Jump to content

Dylan Cozens in his first NHL season


LGR4GM

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, French Collection said:

That speed may serve him well as a winger if they get some C depth.

His speed serves him well. Bury your goals deep down, Cozens. They do you credit, and they could be made to serve the Kheevyn.

(Edit, too busy quoting: While winging it for this year might be good, I want Cozens to be that C depth.)

Edited by DarthEbriate
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we're bringing him up to be, tryout for or considered starting out in the top 6 - then we're worse off than I imagined.  The 2C hole we have is massive.  Meaning it has attached to it too much responsibility and pressure.  Our 3rd and 4th lines are so bad that the second must be not only productive but hugely productive.  You just don't do that to a 19/20 year old. 

IMO, he does seem ready for the NHL and he should compete for the 3C spot or the 3rd line winger.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, 7+6=13 said:

If we're bringing him up to be, tryout for or considered starting out in the top 6 - then we're worse off than I imagined.  The 2C hole we have is massive.  Meaning it has attached to it too much responsibility and pressure.  Our 3rd and 4th lines are so bad that the second must be not only productive but hugely productive.  You just don't do that to a 19/20 year old. 

IMO, he does seem ready for the NHL and he should compete for the 3C spot or the 3rd line winger.  

That Grigs-Okposo-Larry line was an above average line, I thought 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bob_sauve28 said:

That Grigs-Okposo-Larry line was an above average line, I thought 

I thought it was too from a compete stand point but they just did not score.  19,19 and 18 points respectively isn't helping enough offensively.  They do a nice job defensively but because it's not a scoring line - it puts that much more pressure on lines 2 and 3.  Therefore I really think my statement holds true.  JMO

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thanks (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, 7+6=13 said:

I thought it was too from a compete stand point but they just did not score.  19,19 and 18 points respectively isn't helping enough offensively.  They do a nice job defensively but because it's not a scoring line - it puts that much more pressure on lines 2 and 3.  Therefore I really think my statement holds true.  JMO

It was good, useful bottom 6 line, that served a purpose.  They were great at preventing goals, and scored enough to at least break even.  In the quest to score more goals than the other team, they were not a problem.

Obviously the team needs more scoring, but even if better offensive players were brought in, there could still be a role for that Larsson line.

Every player on a team has a role, the roles that were lacking were those secondary scoring lines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Curt said:

It was good, useful bottom 6 line, that served a purpose.  They were great at preventing goals, and scored enough to at least break even.  In the quest to score more goals than the other team, they were not a problem.

Obviously the team needs more scoring, but even if better offensive players were brought in, there could still be a role for that Larsson line.

Every player on a team has a role, the roles that were lacking were those secondary scoring lines.

Bottom 6 line?

I said they were good defensively and the effort was commendable.  But when the 4th line isn't out scoring - the 2nd and 3rd have to and we didn't.

Back to the point, with that line and Cozens as the 2C, we're not only screwed but doing a disservice to him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Curt said:

It was good, useful bottom 6 line, that served a purpose.  They were great at preventing goals, and scored enough to at least break even.  In the quest to score more goals than the other team, they were not a problem.

Obviously the team needs more scoring, but even if better offensive players were brought in, there could still be a role for that Larsson line.

Every player on a team has a role, the roles that were lacking were those secondary scoring lines.

This line as a checking line did serve its role very well. But the problem is that one of the glaring weaknesses of this team is its lack of secondary scoring. No one expects their checking line to be a high scoring line. But they still need to contribute more to the offense than what it currently does. From the standpoint of fulfilling their role this line may have been the most consistent line. But in my estimation you still need a few more goals to chip in with the scoring. 

Okposo fits in well with this line. Because of his contract it is unlikely that he could be moved. Larsson is good at taking draws and has some jam to his game. If a player is going to be moved I see it being Girgensons not because he doesn't serve a role but because it might be in his best interest and the team's best interest to have a change of scenery. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, 7+6=13 said:

Bottom 6 line?

I said they were good defensively and the effort was commendable.  But when the 4th line isn't out scoring - the 2nd and 3rd have to and we didn't.

Bottom 6 line?  Yup

That line was pretty much never the 4th line.  The sometimes were the 2nd line by TOI.  My point was just that they had a role and they did a pretty good job in that role.  They were not part of the problem.  Players in other roles couldn’t get it done.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, JohnC said:

This line as a checking line did serve its role very well. But the problem is that one of the glaring weaknesses of this team is its lack of secondary scoring. No one expects their checking line to be a high scoring line. But they still need to contribute more to the offense than what it currently does. From the standpoint of fulfilling their role this line may have been the most consistent line. But in my estimation you still need a few more goals to chip in with the scoring. 

Okposo fits in well with this line. Because of his contract it is unlikely that he could be moved. Larsson is good at taking draws and has some jam to his game. If a player is going to be moved I see it being Girgensons not because he doesn't serve a role but because it might be in his best interest and the team's best interest to have a change of scenery. 

What you want to see is every line scoring more goals than they concede, or at least close to it.  To me, that shows that they are doing well in their role.

I would agree that Girgensons is probably the most easily replaceable member of that line.  Unfortunately, both Girgensons and Larsson are UFAs.  I think it’s very possible that neither will return and we have seen the last of that line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Curt said:

Bottom 6 line?  Yup

That line was pretty much never the 4th line.  The sometimes were the 2nd line by TOI.  My point was just that they had a role and they did a pretty good job in that role.  They were not part of the problem.  Players in other roles couldn’t get it done.

You're choosing to ignore the point and that I've said that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Curt said:

What you want to see is every line scoring more goals than they concede, or at least close to it.  To me, that shows that they are doing well in their role.

I would agree that Girgensons is probably the most easily replaceable member of that line.  Unfortunately, both Girgensons and Larsson are UFAs.  I think it’s very possible that neither will return and we have seen the last of that line.

Oh well. 
 

It’s a 4th line. Everyone on it should be easily replaceable. If only we didn’t have someone making $6 million on it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/1/2020 at 9:05 AM, LGR4GM said:

I was watching highlights and I was thinking about where a player like Cozens could end up as far as the lineup goes. The truth is that isn't as important as what role he would play on the ice. I noticed later in the season Risto in front of the net (which was dumb) on the PP and that is spot I would like to see Czoens get some time. He is big enough and skilled enough, it is a place he has played before, it helps give him protected minutes. 

What other types of on ice situations should Cozens be put in? Front of net on the PP, winger to start, center to start, pk? 

If he's physically ready (has put on enough adult muscle) I'd certainly try him in front on the PP. He looked very good in that role at the worlds and I saw him often get that cocky grin and smile hard nosed players get when the pushing and shoving starts. He really seemed to love the contact.

I don't know who will end up on the roster but I'd actually like to see him in a 4th line role but a type of line we saw with the Larsson line last year. A feisty group of guys going for it and working hard. Chicago was doing this with Dach last year and he seemed to be developing nicely for them. I see something similar here.

Don't under any circumstances do a Mitts part 2 and force him to play against top or 2nd line players night after night. Build his confidence slowly, don't destroy it. 

All depends on the coaching though. If we don't have coaches working with kids like Cozens on a constant basis we might as well leave them in junior or Rochester. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a VERY SPECIFIC REASON to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...