The Fourth Line
by Elsker on Aug 14, 2010 11:52 AM EDT
Email
Print
Abramsdoug succinctly framed what could be an interesting discussion to have in the dog days of August when he summed up a discussion that had evolved within the Canes prospects thread about the philosophical role of the fourth line:
The Fourth Line - Which Philosophy Will Jim Rutherford and Jason Karmanos and Coaches Choose?One of the key issues Jim Rutherford, Jason Karmanos, and the coaching staff have to resolve is what role do they want the fourth line to serve? Answering that question will dictate which players have to be kept in Charlotte (until injuries create spots in the top nine) and which players will be in the Hurricanes long-term plans.
Elsker advocates a fourth line with a specific role and that role could be well-served in coming years by Samson/Dodge/Dwyer. Those players, however, in the totality of hockey skills would not be ranked above Boychuk, Bowman, Tlusty, Dalpe, Osala, Terry, Jared Staal, and perhaps Shugg as he gets more age and experience. If the Hurricanes organization decides to run a fourth line as an energy line, they probably will go with players like Samson, Dodge, and Dwyer. If on the other hand, the Hurricanes organization elects to go with its best 12 forwards, it will be difficult for all three – Samson, Dodge, and Dwyer to crack the line up. Interesting decisions are on the way.
This was in response to a comment I had just made regarding the possibility of seeing Nick Dodge centering Patrick Dwyer and Jerome Samson as a future fourth line:
If there’s some possibility of Dodge centering Dwyer and Samson on a future fourth line for us…
Well, now we’re getting somewhere!
I’ve had Dodge penciled in for our fourth line center ever since he came out of Clarkson. Love the whole character and talent package.
If Dwyer could be moved to wing, we’d be getting back to the days when, yes, Chad LaRose was making teams miserable with the two Adams Family boys.
Now that was a fourth line.
Here we are now...entertain us.
I'll save my contributions to the discussion for comments below, but it's certainly an interesting topic that has many facets for consideration.
So, let's discuss among ourselves. What do you have to say about fourth lines for the Canes...past, present, and future?
119 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Interesting way to isolate one of the defining issues for who plays here, and who is in Charlotte. – and I agree something that we need to keep an eye on.
I’ll also toss in Jon Matsumoto as another potential 4th line center. He hasn’t put in the time w/the organization that Dodge has, but he has a stronger resume with his AHL achievements.
I’m also strongly in favor on moving Dwyer away from Center – not his thing, never was.
Twitter @HMof2
by Carolyn Christians on Aug 14, 2010 12:39 PM EDT reply actions
Facets
As a designer (one of my many facets), I’m always in search of the constraints and a sense of just how the subject of the design is to be used.
Same here, as we discuss the permutations that a fourth line can take within an org.
What are the constraints at any given time for the org as it eyes its fourth line?
What’s the depth of available talent pool? Total financial resources available, both now and going forward? Committed or budgeted reserve financial needs for individual players, both now and over the next season or so? What’s my waiver situation with some of the candidates? What skill/character packages do we possess…or lack?
Similarly, I’m searching for just how this fourth line I’m constructing is to be used.
Offensively, as a fourth wave of an offensive scheme that aims to wear teams down and searches for defensive mismatches? Defensively, as my shut-down checking line? Somewhere in the broad continuum that’s between these two bookends?
What’s the strategy here? Just what are we trying to accomplish?
Hopefully, it’s not what our last season’s fourth line seemingly became by default – a spare parts bin that gamefully tried to fulfill its mission, despite some components that did not always fit the role assigned.
Seemingly we are now free to design a fourth line that we want, instead of cobbling something together with what we simply must use, whether by bad contracts or insufficient talent pool.
We also have the benefit of many other permutations of fourth lines that have existed, both within our org and without, for copycat and/or learn-from-mistakes purposes.
Here we are now...entertain us.
Depth of talent
A major component of what a fourth line can (and cannot) be is depth of talent within an org at any given time.
Such is clearly the case for the Canes, for which long-timers will recall seasons in which a fourth line could barely be fielded, using only borderline AHL talent in some slots to do so.
Those were the years when the AHL talent pool was so shallow that we shared an AHL team with other orgs that were in a similar plight (although theirs might have been due to trading away picks for instant gratification, whereas ours was due to poor drafting).
Also, there are seasons when bad contracts and/or bad players under contract simply limit options by overcrowding the roster with one-way veteran contracts (sound familiar?). In fact, it might be the case that we still have one more of those seasons to get under our belt before our options truly open up.
For an historical extreme, many personally witnessed the 2002 Detroit Red Wing HOF team, with sixty-some million dollars of pre-cap budget on the ice against our sub-thirty million budget team.
It was their fourth line that drove the stake in the third OT period, sometime after 1 a.m., with HOF’er Igor Larionov taking the pass from Tomas Holmstrom, no less, and calmly backhanding the puck past Arturs Irbe to seize back the momentum that Ron Francis’ OT goal had gained for us in Game 2.
We’re not going to have that level of talent from which to choose over the next few years. But, thanks to recent good drafting and improved player development, we do have options.
Here we are now...entertain us.
My take..
I start the 4th line analysis with looking at the 1st 3 lines 1st……
How many minutes do we want the 1st line, 2nd line to play?
Last year Staal averaged about 20 mins/ game, makes sense you want your best player to play the most! I’m not gonna do all the math, but if you did, (player by player…line by line)
you’d find you get “X” min. left for the 4th line. THAT “X” # will be pretty small! AGAIN better players get more mins. (not just Staal).
At this point it’s clear that (as we all know) 4th line guys get minimum wage! so even if we
spend to the CAP (possible in the future) we’re not likely to have a 4th line that remains the same for very long. either players beat out 3rd or 2nd line guys, or get traded/ waived, or sent down to Charlotte- because we can’t pay much for a 4th line guy!
Since the competition for top three lines (and higher paychecks) will determine the candidates for the 4th line, then the coaches should decide who fits THEIR MOLD for what they want out of this line; OR LET the available players’ skills determine how they s/ b used!!
Time as a constraint
Yes, ice time is a constraint and influences just how a fourth line is deployed.
Give 20 minutes to your first line, some of which is logged on the power play.
Give somewhere in the teens to your second and third lines, with some of that presumably being either power play or penalty kill time, and there’s not much left for the fourth line.
If an org’s fourth line contains elements of one of the PK units, then there really may not be much 5-on-5 time at all for them.
But, does that affect their role? They still could be AD’s young rookies, trying their wings in those few minutes. Maybe the PK elements come mostly from the second line, with help from the third and one of the fourth liners, so no special team pressure on these rookies at all, even though on a traditional special team line.
Or, it could indeed be stocked with defense-first penalty killers, who at least won’t hurt you if you also need to skate them at even strength.
Nonetheless, turning back to the clock, it is easy to see how there’s just not enough ice time to slice the cake into four equal pieces. The fourth line is going to necessarily see less ice time than the other three lines.
Here we are now...entertain us.
I would like to see a 4th line of more defensive minded energy players that play somewhat significant roles on the PK. I also see “cheap” 4th line players as the way to go, so more money is allocated to players that will see more ice time.
You can go in many different directions with a 4th line, but I think everybody will agree that you cannot have expensive players (like Brind’Amour, Samsonov, Walker) eating up limited cap space and only playing limited roles/time.
Triple Gold Juice - It's Potent and Guaranteed to Help You Score!
by PackPride17 on Aug 14, 2010 9:09 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
The energy line approach
Fourth line is a time-tested place to stash penalty-killers and/or enforcers, especially ones that have a 5-on-5 game in them, too.
We haved such players. People may have their candidates and care to name them.
But, no question, it’s really a bonus when a pair of rested forwards can go over the wall to be the first unit of your penalty kill period. Forwards who know exactly what their role is on the team and work together as an offensive pair on the ice during similar needs for “energy”, like just after a powerplay, when top nine resources are depleted and the other team’s rested offense hits the ice to the roar of their home crowd.
A coach can take great comfort in knowing he’s always got a tool like that rested, focused, and ready to go whenever the situation occurs. And, the best way to keep them rested, and focused, is to have them on a fourth line that is strategically used in a situational manner only, with ice time divided between penalty kill and 5-on-5.
It’s a viable strategy.
Here we are now...entertain us.
Two Philosophies, at Least, Possible
Philosophy 1: you win and lose with your stars; and stars need and deserve the most minutes. You have to pay your stars, so it is natural that the fourth line will be your least expensive players who are likely to have some gaps in their game, but will have all the energy in the world. The fourth lines cycles, wears out defenders, to soften up the defense so the higher skilled players can have more of an advantage during their shifts. Accordingly, one does not look for the top, potentially elite players to fill the fourth line. The fourth line is for solid NHL players who know their role and are happy to have the job on the fourth line.
Philosophy 2: in a salary cap era, the fourth line is the proving ground for the young, inexperienced, but talented young players. They cut their teeth on the fourth line and the plum held out for them is that as they develop, they will move up to top nine and potentially top six minutes. The team also gets to show case its young talent, if the team is deep, in order to attract interest in those players for trades – either to fill team needs or to gain more draft choices. In this model, the coaches/GM select their best 12 forwards and the lines are very fluid. Over the course of a game, players on a particular line not only will shift up or down, but the entire line can gain additional shifts as a reward for their productivity. In the model, lines are not modeled as 1st, 2nd, 3d, 4th, but are named after their centers – Staal line, Sutter line, Nash/Dalpe line, etc.
There are certainly other hybrid approaches as well as other entirely different models. I would love to hear from the Hurricanes organization what they are thinking about the use and paradigm for the fourth line. I am also looking forward to the view of others about the composition of the fourth line and their view of the function to be served by the fourth line.
Ok but..
The one thing about “hearing from the organization”, is unlikely to happen… if u broadcast ur
strategy to other teams, they can use that info to gear up for it! not a good idea!
Skill players should either play on the top 2 lines, or stay in the “A” and get lots of ice time!
--in other words ADOGS 1ST PHILOSOPHY!
Fourth Line Roles
There’s no one right answer, in my opinion, as to what a fourth line has to be. Even within an org with as stable a GM and coaching system as the Canes, the fourth line’s role has changed from season to season, and even changed during the course of last year’s season.
Sometimes it’s stuffed with borderline or rookie players that need to be sheltered during certain parts of the game, so the bench “shortens” to the top nine only. Maybe it has some spare parts, like an expiring contract or an enforcer type. Basically a junk drawer for the roster.
Sometimes, like Detroit’s pre-cap loaded team or perhaps the Canes now with their entry-level contracts heavy team, there’s truly an option of rolling four lines (at least at times).
Sometimes its a checking line, although not sure I can think of a team that’s doing that right now. When John Madden centered the Devils fourth line, it was always on the ice against the opposition’s best, and capable of not just defending, but scoring, as well.
Sometimes it’s an “energy line”, used to pump up the team and the crowd, with a good cycle game among the linemates almost essential to be effective. Used after powerplays, in particular, to defend and even pin down the now recharged opposition in their own end, re-seize the momentum, and let the top nine rest until we can slip them back over the wall against now tired defenders.
We certainly have the talent pool to go more than a couple of ways with our fourth. Dollars will eventually (if not immediately) start influencing some options. Ice time is also a factor.
But, there’s perhaps at least a brief window where the Canes might assemble one type of fourth line for a season or so, at least until the dollars do start to pinch, and then morph it into another type of fourth line afterward that can live within the salary budget that will start to get constrained as those entry contracts begin to expire.
Here we are now...entertain us.
The year without a 4th line
I would agree with Elsker that the Canes’ surfeit of young talent gives them options, and with AD that this is a year for the Canes to treat the 4th line as a proving ground.
But I think the Canes should take the proving-ground approach to the full measure. This year’s 4th line should not just serve to give young players a taste of the NHL. It should challenge them to play like a 1st line and show that that’s where they belong.
In terms of this year’s competitive position, it’s important to remember that there’s more than one way to limit talented players on the other team. Playing keep-away by cycling the puck along the boards is one tactic. Another is to run the opposition’s top lines ragged, to force them to defend against talented offensive players who may be able to skate just as fast and with greater energy, and to put the puck in the net if given an opening. If you have young players with enough talent to pose constant threats when on the ice against top lines, you run risks, but you stress the other team.
Most importantly, you learn very quickly about the NHL talent level of your young forwards. You don’t send out your Larionovs like the Redwings of old, but you send out your young forwards to find out who comes closest to being a Larionov or pre-injury Eric Cole or Justin Williams or a 40-goal scorer with a style of his own.
The type of 4th line to assemble for this year is a virtual 1st line. That’s the level of proof you want from the proving ground.
In your phrase, Elsker, the Canes can morph the 4th line into something else for next season.
by curiouscanesfan on Aug 15, 2010 1:19 PM EDT reply actions
I’m trying to keep an open mind on using all four lines to open up try-out slots for prospects, at least as a temporary strategy.
Also, it may well be late this season, or even ‘11-’12 before such an approach to the roster could be taken, due to lingering contracts still clogging up slots for full implementation of this strategy.
Again, I’m not sure I’m for it, but I’m looking at it with implementation eyes to see if there are any flaws and/or barriers to the approach.
First barrier is Samsonov’s contract and perhaps even Cole’s. Both are UFA’s and not locks for renewal this summer.
But, while on the roster, at least two bodies with a one-way contracts are going to get shoved down to the fourth line, keeping two players with two-ways in the AHL.
Also, I’m definitely fearful of the splash/swim approach of throwing near-rookies over the wall to defend against the NHL’s best. Because, out there with the top lines are also the top defenders.
Those top centers, wingers, and defenders are just too much for someone that’s just now taking in the speed of the game.
This strategy would, in my opinion, be the tank-for-the-draft strategic approach to the season, and not one that I’m personally interested in paying to see unfold.
Instead, I’d be looking to match this fourth line up against the other org’s fourth line, by forcing them to match my four line rotation and out-talenting them when they do so.
Here we are now...entertain us.
You touched on one of the things most likely to affect the 4th line make-up. We have a few older (not very) players, at the end of contracts, who may or may not figure in future plans, who make too much money to be totally ignored. Samsonov, Cole, even LaRose could fall in here, and be used on a 4th line. We certainly did it enough last year. You might even argue that that would be better, giving more time for up and comers on the top 3 lines. You also have someone, in Tom K, who’s talents may be best suited to 4th line and PK duty. In future years, the 4th line will evolve differently, but this year may see the 4th line in a constant state of flux, dependent upon who’s available, who’s performing, and who is just too expensive to sit.
I think you are indeed correct that next season’s fourth line is going to be whatever it becomes due to some existing contracts which must be accomodated…at least until opportunities arise to perhaps trade one or two of those contracts or they expire.
Kostopoulos is almost a lock for the fourth line, in my opinion, since that’s what he was acquired to do (that and spot duty in the top nine, if needed).
LaRose could certainly play fourth line, and has effectively done so before. As nicely as he was meshing with Staal on the first line at the end of the season, I doubt that’s his fate.
In fact, if we could possibly afford to assign him to fourth line duties instead…well, now we’re getting somewhere in formulating a pretty effective fourth line (ignoring for the moment what’s going on in the top nine because of this assignment).
Samsonov needs to be slotted into the top nine, in my opinion, as long as we have him under contract. Total waste on the fourth. Let him set up some kids on the third, if nothing else.
So, all we need now is a center for these two PK’ers, although both of them shoot right and normally play right wing, so someone’s going to have to go off-wing on this fantasy line.
Since both LaRose and Kostopoulos are penalty killers, their center could be someone who is not…just needs to be defensively responsible, terrific at faceoffs, and a good puck cycler, as long as we’re wishing.
So, who’s a candidate for this fourth line center role? Could see quite a tryout rotation in this slot occur among Matsumoto, Dwyer, and Dodge, I suppose.
Who’s been the faceoff artist for the Rats/Checkers?
Here we are now...entertain us.
probably Dwyer with TKO and mix-mash (whoever is not going on that given night). I don’t see we have clear-cut lines, we probably have an avg. 1st line, a good 2nd line, and 2 good 3rd lines. I see PM shifting around our lines more then ever this year and playing whoever he feels deserves the ice-time, especially in 3rd periods. How that works – TBD.
This one is easy
Look, Doug makes a lot of thoughtful posts, but he has been on this fourth-line-of-prospects thing for a while. I understand the instinct to want to skate the twelve most talented forwards, but that does not make for the best hockey team. All successful playoff teams, the 06 Canes included, have plenty of role-players, like face-off specialists, energy-forecheckers, enforcers, shot-blockers, etc. People like the Adams boys (how many Cups does Craig have?), or Stephane Yelle in his Avs days, or Tom Kostopolous. You cannot win without those type of players. Good teams have three to six guys like that.
Moreover, as I have said before, it does not do elite prospects any good to play 4-7 minutes a night in the NHL on the fourth line, when they could have 16 on the first line in the AHL. It isn’t just NHL experience that is needed, it is experience doing the type of thing that we want them to do as players. Making Zac Dalpe center the fourth line would not be ideal if we believe he will develop into a top-two centerman, for example.
Let’s see what the coaches and Jim Rutherford and Karmanos come up with for the fourth line. You will recall that Samsonov, Brind’Amour, and Kostopuolos were the fourth line for the Canes at the last of the season. I predict those wanting a traditional fourth line that plays 4 to 7 minutes per game of cycling will be disappointed with the Canes fourth lines. On the other hand, I believe I am going to be less than totally thrilled because the fourth line still won’t be given 12 to 16 minutes a game. I think we will see Samsonov on the fourth line until he is traded; and I think the Hurricanes will give Dalpe some fourth line center time as well. It won’t take long to determine what approach the Hurricanes organization will take toward its fourth line.
That’s pretty much why I don’t see us having a useful fourth line until some contracts are dealt or expire.
The left side is full (Jokinen, Tlusty’s one-way contract, and presumably Boychuk), and although Samsonov is a terrible waste on a fourth line, there’s little chance to slot him elsewhere.
None of those three deserve fourth line time, so Samsonov becomes odd man out by default.
So, there goes fourth line functionality options. It simply becomes a spare tire.
And, if that’s the case, that the fourth line has no function within our system, other than to hold spare parts, then it sadly becomes a possibility to use it as a set of training wheels for our center-rich prospect pool.
I’m personally not going to have high hopes for the team until this situation is resolved, either later this season or the next.
Here we are now...entertain us.
Hopefully, the necessity of giving young, talented players more ice time will result in the discovery that traditional notions of a fourth line of limited hockey skills are passe in today’s NHL. I think Caniacs are about to find out whether a fourth line of Samsonov/Dalpe/Kostopoulos will be productive or not.
That fourth line just makes no sense at all to me.
It’s obviously just a pile of left-over parts, except for Kostopoulos.
And where now do we stash the penalty-killers and still have a rested, intact line once the penalty is over?
Guess we send out the first line afterward, since none of them are hopefully involved with penalty-killing duties. Maybe the third line stays pure and we can use the checking elements of Sutter’s second line for PK duty.
Looks like it will be at least a season, or maybe even two, before we can begin to construct a proper fourth line.
Here we are now...entertain us.
That is the essentially the fourth line (w exception of Dalpe for Dwyer) that was in place when the Hurricanes were one of the best teams in the NHL. I think that fourth line would actually be enhanced by having any number of forwards substitute for Samsonov, but Samsonov’s contract makes that difficult. During 2008-2009, who did you consider the fourth line to be because that fourth line was sufficient to get the team to the Eastern Conference finals?
The coaches for the penalty kill used Staal, Sutter, (Cullen when he was on the team), Cole, Tlusty, Dwyer, LaRose, Kostopoulos, Jokinen, and Ruutu among the forward combinations. Does it really make a dramatic difference to have Dalpe rather than Dwyer or in addition to Dwyer killing penalties? Sutter is a beast on the penalty kill. Tlusty does quite well on the penalty kill as well.
During 2008-2009, who did you consider the fourth line to be because that fourth line was sufficient to get the team to the Eastern Conference finals?
When Chad LaRose was elevated from the fourth line into the top nine, Ryan Bayda more than adequately filled his left-wing slot. Good fourth line player, who carved out a NHL career doing so. Excellent cycler, checker, who could also score.
Patrick Eaves was our fourth line right wing, same as he’s being used in Detroit, although Patrick Dwyer also got a tryout there for a few games.
By playoff time, I believe it was Brind’Amour that was centering them, which was not ideal, but evidently effective to some degree.
Here we are now...entertain us.
Eaves, Bayda, Dwyer, Brind’Amour as part of a fourth line on an team that reaches the Eastern Conference Finals is supportive of my point. Bayda did not establish himself as an NHL fixture. Brind’Amour has retired. Eaves is slightly above minimum wage. Dwyer very capable of third line and fourth line time; and is economical.
I think the more one closely scrutinize the Hurricanes’ depth of talent and how players are used by the present coaching staff, I think the ultimate conclusion is inarguable.
I’m seeing where you are having no problem convincing yourself there’s only one evident solution.
But, you’re going to have to spell it out for me, because I’m not seeing it.
Here we are now...entertain us.
I suggest the coaches and GM have already described how they plan to use the fourth line – similarly to how it was used from January, 2010 until the season’s end. Their approach is not the only choice available; but it was their approach and it worked well during that time frame.
Sent via Ipad
And I am suggesting that they are using the fourth line the way they did last season, and evidently will do so to some degree this season, not because they have some grand plan that will continue into the future, but because we have some bad contracts still on our hands.
It’s becoming the junk drawer of the org, and being used accordingly.
Here we are now...entertain us.
I tend to think we’ll use our 4th line like everybody 5-8 minutes and it’s with the set of guys we have (not a lot of differentiation between our 5th forward through our 12th forward) it will end up being the dog house.
If there is not a huge differentiation between the 5th best forward and the 12th best forward, why should their time on the ice suddenly fall just because they are on a line some people call “the fourth line”? Why would a player play any differently on a line if the entire line is moved from the second line, to the third line, to the fourth line?
I think in our case it will be because someone’s not going on that particular night. For example, we’ve seen Eric Cole come out and be the most dominant player on the ice one game and then the next game be completely invisible, in that case you wouldn’t see a lot of him in the 3rd period. You can probably use that example for anyone on our roster except probably Staal. Most coaches shorten the bench in 3rd period if not the 2nd period in some cases. I don’t think we’ll see entire lines moving from say 2nd to 4th, we’ll more likely see players move around from line to line.
Assume, hypothetically, that everybody’s legs are moving, such as happened against TB when the Canes stomped them 8 to 5 and it was a worse beatdown than the score. Why not keep everybody fresh if all the players are working hard? I agree that if some of the players are banged up or just not in rhythm, it makes sense to let them have some more rest that game. I also am 100% positive the coaches will be switching up lines with a revenge in 2010-2011.
I know you’re proponent of rolling 4 lines and in an ideal world so am I, but no one rolls 4 lines not even Chicago arguably the deepest team NHL last year. How many times last year did we play like we did against TB, not many. I’d like to see more stable lines than switching them up every game, I also understand that when you need a goal sometimes you have to throw out your line combo’s notepad and go with who’s playing best. As a player, if you’re switching line mates every game it’s tough to get familiarity with your linemates (Eric Staal has different tendencies then Brandon Sutter) not to mention chemistry which doesn’t happen overnight.
So is it your thought that a player on the fourth line finishes checks harder than when placed on the third or second line? Does the player more effectively kill penalties because coaches put him on the fourth line? Does the naming of that fourth line really affect a player’s skills so dramatically?
To me there is a logical disconnect in the contentions about some magic mojo with the fourth line denomination. I can envision that some GMs such as Burke, calls his third and fourth line players, plumbers, and he drafts or acquires players specifically for that purpose. I don’t think it really bears the weight of close scrutiny unless a team is an “aces and spaces” team with most of its salary cap invested in a very small number of players. Certainly, the Hurricanes are not an “Aces and Spaces” team at this point.
Burke’s strategy is his top six are his scorers and his bottom six are his grinders which is pretty typical among GM’s & coaches. When you’re in the bottom six you’re expected to do different things than when you’re in the top six, you’re matching up against different players. Players have a different focus in the bottom six, they’re not as worried about creating offense and more focused on playing the body; creating energy/momentum with a big hit or sustained pressure. The Canes have 39% of their cap salary allocated to 3 players Staal, Ward, and Pitkanen. The also have 8 players making under a $1mil. I know what that says to me.
We’re in Philly, coming off an extended powerplay that even had twenty-some seconds of 5-on-3, in which we could not capitalize.
Statistically, that’s not too surprising, but nonetheless momentum has definitely swung Philly’s way as the “sure-thing” penalty is killed, the crowd’s going nuts, and their first line is coming over the wall, chomping on the bit having watched all this from the bench.
Our top-nine resources were used throughout the extended powerplay and need a shift before we can send out whichever line has powerplay elements that have been off the ice the longest.
Sending Samsonov, center-prospect-du-jour, and Kostopoulos out to face that situation is not my ideal response.
This is among the many situations where you reach for a line like Kevin Adams centering Craig Adams and Chad LaRose, from the Cup team days. A trio that is very, very comfortable with one another, know their roles on the team, and can cycle a team to death once puck possession is gained, holding them in their own zone until the cavalry arrives.
Fourth lines have purposes other than just stealing minutes from the top nine that deserve them. You do want your top talent on the ice for an optimal amount of time, not divided four ways among the available talent pool.
Here we are now...entertain us.
So does Bowman, Dalpe, Kostopoulos, Samson, Samsonov, Nash, or Osala become less skilled when assigned to the fourth line? Given the talent level, all have the ability to play excellent two way hockey. Time after time, Maurice, Francis, and Rutherford have credited solid fourth line play with keeping the top nine fresh.
No, the approach I am advocating is entirely different than what we have been doing the past couple of seasons, and evidently will continue to do so this year.
An org doesn’t assign players to a fourth line, and then expect them to “less skilled”, or even assign them there because they are “less skilled”. Only in your approach of evidently using some type of sorting hat to rank players into a 1a, 1b, 1c, 1d order would such a consideration even be relevant.
Instead, an org should recruit, develop, and assign players to their fourth line because they have a definitive, well-thought out strategy as to how to use that fourth line.
It’s not a junk drawer of also-rans. It’s a weapon to be deployed for special teams and for special times within the game.
Here we are now...entertain us.
The Fourth Line Role
Under the Burke approach, for example, he would trade a more skilled forward in order to find his “plumbers” for the third and fourth line with the idea that the plumbers would kill penalties, finish checks with a passion, and cycle the puck. If I am understanding your approach if you were in charge, you would adhere to the Burke approach of having players on the fourth line and some on the third line whose focus would be to kill penalties when necessary, provide bursts of energy during their 4 to 7 even strength minutes on the ice, and cycle the puck to burn out the defense.
It’s a traditional approach that has been employed many times in the past. With the right players it has some significant advantages. I would disagree that the organization has not made a conscious decision to go with a different approach to its fourth line; but I totally agree that as one looks toward 2010-2011, Samsonov’s contract does not look very attractive. I disagree that Cole’s contract is a bad contract with that same perspective. I agree if Cole doesn’t stay healthy and can’t generate 20 + goals, his salary will have exceeded his productivity. Assuming Cole stays healthy – which is a huge leap of faith – other than Samsonov, the next player on my list with a potentially questionable salary would be LaRose. I think this year is a cross-roads year for LaRose. If he scores his 20 goals with his energy, loyalty, commitment, and versatility, he is appropriately compensated. If he has another 10 to 12 goals, there will be issues there. The difference is that although I recognize some teams are very comfortable with their fourth line as 5 to 8 minutes a night players, I think the Hurricanes approach is a better approach for the team, the organization, and the fans.
I’m sorry, but I see no evidence whatsoever that the Canes have “chosen” either path right now. Last season, and this upcoming one, as well, they are simply reacting to a roster situation that dictates just who must be accommodated or evaluated instead of systematically building a fourth line to be used in a strategic manner.
Yes, I advocate a special teams approach, which is a traditional approach (and with good reason) for teams to take, mostly due to financial constraints introduced by properly compensating the top two lines of talent.
In our particular instance, the “third line checking role” is actually carried by our “second line” of Sutter and whoever (whenever we can get that matchup), allowing Staal to go against lesser talent instead of a strength-on-strength approach of letting top lines collide.
The fourth line sees less minutes in this system, simply because it’s a specialized tool and the org wants to divide the 60 minutes of ice time into slices that are greater than 15 minutes for the top two, or even three, lines.
Here we are now...entertain us.
My disagreement is that you suggest that Jim Rutherford, despite having won a Stanley Cup, and Ron Francis, despite being in the Hockey Hall of Fame and being an outstanding hockey player, and Paul Maurice, who has taken his team to the Stanley Cup Finals, all have no plan but are just reacting to things happening to them and the team.
I also disagree that the approach of treating the fourth line as role players with a limited, but important, role for the team is the most prudent approach. The Hurricanes have amassed significant talent at forward and most of that talent is both young and inexpensive. I see no evidence that the Hurricanes organization failed to recognize the choices available to them. To the contrary, my view is that the organization is building a team capable of playing the way the Hurricanes need to play to win a Stanley Cup. Jim Rutherford is a GM who plans for the future and is often ahead of rather than behind the learning curve. As young talent is coming into the NHL, old stereotypes will end and new matrices will appear. I see the traditional view of the fourth line as becoming a relic of the past. Time will tell which view prevails in the marketplace of ideas.
We won our first Cup with a fourth line that is exactly what I’m describing.
I see no reason, nor have I heard one peep, that the org would do anything differently, once given the chance to actually make some strategic decisions.
While temporarily having to shove a top-nine player (Samsonov) onto a fourth line and audition too many centers for slots available by skating them on a fourth line, yes, we’re reacting to a situation, not building the ideal fourth line or even the ideal roster from top to bottom.
Here we are now...entertain us.
Having a Chance to Make Strategic Decisions
So what are the reasons the coaches and Jim Rutherford and Jason Karmanos couldn’t make strategic decisions until now? The “ideal” fourth line or “ideal roster” from top to bottom is not being built, according to your post, but what do you think Jim Rutherford, Jason Karmanos, Francis, Wesley, Maurice, and Rowe are doing with the drafts and trades?
If you mean, from your perspective of what you define as an ideal team from top to bottom, including an ideal fourth line, that would clearly be the case based on your comments; and given the their direction with the draft and trades, your expectations are not being met. Whether or not the team succeeds with this approach should be the litmus test. If the team does well, their approach worked.
What do I think they’re doing?
I think they are stockpiling BPA’s (best players available) that fit their criteria of speed, size, “hockey sense”, and everything else the scouting staff looks for, in order to assemble the best top nine available. Right now, we have an over-abundance, which we can temporarily afford due to a lot of entry level and two-way contracts that won’t last.
I do not believe that they wish to extend that philosophy to build a clone army that is twelve deep among the forwards. Ultimately, we can neither afford nor should we even try to do so. Eventually, the thinning will begin.
I believe we’re in a transition period that’s a real mess for getting something coherent going on the fourth line, but finances alone will drive us to a more satisfactory permutation in a season or two.
At that point, we will only be able to afford, and we will return to using, an energy line approach to the fourth line.
I’m not complaining about what’s going on now, because they have few choices. But, when they do have the luxury of being able to make choices about how to build a fourth line, I don’t think we’re going to see a clone army there of fourth-best everythings.
We’re going to see specialized players playing specialized roles.
Because…that’s hockey.
Here we are now...entertain us.
No, their role changes and what’s expected of them should change. Playing the 3rd & 4th line is tough, you’re not given as much leeway on those lines as you are on the 1st two, there’s large gaps in between shifts, you’re typically playing very physical minutes against bigger players, and you never really know when your last shift is going to be. Their game has to change a little, for example when we play Atlanta this year, our 4th line is going to matchup against C.Thorburn & B.Eager, you have to play a little different those type of guys.
Speed versus Size
It seems apparent to me that the Hurricanes organization is going with speed, intensity, and skill over brute strength and size. The present plan seems to be to get the fast, highly skilled younger players matched against bigger, less skilled third and fourth line opposing players and run the opposition into the ground. The theory seems to be, “you can’t hit what you can’t catch.”
Atlanta has added some significant size to its team – which reflects a coaching and organizational philosophy. I would love to see the Hurricanes add another big, tractor-trailer power forward, but I don’t know who I could persuade myself to trade from the present young cadre of forwards.
Wait a minute. We were just talking about Kostopoulos and Samsonov necessarily being stuck on the fourth line next season.
How does that fit into your perception that the Canes have chosen to go with younger players on the lower lines, with more skill and speed looking for mismatches?
Looks like we’ll be more the victim of such a coaching philosophy than the ones exploiting such an approach.
Here we are now...entertain us.
Kostopoulos and Samsonov
Samsonov was signed when Laviolette was the coach and the style of play was quite different. Kostopoulos was signed to be the model fourth line player. I know the organization really likes Kostopoulos, but I think he may well be beaten out by the younger talent. My point is that the younger players will fill not only spaces in the top three lines, but ultimately will take spots on the fourth line as well. The Hurricanes couldn’t pencil in those players until they drafted them or traded for them. How could the Hurricanes project roster spots for Tlusty, Nash, Osala, and Skinner until they obtained them?
So you’d match Tlusty, Boychuk, and Dwyer against Thorburn, Eager, and Slater. Remember one of Edmonton’s biggest problems last year was too many fast highly skilled fowards that were all about 6’0. I don’t mind our smaller guys in 1st or 2nd line roles but I think in 3rd & especially 4th line roles those guys are too small and will get pushed around. All the speed in the world is no going matter when you’re staring at the ceiling all night.
Matching Up Against Atlanta
In matching up against Atlanta, the Hurricanes are going to have a challenge. I would not have a problem putting Boychuk, Dalpe, Tlusty or Boychuk, Nash, Tlusty against the line of Thornburn, Eager, and Slater. I’d match skill, determination, and speed, against raw power and strength. It’s a perfect match up to create penalties. The last thing opposing teams third and fourth lines want is to take penalties. Boychuk did a masterful job of drawing penalties when matched up against opponents who couldn’t skate with him.
Who would you match up against Thornburn, Eager, and Slater? What lines do you project Thornburn, Eager, and Slater to be for Atlanta?
TKO, Dwyer, ???. I don’t know, that line could be very tough to play against on the road. Because Thorburn and Eager skate pretty well for big guys they could cause a lot of havoc especially if they can get the puck deep, they’ll take turns running our players and no one really matches up well against either in a fight (Harrison, but now you’re down to 5 d), particularily Eager. What would be bad is if Eager tee’d off on someone like McBain and Gleason stepped in – not a good trade-off. Go back & watch, when Boychuk 1st came up last year he played against 3rd & 4th line players – he struggled. He couldn’t use his speed, every time he touched the puck he got hit – thus negating his speed.
Boychuk's First Trip to the NHL
There is no question that Boychuk had much to learn during his first stint with the Hurricanes this season. On the other hand, what is much more important to me is that when Boychuk returned from the AHL, he was very effective in the minutes he was given. In fact, what Boychuk learned was how to avoid being slowed down on the rush down the ice; and instead, how to draw penalties if a dman tries to obstruct him. Boychuk did quite well when put on the power play with players like Sutter and Bowman.
I have been advocating for several years that the Hurricanes draft or trade for some jumbo-sized forwards for the very reason you describe. The point is that other than Osala and Jared Staal there are no very large bodied forwards for the Checkers.
Given the players the Hurricanes have at forward, and they are almost all quite talented, the Hurricanes coaches will have to decide how they will match up against the physical teams. TKO is 200 lbs, Dwyer is 175 lbs and ?? is well ???.
Point is, we don’t really have a 4th line, we have 2 3rd lines, in certain situations this will benefit, and others this will hurt. It will be to our benefit when the opponents have a big slow 4th line and to our detriment when we play teams that have big guys that can skate. I think Jared Staal may be a good fit for that role, in todays climate it’s a tough role to fill because you have to be able fight (well) and you have to be able to play effective hockey at the same time, so this role is definitely changing. I think fighting is very important to hockey and should continue to play an integral role, yet at the same time I’m glad to see the knuckle draggers of the past that can’t play hockey are also a thing of the past. It’s going to be interesting to watch this role evolve.
3 Second Lines
I respectfully suggest that the Hurricanes seem to be developing where they have at least three second lines. I do agree that one important element to the Hurricanes season will be how they match up against the bigger more physical teams. From my perspective, the teams that I consider to be on the bigger side and more physical side include: Boston, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, San Jose, Columbus, Atlanta, and Phoenix. It is interesting to me that Chicago traded away a number of its bigger, more physical players.
I am convinced that other than the situation with Samsonov, who found himself on a team built around speed, crashing the net, and finishing checking under the present coaches, the remaining forwards play Hurricanes hockey. It is easy to under-estimate Samsonov because he is so streaky and last year was a downer year for him. On the other hand, his NHL history is of rising from the ashes of an off year; and that is particularly true in his contract year. The point is I find it beyond unlikely that the front office and the coaches just meandered into the rebuild of the team and that they lacked an over-all plan. My take is this remake has been orchestrated to get players who are self-starters and who love to play in the dark areas of the ice. I think the Canes organization sought out players who fit specific profiles, as to hockey skills, hockey intelligence, and hockey desire. With Dalpe, Tlusty, Bowman, Osala, Nash, J. Staal, and Sutter, they each have decent to excellent size and all but J. Staal have great speed.
I think as the talent pool available to GMs continues to improve with the addition of young prospects who are well-coached and highly motivated, the fourth line role will evolve. I think the Hurricanes have foreseen that change and are ahead of the curve. Where I have concerns continues to be how the Hurricanes forwards will match up against players like Ovechkin, Jordan Staal, Malkin, Malone, Horton, and Nash – just to name some of the players who use their size very well.
I have high hopes for Osala and J. Staal, and perhaps Matthias to file the need of a jumbo-sized, skilled forward. I would love to see some more talent in that niche filled in the 2011 draft; but the talent pool at forward is so deep, it’s hard for me to envision the Hurricanes shuffling off some of its prized prospects for the big tractor-trailer forward.
Size??
I think everybody agrees that fast skilled players are always desired, and if they’re big…so much the better! however, there’s only so many guys that fill that criteria (big)!! when we won the CUP we didn’t have an over-abundance of big/ fast guys, but we did have a lot of speed, and “hard-working” type guys who did their jobs WITH ZEAL!! IMO – ZEAL/ HEART (with reasonable skill/ speed) beats size/speed (but less desire)!
Nobody doubts that zeal, skill, speed, and commitment defeats size, talent, and laziness; but that begs the question. The point is that the Hurricanes need to be able to play physical hockey sufficient to off-set the physicality of some teams. The odds of accomplishing that task increase when there are at least one or two Jordan Staal type of forwards on the team.
Energy Line Redux
Freshly watching our Game 7 Cup-win the other day reminded me again just how important it is to have a fourth line that is not a training ground for prospects or a junk drawer full of spare parts that don’t fit into the top nine anymore.
Kevyn Adams centering Craig Adams and Chad LaRose was our fourth line for pretty much that entire season. Any of those three were capable of shifts or games in the top nine, if needed for injury duty, but were essentially our fourth line and penalty killers (along with Brind’Amour and others from the forward ranks).
Great chemistry existed between “the Adams Family” to begin with, and Chad fit right into their cycling and checking game.
Their mission was to control the puck, and they were excellent at doing just that, but also were looking to score out of that cycle game and could do so on occasion.
Chad had some injuries that year and missed part of the regular season, plus had not yet found his NHL scoring touch. But Kevyn had 15 goals and Craig had 10 goals during the regular season, although none of the three scored during the playoff run.
But, then scoring was not their mission. Keeping the other team from scoring and buying their teammates some time on the bench was their function, and they served it well.
I don’t have contract data anymore for the three, but my memory is that at least Craig and Chad might have been on near-minimum salary deals, and that Kevyn was probably not very far above them. It was a very affordable fourth line.
And, that’s what I’m saying is needed again, just as soon as we can get out under the one-way contracts that are influencing the NHL roster make-up and can finish the auditioning process as to who is top-nine worthy among the forward prospects.
Candidates for such a fourth line include LaRose himself in a return engagement (salary may or may not need to be adjusted for that role), Nick Dodge as center (excellent at faceoffs and defense), and either Kostopoulos (if still around when time to form this line) or Dwyer (if deemed capable) as right wing.
This line is not intended to be a set of training wheels for future top-nine skaters. It is, instead, a specialty function fourth line put on the ice after every power play for 5-on-5 time and serving time individually on the penalty kill.
It’s the line you send over the boards to re-seize the momentum, stir up the home crowd, and to show the boys on the bench how a shift should be skated. And, it puts most of the penalty kill on one line, so as to not disrupt the more offensive-minded lines when the penalty kill ends.
Finances alone will drive us to this approach eventually. After all, this particular line’s salary budget does not escalate beyond “cost-of-living” raises.
This is what these guys do, and the type of player I have in mind has little aspiration for anything else. If someone’s injured, they may see spot duty in the top nine, but their ticket to the NHL is playing a needed role on that fourth line, where chemistry with their linemates is essential.
I look forward to the day when we can return to playing hockey in such a strategic manner once again.
Here we are now...entertain us.
agreed, the 4 scoring lines theory falls apart in practice. It’s tough to get a player who’s played their whole career on a scoring line to buy into what’s required as a 4th liner. Maybe Dodge will be the 3rd guy to fill that role – a couple of other cheap suggestions: Arron Asham, Adam Mair, Nigel Dawes.
So your take is that Ron Francis, for example, doesn’t know enough about hockey to realize the Hurricanes are not playing hockey in a strategic manner? With all due respect and not meaning at all to be snide, I would have to side with Francis, Maurice, Wesley, Rutherford, J. Karmanos, Rowe, and Barrasso in terms of their experience in NHL hockey over the arguments being presented to show that their plan is fatally flawed.
Ron Francis is not calling the shots here, AD. Not his job. Not his role.
So, no need to get cute by acting like someone’s attacking him…or the rest of the org that you name.
It’s a situation that the org is in, not a well-thought out plan. For the next season or two, there’s going to be quite a bit of chaos as the sorting process of who stays and who goes (yes, breaks your heart, I know, but some of those prospects are going) plays out.
You may get your wish of a disorganized, chaotic “fourth line” that has all kinds of tryouts and cameo appearances within it for the next season or two. But, that’s not the future of Canes hockey.
Sooner or later we will return to the traditional role for a fourth line.
And that’s when the chances of our second Cup begin to increase.
Here we are now...entertain us.
That is a remarkable statement that Francis is not calling the shots. You are suggesting you have some information that Francis believes the traditional approach is best but nobody will listen to him? What is Francis’ role in your opinion? What facts are you relying on to make the statement that Francis is not calling the shots or that the organization has no well-thought out plan?
Surely you have some facts to make those statements.
My fact is that he’s the associate coach.
Not the head coach. Not the GM. It’s not his show.
I don’t understand why you’re all bent out of shape about this. And no one said “the organization has no well-thought out plan” except you, in your typical “I’ll just put some words in your mouth for you and then use it to attack you”.
Sorry, but I’m just not going to play that game, so amuse yourself with some typical “last word” shot here.
Here we are now...entertain us.
LaRose on the Fourth Line in 2005-2006
LaRose is exactly the example that disproves your theory of an ideal fourth line comprised of players who only aspire to the fourth line minutes and an energy role. LaRose did play fourth line minutes in 2005-2006, but as he developed as a player, he was given more and more time and responsibility on other lines.
In ‘05-’06, when LaRose was on the fourth line, he was an undrafted player breaking into the NHL. I’m pretty sure he was just happy to be here, and was not longing for a top-nine role.
Big contrast with your “plan” to put first and second round draft picks on the fourth line and expect them to be content with that role.
Perhaps Chad was indeed worthy of a top-nine role after a few years in the league. Maybe we also over-slotted him, as is our pattern of behavior. It’s certainly easier to float upwards when other players are sinking down past you.
However, the later years don’t matter, because the point is that when he was in that fourth line role in ‘05-’06 he was “living the dream”.
I’m saying Nick Dodge could be just such a player for us.
Here we are now...entertain us.
It doesn't have to be either or....
Here’s my challenge with the two prevailing arguments going on right now. It doesn’t have to be an “either or” type of situation. In fact, in today’s NHL, while role players, checking lines, energy lines, and defensive specialists do exist (just like pure "goal scorers exist), today’s teams need to focus on….or perhaps a better word is, evolve to non-specialized teams. We need a team with 12 two-way forwards. Perhaps the 4th line gets targeted a bit more, but if I recall, in the ‘08-’09 campaign, the Boston Bruins had, if not the best, one of the best records in the Eastern Conference. If memory serves, they pretty much rolled 4 lines, each with significant offensive talent. Sure, the 3rd and 4th lines also had more “role” type players, but I seem to recall that the 4th line ended up getting something like 8 to 12 minutes a game on average. And didn’t Blake Wheeler see a bunch of time on the 4th line? I’m thinking he had more than 20 goals that season too. While I don’t really want to jump into this fray, it seems that skilled players with energy and playmaking ability should define our 3rd and 4th lines going foward. I’m not sure I care whether they are 20 or 21 or 30 or 31. I also don’t think its a bad thing to get the youngsters involved AND have high expectations for their success. If they fail, then they have something to build on plus experience to boot.
So my contention is that a 4th line that was composed on Osala, Dalpe, and Bowman, for example (pick your rookie or substitute Kosto), would be energetic, gritty, and defensively responsible…or they would be replaced with guys like Samson, Dodge/Matsumoto, and Terry…I really don’t care where my PK’ers come from as there’s no really valid argument that says they have to be 4th liners. If we kill off an opposing powerplay and Staal is on the PK, we send out our rested 2nd line that has nearly equal goal scoring potential…or a 3rd line that’s so speedy the opposition has to worry about keeping up.
I’m not siding w/AD or w/Elsker…I think both of your arguments have merit. I just feel that our 4th line should be close to our 1st line in all skill sets, but just not quite there yet. One of the ways that we won in the Cup year as well as in
08/09 was that our 3rd line was significantly better than most other teams’ 3rd lines. I’m thinking that if our 4th line was a scoring threat and still defensively responsible and overall energetic, that would be an equally confusing mismatch.
And, one last thing….love me some Chad, but I think that the coaching staff will come to learn that his highest and best use is as a 3rd/4th liner with lots of special teams roles (both pk and pp)….I think we waste a slot for a much more skilled youngster on the 2nd line when Rosey slots in there.
…I seem to recall that the 4th line ended up getting something like 8 to 12 minutes a game on average…
I didn’t check Boston’s stats, but that seems about right for a good fourth line.
For comparison purposes, take a look at the the ‘05-’06 Canes season.
Average ice time in during the regular season for the fourth line broke down like this:
Kevin Adams – 12:53
Craig Adams – 12:18
Chad LaRose – 10:35
Chad, as the new kid on the block, not seeing as much PK duty as the more trusted and battle-tested Adams pair (here’s where we work in someone new that demonstrates hustle and defensive responsibility).
The bench was shortened during the long playoff march, with average ice time for the fourth shaking out like this:
K. Ads – 11:44
C. Ads – 8:16
Rosey – 8:58
So, your vision of 8 to 12 minutes for a proper fourth line is consistent with our Cup team’s experience.
Also, just for the record, note that not a single playoff goal came from this line. In fact, Kevin had no points at all, despite playing in all 25 playoff games. Chad and Craig each had one assist.
Heck, even Cam Ward had one assist for the playoffs. :-D
But, that’s because scoring was not their mission.
Buying time and drawing penalties was their mission.
Here we are now...entertain us.
As long as I’m at that data site, here’s the ‘08-’09 Boston team that you referenced.
Looks like fourth line average ice time varied from around 9 minutes for the wingers to 13 minutes for the center when that center was Stephane Yelle, with his special team penalty-killing talents.
Here we are now...entertain us.
I feel the key here is broad—based skill, not specialized skills…roles yes, but not at the expense of a skill set that allows for offensive, defensive, and “energy” productivity. To say that the Canes are better served with an “experienced” Dwyer as opposed to an “untested” Bowman seems to penalize professional growth based on an acceptance that because they haven’t almost exclusively been tied to a 4th line “role”, they can’t use a higher level skill set to contribute at that higher level.
I just don’t buy it, but then, that’s my personal opinion.
Using the Fourth Line as Stepping Stone
The Hurricanes have one player, Kostopoulos, who probably does not consider time of the “fourth line” to be a stepping stone to show the coaches he deserves more playing time. Yelle, on the other hand, is the classic example of a veteran with all the fourth line credentials in the world who failed miserably on the fourth line. I remain unpersuaded that the Hurricanes should favor the Yelles of the NHL over the Bowmans, Osalas, Samsons, LaRoses, Dalpes, Nashs, etc. Talent will rise to the top. One valid criticism of Laviolette, in my view, is that he jumped to conclusions about players. LaRose and Belanger come to mind. Laviolette lacked confidence in LaRose and treated him as a player lucky to get 7 or 8 minutes a night.
I prefer the approach being used by the Hurricanes organization with players such as Sutter, Boychuk, Tlusty, and Bowman. These players spent time on the fourth line getting accommodated to the speed and physicality of the NHL. As their play improved, they got more opportunities with the other three lines. As their play continued to improve they moved up the lines. LaRose did the same thing. Career fourth line players have their advantages, but they also have their disadvantages. I doubt a sane GM would trade Bowman in order to obtain Yelle, for example.
The Hurricanes have an amazing abundance of talent at forward. It would be the height of foolishness in my view to have some formula in mind about how much time on ice a player should get because one game the match-ups put him on the third line and another night he was on the fourth line. It is situational as well how a fourth line should play. One night, the totality of the circumstances might demand the fourth line cycle like wild men; and another night different circumstances might dictate the fourth line try to create as many odd man rushes as feasible. Having a fourth line that can score goals is the dream of any coach or GM as long as that line, like the other three lines, is sound defensively.
It seems a no-brainer to use the talent that you have on a team to its highest and best use. In the case of the Hurricanes, the team has a phletora of highly skilled, fast forwards. What logic is there to refusing to use them to the benefit of the team?
When your toilet breaks do you call a rookie accountant or a plumber. I mean an accountant is much more talented and might rise to the top of his profession? You fill your team with the players best suited to fill the needed roles. We have a plethora/abundance of 2nd & 3rd line players that may pan out or may not – they’ll certainly get the opportunity here shortly. Putting scoring players on checking lines isn’t beneficial.
The Philosophy of Plumbers on the Fourth Line
You will have all the chance in the world this coming season to see if the Plumbers on the Fourth Line philosophy works – just watch the Maple Leafs. Burke is an avid proponent of that concept.
so were the Stanley Cup finalists since the lockout, everyone of those teams had mucker type 4th lines. What do you have against Burke anyway?
Muckers on the Fourth Line
If Muckers are so critical, why did Chicago unload virtually all its “muckers.” If muckers work so well, why did teams like Ottawa beat teams with true muckers? If it is so blatantly, incredibly obvious that a muckers’ fourth line of professional plumbers is so obvious how did Rutherford, Jason Karmanos, Paul Maurice, Ron Francis, Glen Wesley, Tom Rowe, and Tom Barrasso all now realize they were being very, very foolish not obtain a fourth line of plumbers? I guess Francis and Barrasso got to the Hockey of Hall without knowing much about hockey because some people at CC seem to be persuaded that concept is hockey 101. So among a hockey brain trust containing two hall of fame members, two players who had their jerseys retired, and a GM who put together a Stanley Cup Winner, none of them realized they didn’t know how to construct a fourth line. Does that really seem logical and credible to you or to the contrary does it seem that perhaps there is a legitimate difference of opinion among knowledgeable people as to the best method to construct a fourth line?
Burke strikes me as overly arrogant and self-absorbed. His plan seems to be self-contradictory, and I will be surprised if his approach brings playoff contention to the Leafs.
Salary cap is why Chicago unloaded or did not re-sign their 4th line. The reason we haven’t gone out and acquired a UFA 4th line guy is a self imposed budget. They got to the HHOF because of their ability as players not mgmt. I think it’s logical to use what has been successful in the past and for the past 30 year or so 4th line players have been what you’d call muckers/plumbers/energy guys/PK specialists/fighters/etc; they haven’t been top prospects. If you’re going to justify their decision to go with the tools they have versus they tools the need or want because they’re a “brain trust” go ahead. I think I’ve proven that this is unconventional and the other model has been more successful, obviously there are exceptions, but for the most part that’s the way it’s done. Ottawa’s is the exception not the rule.
The Choices as to Who to Trust
It does come down to who to trust. On the one hand, a group of professionals who have a long and storied history of success in the NHL or on the other various well-informed and well-intentioned and highly intelligent hockey fans. After giving the choice, due consideration, as for me, I will go with the NHL HOF players and GM who has gotten his team to the Stanley Cup and the Eastern Conference finals twice from 2005-2010. They may well be wrong, but on balance their opinions carry more weight as far as I am concerned.
Agreed, which is why I like the model most of the NHL uses.Both of those teams had solid 4th lines with 4th line players; caveat Chad LaRose – C.Adams, K.Adams, R.Bayda, T.Conboy, P.Dwyer, P.Eaves, D. Helminen, M. Ryan. I know that’s more than 6 but if memory serves we had a lot of injuries in 08-09 and we brought up a number of guys to fill that role but none of them were what you’d consider top prospects.
Love how you somehow imply that the Canes org agrees with your fantasy team theory of dividing the 60 minutes of total ice time equally between four lines and seeding the “best 12” forwards indiscriminately through the four lines…when there’s absolutely no evidence that they do so at all.
Please find one game, or heck, one NHL team that divides the ice time equally between all four lines. You’ve yet to give us one credible example of what you’re fantasizing we should do practiced by any other org.
No team is giving “12 to 16 minutes”, as you advocated earlier in this thread, to their fourth line.
12 minutes maybe to their top specialty team player on that fourth line…but not the entire line. It’s just not done. And, for very good reason.
I will go with the NHL HOF players and GM who has gotten his team to the Stanley Cup…
Yeah, me, too. With an energy line like the LaRose – K. Adams – C. Adams fourth line that was so essential to winning that Cup.
Here we are now...entertain us.
The thread does present a very good example of how your position has morphed as the discussion proceeded. The language you used speaks for itself.
In my view, the discussion demonstrates that the advocates for the “classic approach” of plumbers/muckers are clear in their conclusion which is fine; but are lacking in explaining why the Hurricanes organization did not include a bevy of plumbers/muckers on the team.
Who are the muckers/plumbers you contend are on the team and slated to play the fourth line as a plumber/mucker? If not, how do you explain the absence of such an obvious, basic, inexorable need?
In terms of time on ice, if the fourth line is LaRose/Dalpe/Kostopoulos why would they get less time slated as a “fourth line” than if LaRose/Dalpe/Boychuk or LaRose/Nash/Boychuk or Boychuk/Nash/Dalpe were slated as a “third line.” Does the title of the line matter that much to you?
I get what you’re saying and I think I’ve said my piece, but I don’t know if I agree that the mucker/plumber is at it’s conclusion. I think it will morph into guys like M.Talbot and D. Carcillo like players. I don’t think we’ll ever see the NHL full of players like Staal and Crosby (all finesse) nor should we want to. You talk about with disdain, every city like every hockey team needs it’s blue-collar guys.
What I think is that the talent pool is do deep of NHL quality players available to all teams that what I see is the need to find more roster spots for the young Chad LaRose’s, the young Sutters. Look at all the great players who began on the fourth line and proved themselves there. As the talent pool continues to increase, GMs will figure out ways to use the best talent they have. What I think is that talented players play hard and tough. It isn’t restricted just to the plumbers/muckers.
…why would they get less time slated as a "fourth line"…
Because I look at the constraints that we defined way up there in the very first posts of this thread.
Finite salary budget and finite ice time to be shared.
The salary budget, especially when constrained nearly $15M below the salary cap, is necessarily unbalanced toward my top lines…because that’s where the talent lies.
Similarly, the ice time is unbalanced towards the top lines…because that’s where the talent lies.
Why would I want to short the team by skating less-skilled players the same amount of minutes I’m giving my first line?
So, I’m going to be short on minutes for my fourth line and short on money…always.
Maybe I can temporarily get around the money constraint by stuffing some entry level players onto the fourth line, at near league minimum, until that first contract expires and I have to pay them something. Better have some more indentured servants coming along, if so, in order to make such a system sustainable.
But, the ice time is going to be limited no matter what I do, as it should be. So, why would I want to stunt the development of my most promising prospects by giving them 8 to 10 minutes in the NHL and no special team duty, when I could have them skating top line duty in the AHL plus special team duties?
I don’t. In fact, I have a whole ‘nother need for my fourth line than auditioning players. I’m going to use it to make my other three lines more effective with their ice time and their roles instead.
Here we are now...entertain us.
How would you apply your theory to the players on the Hurricanes team? Please identify the Hurricanes players you reference when you state:
Similarly, the ice time is unbalanced towards the top lines…because that’s where the talent lies. bq.
As the lines’ composition changes, does that mean a player who was on the third line, but is moved up to the second line becomes more skilled? What are the measures and considerations you use to rank the Hurricanes’ players among the top 16 forwards?
As a “line”, yes our second line is more skilled than our third line, just like our first line is more skilled than our second.
Therefore, the player’s performance must have changed somehow, if we’re moving him from third to second line…so, yes, we’re going to give that player more ice time when good enough to be on our second line, than we would give that player if they’re not good enough to be on our second line.
Here we are now...entertain us.
so, yes, we’re going to give that player more ice time when good enough to be on our second line, than we would give that player if they’re not good enough to be on our second line. bq.
Under your assessment, if Jokinen moves down to the second line for two shifts, he is not good enough to be on the first line; until he is moved back in the same game to be the first line wing; and then he suddenly improves and is better and deserves more ice time. According to what the Hurricanes coaches say, they move players around the various lines to get the match-ups they want against specific teams and specific players. I think the Hurricanes coaches are correct that it is not a shifting evaluation of who is “not good enough to be on our second line;” and instead it is an evaluation of which players work best against other teams players at a particular juncture in a particular game.
I swear, it’s like you’ve got the whole game approach turned upside down.
I don’t care how he got there, but if Jokinen is assigned to the second line, then yes he’s going to see less ice time than if he was assigned to the first line.
I’m putting that first line out every chance I get, because that’s where I’m maximizing my chances of scoring by re-arranging its parts.
Here we are now...entertain us.
I don’t care how he got there, but if Jokinen is assigned to the second line, then yes he’s going to see less ice time than if he was assigned to the first line. bq.
There is no reasoning behind this statement. There is no rule of the laws of nature that requires the first line and particularly a first line that shifts in which players are on the line, to have more time than anybody who takes some shifts on the second line. Accordingly, there is no reason to suggest by definition a second line cannot play virtually equivalent time to a first line. In short, your statement simply makes no sense to me.
I do understand that this is all not making any sense to you.
But, please take a look at any NHL team’s gamesheet sometime and you will see that this seemingly nonsensical fact…is true.
First line gets the most ice time.
It just does.
Here we are now...entertain us.
First Line Times
For the Hurricanes with the shifting lines, including the first lines, the time on ice varied significantly for many of the top six and top nine forwards. For the Hurricanes, there was frequently not even a well-defined first line other than Staal at center when Staal was healthy and Jokinen for most of the year. If there is not even a well-defined, established first line, second line, third line, or fourth line, one can’t even really define who the first line is with any accuracy. Your argument totally falls apart under the Hurricanes approach of rapid shifts of the composition of lines – and that further demonstrates why your position is not founded in reality as it relates to the Hurricanes. There are of course some teams that set their lines and don’t change them come hell or high water. That approach does not apply to the Hurricanes.
For any given game, it does apply.
Forget who the pieces are at any given moment. That doesn’t matter.
There’s still a hierarchy of ice time among the lines from first to fourth.
Here we are now...entertain us.
These Statements are Self-Contradictory
For any given game, it does apply.
Forget who the pieces are at any given moment. That doesn’t matter.
There’s still a hierarchy of ice time among the lines from first to fourth. bq.
Those statements are internally contradictory. For any given game, there is no way if the lines are shifting that such that various players are on the first and second line that the first line plays more than the second line every time. There is no logic to these statements. The coaches don’t have some command from Gary Bettman to make certain that whatever arrangement constitutes the “first line” must by rule of law exceed the time of any group constituted as the “second line.” There is not even an easy way to track what the time on ice was for “first line” was when the lines’ composition is shifting.
The facts weigh against your argument that every team should have an hierarchy of even strength ice time and that whoever is on the first line will always get more ice time that whatever group of players compose at any given shift or game the second line. The truth is your conclusions fall apart when the facts underlying the conclusions are examined.
Among Mo’s line juggling, there is one constant, and that is the centers.
So, we need look no further than comparing Staal’s average ice time last season (20:43) with Sutter’s (16:33) – Source.
Again, look at any NHL gamesheet for any game.
1>2>3>4.
Here we are now...entertain us.
The Logic Becomes More Inscrutable
So, we need look no further than comparing Staal’s average ice time last season (20:43) with Sutter’s (16:33) – Source.bq.
So seriously, your logic continues to become more convoluted. The fact that Staal as the #1 center averaged approximately 4 minutes more than Sutter (who played on various lines) supports the argument that lines should get about equal time. Staal’s average time on ice includes penalty minutes time and penalty kill time. It has nothing to do with even strength time on ice.
It’s merely another example of you citing facts that disprove your conclusion. To be certain everybody has a right to their own conclusions. The issue is whether your conclusions are based on anything other than a personal preference. As the discussion as continued, the more clear it is that you have a very personal preference for a fourth line designed in a specific manner. What is equally clear is that you cannot articulate any significant facts that prove your preference to be a better than other approaches.
I think it’s pretty plain to the readers who is using facts and who is using adjectives, adverbs, subjective takes, and suspect logic.
Honestly, I’m not seriously trying to convince you of anything, AD…because no one on this board has ever successfully been able to do that, although many have tried.
I’m just posting to draw out your thinking a bit so as to expose its flaws for those that might otherwise take it at face value.
Bottom line, no team has ever divided the ice time equally among the four lines.
And the Canes are certainly not going to be the first to do so.
Believe what you want.
Here we are now...entertain us.
I’m just posting to draw out your thinking a bit so as to expose its flaws for those that might otherwise take it at face value. bq.
Bottom line, no team has ever divided the ice time equally among the four lines. bq.
The logic becomes more and more circular. According to you “no team has ever divided ice time equally among the four lines.” The premise, however, began with your assertion that the fourth line should always be given minimal time because the fourth line always had a specific role of energy and could not support having significant time on the ice. The argument now has evolved into your assertion that no time has a stop watch and equally portions out fifteen minutes of time for each line. Well, that is a shocker of a concept.
The facts, however, do support the concept that with a team stacked with talent at forward and with a coaching philosophy of mixing up lines throughout the game, the players of the fourth line deserve as much time as they can properly handle – even if that time on ice runs from 12 to 15 minutes as compared to 4 to 8 minutes. At the 8 minute segment, that is approximately eight shifts. Adding four more one minute shifts over three periods means effectively that there are literally two more shifts in one period and one more shift in the other two periods. Such a concept is hardly mind-boggling. Western civilization is not going to come crashing down with a fourth line having one more shift in two periods, for example.
What is telling is that as the “reasons for the dogma” of treating every fourth line in the NHL as second class hockey citizens were exposed, the logic wrapped around itself – exposing at the core, a set of beliefs and preferences. The reality is that only a fool of a coach would fail to rest his top lines by playing third and fourth lines comprised of highly talented, two way forwards, who more than carried their own weight each shift.
Teams that limit their fourth lines exposure on the ice by limiting that line’s time on the ice do so out of necessity rather than out of design. The coaches cannot afford to have players who have a limited set of NHL level skills at key points in the game. Those fourth lines just serve to shorten the game and let their talented players catch their breath.
Wrong analogiy in my humble opinion….that’s like asking do you call a catcher to kick a field goal….the better, more appropriate question is do you call the plumber that has used the same, sometime successful, tools to fix your toilet. Or do you call the plumber that has a better set of tools, more technologically advanced….yup, he may be younger and his tools may not work in all situations (just like the old time plumber and his “trial and error” mentality), but it often does work, faster, more effectively, and with a higher level of customer service….that seems like the better analogy to me.
You really believe that is a rational comparison? If you were GM, according to your logic, you would choose Yelle or Brind’Amour over Bowman, Dalpe, Nash, Osala, Tlusty, among others? I feel certain there are 29 NHL GMs would if you were GM and they had the opportunity to obtain Bowman, Dalpe, Nash, Osala, or Tlusty for Yelle or Brind’Amour would be very, very happy to oblige you. LaRose played on a checking fourth line and wasn’t any worse for the wear. Whitne played on a checking line and survived. Eaves despite being a former first round draft choice is on Detroit’s checking line. The data does not support the conclusion that there is a cultural divide and that highly skilled players should never cut their teeth on the fourth line. The evidence is vastly to the contrary.
Conference Finals Last Year:
SJ 4th Line: Mitchell, Malholtra, Nichol
CHI 4th Line: Burrish, Madden, Eager
PHI: Lapierre, Powe, Betts
MON: Darche, Metropolit, Moen
I don’t see one prospect rookie on that list of players, most of those guys are tried and tested veterans. The data does suggest that and has for a long time, really, how many NHL teams last year put their top prospects on the 4th line?
The Lines You Mentioned
If these players are so critical to the success of the team, why were so many not re-signed and why were so many traded?
Because it ain’t the individual players. It’s the role they are recruited for and play for the org that’s important.
Faced with having to shed salary off a roster, or facing raises that can’t be afforded, then of course a GM simply re-invests at entry level for the following season.
Change is the name of the game to keep a team fresh. And part of having a good energy line is a certain element of job desperation.
Here we are now...entertain us.
An equally telling question might be how many teams had their first and second line centers as penalty killers. Most of the time our first two PK units are Staal and__ followed by Sutter and _ . Cole and LaRose, who are at least top nine forwards, are also penalty killers, as was Cullen when here. I doubt that is true on many other teams. And, if that is true, than the rationale for having a 4th line as place for specialists, such as penalty killers falls apart.
weekends are good (90% – 95% full) a lot of fun, weekdays there’s a lot of empty seats especially in the upper corners (75%-80% full). Tickets are cheap, pretty easy to find, and on the whole it’s a great experience. Like most pro-sports attendance is correlated to success, this team is no different.
Well I want somebody to tell me what GM in the NHL would not ice 4 lines of highly offensively skilled AND defensively responsible forwards….nobody can because there’s not a GM or coach that wouldn’t do that….the only thing that keeps them from doing it is the salary cap. So if we have rookies and/or youngsters who can be a 4th line of offensively skilled and defensively responsible players, then that sounds like we’d be in the proverbial cat bird’s seat.
Your answer is so obviously true it takes pretzel logic to dispute it. Of course, any sane GM would play all four lines of forwards if all were highly skilled offensively and were defensively responsible. If there is such a GM, I would like to see a quote from that GM to the effect that although he has the talent to field four lines of highly skilled offensive forwards who were defensively sound, he elected not to use his fourth line other than as paper weights or game shorteners.
Scott Walker?
I’ve been out of town as you may know – Haven’t read all this (sheez guys! all this about a 8 min/game 4th line?! – I thought I was obsessed and/or bored =D)
But – with ice_chip tweeting yesterday that the Canes may be talking to Scotty Walker – how would that mess with your 4th line winger conversations? —→ Dwyer, Nick Dodge, Walker??
Walker at League minimum, one-year, I’m assuming.. Good for his kids to stay here.
Twitter @HMof2
by Carolyn Christians on Aug 22, 2010 9:29 AM EDT reply actions
LOL!
Oh, my. Well, it will drive AD crazy, but it would be all right with me.
Although honestly, when I saw Chip tweet that I was wondering if he wasn’t just a bit swept up in the moment of seeing Scott’s familiar face and went a bit nostalgic on us.
Scott on the fourth line and on PK suits my vision for a fourth line, but not AD’s, who would rather use that line as a clone of the other three scoring lines and audition young talent.
Small details on the theoretical fit is that both Walker and Kostopoulos shoot right and normally play right wing. Plus we have Ruutu, LaRose, and Cole ahead of both of them on the depth chart, with Bowman and Samson both wanting right-wing action, as well.
I just don’t see it happening, unless JR wants to go cheap by dealing Kostopoulos (who would have plenty of takers) for a cheaper version by using Walker at league minimum for a $450,000 savings.
Here we are now...entertain us.
The Case for Scott Walker
Okay, bear with me for a moment, because the more I think about Chip’s daydream of a Scott Walker return, the more I can actually see JR doing something like this.
Yes, Scott Walker’s a right wing in a right-wing crowded depth chart, but what if he is viewed as an even more affordable (assuming a $0.5M league-minimum price tag) fourth line right wing than our current lock for the position, Tom Kostopoulos ($0.95M/$1.1M).
Further advantages include:
- turns a two-year contract into a one-year contract on a roster that needs to open up some slots
- probable good return for Kostopoulos, even with the two-year, since it’s at such a good rate and he’s such a good utility player
- Walker will eagerly fight and is arguably as effective as Kostopoulos in the win department
Furthermore, if I’m JR, I’m looking at my right wing depth chart and note that I have a couple of players that rarely make a full season, with one coming off shoulder surgery (Ruutu / Cole). So, the chances of me needing at least a third-line fill-in, and possibly higher, from the fourth line is good. Could even turn out to be for a while.
Kostopoulos performed well when given a shot at the top nine, including some time with Staal, as I recall. But, Walker is easily a third line center and could also pair with Sutter in a checking line role, if needed (as could LaRose).
So, I am liking my options with a good locker room guy, effective team defender, and solid vet who would be content with his role, whatever it might be.
No knock on Kostopoulos at all, who is clearly all of this, as well.
He just may be under-priced by Walker, is all. And this is a team looking to cut budget wherever possible.
Here we are now...entertain us.
Walker is easily a third line center…
Sheesh! Yes, I know he’s a right wing.
But, while I’m here, it’s hard to imagine finding a buyer for Kostopoulos on such short notice, especially when there are lots of free agents around still unsigned that can perform a similar role.
Probably have to bundle him up with someone else as a very good sweetner. But, who else of value that might could be moved on short notice is unknown.
Who knows? Maybe there’s room on the team for both Walker and Kostopoulos…and it’s someone higher on the depth chart that would need replacement.
Bowman and Samson lurk below, but probably aren’t ready this season for much more than injury replacement stints.
Here we are now...entertain us.
2010-2011 Fourth Line
Although some pieces may shift, as they always do, I’m going to make some predictions and express some preferences before training camp even begins as to what our fourth line should/will be as the season begins.
First of all, I wish there was a magic wand I could waive and move Samsonov out of the way for a seemingly inevitable odd-man-out stint on the fourth line in the left wing position.
With Jokinen, Tlusty, and Boychuk all vying for left wing slots, he’s probably there by default so as to not stunt the development of Tlusty and Boychuk.
If he were out of the way, here’s where I shock AD by selecting Osala for that fourth line LW, not because I think he’s a classic fourth liner or that I think that’s where he belongs.
No, here in a fine nuance that applies only to his particular style of game, I see no problem breaking him into the NHL from the fourth and working him upward to the third or wherever later in his career. His physicality and energy would be welcome on a fourth line and would not dampen his development whatsoever. Let’s get him on board as soon as Samsonov and/or injury allows.
Right wing is a no-brainer. It’s Kostopoulos or Walker (see above).
Center? Here’s where I make my case for Nick Dodge, right out of camp.
He’s capable, he’s the right package for the job, and he’s a bundle of character, which I can expand upon if curious. Let’s get him activated, the sooner the better.
Let’s let Nash and Dalpe trade time at third line center and not stunt their growth on the fourth. They can easily move back and forth from here to Charlotte, seeing special team time in Charlotte moreso than here.
So, Dodge centering Osala and Kostopoulos/Walker is my dream fourth line for the Canes in 2010-2011.
Here we are now...entertain us.
I like that fourth line a lot
Two kids, one vet. Osala adds some size to go with the tenacity of the other players—maybe Osala will take a cue and take more advantage of his size. The Canes find out what Osala and Dodge can do at the NHL level.
I also like Dodge as fourth-line center more than Nash or Dalpe.
I still want to find out this season what Nash and Dalpe can do in the NHL. It doesn’t have to be at the start of the season, but it’s important to find out what they can contribute. With Dalpe, I’d most like to see what he can do as a wing on a scoring line. The Canes are overloaded with young centers and need to find out who’s best at wing. They also need to move Samsonov and Cole, if possible, to make room.
by curiouscanesfan on Aug 23, 2010 11:42 AM EDT up reply actions
Using the Fourth Line to Develop Forwards
I think Osala is exactly the kind of player who would benefit from 10 to 12 minutes on a talented fourth line. I happen to think Bowman would also benefit from that time. In looking at the depth of talent at center on the third and fourth lines, it might work out to have a rotation from Raleigh and Charlotte consisting of Nash, Dalpe, Dwyer, and Dodge (although some of us are convinced Dwyer is better suited for wing that center). If one or two of those three establish themselves the way Sutter did as completely ready for full-time NHL play, then they’d stick – but otherwise, it might make sense to them shuttling back and forth between the Canes and the Checkers as they refine their NHL skills.
I would be very pleased to see a fourth line, at some point during the season, of Bowman/Dalpe/Osala or Dalpe/Dodge/Osala or Bowman/Dodge/Dalpe to see how they fare in the NHL. Osala played the fourth line for Finland in the World Championship and by all accounts did a fine job in that role.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Canes Country
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Why the Devils and the Kings are evidence the Capitals shouldn’t trade Alex Ovechkin
- Eulogy: Remembering the 2011-12 New York Rangers
- Stanley Cup Final: 5 keys for New Jersey Devils and Los Angeles Kings
- Friday’s Three Stars: Devils head to Final; Brodeur, Kovalchuk the difference in Game 6
- Devils eliminate Rangers in Game 6, ending fear of the past, setting course for the future
