Use a guy with no experience as a C, and platoon him with another guy who isn't a #1C, thus not actually solving the stated problem

Do you see why you might be getting some push back on this idea?

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

It was funny and not a big deal, this entire thread would read different had to not reacted that way.



That’s it then? I guess we’re doomed.

Fair enough. How do you respond to that? Basically calling me a stupid child is what I take from that.

It's just funny coming from the guy who wants to see Gaudreau traded for a bag of 2nd line maybes and a bloated contract.

I took some time to come up with a post that I felt addressed some team issues and I'm being compared to a baby and having my hockey knowledge questioned. Tough crowd. Ffs Lindholm is described as his RW/C who would help with the heavy lifting bit that is ignored completely.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

The way this team is built bugs the hell out of me. There is no 1C and you can't win without one. Our three best forwards are wingers.

Well, this is just not true. I assume that your list comprises Gaudreau, Lindholm, and Tkachuk, and then I must also assume that Lindholm in your evaluation is designated a winger. In the first place, I am not the least convinced that Lindholm is a better player than Monahan. Since he was drafted Sean Monahan ranks #31 in total production through seven seasons (#18 among centres), and #16 in goals. Since the 2014–15 season Monahan has scored more than Patrice Bergeron, Ryan O'Reilly, Jonathan Toews, Logan Couture and Ryan Getzlaf. While still developing, Monahan has produced more than five of the NHL's top centres all playing at the top of their games. He is not a perfect, prototypical top-line centre, but he is definitely better than merely a great #2.

Second, Lindholm is not properly classified as a winger, especially because even while playing predominantly on the wing he still does things on the ice that centres characteristically do. For his entire career he has been designated a centre—he's more of a hybrid forward who looks like he can play either position equally well.

1C's are impossible to acquire unless you are a lottery team. What does BT do? I've posted a lot on this topic but the answer might be right in front of us or maybe I'm thinking too far out of the box, I don't know. My idea hinges on signing Hall or getting a fast north/south LW with skill, but why not try Tkachuk at 1C? I know these things rarely work out (think Tanguay and Cammalleri as 1C)

There is a reason this switch pretty much never works out. There are tonnes of instances in which players drafted as centres make the shift to the wing at the NHL level; Tanguay is a good example of that here. But are there any cases in which a player who has developed his entire career as a winger, was drafted as a winger and starts his NHL career as a winger has successfully made the switch to centre? To being the most important centre on his NHL team? I cannot think of any.

I think a better approach would be to continue working with the team's existing top centres—Monahan and Lindholm—in hopes that they can make the necessary adjustments to become everything we hope they can be. If at all possible, upgrade at the position through a trade, but this seems unlikely. In any event these options strike me as much more viable avenues to improvement than asking Tkachuk to play a position at the highest level that he has never played.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

Premise: It's impossible to win without a #1C

Problem: We don't have a #1 C

Solution: Use a guy with no experience as a C, and platoon him with another guy who isn't a #1C, thus not actually solving the stated problem



Do you see why you might be getting some push back on this idea?

Sure, I guess, whatever.

Let's just keep on keeping on with what's clearly not working then.

How about some actual solutions instead of poking holes in mine if you disagree? I am well aware that it is a long shot. I even referenced Cammi and Tanguay as memorable failures. Say it won't work, but maybe provide more than that? Or is their solutions to literally circle the drain until we finally suck so bad we can at long last draft our 1C?

How do we get our 1C if my idea is so stupid? Are we to just keep cheering hopelessly for this team for another 5-7 years while we wait for the cyclical rebuild?

[Gaskal]

Now you're just sulking.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

Thanks for the well thought out response. Let me guess, Morgan Frost will fix the problem if only we can find a way to acquire him.

Hey, at least Morgan Frost has played center at some point in his life, and did so to a high degree of success.

Did you even read the post or did you just read the title and decide to go fishing for thanks?

No, I just recognized stupid the minute the I read the title. Of course I read the post, and it made no sense. Tkachuk has never been a center and playing him there would force him to learn a new position. It is ridiculous to think that you could just drop a winger into the middle and believe that success is likely to follow. Do you know how many players who have been centers their whole lives growing up can't cut it in the NHL and have to shift to the wing where there is less responsibility? Asking a winger to switch to center is a huge ask. Doing it on the top line is just crazy. You are trying to force a square peg into a round hole. Plain. And. Simple.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Sorry for wasting everyone's time. Close it down, there's probably no good discussion to come from this. Just trying to think outside the box but that means l lack hockey knowledge apparently.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Gaskal

Now you're just sulking.

Fair enough, you're probably right.

[GreenLantern2814]

Tkachuk isn’t a centre.

There was a better argument for converting Iggy to a centre back in the day (he was the best face off man on the team, after all).

Nothing about Tkachuk’s game screams centre.

Meanwhile, everything about Lindholm says the guy is a C. Put him there.

Tkachuk-Lindholm-X
Gaudreau-Monahan-X
X-Backlund-X
X-Ryan-X

Christ this forward group is shallow.

[Strange Brew]

Not sure why people can't disagree with a poster's idea without commenting on their lack of hockey knowledge. The GIF was kind of funny though and summarized the response nicely.

While Tkachuk has some qualities you'd like to see in a C, no doubt there are reasons he hasn't played there. Skating comes to mind first and foremost. It's highly unusual to see NHL wingers convert to C and I doubt it's because no one has thought of it. Plus you hate having your #1C spend as much time in the box as Tkachuk does.

I don't disagree that having an elite #1C is a critical component of being a Cup contender. Before focusing on trading Gaudreau, I'd like our GM to target any and all possibilities for acquiring the best C possible. And maybe that's trading for a high draft pick.

And then identifying the pieces on the team needed to acquire such a player.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

...Might as well keep going with what isn't working...

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

...truly I think we are basically screwed until a 1C can be secured... I guess keep trying the same failing thing, over and over... Should be fun watching this team bottom out over a 5-7 year stretch...

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

...Let's just keep on keeping on with what's clearly not working then...

You keep saying this stuff, and I don't buy it. Yes, things were not working well this past year, but in a bad stretch it seems like an overkill to simply give up. I think it's shortsighted to assert that this team is incapable of winning a championship with a 25-year-old top-15-producing centre.

[Inglewood Jack]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Since the 2014–15 season Monahan has scored more than Patrice Bergeron, Ryan O'Reilly, Jonathan Toews, Logan Couture and Ryan Getzlaf.

my opinion is that Monahan certainly produces points like a #1 centre, but to my eye doesn't play like one (counter-intuitive I know). when I think of those other centres you listed, they spend a good chunk of their ice time bullying guys off the puck, carrying it into the offensive zone, and being the focal point for defenders to chase, leaving his linemates open for prime scoring chances if he decides not to take one himself.

when I think of Monahan's ice time, I see him skating up ice with the puck on Gaudreau's stick (which got there either from the defenseman or from Monahan immediately passing it to him early in the rush), and then looking for undefended space in the slot to pull off a quick shot if Johnny can get the puck there. that's nearly the opposite of the traditional centre - winger relationship, and it basically means your actual #1 C is 5' 9" and 150 pounds. that's why shutting down the Flames offense has become awfully simple this past year.

lots of people here believe that Mony's got untapped puck carrying skills in him. if he does, I will rejoice but until then, the way he currently plays puts a significant cap on this team's true potential.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

You keep saying this stuff, and I don't buy it. Yes, things were not working well this past year, but in a bad stretch it seems like an overkill to simply give up. I think it's shortsighted to assert that this team is incapable of winning a championship with a 25-year-old top-15-producing centre.

There's more to being a C than pure production. Monahan is great at producing but the other guys ahead of him are better 2 way players and/or puck distributors. There's a reason other teams rush to match their top line with ours.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

I think sometimes gifs don't help a conversation, but in this case it was a simple visual to make the point. He could have written out "I think you are trying to put a square peg in a round hole and it won't work" but the gif communicates the same point.
Nothing wrong with it.

GIFs are thank bait generally. New era was looking for the dopamine hit from getting thanks. He wasn't interested in discussion at all.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Inglewood Jack

my opinion is that Monahan certainly produces points like a #1 centre, but to my eye doesn't play like one (counter-intuitive I know). when I think of those other centres you listed, they spend a good chunk of their ice time bullying guys off the puck, carrying it into the offensive zone, and being the focal point for defenders to chase, leaving his linemates open for prime scoring chances if he decides not to take one himself.

when I think of Monahan's ice time, I see him skating up ice with the puck on Gaudreau's stick (which got there either from the defenseman or from Monahan immediately passing it to him early in the rush), and then looking for undefended space in the slot to pull off a quick shot if Johnny can get the puck there. that's nearly the opposite of the traditional centre - winger relationship, and it basically means your actual #1 C is 5' 9" and 150 pounds. that's why shutting down the Flames offense has become awfully simple this past year.

lots of people here believe that Mony's got untapped puck carrying skills in him. if he does, I will rejoice but until then, the way he currently plays puts a significant cap on this team's true potential.

I totally agree, and for a long time now have been saying that Monahan's biggest problem is that he defers to Gaudreau far too much. This seems like simple enough of a correction to me, and something that I won't be the least bit surprised to see in his game in his later-twenties.

[BigErnSalute_16]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

Fair enough. How do you respond to that? Basically calling me a stupid child is what I take from that.

It's just funny coming from the guy who wants to see Gaudreau traded for a bag of 2nd line maybes and a bloated contract.

I took some time to come up with a post that I felt addressed some team issues and I'm being compared to a baby and having my hockey knowledge questioned. Tough crowd. Ffs Lindholm is described as his RW/C who would help with the heavy lifting bit that is ignored completely.

So you took that as him calling you a stupid child then proceeded to act like a stupid child to everyone who didn't agree with your bad idea?

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by BigErnSalute_16

So you took that as him calling you a stupid child then proceeded to act like a stupid child to everyone who didn't agree with your bad idea?

Not stupid. Petulant.

[Diemenz]

Originally Posted by Fire of the Phoenix

There's more to being a C than pure production. Monahan is great at producing but the other guys ahead of him are better 2 way players and/or puck distributors. There's a reason other teams rush to match their top line with ours.

Do you consider McDavid a first line center? I only ask because his 2 way play is very poor. I would think every team in the league would take him as their 1st line center in a heartbeat.