For instance, cap space– we love cap space… or lack thereof. Not even hardcore NFL fans — a sport where the cap plays an even bigger role — spend as much time talking about the salary ceiling as hockey fans.
We love the power play, too. How does the power play look? Are they struggling on the power play? Jagr really impacts the power play. Power play. Power. Play.
We love it. Or hate it. It’s always one or the other.
Perhaps most notable of all, however, is our fascination with lines. Other than baseball, a sport with a very specific and defined ordering of the troops, hockey is only sport in which there is a clear, distinct grouping of players. Sure, there are starters in football and basketball, but nonstop substitutions keep those groupings in constant flux. Not hockey, though. While the sport has more on-field(ice) turnover than any other, players are consistently grouped with the same peers: their linemates.
One fortunate (or unfortunate) offshoot of our fascination with lines is the feeling that we need to give the best ones names. For the Flyers, there was the LCB Line, the Crazy Eights, and the Legion of Doom, to name a few. Last year, there was the short-lived Costa Rica Line, which can perhaps now be called the not gon… not gon… not gonna work here anymore line. It was named for the All-Star break trip taken by Mike Richards, Jeff Carter, and Ville Leino. Ironically, every member of the line that got its name from a three-day boozefest has been either traded or let go because – allegedly – they partied too much.
So now we have a void to fill. Ladies and gentlemen, ESPN’s John Buccigross:
And two reader emails:
I love reading your site! I was looking on CSN and saw that Tim Panaccio had named the Jagr, Hartnell, Giroux line the “G line”. All I could think was “really though? I mean, I know you lack skills in many writing areas, but that’s all you could come up with?” I propose that we start a movement to call this line the “I line”. While this might not sound too far off from Tim Panaccio’s “G” I feel that as a whole it just is better. We all had alphabet spaghetti o’s as kids we all know our “ABC’s” and clearly if anything has been shown by this line it’s that there is only one thing missing from this line and it is an “I” from their last name. That’s my piece, keep up the awesome work.
[Editor’s note: I-Line is no good.]
the “g line” name stinks… How about the “roogr19” line ( roo from giroux, gr from jagr and 19 from hartnell, of course) the ruger 19 is a type of handgun so that name is perfect for a scoring line. c’mon man, pump it up
[Editor’s note: No.]
But I’m on board with the concept of the G-Line being an awful name (plus, anything propagated by Tim Panaccio probably stinks).
It seems we need to give them a new name. Ryan Bright of Philly Sports Daily doesn’t think so, but, hey, it’s Thursday and we need something to talk about.
So you have Giroux, Jagr, and Hartnell. The G-Line is 100% mailing it in– we’re all in agreement there. I think the answer is quite simple, really. Giroux and Jagr both possess world-class hockey skills. They move effectively without the puck and marvel us with what they can do with the puck. Giroux dangles and, Jagr… he has moves. Together, the two make for a nasty, sometimes figuratively filthy duo. And Hartnell? Well, he falls down a lot. So the name is pretty obvious if you ask me: Down and Dirty.
However, being a fan of our fine democracy, let’s weigh input from the world of Twatting:
Legion of Swoon and Legion of Sex are somewhat funny, but too unoriginal. Flow Riders is nice, though I’m not sure that works since Jagr is now all cropped up top and Giroux is only considered to have nice hair because it’s red.
Czech and Balance, however… that’s nice. You have the obvious Jagr reference (Czech), which is also a hockey term (double-word score), and Balance, which pokes fun at Hartnell’s propensity to fall down. And the whole thing is an intentional malapropism (I think).
Let’s put it to vote, you Americans you:
We would announce the winner, but after about 50 votes, the ratio will likely remain the same. So, really, you’re looking at the winner.