Hartsburg does line shuffle... AGAIN

Remember who he was playing with though Smash: two nerds who have a combined one goal (Vermette and Fisher). Is that Winchester's fault - or is it Vermette and Fisher's fault?

Foligno has been quiet lately. I didn't really notice him (or anyone else to be fair) in the leaf game.

504Heater wrote:Remember who he was playing with though Smash: two nerds who have a combined one goal (Vermette and Fisher). Is that Winchester's fault - or is it Vermette and Fisher's fault?

Yeah but difference is, we know what Vermette and Fisher are capable of... They are just in a slump, whereas We've never seen Winchester's capabilities... Are you actually saying that Winchester's "production" was hampered by Fisher and Vermette? I'd think it would be the other way around... Winchester needs to prove he belongs here, which in my opinion other than a few pre-season games he hasn't proved to anyone he deserves a spot on this team... I'd give to Bass before i'd give to Winchester, at this present moment... But since it's a numbers games Winchester will stick....

smash88 wrote:
Yeah but difference is, we know what Vermette and Fisher are capable of... They are just in a slump, whereas We've never seen Winchester's capabilities... Are you actually saying that Winchester's "production" was hampered by Fisher and Vermette? I'd think it would be the other way around... Winchester needs to prove he belongs here, which in my opinion other than a few pre-season games he hasn't proved to anyone he deserves a spot on this team... I'd give to Bass before i'd give to Winchester, at this present moment... But since it's a numbers games Winchester will stick....

Fair enough.

504Heater wrote:

smash88 wrote:
Yeah but difference is, we know what Vermette and Fisher are capable of... They are just in a slump, whereas We've never seen Winchester's capabilities... Are you actually saying that Winchester's "production" was hampered by Fisher and Vermette? I'd think it would be the other way around... Winchester needs to prove he belongs here, which in my opinion other than a few pre-season games he hasn't proved to anyone he deserves a spot on this team... I'd give to Bass before i'd give to Winchester, at this present moment... But since it's a numbers games Winchester will stick....

Fair enough.

I have a feeling He'll be more comfortable on the 4th for now, as he won't have any pressure of feeling like he has to perform since he's playing with top players.. I just think it was too much for him so soon...

Seeing as our 4th line was the only line producing last game - perhaps Winchester has a 3-4 point night.

I'll be on the side that is very happy with Winchester so far.

smash88 wrote:
I have a feeling He'll be more comfortable on the 4th for now, as he won't have any pressure of feeling like he has to perform since he's playing with top players.. I just think it was too much for him so soon...

Also quite fair. Good take man.

smash88 wrote:

504Heater wrote:

smash88 wrote:
Yeah but difference is, we know what Vermette and Fisher are capable of... They are just in a slump, whereas We've never seen Winchester's capabilities... Are you actually saying that Winchester's "production" was hampered by Fisher and Vermette? I'd think it would be the other way around... Winchester needs to prove he belongs here, which in my opinion other than a few pre-season games he hasn't proved to anyone he deserves a spot on this team... I'd give to Bass before i'd give to Winchester, at this present moment... But since it's a numbers games Winchester will stick....

Fair enough.

I have a feeling He'll be more comfortable on the 4th for now, as he won't have any pressure of feeling like he has to perform since he's playing with top players.. I just think it was too much for him so soon...

I agree. Due to his contract he can't be sent down without going through waivers first. So rotate him between lines 3 and 4 so he won't get worn out by the much longer NHL schedule that he's not used to. give him some time on the 2nd PP unit and see what he can do on the PK as well. Stick with that and I think it'll help his development a lot.

Hartsburg did this his entire time in the minors, he never has set lines. He wants his players to be ready for any situation, and any players.

Of the approximately 23,985 line combinations we've seen over the past year or so, why are we not seeing Vermette at centre somewhere? Vermette played centre for a stretch late last year and it was probably the best he's played in a Sens uni. He's more comfortable there and his skill is better served down the middle. Fisher's game is more suited to the wing and I don't give a rusty Diddle if he has never done it before. Not like his production can get any worse.

hemlock34 wrote:Of the approximately 23,985 line combinations we've seen over the past year or so, why are we not seeing Vermette at centre somewhere? Vermette played centre for a stretch late last year and it was probably the best he's played in a Sens uni. He's more comfortable there and his skill is better served down the middle. Fisher's game is more suited to the wing and I don't give a rusty Diddle if he has never done it before. Not like his production can get any worse.

Apparently he's not *comfortable* at wing. Unbelievable :x

smash88 wrote:Hmmm.. the Winchester experiment i think may be coming to an end soon if he dosen't start producing... Could this be another Bochenski? He has looked good in some games, but not that great, especially not what he was showing in preseason...

HE's afraid to shoot. He's much better than Bochenski though.

Tukker wrote:

hemlock34 wrote:Of the approximately 23,985 line combinations we've seen over the past year or so, why are we not seeing Vermette at centre somewhere? Vermette played centre for a stretch late last year and it was probably the best he's played in a Sens uni. He's more comfortable there and his skill is better served down the middle. Fisher's game is more suited to the wing and I don't give a rusty Diddle if he has never done it before. Not like his production can get any worse.

Apparently he's not *comfortable* at wing. Unbelievable :x

Vermette is too, but he's doing it. For less money I might add. For $4.2 million cap hit, play where the coach says. Sell the concessions if that's what it takes for God sakes.

On second thought, maybe ought to tell him that God wants him to switch to the wing. I'm sure he'd do it then

Snuh wrote:

I agree. Due to his contract he can't be sent down without going through waivers first. So rotate him between lines 3 and 4 so he won't get worn out by the much longer NHL schedule that he's not used to. give him some time on the 2nd PP unit and see what he can do on the PK as well. Stick with that and I think it'll help his development a lot.

Just a quick correction: based on my reading of the CBA, Winchester CAN be sent down to the minors without having to pass through waivers. He was 24 when he signed his first (two-way, 1 year, March 2008) and second (one-way, 2 years, May 2008) deals. From what I can tell of article 13.4, that means that he's exempt from waivers until the end of this season or until he plays 60 NHL games.

However, because it's a two-way deal [EDIT: typo, should read one-way deal], we'd have to pay him his full salary in the minors, and I think that factor alone -- to saw nothing of his solid play -- means he stays with the big club.

Winchester has been one of our steadiest players. People who point to the lack of goals and assists aren't paying attention to the little things he brings. He skates hard, competes, is reasonably physical, and dominates on the boards. I don't think this demotion is necessarily a bad thing -- in fact, I think he'll play a great 4th line shift for us -- but to say that he's not been steady for us for a rookie of 9 games is ridonkulous.

rooneypoo wrote:However, because it's a two-way deal, we'd have to pay him his full salary in the minors, and I think that factor alone -- to saw nothing of his solid play -- means he stays with the big club.

I thought that was only for one-way deals?

rooneypoo wrote:

Snuh wrote:

I agree. Due to his contract he can't be sent down without going through waivers first. So rotate him between lines 3 and 4 so he won't get worn out by the much longer NHL schedule that he's not used to. give him some time on the 2nd PP unit and see what he can do on the PK as well. Stick with that and I think it'll help his development a lot.

Just a quick correction: based on my reading of the CBA, Winchester CAN be sent down to the minors without having to pass through waivers. He was 24 when he signed his first (two-way, 1 year, March 2008) and second (one-way, 2 years, May 2008) deals. From what I can tell of article 13.4, that means that he's exempt from waivers until the end of this season or until he plays 60 NHL games.

However, because it's a two-way deal, we'd have to pay him his full salary in the minors, and I think that factor alone -- to saw nothing of his solid play -- means he stays with the big club.

Winchester has been one of our steadiest players. People who point to the lack of goals and assists aren't paying attention to the little things he brings. He skates hard, competes, is reasonably physical, and dominates on the boards. I don't think this demotion is necessarily a bad thing -- in fact, I think he'll play a great 4th line shift for us -- but to say that he's not been steady for us for a rookie of 9 games is ridonkulous.

What? That's the point of a two way deal. One salary for the NHL and one for the minors. If his deal is two way, we wouldn't have to pay him his full NHL salary in Bingo as far as I understand.

rooneypoo wrote:

Snuh wrote:

I agree. Due to his contract he can't be sent down without going through waivers first. So rotate him between lines 3 and 4 so he won't get worn out by the much longer NHL schedule that he's not used to. give him some time on the 2nd PP unit and see what he can do on the PK as well. Stick with that and I think it'll help his development a lot.

Just a quick correction: based on my reading of the CBA, Winchester CAN be sent down to the minors without having to pass through waivers. He was 24 when he signed his first (two-way, 1 year, March 2008) and second (one-way, 2 years, May 2008) deals. From what I can tell of article 13.4, that means that he's exempt from waivers until the end of this season or until he plays 60 NHL games.

However, because it's a two-way deal, we'd have to pay him his full salary in the minors, and I think that factor alone -- to saw nothing of his solid play -- means he stays with the big club.

Winchester has been one of our steadiest players. People who point to the lack of goals and assists aren't paying attention to the little things he brings. He skates hard, competes, is reasonably physical, and dominates on the boards. I don't think this demotion is necessarily a bad thing -- in fact, I think he'll play a great 4th line shift for us -- but to say that he's not been steady for us for a rookie of 9 games is ridonkulous.

Thanks for that correction rooney. I did not know that. I agree, he should do well on the 4th for a while.

hemlock34 wrote:

Tukker wrote:

hemlock34 wrote:Of the approximately 23,985 line combinations we've seen over the past year or so, why are we not seeing Vermette at centre somewhere? Vermette played centre for a stretch late last year and it was probably the best he's played in a Sens uni. He's more comfortable there and his skill is better served down the middle. Fisher's game is more suited to the wing and I don't give a rusty Diddle if he has never done it before. Not like his production can get any worse.

Apparently he's not *comfortable* at wing. Unbelievable :x

Vermette is too, but he's doing it. For less money I might add. For $4.2 million cap hit, play where the coach says. Sell the concessions if that's what it takes for God sakes.

On second thought, maybe ought to tell him that God wants him to switch to the wing. I'm sure he'd do it then

that's.... just....wrong :lol!: