Two fourth round draft picks.
Has there ever been a case when a team’s Stanley Cup hopes come down to
a pair of fourth round draft picks? That may be what the Canucks’
hopes are riding on and it should make for an interesting test of theories as
the playoffs approach.
Last year, Vancouver utilized two excellent scoring lines, one rock
solid defensive line and a fourth line they were never comfortable playing. A
trade at last years deadline brought Maxime Lapierre to centre the fourth line
and the Canuck brass thought they had the balance they had been looking for all
season. It lasted 16 days.
An ill-timed puck struck Manny Malholtra in the eye and Coach V and
Canuck management have been searching for the right mix on their third and
fourth lines ever since. By the playoffs, Coach Vigneault settled on
Lapierre for the middle of the third line after auditioning several players for
the position, and Maxim played well enough to help the Canucks get as far as
game 7 of the finals. The fourth line centre was still an issue through the
entire playoff run and really came to light against a balanced and deep Boston
team. Vancouver became terrified of using their fourth line— with the injuries on the other lines piling up, the wear on the top players became more
pronounced as they handled all the hard minutes with no one at the bottom of
the line up to ease the work load.
Canuck management being a bright group of people saw the deficiencies at
the bottom of their line up and they were determined this year to ensure they
had the centre ice position covered and deep. Despite Malholtra being
available to start the season and the presence of Cody Hodgson to fill the third and fourth line centre spots, Mike Gillis resigned Lapierre. Now the Canucks had three
legitimate centres to man two spots and they appeared set.
Contrary to the master plan though, there were still flaws in the make
up of the bottom two lines.
Before we can understand the flaws, we need to understand what the
Canucks want from their bottom two lines. In a perfect world for Alain
Vigneault, his top two lines take about 35 - 40 minutes of ice-time, which
means his third and fourth lines should receive a split of the remaining 20 –
25. Last year, when healthy, Manny Malholtra and the third line played
about 16:30 a game, much of it against the other team's top line. This
allowed AV to pick and choose his matchups against the other team’s third lines.
While Vancouver's third line could eliminate the top players on their
opponent’s rosters, other team's third lines had a much more difficult time
matching up against the Sedin or the Kesler line.
The defensive domination of the Vancouver third line freed the top lines
to think more offensively and play less defensively.
Fast forward to this year, the Canucks started the season with what
appeared to be the depth at centre to give Coach V the versatility to match up with
any team in the league. Hodgson gave the Canucks the most offensively
talented third line centre since Murray Craven helped Vancouver to the '94 cup finals.
Manny Malholtra was back to resume his checking role and Lapierre was
there in case anyone faltered.
Unfortunately, Malholtra didn't regain his form and Hodgson was not
suited to a checking line role. With Kesler out to start the season, AV
tried to give Hodgson 15 - 16 minutes a game but soon realized Hodgson's
defensive shortcomings were too glaring and Malholtra was not the dominating
checker he had been during the previous season.
Upon Kesler's return, AV started experimenting with the bottom six.
He rotated Hodgson, Lapierre & Malholtra through the third and fourth
line centre spots in search of finding that dominating mix they had the
previous season. At times, in November and December, Hodgson's ice
time was cut down to below five minutes a game. Howls of complaint were
heard through Canuck nation about AV's use of Hodgson and fans were pointing to
the fact Hodgson was producing despite limited minutes.
When December turned to January the Canucks as a whole struggled, with
the top line’s play the most disappointing of all. The Canucks didn't miss a
beat in terms of wins and losses though and the catalysts were the goalies and
Cody Hodgson. Every time the Canucks needed a big goal Cody was involved
and he led the Canucks in scoring through this stretch.
Canuck fans were ecstatic. They finally had the third line scoring
that they thought was the key to getting them over the hump in the Stanley Cup
playoffs. To their dismay, the second Hodgson's scoring slowed he was
demoted back to the fourth line.
After a couple more weeks of the third/fourth line shuffle, Hodgson was
traded to the Buffalo Sabres for winger Zack Kassian. 'How could this
be!' cried Canuck fans, 'Zack Kassian can't replace Hodgson's secondary scoring
and Sami Pahlsson (the player actually brought in to replace Hodgson as the
third line centre) is only a checker. We're going to miss those goals, where
are they going to come from.'
Which leaves us trying to figure out why Mike Gillis would make these
moves and how come he thinks Vancouver is better today than before the trade
deadline.
The first thing to remember when looking at these deals is to remove
emotion and understand that even if Cody Hodgson becomes Marcus Naslund to Zack
Kassian's Alex Stojanov, it's irrelevant if the Canucks win the Stanley Cup.
It doesn't matter if Cody winds up as a perennial 80 point producing,
two-way, first line centre. The only question relevant today is whether the Canucks are better
positioned to win the cup today than yesterday.
Vancouver management isn’t concerned with who will be the best group of
forwards three years from now, it's what group of forwards can bring them the
cup today. Gillis and his staff obviously feel a more stable bottom six
was key to winning this year.
The second thing Canuck fans need to understand is where Cody Hodgson's
points were coming from. If we compare this year's squad to last year's
the scoring stats are remarkably similar. Through 63 games prior to the
trade deadline this year, Vancouver had 203 goals for and 154 goals against;
last year through the same number of games, the Canucks had 208 goals for and
150 goals against.
Despite receiving the secondary scoring from the third line that many
feel was missing last year, Vancouver has actually gotten slightly worse both
offensively and defensively. Hodgson fans will use this to defend Cody
saying imagine where the Canucks would be without him.
It appears Canuck brass had a different feeling about the Cody effect.
As mentioned, last year Coach V employed the Malholtra line against the
other team's top line. This freed the Sedin or Kesler lines to face the
third line of their opponent, creating a huge mismatch. This year, Coach V
didn't trust Hodgson's ability to line up against the top players on other
teams. Hell, on some nights he didn't trust Cody against the other team’s
third lines. Couple this fact with Malholtra's slow recovery from his eye
injury and Vancouver was forced to use the top two lines, specifically the
Sedins, in more defensive situations compared to last year.
In fact, taken a bit further, you can rightly conclude that part of the
reason Cody was producing from the third line is due to the fact he was taking
many of the opportune shifts the Sedins used to receive. Really, Hodgson
wasn't supplying secondary scoring, he was merely the beneficiary of the
redistribution of scoring opportunities that were taken from the top lines.
Hodgson's presence in the top 9 forwards meant more hard shifts against
tougher opposition for the top lines, compensating for Hodgson's defensive liability. When
Mike Gillis and Alain Vigneault started looking at their team for the playoff
stretch they had to make a decision: do they balance scoring at the expense of
Sedin opportunities, while trying to hide the third line from mismatches? Or is
it a better option to create a defensive line to free the top lines to score
and neutralize the opposition’s main threats.
About noon last Monday we got our answer.
We won't know if Gillis and AV were right until the playoffs but after
watching the Canucks play St. Louis on Thursday, it's certainly much easier to
understand. With the additions of Pahlsson and Kassian, Vancouver now has
two lines capable of defending and checking at an elite level. There were
more solid body checks thrown by both teams in this game than there had been in
the previous ten combined, and by the end, it was Vancouver who had worn down
the Blues’ big forwards.
AV no longer has to hide or compensate for any player, he'll trust all
four lines to be responsible, and he must be tickled with the depth he has to employ
against an opponent. He'll be able send both Pahlsson’s and Malholtra’s lines
over the boards in any situation. With
both lines almost interchangeable in their ability to check a top line, he can
use them to wear down the other teams’ best players.
Even better, the Canucks now have more flexibility throughout their
line-up. Current third and fourth line
players Hansen, Kassian and Higgins can be moved to any of the four lines
depending on who’s performing well and Malholtra, Lapierre and Pahlsson give AV
three outstanding checking centres to take defensive draws and play the
grinding shifts.
In short, the Canucks are now a bigger, deeper, stronger team with much
more flexibility to mix their line up to match the opponent.
Despite the hype about the Hodgson - Kassian trade, the key to the
Canucks’ new look is the almost under the radar move they made for Sami
Pahlsson. If he can perform his role at
an elite level, the Canucks may be able to hoist the cup for the first time in
their 41 years.
If that happens, Mike Gillis and his staff will be proven right in their
vision of how a team should be constructed and the Hodgson deal will be
forgotten. If the Canucks’ get knocked
out of the playoffs early, the Cody debate will rage for at least another year.
It makes you wonder if two fourth round picks have ever been this important?
No comments:
Post a Comment