Ottawa Senators TIDBITS & QUICK HITS!

I don't recall Ryan Shannon being in the running for the Calder ....

I thought of this Ryan Shannon comparable earlier, but I talked myself out of it. While they both did 4 years of university hockey, in Conacher's first year of NHL at the age of 23, he has put up 24 pts in 36 games so far. Ryan Shannon, in his first year of NHL, Shannon turned 24 at the end of it, he put up 11 pts in 53 games.

It actually took Shannon 77 games to reach the 24 pt mark.

I also find the comments that say Conacher played 40 % of the time with Stamkos a little misleading. While they may be true, Stamkos was on the ice for 41.7% of Conacher's points, and was a part of 37.5 % of Conacher's points. This means that Conacher was still producing points when he wasn't on the ice with Stamkos, and he wasn't just mooching off of Stamkos' ability.

You can say his level of opposition was lower, but if what Murray said was true, Conacher won't be playing with Spezza when everyone is healthy, which means he'll be facing worse opposition anyway. So it doesn't even matter how he would do against tougher opposition. If they want to put there best guys on the Conacher-Ziba-Silfv line, that leaves Turris' and Spezza's lines to play against easier competition. Fine by me.

Hoags wrote:I don't recall Ryan Shannon being in the running for the Calder ....

Again, "comparable" doesn't mean "the same." Continuously pointing out differences doesn't mean they aren't comparable. They're small, fast players who have put up similar numbers. We can make the comparison.

The Silfer Server wrote:
You can say his level of opposition was lower, but if what Murray said was true, Conacher won't be playing with Spezza when everyone is healthy, which means he'll be facing worse opposition anyway. So it doesn't even matter how he would do against tougher opposition. If they want to put there best guys on the Conacher-Ziba-Silfv line, that leaves Turris' and Spezza's lines to play against easier competition. Fine by me.

Conacher should be playing on the 3rd line at this time, pretty common to shelter rookies like this. He could move up to the 2nd line if/when he rounds out his NHL game.

This season our top line has been pretty much smothered due to Spezza's injury and Turris struggling to fill such a role.

However as the opposition has focused on what's left on our top-6, Zib, Silf and co. have flourished.

If we get our players back from the IR we will have a dangerous top-9 that few teams will be able to fully contain.

tim1_2 wrote:The only "comparable" is their size. They are quite different, as you'll see soon.

Prags, the Greening/Smith/Neil line is hell to play against, and the best 3rd line in the league. MacLean will keep it together, mark my words!

When you get players like Michalek and Spezza back in the lineup your third line might become your fourth line and then you shuffle. Maybe you don't need to run around hitting everything in sight if you can actually score goals off the rush 2-3 times a game, plus another on the PP. Guys like Regin, JOB put on their shirts and ties and wait for someone to get injured again. If Mac thinks Greening can help out in the top six then Greening will be in the top six, I don't care how "hell to play against" that line is.

And I don't care if you don't care.

That will be our 3rd line once our lineup stabilizes.

tim1_2 wrote:And I don't care if you don't care.

That will be our 3rd line once our lineup stabilizes.

once everyone is healthy that is the 4th line.

and I don't know where the "best third line in the league" talk comes from but I hear that from every fanbase of their third line.

Ev wrote:

tim1_2 wrote:And I don't care if you don't care.

That will be our 3rd line once our lineup stabilizes.

once everyone is healthy that is the 4th line.

and I don't know where the "best third line in the league" talk comes from but I hear that from every fanbase of their third line.

We have "elite" 3rd liners. No question.

So Flyers offered Zac Rinaldo and a 2nd for Bishop ?

Hoags wrote:So Flyers offered Zac Rinaldo and a 2nd for Bishop ?

Isn't Rinaldo just a goon? We've got Kassian for the dirty deeds done dirt cheap. Good luck with Mason. I'm sure a place like Philadelphia is great for a former great rookie goalie to get his career back on track.

Hoags wrote:So Flyers offered Zac Rinaldo and a 2nd for Bishop ?

not really that funny since that was their asking price.

Ev wrote:

Hoags wrote:So Flyers offered Zac Rinaldo and a 2nd for Bishop ?

not really that funny since that was their asking price.

I think when they were asking they weren't asking for someone with the second lowest TOI per game on the roster (only Zolnierczyk had less ice time, and they traded him away for Rosehill).

It's funny because the Sens needed help scoring or defending on the right side. They didn't need help running around jumping at people.

Great article on Conacher -- interview with a TB blogger. Explains why he was taken off the top line, too. And it's not what you think:

http://www.the6thsens.com/2013-articles/april/ask-a-lightning-blogger-johnny-fonts-about-conacher.html

3. Which part of his game needs the most work?

At times, I think Conacher can be a little careless when speeding into the opponent's zone - and that leads to losing control of the puck or a general turnover. So puck possession could use some strengthening. At the same time. The Lightning were specifically working with him on improving his defensive game. That took him off the Bolts top line combos (next to Steven Stamkos or Vincent Lecavalier) and saw him on the lower lines.

wprager wrote:Great article on Conacher -- interview with a TB blogger. Explains why he was taken off the top line, too. And it's not what you think:

http://www.the6thsens.com/2013-articles/april/ask-a-lightning-blogger-johnny-fonts-about-conacher.html

3. Which part of his game needs the most work?

At times, I think Conacher can be a little careless when speeding into the opponent's zone - and that leads to losing control of the puck or a general turnover. So puck possession could use some strengthening. At the same time. The Lightning were specifically working with him on improving his defensive game. That took him off the Bolts top line combos (next to Steven Stamkos or Vincent Lecavalier) and saw him on the lower lines.

Yeah, we saw a bit of that last night but he's only a 2nd year pro and that's the sort of thing that can be taught.

SeawaySensFan wrote:

wprager wrote:Great article on Conacher -- interview with a TB blogger. Explains why he was taken off the top line, too. And it's not what you think:

http://www.the6thsens.com/2013-articles/april/ask-a-lightning-blogger-johnny-fonts-about-conacher.html

3. Which part of his game needs the most work?

At times, I think Conacher can be a little careless when speeding into the opponent's zone - and that leads to losing control of the puck or a general turnover. So puck possession could use some strengthening. At the same time. The Lightning were specifically working with him on improving his defensive game. That took him off the Bolts top line combos (next to Steven Stamkos or Vincent Lecavalier) and saw him on the lower lines.

Yeah, we saw a bit of that last night but he's only a 2nd year pro and that's the sort of thing that can be taught.

I really liked his game. There was one early shift he had where the Calder line started in the O zone and ended in the D zone that I didn't love, but the rest of the time, I really liked the kid's game. That line will be dangerous, particularly when Spezza and 9MM return.

I totally understand what you were saying before about having a complete top six, SSF. Still, I think we'll have an excellent 5/6 of a top six (adding Greening or Condra into the mix of true top sixers), and 8/9 of a potent and frightening top nine. I think adding Conacher will help that line become even more dangerous than they've been.