 |
Kr55 Messages: 12884
Registered: May 2002
Location: Edmonton
6 Cups
|
|
| Adam wrote on Tue, 20 January 2026 11:20 |
| Kr55 wrote on Mon, 19 January 2026 15:56 |
| Skookum Jim wrote on Mon, 19 January 2026 13:11 | With Kapanen down and keeping 3 goalies.. now is the chance to try the "Darnel Experiment".. run him as a winger instead of the team going 11F x 7D .. unlock some of that 9.25 value! Power Forward !
|
Kapanen creates a little test case to show how bad our depth actually is. He's not that great of a player, but in contrast to a lot of the slugs we've been carrying all year in the bottom 6, how he is able to look so effective shows us how weak our depth really is. Henrique out has also ended up addition by subtraction in the bottom 6. Having a line depending on someone that can barely get to a puck 5v5 to be the center/playmaker is just instant death for a line if you expect any offense from it.
|
It's interesting that the Roslovic/Howard line has struggled to score. I've thought they've generally looked good and got chances, but they have yet to put any numbers up really - and they've probably been a little unlucky too - outchancing but getting outscored on a couple nights. I'm curious how much rope they'll get.
|
Yeah, Roslovic isn't an ideal C either. Listed as C, but almost all his career he's been on the wing. But at least he is getting the puck and creating things. A pretty big contrast to Henrique who really seems on his last legs and kinda dooms his line to be in pure survival mode. Roslovic having both Savoie and Howard as his wingers has to be a challenge as well. Those guys are close, but still look like they need experience before they start to look more effective and get into good position more often.
I see Roslovic gets a lot of Walman/Stastney as well, who have been a struggling pair In any case, still think it's working better than Henrique for now.
"We need to get better immediately. That starts today"
- Lowe, 2013
"Next year I would forecast as another developmental year"
- MacT, 2015
5 x $5,000,000
|
|
|
|
Review:
St. Louis @ Edmonton (Game #50) |
By: OilFans on Sun, 18 January 2026 20:30 |
Re: Review: St. Louis @ Edmonton (Game #50) |
By: Mike on Sun, 18 January 2026 20:54 |
Re: Review: St. Louis @ Edmonton (Game #50) |
By: Kr55 on Sun, 18 January 2026 21:28 |
Re: Review: St. Louis @ Edmonton (Game #50) |
|
Re: Review: St. Louis @ Edmonton (Game #50) |
By: Adam on Mon, 19 January 2026 11:22 |
Re: Review: St. Louis @ Edmonton (Game #50) |
By: smyth260 on Sun, 18 January 2026 20:55 |
Re: Review: St. Louis @ Edmonton (Game #50) |
By: Leia on Sun, 18 January 2026 20:56 |
Re: Review: St. Louis @ Edmonton (Game #50) |
|
Re: Review: St. Louis @ Edmonton (Game #50) |
|
Re: Review: St. Louis @ Edmonton (Game #50) |
By: Mike on Mon, 19 January 2026 06:48 |
Re: Review: St. Louis @ Edmonton (Game #50) |
By: Jay on Mon, 19 January 2026 09:34 |
Re: Review: St. Louis @ Edmonton (Game #50) |
By: Adam on Mon, 19 January 2026 11:18 |
Re: Review: St. Louis @ Edmonton (Game #50) |
|
Re: Review: St. Louis @ Edmonton (Game #50) |
|
Re: Review: St. Louis @ Edmonton (Game #50) |
|
Re: Review: St. Louis @ Edmonton (Game #50) |
By: Adam on Mon, 19 January 2026 15:38 |
Re: Review: St. Louis @ Edmonton (Game #50) |
By: Kr55 on Mon, 19 January 2026 15:56 |
Re: Review: St. Louis @ Edmonton (Game #50) |
By: Adam on Tue, 20 January 2026 11:20 |
Re: Review: St. Louis @ Edmonton (Game #50) |
By: Kr55 on Tue, 20 January 2026 11:30 |