Jared Crozier: Colin White signs ATO - what could happen from here

Great news !! Good luck in Bingo Colin

They were talking about him on team 1200 this morning about how now is the time for him to really step up and prove himself.
Pierre was saying he isn't going to be a Austin Mathews and come in and score 30+ goals.

What he is looking like is a version of Patrice Bergeron... not near that good yet but the similarities are uncanny in terms of play right now and development.

Good to have him on board, now let's be patient and see how things turn out. There will be an adjustment as he learns how to play with pros.

Good luck to him

I liked the draft choice of White at the time and he seems like he has developed well since then. However, everything I have heard about him suggests he will become another Turris/Zibby/Brassard/Pag/2nd-3rd line type centre. Not necessarily bad, but just something we already have.

Moving him in a package for a top forward, might be the best course of action. There will be teams looking to shuffle their decks in the summer.

The current stretch of games against solid opponents has really showed that the team is in good shape, but could really use some legitimate-consistent firepower up front.

They were talking about him on team 1200 this morning about how now is the time for him to really step up and prove himself.
Pierre was saying he isn't going to be a Austin Mathews and come in and score 30+ goals.

What he is looking like is a version of Patrice Bergeron... not near that good yet but the similarities are uncanny in terms of play right now and development.
- Maverick1818

I added a couple of more items to the piece, including Anderson being nominated as the Senators' candidate for the Bill Masterton Memorial Trophy as well as what I would like to see the forward lines look like heading into the playoffs.

I added a couple of more items to the piece, including Anderson being nominated as the Senators' candidate for the Bill Masterton Memorial Trophy as well as what I would like to see the forward lines look like heading into the playoffs.
- JaredCrozier

Biggest issue with loading the first line is that they aren't consistent enough to bring it every night. It's well documented that Boucher likes to roll all 4 lines if possible. Heck, before Boucher, the only success this team had was when 4 lines were rolling.

If you don't have guys scoring at a point per game pace, you need others to contribute when players are cold. If Turris isn't scoring, Brassard has to be going and vice versa. If Hoffman is struggling, Ryan needs to chip in and vice versa. Easiest way to do that is to spread out your top guys. Not to mention, pretty easy for other teams to just focus on shutting down Turris, Stone, and Hoffman and leave the other 3 lines alone.

I like stacking lines as well, but with this current roster, spreading out your talent is really the only way to go, unless Brassard and Ryan get start turning it on.

Agreed

Smith - Turris - Stone
Hoffman - Pageau - Pyatt
Burrows - Brassard - Ryan
Dzingel - Kelly - Stalberg

Wingels, Neil

I like stacking lines as well, but with this current roster, spreading out your talent is really the only way to go, unless Brassard and Ryan get start turning it on.
- Gord_Wilson_2.0

Agreed - unless your "stacked" top line plays 20min/gp of consistently productive hockey that can match up favorably against almost any line, you're better off diversifying your scoring over 2-3 lines. Otherwise, you're basically putting all your fish in one barrel and running the risk of either being shut down by a high-end defense pairing, or being out-matched by the opposition's even more gifted "stacked" top line.

Plus, there's really no point in the team pretending they're something they're not just because it's playoff time. It's been a team system approach all year, and if Ottawa is going to win playoff rounds it's most likely going to come as the result of grinding out a lot of 2-1 and 3-2 wins. Given that, I'm significantly more concerned about Methot's injury and Anderson's inconsistency, than I am about who plays with who on the various lines.

Agreed - unless your "stacked" top line plays 20min/gp of consistently productive hockey that can match up favorably against almost any line, you're better off diversifying your scoring over 2-3 lines. Otherwise, you're basically putting all your fish in one barrel and running the risk of either being shut down by a high-end defense pairing, or being out-matched by the opposition's even more gifted "stacked" top line.

Plus, there's really no point in the team pretending they're something they're not just because it's playoff time. It's been a team system approach all year, and if Ottawa is going to win playoff rounds it's most likely going to come as the result of grinding out a lot of 2-1 and 3-2 wins. Given that, I'm significantly more concerned about Methot's injury and Anderson's inconsistency, than I am about who plays with who on the various lines.
- khawk

I get your points and also considered them when I made "my" suggestion. My school of thought is and has always been, that if you have 4 or more guys you can consistently go to for offense, you can spread it out. If you have 3 or less, as the Senators arguably do now, you put them together and hope. Hoffman, Turris and Stone have all had their ups and downs as well, but they are without a doubt the 3 go-to guys, head and shoulders above anyone else. If they aren't producing (along with 65 of course) the team has no chance, and the best possible chance for them to produce is by playing them together. Anything else you get from the other lines is gravy.

It is like 2007, but on a smaller scale. There was 11-19-15 and not much else offensively, so you had to put them together. If there was a fourth legitimate option, you might move Alfredsson to play on a second line with that option, but there wasn't. Those three were almost 40 full points ahead of the fourth place scorer on that team. Of course the gap in this year's group isn't nearly as substantial, but the same theory holds true.

Ryan, Dzingel, Smith, and even Brassard and Pageau have the capability to be options on any given night, but until they can step up an be go-to guys more consistently, I am of the opinion (and you are free to have your own, which is why I brought it up) that if you are going to go down, go down with your best front and centre.

Its not perfect, and admittedly the biggest problem with my theory is that they have played together as a unit so infrequently this season (as opposed to Alfie, Spezza and Heatley in '07) that there might not be time to put it into play, not that it is something Boucher is even considering anyway.

I get your points and also considered them when I made "my" suggestion. My school of thought is and has always been, that if you have 4 or more guys you can consistently go to for offense, you can spread it out. If you have 3 or less, as the Senators arguably do now, you put them together and hope. Hoffman, Turris and Stone have all had their ups and downs as well, but they are without a doubt the 3 go-to guys, head and shoulders above anyone else. If they aren't producing (along with 65 of course) the team has no chance, and the best possible chance for them to produce is by playing them together. Anything else you get from the other lines is gravy.

It is like 2007, but on a smaller scale. There was 11-19-15 and not much else offensively, so you had to put them together. If there was a fourth legitimate option, you might move Alfredsson to play on a second line with that option, but there wasn't. Those three were almost 40 full points ahead of the fourth place scorer on that team. Of course the gap in this year's group isn't nearly as substantial, but the same theory holds true.

Ryan, Dzingel, Smith, and even Brassard and Pageau have the capability to be options on any given night, but until they can step up an be go-to guys more consistently, I am of the opinion (and you are free to have your own, which is why I brought it up) that if you are going to go down, go down with your best front and centre.

Its not perfect, and admittedly the biggest problem with my theory is that they have played together as a unit so infrequently this season (as opposed to Alfie, Spezza and Heatley in '07) that there might not be time to put it into play, not that it is something Boucher is even considering anyway.
- JaredCrozier

Comparing our "top stacked line" today to the 2007 CASH line just demonstrates even more what we are lacking in order to be a contender. Even having one player who could produce like Heately, Spezza, or Alfie did that season would go a long way.

Guys like Burrow and Stalberg were brought in to add to the depth of this team so that we can role four lines. The team was unable or unwilling to add to the top forward positions, so the four line rotation will have to do. No point in pretending we have firepower we can rely on like the CASH line way back.

Either way you create the lines, your top players still have to be your top players in order to succeed.

Seems to me like White is taking a risk by agreeing to the Sens' proposal. What if he gets seriously hurt playing in Bingo and can't play again?

I'm thinking he should have just stayed eligible for the NCAA and sign a contract for next season. That way if he gets hurt, he can still be eligible for college and if he doesn't get hurt he can sign an entry level deal for the following season. With his decision he loses NCAA eligibility and has no risk protection in case of injury, AND he remains without an NHL contract.

Seems to me like White is taking a risk by agreeing to the Sens' proposal. What if he gets seriously hurt playing in Bingo and can't play again?

I'm thinking he should have just stayed eligible for the NCAA and sign a contract for next season. That way if he gets hurt, he can still be eligible for college and if he doesn't get hurt he can sign an entry level deal for the following season. With his decision he loses NCAA eligibility and has no risk protection in case of injury, AND he remains without an NHL contract.
- AlfieFever

If he gets seriously hurt, he won't be playing NCAA hockey either.

His NCAA playing days are being forfeited but he can still enroll in college for school... your argument doesn't make much sense IMO..

If he gets seriously hurt, he won't be playing NCAA hockey either.

His NCAA playing days are being forfeited but he can still enroll in college for school... your argument doesn't make much sense IMO..
- sensfan1984

I meant that he could still be a student if he gets hurt and pursue a career other than hockey.

I meant that he could still be a student if he gets hurt and pursue a career other than hockey.
- AlfieFever

Exactly my point. He still can, regardless of the deal. He can't play NCAA hockey, but he can be a student.