Zubov being misused

I don't understand anymore what's happening here. Hartsburg is supposed to be the kind of coach that can get the best out of youngsters - and whether Zubov, Winchester and Bass are doing it on their own, or with his help, they're doing it.

So why is Zubov not a permanent fixture on line two, including playing regular shifts in the 3rd? What could possibly the reasoning behind this? He plays a hard, physical game, he's unbelievably talents, he can pass and he can shoot.

In my estimation that equates to pretty much everything this team is lacking.

I would fix the 2nd line as:

Folgino - Vermette - Zubov

and I would highly think about Zubov being the center and Winchester on the right.

I would be giving them close to 20 minutes a night. Why? Because they're strong, creative and have the tools to put the puck in the net.

Bass played just over 5 minutes last night. 5 minutes!!?

Is this not an option? Am I missing something here?

Bass gets the most out of his 5 minutes...
Donovan has been getting the most out of his 6 minutes...
McAmmond too...

I think the guys who are performing don't seem to be getting rewarded with ice time. That I have a problem with.

You dont put on 21 year old guys who have 3 games of NHL expierence when you are protecting a lead, its that simple.

Zubov was on the BIngo line so he could feel comfortable playing with guys he has been with for over a year now for the most part. why put pressure on a kid to put points up on the board. He is being used fine, he was on the 2nd pp unit, what else do you want?

If Zubov is on the ice when they score that goal then we ae questioning why was a guy with 3 NHL games to his name on the ice protecting a 1 goal lead in the 3rd with 5 mins left. Cant win with some people.

Bass played a great game, but thats his role. No one likes Bass more than I do, I can garentee that but if you take him outside of the role that makes his sucessful then you are screwing him and the team.

Harstberg is coaching within the game being played, its situational hockey. If they are up by 6 you would see Zubov and everyone else get more ice time. The right decsions was made last night without question.

Hartsburg is giving the top line all these minutes so that he can get them in rhythm again. Zubov has great energy and talent, and I also agree that he should be on the second line with Vermette and Winchester on his wings.

But at the same time, it's hard to put him in in the third period when you're trying to protect a lead. He's just not experienced enough, or good enough defensively to warrant a move like that.

However, it will come with time. I've been pleasantly surprised by our youngsters this year. Now only if we could get Lee back into the lineup.

PKC wrote:Hartsburg is giving the top line all these minutes so that he can get them in rhythm again. Zubov has great energy and talent, and I also agree that he should be on the second line with Vermette and Winchester on his wings.

But at the same time, it's hard to put him in in the third period when you're trying to protect a lead. He's just not experienced enough, or good enough defensively to warrant a move like that.

However, it will come with time. I've been pleasantly surprised by our youngsters this year. Now only if we could get Lee back into the lineup.

They have been good for us for sure, no doubt about it. Zubov was getting 2nd PP time as well so its not like he wasnt out there just in a checking role. You go with your guns, you have to. Also, Kelly was having a monster game along with everyone else except 2 certain centers.

Harstberg coached a great game last night, everyone was involved and played well for the most part.

Neely4Life wrote:

PKC wrote:Hartsburg is giving the top line all these minutes so that he can get them in rhythm again. Zubov has great energy and talent, and I also agree that he should be on the second line with Vermette and Winchester on his wings.

But at the same time, it's hard to put him in in the third period when you're trying to protect a lead. He's just not experienced enough, or good enough defensively to warrant a move like that.

However, it will come with time. I've been pleasantly surprised by our youngsters this year. Now only if we could get Lee back into the lineup.

They have been good for us for sure, no doubt about it. Zubov was getting 2nd PP time as well so its not like he wasnt out there just in a checking role. You go with your guns, you have to. Also, Kelly was having a monster game along with everyone else except 2 certain centers.

Harstberg coached a great game last night, everyone was involved and played well for the most part.

I though Spezza was okay last, Vermette on the other hand was gift wrapped a couple of chances.....

Spezza looked good in the first. Did he fall apart or something later on?

RobbyJ wrote:

Neely4Life wrote:

PKC wrote:Hartsburg is giving the top line all these minutes so that he can get them in rhythm again. Zubov has great energy and talent, and I also agree that he should be on the second line with Vermette and Winchester on his wings.

But at the same time, it's hard to put him in in the third period when you're trying to protect a lead. He's just not experienced enough, or good enough defensively to warrant a move like that.

However, it will come with time. I've been pleasantly surprised by our youngsters this year. Now only if we could get Lee back into the lineup.

They have been good for us for sure, no doubt about it. Zubov was getting 2nd PP time as well so its not like he wasnt out there just in a checking role. You go with your guns, you have to. Also, Kelly was having a monster game along with everyone else except 2 certain centers.

Harstberg coached a great game last night, everyone was involved and played well for the most part.

I though Spezza was okay last, Vermette on the other hand was gift wrapped a couple of chances.....

Yeah, I second that. Vermette has lost the scoring touch, no doubt. I've seem him trying to shovel the puck through a goalies pads a few times over the last couple games and I don't like it one bit.

mattshock wrote:Spezza looked good in the first. Did he fall apart or something later on?

Some people just can't view some players objectively, for example I believe I am the only one who wants to get rid of the Preacher.

RobbyJ wrote:

mattshock wrote:Spezza looked good in the first. Did he fall apart or something later on?

Some people just can't view some players objectively, for example I believe I am the only one who wants to get rid of the Preacher.

Meh, you can get rid of him, but then he leaves another hole. Depends what Murray wants to do by getting rid of Fisher. If its to improve our team then go for it, but if its not, its just a move for the sake of making a move.

Spezza wasnt that good in the first and the guy is just coasting and going through the motions right now without the puck.

I'm not disagreeing with that.

I don't want to get rid of him. He's worth every penny in the post-season, and while I agree he's overpaid, you can't say he's not a $3.5M player. Would you be on the "get rid of Fisher" wagon if he were paid less?

Neely4Life wrote:

RobbyJ wrote:

mattshock wrote:Spezza looked good in the first. Did he fall apart or something later on?

Some people just can't view some players objectively, for example I believe I am the only one who wants to get rid of the Preacher.

Meh, you can get rid of him, but then he leaves another hole. Depends what Murray wants to do by getting rid of Fisher. If its to improve our team then go for it, but if its not, its just a move for the sake of making a move.

Spezza wasnt that good in the first and the guy is just coasting and going through the motions right now without the puck.

Not to mention the guy is a career Senator with a no trade clause that might have something to do with it. Add in his declined production (stats wise), and you probably can't move him anyways.

Dead issue IMO.

Pretty much no point in talking about Fisher being moved, prob wont be happening and his has the NTC and NMC.

Neely4Life wrote:Pretty much no point in talking about Fisher being moved, prob wont be happening and his has the NTC and NMC.

I have been misunderstood. Fisher might be a bible thumper, but McAmmond is the Preacher. Aledgedly he pushes his religion on others, which could get a little annoying.