I’d like to see:

Parise – Zajac – Langenbrunner
Elias – Zubrus – Clarkson
Pandolfo – Niedermayer – Rolston
Pikkarainen/Leblond – Pelley – Bergfors

I think Elias should remain at wing, and I’d like to see Clarkson given a shot on the second line.

I also wouldn’t mind seeing Bergfors given a shot up on the second line with Elias and Zubrus, as he can bring another speedy, slick stick-handling scoring threat to complement Elias and counter Zubrus’ anchor, leaving:

Parise – Zajac – Langenbrunner
Elias – Zubrus – Bergfors
Clarkson – Niedermayer – Rolston (or reversed if they prefer the other wing)
Pandolfo – Pelley – Pikkarainen/Leblond

Neither case leaves me with much confidence in the fourth line, and barring someone’s sudden development or a trade, I think we might have to accept that we’re largely a three line team.

The alternative is to try their plan to put Elias at C between Clarkson and/or Rolston and/or Bergfors, dropping Zubrus to the fourth line and sitting Pelley, but John has shown more than adequately that he’s better at Wing, and that leaves us pretty weak on the third and fourth lines, so it might be sacrificing the back end to field two good lines.

It must be considered, however, that Elias might not be able to immediately jump right in and will have to be worked back in with limited minutes.

And, I agree that Clarkson should remain out on the 1st PP.

I think what’s going to really come into play are the forms of the current lines when Elias is able to return.

For example, tonight, Bergfors-Zubrus-Clarkson played very, very well. On paper, you’d move one of the wingers (I hope not the center!) and put in Elias. But Lemaire may not want to touch that and would rather mess with the ZZ Pops, as he did in the third period tonight, and perhaps move Elias to the off-wing. Langenbrunner can work the third line just fine and the fourth line gets a boost from whoever goes down from that (likely Pandolfo). Lemaire’s not afraid to “think outside the box” and break up ZZ Pops if he feels a match up is favorable.

As far as the PP units, when Elias returns, Clarkson’s probably going to the second unit. Unless Lemaire wants to put two defenseman on that unit, the second unit needs an improvement over Pikkarainen/Halischuk/etc. to go with Rolston-Bergfors-Zubrus-Greene and Clarkson could do just that.

Of course, overall, I think what you and elesias suggest are more likely and I honestly wouldn’t mind seeing all those possibilities given a chance here or there. Like with anything else, there will be an adjustment period with the lineup as Elias returns to regular season hockey.

but if they have to be broken up, then so be it. sometimes things just need to get mixed up.

i haven’t been able to catch any of the games so far, as ive been busy and in the midwest.
how has langenbrunner looked so far? it sounds like he has been struggling a little bit.

Personally here’s my lines

ZZ Pops
Rolston-Elias-Bergfors
Clarkson-Zubrus-Niedermayer
Pikk/PL3-Pelley-Pandolfo

Rolston and Clarkson can rotate between spots, mainly if the lines aren’t working, or Lemaire would like some toughness with Elias and Bergfors.

I know it’s sacrilegious to break up the top line, but I think slapping Bergfors or Clarkson up there in place of Langenbrunner now and then isn’t necessarily a bad idea.

Elias is stepping up his practices, and Lemaire has said that he intends to use him as a center.

At first, I would hope.

regardless of what Lemaire says, that part of playing Zubes up with Parise and Langs is because he’s preparing for Elias to center those two and he’s letting Zajac get comfortable elsewhere. It’s really the only thing that makes sense. If Lemaire is going to have him play center as he keeps saying, he’s surely not going to put him on a 3rd line. I’m thinking something like this

Parise-Elias-Langs
Bergfors-Zajac-Clarkie
Zubrus-Neids-Rolston
Pando-Pelley-Pikka/PL3