Thrashers

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 24, 2008 11:05 AM | Link to this

Who are the young guys that are gone?

By Germaniac

September 24, 2008 11:07 AM | Link to this

First!

I have a really good feeling about JA´s coaching abilities. I think he will put the best “chemistrie-lines” on opening night ice, IMO.

By GaVaHokie

September 24, 2008 11:07 AM | Link to this

Thanks for the update Mike… one correction, it’s Rylan Kaip, not Ryan. Just don’t want you to embarass yourself approaching him for an interview and calling him Ryan. :)

By GaVaHokie

September 24, 2008 11:11 AM | Link to this

About a dozen of the young guys are gone.

By that, do you mean back to Juniors and AHL?

By Bob

September 24, 2008 11:19 AM | Link to this

So White centering the 2nd line.

Where’s Little skating?

I like Machacek, how old is he and where did he play last year?

By Sara

September 24, 2008 11:23 AM | Link to this

Perrin huh? Well, he’s got skills and he’s got speed so I suppose it could work.

So who was Little playing with then if White was on line 2?

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 24, 2008 11:29 AM | Link to this

Bob — I have that same question regarding Little. We haven’t heard much about him to this point, hopefully that’s not a sign that he’s underwhelming.

As for Machacek, he’ll be 20 on the 14th of October, which I believe means he can play in the AHL this season. He played for Vancouver of the WHL last season, his third in that league. The link above gives you his career stats.

By Mike Knobler

September 24, 2008 11:56 AM | Link to this

Thanks GaVaHokie

I have fixed the typo on Rylan’s name. Just when I was patting myself on the back for keeping my Eriks and Erics straight, too.

By Mike Knobler

September 24, 2008 12:02 PM | Link to this

Bob Little was working with Joey Crabb and Colin Stuart. Don’t get too hung up on the lines — I know, I know, it’s me who has been writing about them — because the lines will mean a whole lot more for the final three exhibition games. For now, the coaching staff is more worried about getting a left wing, a center and a right wing together for drills than in forming working relationships among trios of players. Little might very well wind up centering the second line.

By Nikita

September 24, 2008 12:19 PM | Link to this

Perrin’s got the skills — he just lacks the size. Interesting choice, anyway.

I gotta tell you, I’m pretty underwhelmed by Lavallee. He did o.k. in his visits to Blueland last year, but he didn’t exactly set the rink on fire and I didn’t even notice him at practice.

By Mike Knobler

September 24, 2008 12:22 PM | Link to this

Here’s the roster for the first two exhibitions:

Forwards — Stuart, Little, Crabb, Sterling, Slater, Thorburn, Esposito, Stevenson, Lessard, Boulton, Reasoner, Hoffman, LaVallee, White, Holzapfel, Armstrong, Machacek

Defensemen — Valabik, Hainsey, Oystrick, Rivers, Exelby, Klee, Lewis

Goalies — Hedberg, Pavelec

My first reaction: The emphasis is clearly on looking at players to decide roster spots. I spoke with Anderson before I had the roster; he talked about wanting to win and wanting to get some fresh video of Thrashers players running his system. I think the winning bit was all about attitude, that he wants his team to compete every time it takes the ice, whether in an exhibition or a regular-season (or, maybe even, a playoff) game. But he’s obviously making his roster decisions based on other priorities.

By GaVaHokie

September 24, 2008 12:43 PM | Link to this

Wow, thanks Mike… this is a roster built for some immediate roster cuts, obviously. This is 3rd and 4th line material. This is a battle for White and Little to play 2nd line C, and if anyone can elevate their game to take 2nd line RW out of the rest of the bunch.

By Bob

September 24, 2008 12:43 PM | Link to this

the lines will mean a whole lot more for the final three exhibition games

Thanks for the info on Little. I agree with you that the lines don’t mean much for now as they first need to find the couple of guys that are on the bubble to make the roster, but it is interesting that White is skating with guys that will definitely make the roster, and Little isn’t.

By Mike Knobler

September 24, 2008 12:46 PM | Link to this

We are right now posting a story about a four-year contract extension for Tobias Enstrom.

By Tony C.

September 24, 2008 1:09 PM | Link to this

GREAT WORK KNOBES!!!!

Man, I can’t tell yall how excited I am for puckey to be almost ready to go!!!

By Alan

September 24, 2008 1:09 PM | Link to this

An Enström contract extension is wonderful news!

By Smoothie

September 24, 2008 1:12 PM | Link to this

Wow! Thanks for the scoop Mike!

Well color me amazed for once! The Thrashers actually did something in a proactive fashion that makes good sense for the future of the franchise!

I hope Tobias is getting at least $1.25 - 1.5 million a year. He’s worth probably more than that but he still has lots left to prove. Despite getting his big contract and the chance he might “relax” a bit, I still see him putting up 10 + goals and 40 + assists in JA’s system.

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 24, 2008 1:12 PM | Link to this

We are right now posting a story about a four-year contract extension for Tobias Enstrom.

HELL YEAH!

Regarding the lines, those are prime time roster cut lines. Interesting to see White and Little in the mix…they’re battling against eachother in my mind.

I hope some of the youth shine, and Pavelec makes this training camp a hard decision for the coaches in making the two NHL goalie openings.

By stendec

September 24, 2008 1:12 PM | Link to this

Greetings Mike. wanted to get this before all Thrasher followers. Just a few points as we all prepare for another season of Thrasher hockey. Being a newspaper writer for over three decades myself I know the truth can hurt. The Thrashers simply quit trying last season. That was obvious to even casual watchers (which I AM NOT). Ilya Kovalchuk will escape Atlanta at the first opportunity which presents irself. If owners bankrupt the city to keep him in a Thrasher jersey his performance level will fall to the level of that other all-star guy who now plays elsewhere. It is a lose-lose scenario. Kari Lehtonen (Sori Letemin) will continue to make millions of saves but will always allow just enough goals at the most inopportune times. Would like to be wrong about him but do not believe I am. I am told to give the kid a break? He is no longer a kid! How many years does he need? Offense must produce plenty of goals if team is to succeed. Just a few random thoughts. Give ‘em blue blazes. . Drop the puck already!

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 24, 2008 1:20 PM | Link to this

Anyone care to guess which newspaper Stendec used to work for…

I’m thinking “Weekly World News”.

By Smoothie

September 24, 2008 1:20 PM | Link to this

stendec — who p** in your cornflakes this morning?? You must be Jeff Schultz then if newspaper “reporting” is your profession. Yours is STILL just an opinion and you know what they say about opinions right??

And who the hell are you talking about in your post that you liken to Kovalchuk? You don’t know Kovy any better than the rest of us so how could you possibly know how loyal he might prove to be??

By Alan

September 24, 2008 1:34 PM | Link to this

ranallo - Weekly World News sounds like a fairly sound guess, right there.

He obviously hasn’t read the recent blogs where a lot of us have expressed disdain at those who continue to try and ship Kovalchuk out of Atlanta. But then again, I think he’s been busy this summer coming up with ideas for the next BatBoy story.

By Mark

September 24, 2008 1:38 PM | Link to this

Warning Knobler someone hacked into your ajc account and printed a false story about Tobias Enstrom signing a contract with us. Fortunately I know that you are already aware that we are just supposed to be disgruntled people who repeatedley say over and over again that no one wants to play in Atlanta and no star would ever sign a contract with Don Waddell so I know you would not write a story with so much misinformation. Please call the Department of Homeland Security and find out who hacked into your computer and said that a star would sign a contract with Don Waddell.

By GaVaHokie

September 24, 2008 1:45 PM | Link to this

Mark… Surely Enstrom is aware of the ownership dispute and that Waddell is the laughing stock of the league… doesn’t he realize that Kovalchuk is leaving in two years? :)

By NASCAR Dave

September 24, 2008 2:39 PM | Link to this

Waddell said the signing sends a message to fans about the team’s commitment to succeed.

Funny how it takes him 10 years to let the fans know that… That the team has “a commitment to succeed”…

LOL

By The real NASCAR Dave

September 24, 2008 2:53 PM | Link to this

Must…find…way…to…not…give…Waddell…credit…

By Bob

September 24, 2008 3:06 PM | Link to this

Funny how it takes him 10 years to let the fans know that… That the team has “a commitment to succeed

Now, now, be nice. This was a smart move. And don’t think that Waddell hasn’t tried his hardest to sign and extend multiple players, sure it’s his fault that none of the others wanted to sign here, but I don’t think he hasn’t tried his best to succeed, it’s not about effort with him, it’s about ability, but that’s been hashed out. This is a good smart early re-signing of one of our up and coming RFAs. Good job and nice to see him get with the program in the new NHL, all the smart GMs lock up their impending RFAs very early (I assume Enstrom would have been RFA next July 1). Who else is RFA next summer?

By GaVaHokie

September 24, 2008 3:24 PM | Link to this

Who else is RFA next summer?

More than you want to know… bookmark this site, it’s a good reference tool.

By GaVaHokie

September 24, 2008 3:28 PM | Link to this

It’d be nice to lock-up Christensen long-term (say, 3 years $6 million) before he scores 50 points this season on a line with Kovalchuk (ala. Savard).

By Tony C.

September 24, 2008 3:36 PM | Link to this

“Terms not discussed”

ugh!

I’m just hoping he got extended beyond Hainsey’s deal-or at least that they’re setting up the end of Hainsey’s window as a “cash-out” year (you know, kind of like this summer, but moreso: Everybody’s UFA).

By other Bob

September 24, 2008 3:42 PM | Link to this

Now, now, be nice. This was a smart move. And don’t think that Waddell hasn’t tried his hardest to sign and extend multiple players, sure it’s his fault that none of the others wanted to sign here, but I don’t think he hasn’t tried his best to succeed, it’s not about effort with him, it’s about ability, but that’s been hashed out.

yes let’s be nice. Saying that it took ten years to let the fans know we are committed to win is uncalled for. But saying it’s his fault no one signed here and that he has no ability is perfectly acceptable. Let’s keep saying that while fans are excited about this new contract

By Sara

September 24, 2008 3:48 PM | Link to this

Yeah Hokie there’s the rub. Neither Christensen nor Armstrong have been here long enough IMO to offer them contract extensions. Both will take on bigger roles this season and we just don’t have enough to go on. Their agents shouldn’t even let them sign deals this early. However, it’s also a risk that they will post big numbers. If I’m Waddell, I say meet in the middle short term and let your client show me this was more than just one fluke season.

By Nikita

September 24, 2008 3:55 PM | Link to this

Hereare the kids who got sent back. We released Marchesi and Anderson.

By Mike Knobler

September 24, 2008 3:56 PM | Link to this

Here’s the list of today’s roster cuts:

Forwards Tomas Pospisil, Matt Siddall and Myles Stoesz to the Chicago Wolves.

Goaltender Chris Carrozzi, forward Danick Paquette and defenseman Paul Postma back to juniors.

Defenseman Scott Marchesi and forward Matt Anderson released.

By Tobias Enstrom

September 24, 2008 4:05 PM | Link to this

u guys r suckers. I just got huge signing bonus from Dumb Fraudell. Once Ilya doesn’t sign I demand trade and leave u losers in ga.

By Sara

September 24, 2008 4:09 PM | Link to this

Nothing too surprising about any of those at this point, especially not Marchesi - he stood out on Sunday and not in a good way. Better luck next year perhaps.

UGH, who’s ready for some real hockey now? I may not survive until next Wednesday - these people are trying to kill me I swear!

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 24, 2008 4:13 PM | Link to this

Stoesz to Chicago…I wonder if he’ll be able to stick there this year or if he’ll wind up back in Gwinnett as he did last year.

With Desbiens gone, Stoesz is our next best thing for “enforcers” in the pipeline.

It’s no surprise about Paquette, Carrozzi or Postma, but I’ve heard plenty of positive accounts about the three of them to like what they can bring to the table in the future.

By Tony C.

September 24, 2008 4:39 PM | Link to this

I’m curious as to yall’s opinion of where Army should be slotted in?

Good to see that it isn’t something serious w/Crusher’s wing…I am looking forward to seeing if it’s really going to be

…although I don’t know that I wouldn’t mind seeing

By GaVaHokie

September 24, 2008 4:53 PM | Link to this

Tony… I won’t be happy unless Army is planted on the checking line with no question as to who the 1st and 2nd line RWers are… right now, it’s possible for him to be 2nd line RW and I don’t like it.

… in my book, he’s a checking line winger and a penalty killer.

I really think our Checking line needs to be Perrin/Reasoner/Army with no question.

By NASCAR Dave

September 24, 2008 5:04 PM | Link to this

Yeah Hokie there’s the rub. Neither Christensen nor Armstrong have been here long enough IMO to offer them contract extensions.

I agree with that. Especially with CRUSHED… Until he can prove he can take a hit like a man, I have no interest in bringing him back…

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 24, 2008 5:13 PM | Link to this

Hokie — I have to disagree with you there. Armstrong is not much different of a player than Thorburn in my opinion, with perhaps a bit more talent. He does play fine on the PK, but I think his playing alongside Crosby should show you he’s got the ability to crash the net, and the forechecking ability to keep the puck in the offensive zone. In Therrien’s eyes, he was a fine compliment to the best player in the NHL (arguably).

Personally I wouldn’t mind seeing him alongside Little. I also liked the line of Perrin-Christensen-Armstrong last year, so I wouldn’t mind seeing it again. Kovalchuk for Perrin on that wing, and you could then put Little alongside two vets with scoring ability (Kozlov-Little-Williams), and have Thorburn (the second closest thing to an enforcer last season) on the checking line with Reasoner and either Perrin or White (both being too small for the grinding line, but both defensively responsible for the checking line).

I know, there is too much offensive talent on this team that can’t be placed in defensive pairings for the checking line or grinding line…and unfortunately that means Little is likely the odd man out. If so, White between Kozlov and Williams wouldn’t bother me.

What’s been bothering me lately is how easy it is to cast Slater to the fourth line duties. Most of us know for sure that Slater will be the fourth line C, Boulton a fourth line W, and the final spot being either overflow or being Larsen’s. Personally I think Slater can eventually be the shutdown center this team will need, and he should be given time shutting down the best line from the opponents. He can win face-offs, has speed to burn, and is not too bad defensively (good PK player too).

By Tony C.

September 24, 2008 6:21 PM | Link to this

While he’s obviously the least-ready netminder we’ve got signed, I imagine that Carozzi will be challenging for the #1 spot in Chi. next year, I don’t how many of yall got to watch the prospects tourney, but I was very pleased with Carozzi’s play in Traverse City.

Ranallo; the files are too big for me to put on my current servspace, as soon as I find a good host, I’ll let you know the ftp info.

By Tony C.

September 24, 2008 6:57 PM | Link to this

Also, I agree on Slater, when he made his debut a few years ago on FrankenBobby’s line,he proved more than capable-like you said, speed to burn, good in the circle and juuust a bit of finish in his game.

I would think that White is destined for more of a scoring role-The Walrus seems to think that’s where he’s going.

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 25, 2008 6:44 AM | Link to this

Danke Tony C.

By GaVaHokie

September 25, 2008 8:45 AM | Link to this

Tony… Carozzi got sent back to Juniors yesterday.

Ranallo… by Armstrong being put on the 3rd line, I meant us picking up a Top 2 RWer… ala Gionta.

Sorry, I thought it went without saying that I’m of the stance of acquiring another RW.

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 25, 2008 8:55 AM | Link to this

Hokie — If that were the situation and a top 2 RW were acquired, I’d let Thorburn stay on the bottom line (Greek Gods) and have Armstrong on the third line. Williams and the acquired RW would be the top two.

I’m still upset Ryder wasn’t pursued…he’s going to tear it up in Boston, I wager.

Hopefully next offseason if there’s still a gaping hole at RW someone like Gaborik (not likely) or Afinogenov are pursued in UFA. A player like that alongside Kovalchuk would definitely give him the impression that this team is trying to win, and not tank for a lottery pick.

By Nikita

September 25, 2008 9:30 AM | Link to this

re: Thorburn, Armstrong, and Slater…in our configuration last year (2 scoring lines, checking line, grinder line coupled with worst defense) I would not want to see any of our smaller guys or Thorburn down on the 4th. If we had a philosophy more like Buffalo’s, where we roll 4 deep and the 4th is actually a beefy scoring line, I’d be fine with it. Of course, new coach and all that — I think anything could change.

Talentwise, I think all three of them could have great years this year. Slater and Thorburn were warming up last year in the second half, and Armstrong came in and stayed serviceable on the 2nd line. Their strengths as I see them — Armstrong has the shortest distance to go, but he’s a well-rounded 2nd liner. His size, speed, and precision will probably limit him from going higher, but he’s already well developed. I don’t think he’s so much talented as solid in all regards. Slater has killer wheels, but couldn’t get the shots right till the end last year depite having a good number of chances. I see him as our Pascal Dupuis if he doesn’t get it right, and very good if he does. And he’s valuable on the PK, regardless. Thorburn is turning out to have both better wheels and hands than anticipated — we didn’t play him in his more natural position last year, either — I think he’s meant to be an occasionally enforcing, intimidating all-around playmaker on a 1st or 2nd line eventually.

By GaVaHokie

September 25, 2008 10:48 AM | Link to this

Ranallo… I think even Mark Parrish makes for a better 2nd line RW for this team than Army… I’m just not of the “wait and see” mindset when it comes to Army scoring on the second line.

If Waddell is going to go out and seek a veteran presence, I wish he’d forget about Schneider, McLaren or whoever and spend just $2 million on either Parrish or Glenn Murray.

My guess is Murray refused us already and Parrish is just waiting on an offer… he just turned down a tryout offer from Carolina.

By ranallo10 (in AT)

September 25, 2008 11:17 AM | Link to this

Hokie — Murray has stated he only wants to play for a contender, so mark Atlanta off his list. Parrish has fielded calls (and offers reportedly) from various NHL teams, and last report said he was weighing his options.

I don’t think either have been approached by Atlanta, nor do I think either would help Atlanta.

Personally I think this team is not just one RW away from being a solid team. I think a top line RW would help, but only if said RW was signed for multiple years and was on the favorable end of 30. Otherwise, I’d rather wait-and-see with any of our currently signed young talent, or give a prospect like Machacek a chance.

As for the defenders you mentioned, I stand by my opinion that unless someone named Klee is moved in that same deal or in a followup deal, I don’t want to see the roster muddied with another veteran presence that blocks the development of Valabik, Bogosian and Enstrom.

By GaVaHokie

September 25, 2008 12:01 PM | Link to this

Murray has stated he only wants to play for a contender

Well, I got bad news for him… the only teams with cap room are longshots.

By Sara

September 25, 2008 12:06 PM | Link to this

Here here ranallo the only way I want Schneids on a plane to ATL is if that Ryan kid is in the seat next to him. That solves our RW problem quite nicely.

For me, if Anderson’s system works the way he/we think it will, if one of our young centers can get it going with Kovy, and when we get XLB and Klee gone and Kulda and Bogosian both up with a bit of experience coupled with that added RW talent, this club is going to kick some butts all over the place. It may take another tweak or two to hit SC Champ status, but it should for sure push us into perennial post-season play.

By Jarndyce

September 25, 2008 12:23 PM | Link to this

Just a little reality test for those who think Thorburn or Armstrong are top-line RWs:

This what a top-line RW looks like:

31 g, 48 a, 238 shots

Thorburn 2007-8:

5 g, 13 a, 72 shots

Armstrong (2-yr avg):

13 g, 22 a, 129 shots

I like them both, and Armstrong might be a serviceable 2nd-line center, but neither of these guys will ever be a true top-line RW.

By GaVaHokie

September 25, 2008 12:40 PM | Link to this

Jarndyce, I was looking at similar stats as well when I made my statement… I agree. Not so much on the EVER, but atleast this year.

This is my idea of a great RW depth chart.

By Jarndyce

September 25, 2008 12:41 PM | Link to this

Quick correction: “Armstrong might be a servicable 2nd-line RW,” not center. Sorry for the typo.

By Sara

September 25, 2008 1:00 PM | Link to this

Jarndyce stats can be deceiving. You also have to compare ATOI and the quality of linemates. Case in point, how many points did Kovy score with Savard versus with Rucchin or White? That’s a significant swing. Kovy can likely finish better than Thorburn and Army’s former linemates. He can also set up plays on his own which they can finish.

It also matters what role they need to play. Frankly I would argue that our top-line RW is not the important RW position - it’s our second line RW that matters most - a la Hossa. It’s primarily Kovy’s job to score on the top-line and his linemates’ jobs to a) get him the puck in a scoring position, b) clear room for him to get into a scoring position, and c) make the opposition pay for it if they focus in on Kovy alone. Those are roles that can be potentially handled by either Thorburn, Army, or Williams. We don’t have enough over-all depth at forward a la TB or DET to load up one line and still have prominent scorers on the others.

The RWs that tend to put up those numbers are usually the main scorers on those lines period. There are some exceptions like Alfredsson or St. Louis - but those teams have also often struggled having all the eggs in one basket - either in regular season or post-season.

Kovy doesn’t need other superstars on his line, he needs servicable players that can keep up, make good passes, and finish themselves when Kovy makes something happen. For pete’s sake look what Kovy did last year with White and Holik as his centers. Christensen is younger and faster than Holik and finishes better too, for sure better than White.

We need a top RW, but that RW belongs on line two for additional depth. Which means that role may not be the one best suited for Army unless either Little or Slave start lighting it up. The more I think about it, the more I think it might be better to move Army up to the top line with Crush and Kovy and put Williams with Slava and Little. I think we’d get more balanced scoring overall that way as Williams projects at this point to be not only our best RW but also likely our second biggest offensive threat behind Kovy.

By Sara

September 25, 2008 1:30 PM | Link to this

BTW when assessing the scoring issues, the forwards lines are not where we need to be focusing our worry - it’s the blueline. We got all of 12 goals from our blueline last year and nearly half were from Enstrom alone (5). Most teams get 30 or more goals from their blueline (CHI got 59 last season).

The Thrashers ranked 23rd in GF last season with 207. Nashville by comparison ranked 12th with 227. They got 30 goals from their D. 18 extra goals in a 20 goal total swing. BOS got 42, WAS got 34, TB got 29, CAL got 36, TO 33. And those are all the middle of the road teams basically not even the elite NHL clubs.

We just acquired two offensive d-men this off-season in Hainsey and Bogosian and Anderson’s system is set up to have the D get into the play. If it works, we should see a significant spike in scoring from the blueline. If the forwards can continue to hold their own (or even improve) AND they couple that with spending less time in the defensive zone and givin up fewer goals, it will make a major difference for this club.

By Nikita

September 25, 2008 1:48 PM | Link to this

I like them both, and Armstrong might be a serviceable 2nd-line center, but neither of these guys will ever be a true top-line RW.

You can’t know that, and neither can I.

As I mentioned, Thorburn has been employed more for his fists than for any real skill up until now. Last year he was on the line from hell for most of the time, matched with the two worst defenseman and two linemates who were mostly bangers. Their role was to minimize scoring and physically tire the opponents before the 1st came back out. Pittsburgh pulled him up specifically to enforce. He was never given the expectation of contributing scoring in the NHL, and he has rarely been given space to do anything but beat people on the 4th. He’s both young and undeveloped, he has the physical attributes, and he showed the skill down the homestretch last season that if developed will make him highly competitive. I don’t think it’s fair to put up his numbers to compare him with an established player who is on a scoring line with competent linemates and D and use that comparison to declare that he will never be as good as that player.

Armstrong, well…IMO he’s had a better path, and therefore the improvement we’re going to see in him will probably be incremental. But he’s a serviceable 2nd liner and could incrementally become a 1st liner, and Pittsburgh didn’t really have room for him to be a top liner given the state of their developed talent in those slots. Like Thorburn he’s young — in a year or two, playing with good linemates, he could be stellar.

By Nikita

September 25, 2008 1:55 PM | Link to this

Oh, also, both Armstrong and Thorburn were decently high draft picks — higher than Brian Gionta, for example. They’re not charity picks like some defensemen we know.

By GaVaHokie

September 25, 2008 2:10 PM | Link to this

Oh, also, both Armstrong and Thorburn were decently high draft picks — higher than Brian Gionta, for example. They’re not charity picks like some defensemen we know.

Come on Nikita, you know better… Stefan #1 draft pick… Pavel Datsyuk #171 draft pick.

By Jarndyce

September 25, 2008 2:15 PM | Link to this

Sara: I understand about linemates and TOI affecting stats, etc., but the truth of the matter is simple. Thorburn doesn’t get 20 minutes a night because he’s not good enough to warrant those minutes. It’s a simple opportunity cost problem. In addition, a top forward should be able to put up points regardless of his linemates. Look at Kovalchuk for a prime example.

As for whether or not you want to consider our glaring RW hole on the first line or the second line is irrelevant. Hossa is not a #2 rw on any team in the league, except for maybe Ottawa or Calgary. The truth is, the optimal lineup does put the top RW on the opposite wing from Kovalchuk. The only reason you would ever split them up is through lack of second-line scoring depth. If a defense can afford to continually match up against one line, they win absent any scoring threat from the second line. If you have to split them to create a second line threat, then you have to do that. But that’s not the preference.

The problem with your roles as listed above are that any top-flight defense in the league can eliminate jobs a through c in short order if they don’t have to consider the off wing as a serious scoring threat. Any quality defense in this league can isolate Armstrong or Thorburn on the RW side, and shift over to provide pressure against Kovalchuk.

By Sara

September 25, 2008 2:16 PM | Link to this

Oh, also, both Armstrong and Thorburn were decently high draft picks — higher than Brian Gionta, for example. They’re not charity picks like some defensemen we know.

Hey now - Enstrom resembles that remark and he rocks!

I know I know - not to whom you were referring. ;)

By Bob

September 25, 2008 2:18 PM | Link to this

Just a little reality test for those who think Thorburn or Armstrong are top-line RWs

Spot on. Thanks for providing a realistic look at the situation. RW is a sore subject on this team, as is center, as is top D.

But what the heck, I’m ok with them leaving the holes there as it’s a build year, let the kids get some play and get that #1 or #2 pick next summer, and then let a new GM do some magic to get this thing headed in the right direction.

By GaVaHokie

September 25, 2008 2:20 PM | Link to this

I invite you all to put Colby Armstrong higher than Brian Gionta on your Fantasy Hockey draft rankings… I wouldn’t dream of it.

By Jarndyce

September 25, 2008 2:29 PM | Link to this

Adding goals from the defense would be nice, but that’s not the problem. Even if you add another 40 goals from last year’s totals, the Thrashers would have ranked 23rd in the league in goal differential, all else equal.

Puck control and sustained pressure is the problem. It allows for more goals from the defense who’ve had time to join the attack, and fewer shots on goal and pressure on the defense. The only way to maintain puck control and sustained pressure is to keep the opponents from being able to outman the puckcarrier, and without credible threats from the entire offensive zone, it can’t be done.

By Bob

September 25, 2008 2:34 PM | Link to this

If Colby Armstrong was a top line RW, the Pens wouldn’t have made that trade for a real one, eh? Thorburn? Goodness.

By Jarndyce

September 25, 2008 2:46 PM | Link to this

Nikita: I like Thorburn and Armstrong both, and I’m happy that they’re a part of the team. But…

Can you honestly tell me that you think Thorburn can suit up against the Wings or the Ducks, etc., as your first or second-best scoring threat on the right side in a seven-game series and win you a Cup?

By Nikita

September 25, 2008 2:48 PM | Link to this

You can be as insulting as you want, but the fact of the matter is that young, untested, undeveloped players employed as backup don’t compare to seasoned players in top roles, and won’t until they are developed as such.

Armstrong pulled 16-20 minutes the entire time he was here. Kovalchuk did very well with Thorburn on his line. I don’t see why you’d want to cap their growth based on the earliest stages of it.

And yes, Enstrom does rock. But his talent wasn’t ever in question, was it? It was my understanding his low standing was based entirely on size.

By GaVaHokie

September 25, 2008 2:50 PM | Link to this

Hossa was a 2nd line RW in Atlanta because he had better chemistry with Kozlov than Kovalchuk… Kozlov makes others look better, which I daresay might end up being the case with Williams this year.

By Sara

September 25, 2008 3:02 PM | Link to this

The truth is, the optimal lineup does put the top RW on the opposite wing from Kovalchuk. * The only reason you would ever split them up is through lack of second-line scoring depth. * If a defense can afford to continually match up against one line, they win absent any scoring threat from the second line. If you have to split them to create a second line threat, then you have to do that. But that’s not the preference.

Precisely. If you are talking in theory than it’s all well and good but I am looking at the reality of what we have and we do NOT have the scoring depth to put all the best players on one line and let ‘er rip. Nor can we hope to add a whole bunch of spiffy new high-class players in the next two weeks so we go with what we have and figure out how to put it together.

A guy like Army can get into the trenches and dig out pucks from along the boards, freeing them up for Kovy or Christensen to make a play on net. He doesn’t necessarily have to be a major scoring threat. Most top lines do not have 3 major scoring threats. Some exceptions apply but it’s not that way on most. You just have to expect a certain amount of productivity from a top line and whether it’s a LW-C combo, RW-C combo, or RW-LW combo that gives you that output doesn’t matter. Do you realize how few highly talented LWs there are in the league? Most of the highest scoring players are Cs or RWs, in that order. So for most teams, it is their C and RW who light it up the most. It just so happens in our case, we snagged a LW that can score like blue blazes. So either give him a center that can produce (best option) or a RW that can produce and all is still right with the world. Holmstrom plays on the top line for Detroit and he is by no means an elite player - it just happens to work out that his style meshes with Zetts and Datsyuk - he does a lot of the dirty work for that line while also occassionally potting some goals (20 last year btw along with 20 assists which put him 5 points more than Colby’s average and he played on the top line for the SC Champs).

Look, this team may never get assembled the way a team “should.” And even if it does, it’s going to take more time to acquire and develop all the right talent. In the meantime, we need to get the most out of what we’ve got and sometimes it takes looking outside the box. Play to the strengths the team has as it were. Utilized effectively this team can likely accomplish a lot more than people want to give them credit for.

By Nikita

September 25, 2008 3:08 PM | Link to this

If Williams is healthy, then his numbers are pretty good. That said, yes, Kozlov makes others look better. So does Perrin. Which I think bodes well for all of the younger players.

Can you honestly tell me that you think Thorburn can suit up against the Wings or the Ducks, etc., as your first or second-best scoring threat on the right side in a seven-game series and win you a Cup?

That seven-game series is a season away, right? My point is that I think Thorburn will open up — and if he does, then I don’t see any factors limiting him from a top role. I did when he was poorly conditioned, with clunky hands and no need to do better. Armstrong is probably a little more limited (size), but I think he’ll improve as well and prove a good top-six presence.

Also, and this is me being very cynical, the road to the playoffs is paved with games against the other teams in the weakest division in the league. The whole team has a ways to go, but we’re a season and several trades and acquisitions and such away fom having to be top-notch.

By Nikita

September 25, 2008 3:08 PM | Link to this

If Williams is healthy, then his numbers are pretty good. That said, yes, Kozlov makes others look better. So does Perrin. Which I think bodes well for all of the younger players.

Can you honestly tell me that you think Thorburn can suit up against the Wings or the Ducks, etc., as your first or second-best scoring threat on the right side in a seven-game series and win you a Cup?

That seven-game series is a season away, right? My point is that I think Thorburn will open up — and if he does, then I don’t see any factors limiting him from a top role. I did when he was poorly conditioned, with clunky hands and no need to do better. Armstrong is probably a little more limited (size), but I think he’ll improve as well and prove a good top-six presence.

Also, and this is me being very cynical, the road to the playoffs is paved with games against the other teams in the weakest division in the league. The whole team has a ways to go, but we’re a season and several trades and acquisitions and such away fom having to be top-notch.

By Jarndyce

September 25, 2008 3:15 PM | Link to this

“Young, untested, undeveloped players employed as backup don’t compare to seasoned players in top roles.”

Rookies are, by definition, untested. Yet Patrick Kane potted 21 goals and 51 assists last year. Thorburn, who is 25 has played 112 games in the NHL, and has scored 8 goals and 15 assists.

Again, it’s an opportunity cost problem. Unless you believe that NHL coaches are, on the average, not savy enough to recognize scoring talent, then you have to be prepared to say underutilization occurs because a better option exists. Will Thorburn and Armstrong improve? Yes. Their both 25 and are just coming up on their physical peaks. Will either of them become a legitimate, consistent scoring threat from the RW side? No. Unless they have a strange and rare mass increase in their skills, it won’t happen.

That said, I’m still very happy they are Thrashers, and you can’t win Cups without guys like that. But you can’t win it with only guys like that.

By Jarndyce

September 25, 2008 3:34 PM | Link to this

And, with Holmstrom being the player that he is, and being able to add his forty points (twice that as Thorbuns two-year totals, by the way), the Wings still went out and added one of the best RW in the world. Why would they do that?

You don’t need a world-class LW-C-RWs to do a lot of damage. But you do need at least average 1st and 2nd line LW-C-RWs. We have the LW covered with Kovalchuk and Kozlov. We have one piece at RW with Williams, and we have maybe one piece at C with either Little or Christiansen. But we have below-average contributers at the other RW and C spots, and that’s what will kill the Thrashers this season.

Does that mean that it’s hopeless? No. Sterling may step up. Armstrong or Little may surprise in Anderson’s system.

On the ice, you play with what you have. All I’m saying is that what we have is one solid RW and a gaping hole that we’ll patch with speed and grit and try to find the goals elsewhere. It’s just we need about net 100 more of them (either through reduction or addition) and I don’t know where they’re coming from.

By Hotrod

September 25, 2008 4:02 PM | Link to this

Oystrick has been having a good camp.

He seems to really move fast. I hope he makes the team. Is he a lock?

By Sara

September 25, 2008 4:06 PM | Link to this

Jarndyce in the case of Hossa to the Wings, I think it’s more a matter of “why not” than “why.” (LOL I started to write “Hossa to the Thrashers” there - freudian slip sigh)

I realize we can have better than what we’ve got. But we don’t have and won’t have anytime soon unless the kids step up (and what better way to figure out if they can cut the mustard in the top roles than by tossing them into them).

And we don’t have to have a Stanley Cup winning roster right now - I’d settle for a couple points out of the play-offs at this point and potentially I think this roster can get us there. The system should do the most to reduce GA (as in teach players how to clear their own darn zone), and hopefully the resulting extra time spent in the other zone will yield good results. Keep in mind Hossa didn’t have a stellar year last season (at least not by his standards) and we still managed to stay in the hunt for the division lead into February. Crazier crap has happened, ya know?

By Nikita

September 25, 2008 4:16 PM | Link to this

To be clear, I don’t think we should stop with those two. I just think you’re being overly negative about their prospects.

By Viking

September 25, 2008 5:00 PM | Link to this

Sara, about Holmström; “By no means an elite player”?

While not doing the flashy stuff, he is without question the best in the business at being a nuisance for defenders and the goal keeper. (And I am not talking about “Avery style bs” here.)

But this valuable ability does just not show up in the stats. Some months ago, I went through the Detroit goals for the regular season, and in addition to the 40 points he got, another 20 goals or so were the direct result of him making the goalie “blind” or preoccupying a defender.

We need a few of our guys to learn and dare to perform the noble art of Holmströmian play…

By Sara

September 25, 2008 5:22 PM | Link to this

Viking you won’t get any argument from me about Holmstrom’s value - I’ve argued that point a zillion times just in talking about our own PP ineptness. And as an FYI, I’m a Wings fan as well as a Thrashers fan (though not in that order). However, while Holmstom is a major asset, he is no Zetterberg, Datsyuk, or Lidstrom. Thus, he is not elite.

By Viking

September 25, 2008 5:54 PM | Link to this

Ok, not that kind of utmost elite, but in any case Holmström should really be valued as a 60+ point player, whether that would constitute an elite player or not.

I guess I am using the term a little loosely, coming from a country where the highest division is called Elitserien - The Elite League.

By GaVaHokie

September 26, 2008 8:37 AM | Link to this

Oystrick has been having a good camp. He seems to really move fast. I hope he makes the team. Is he a lock?

Actually, I think he might be one of the first cuts on D. He got a lot of time on ice last night, but it’s a big hill to climb for him.