As Usual, AV's Lineup Purée Makes Sense

Thomas Drance
January 22 2013 01:14PM

 
Sticktap to bitter rival Harrison Mooney for the image.

On the heels of two losses (although one was a functional tie, with a gimmick tacked on), the Canucks coaching staff has decided to reconfigure their forwards lines. Jason Botchford describes the new forward combinations as "radical," and he's not far off.

Here are the new lines the Canucks are using at practice today (per Jim Jamieson):

Sedin-Sedin-Kassian

Higgins-Burrows-Hansen

Raymond-Schroeder-Weise

Volpatti-Malhotra-Lapierre

There's this perception that when Alain Vigneault modifies his lineup, it's done haphazardly and at random. But I prefer to think of Alain Vigneault as an exceedingly well compensated Jugo Juice employee. Though it seems odd at first glance, there's a method of this apparent madness.

We'll break it all down after the jump

Rusty Legs

The first thing I notice about this new forward configuration, is that each of the top-three lines will consist of at least one player who was active and playing competitive hockey in a European league or in the AHL during the lockout. The first line will have Zack Kassian who has played nearly thirty AHL contests this season, the second line will have Hansen who lit up the SM-Liga during the lockout and the "third-line" will have Jordan Schroeder and Dutch League MVP Dale Weise who've been playing competitive hockey for months. I really have to think that the "rusty legs" factor is a major motivation behind splitting up the twins, and their signature triggerman Alex Burrows. 

When a usually polished team like the Canucks allows a goal late in a period (like they did on Sunday) and then allow their opponent to carry play in the third period (like the Canucks also did on Sunday), you can pretty safely assume that fatigue and a lack of game readiness is, if not a primary culprit, then at least a factor. And I'd guess that part of the idea behind these new scrambled egg line combinations is to try more evenly distribute "game-ready" legs throughout the lineup.

Young Players

Is that 21 year old winger Zack Kassian lining up to play big minutes on Vancouver's top forward line? How does that make sense, when Alain Vigneault hates young players forever and ever, and sucks at developing talent because of that mistrust-y hatred? 

Before the season Tony Gallagher, Dan Murphy and Bob McKenzie, three guys who know a few people in the business, all suspected that Zack Kassian would get a serious look with the Sedin twins in the early-going this season. The Canucks however, started Zack Kassian on a quickly dismantled line with Andrew Ebbett and Mason Raymond. Rather than play too many shifts with those line-mates, however, Zack Kassian bounced around the lineup a bit and looked fast, tough and dangerous in the offensive zone in the team's first two games of 2013.

Am I crazy then, or did the Canucks just make Zack Kassian - who has battled with consistency throughout his career, and again this season in Chicago - earn a spot on the top-line? He capitalized on some lovely Sedin passing on Sunday, and fought and injured a pretty tough guy in Ben Eager. The result: Kassian gets a shot in the top-line. Well doesn't that make a whole lot of sense.

Jordan Schroeder meanwhile, will play with Weise and Raymond on what is, at first glance, a pretty odd looking line. I'd expect that line to be sheltered situationally (why else would Lapierre and Malhotra play together if not to soak up defensive zone draws), and to play maybe a bit over ten minutes at even-strength on Wednesday against the Flames (assuming the game is competitive). It's really not a second line, that would be Alex Burrows, Jannik Hansen and Chris Higgins, but it's very probably a Cody Hodgson-era type third-line. Anyway a top-nine shot still represents a pretty big opportunity for Jordan Schroeder and it will probably come with a good long look on the power-play as well.

One more note I'd make is that in addition to his "game-ready" legs, Dale Weise will bring some much needed size to the Raymond-Schroeder line. I still think I'd rather see Schroeder play with say Chris Higgins and Alex Burrows, but this makes sense to me, especially when you consider that Raymond and Schroeder displayed some chemistry in training camp scrimmages a week ago.

Patience

While the forward lines appear to be radically altered, the defensive pairings are exactly the same: Kevin Bieksa and Dan Hamhuis will stay together, Edler will continue to adjust to playing the right-side on a pairing with Jason Garrison, and Keith Ballard and Chris Tanev will round out the d-corps. If the Canucks wood with that lineup on Wednesday night, that means Alain Vigneault will have allowed Keith Ballard to have a turnover prone game on Sunday, without stapling him immediately to the bench. 

Ballard has never looked comfortable in Vancouver's system and the writing is probably already on the wall in terms of his future with the club. But he can still be useful for this season if he can figure out how to stay on the ice. Paradoxically he'll need some rope from the coaching staff to do that...

3136ae487fac57943f99a50e66e4d6cf
Thomas Drance lives in Toronto, eats spicy food and writes about hockey. He is an NHL News Editor at theScore, the ex-managing editor of CanucksArmy.com and an opinionated blowhard to boot. You can follow him on twitter @thomasdrance.
Avatar
#1 DCR
January 22 2013, 01:30PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I think the problem many people have with AV's line choices is that they often want to match strength to strength while ignoring everything else and he's basing his lines on a combination of factors.

Avatar
#2 Diehardnuck
January 22 2013, 01:51PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Ballard is giving Tanev a great opportunity to learn how to cover for his defensive partner - other than showcasing him for a trade (lol, ya right) I can see no other benefit from him being out there.

Avatar
#4 ES13
January 22 2013, 02:16PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I can see the reasoning behind these lines. They have potential to work out, I just hope they do.

Weise with Raymond and Schroeder does make sense if AV is trying to recreate their line from the 2nd scrimmage. Those two with someone big to make space for them provides that line with something a little more than sticking Higgins or Burrows with them.

Really no reason to break-up Higgins and Hansen right now, and maybe with Burrows that line gets some offense going. Lappy sadly isn't bringing what he's capable of bringing to the table at the moment.

Maybe Lapierre's bulking up wasn't really what we needed right now? But it shouldn't hurt him on the 4th.

At least with these lineups we know what we have in the 1st and 4th lines with some potential in our 2nd/3rd, rather than an underperforming 2rd/3rd from the last two games.

Here's hoping for a great game for "The Dutch One"!

(...crazier things have happened.)

Avatar
#5 Mantastic
January 22 2013, 02:19PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

stop complaining about shoutouts. they've been apart of the NHL for 8 years! if your team was good at them, you sure as hell wouldn't be complaining about them.

Avatar
#7 Mantastic
January 22 2013, 02:48PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Thomas Drance

then just accept it as being part of the game! it's been apart of the NHL for 8 seasons!!! constantly complaining about it here isn't going to change the rules. just put it in your bio or signature and stop writing about it.

Avatar
#8 Unknown Comic
January 22 2013, 03:05PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Stop complaining about the complaining. Complaining about "shoutouts" has been a part of blogging for over 8 years!!! Constantly complaining about it isn't going to change the rules.. just put it in your bio you've got a transparent Oilers agenda.

Thom - can I send a quick shoutout to my buddy in the hospital, he's got a hernia.

Avatar
#9 Mantastic
January 22 2013, 03:31PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Unknown Comic

yes, shoutouts are clearly an Oilers agenda!!! idiot

Avatar
#10 khlhfs
January 22 2013, 03:39PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Shootouts are dumb. It's there to entertain the fans and says little about which team is better.

Avatar
#12 DCR
January 22 2013, 08:40PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Winning in the shootout does give more points in the standings, but does not indicate in any way shape or form which was the better hockey team.

It is no more possible to determine which team played better hockey by looking at shootout results than it is possible to determine which team plays better hockey by looking at their scrabble results - or how much sushi they eat.

Avatar
#13 Mix and match
January 22 2013, 11:10PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Ya, gotta agree I like the look of those lines on paper. You can see how AV's going to use them. Sedin line and Schroeder line will eat easy mins, Burrows and Malhotra line will have a heavy dose of d-zone starts and tough competition I'm guessing.

The Raymond-Schroeds-Weise line is a very quick line, should be intersting.

Avatar
#14 sean
January 23 2013, 04:43AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Thomas Drance wrote:

@Diehardnuck he was a really good player for years until he came to Vancouver. I think it might help him to know that he's not a mistake away from the press box.

I dont know... Ballard wasnt really THAT great. He showed signs that he could get better.

Also theres a video on derek morris and ballard mistakes that you should watch. poor ballard has screwed up so many times in his career...

Avatar
#16 dan
January 23 2013, 09:29AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

For a blogger that purports to use adv. stats it certainly doesn't look like you considered them in this case?

{Burrows with Twins ~56.5% Possession without ~51%}

http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/showplayer.php?pid=592&withagainst=true&season=2007-12&sit=f10&type=corsi

Using goals or Poss #'s, it's been one of the top producing lines IN THE LEAGUE.It is a know commodity. Your team is most likely going to struggle to score without Kes & Booth, yet, you support that it is broken up? LOL

And, putting a player (Burrows) in a position he's never played? (center)entails significant risk! It is made by a coach you are convinced understands adv. stats analysis? LOL He's the guy who used a 'shooter tutor' early on when team couldn't score? LOL

This is also the same coach who is quoted a week ago saying 'familiarity' is such an important key because of the layoff etc. Now it isn't? Typical AV contradictions? You are supporting this fuzzy logic?

If rusty legs are the problem, short shifts & rolling four lines addresses/solves the 'physiological' issue. The rest is a stretch by you to support your untenable position.

The most valuable part of the revolution of adv. stat analysis in hockey is the change in the depth & objectivity of thinking that is behind it. Hockey is full of old school myths/& subjective emotional bias.

And, many decisions by coaches/GMs continue to be made based on & irrational beliefs, such as the one you referenced? (i.e.young players must'earn' their ice time). Or, what did the player show us in preseason?( a 5 or 6 'game' sample that are not even close to 'reg' games in intensity, & Q of C or Q of T)

In this way,your article supports AV & his evaluation of Kassian over part of 2!! games & magically determined he earned a promotion. What is the margin of error involved here?

Hmm? Doesn't adv. stat analysis show us 'sample size' is very important & 'luck' can play huge factor over a few games? Ha! It looks like AV is just 'rolling the dice' again - (a term he loves) however, you fail to recognize this & support it? AV's history is full of these examples that fly in the face of the notion he has ability to think analytically & make decisions accordingly. (EX. No Plan B for D. Sedin)

It seems it is time to reconsider your M.O. & the bias you have?

Avatar
#18 Dan
January 23 2013, 10:32AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@Thomas Drance

Thanks for your response.

"...it makes sense to make the Canucks(or try to make the Canucks) more than a one-line team..."

The risk you are failing to take into account is that the move could make the 'Nucks a "No-line team".

#'s show that Canucks CAN be competitive with One great line, a productive PP. strong d & great goaltending.

As for putting Burrows on the Sedin line. Let's look at ALL the facts. AV took ~3 years to do this? IMO it was a move of desperation just like Sedin (Ozone starts) not a sign of a guy ahead of the curve.

Most coaches don't get 3 years to figure things out.IMO he got this primarily because he has had outstanding & consistent goaltending & his teams have played in the powder puff division.

Yes, he deserves some credit for doing it. However, the SPEED at which one can come up with successful creative solutions is also important.& instills confidence in your team.

Like I said if you roll the dice enough sometimes you get lucky!

And, I repeat, AV acknowledged the need for familiarity. His moves strike as a 'panic move'. And, by my numbers he is not giving his team the best chance to win.

The Canucks are a fair weather front-running team. AV has a history of not dealing with adversity & making successful adjustments when things go wrong.

08 collapse 9 Roughed up by Chi 11 Torched by Chi 11 Injuries,Roughed up,torched by BOS 12. Team flat after Bos game 12. Sedin injury

However, this season IS the ultimate test for a coach. As he said its uncharted waters, and, the team faces significant adversity. IF AV gets team near top of Conference, and to conference final he deserves ALL the credit. It will truly be a "great" coaching achievement.If he doesn't, look for the media to rush in with more excuses...

The clock should be tickin'' on his firing...

If/when it comes it will be three years too late..and the window will most likely be shut!

Comments are closed for this article.