Atd#8-ML 1st Round: #2 Phoenix Roadrunners vs. #7 Dysart Fighting Kugels

VanIslander
02-05-2008, 07:29 PM
Mickey Ion Division Playoffs


Phoenix Roadrunners

coach: Randy Carlyle
captain: Harry Trihey
alternates: Dave Lewis, Phat Wilson
team MVP: Gerry McNeil

Fred Scanlan - Harry Trihey (C) - Arthur Farrell
Adam Deadmarsh - Henrik Zetterberg - Ray Sheppard
Bob Berry - Metro Prystai - Claude Larose
Sergei Brylin - Joe Murphy - Mel Hill
Tony Hand

Garry Galley - Bruce Driver
Hy Buller - Dave Lewis (A)
Phat Wilson (A) - Jack Ruttan
Jay Wells

Gerry McNeil
Guy Hebert



vs.



Dysart Fighting Kugels

coach: Marc Crawford
captain: Keith Acton
alternates: Slava Kozlov, Bob Murray
team MVP: Pierre Larouche

Slava Kozlov (A) - Pierre Larouche - Stephane Richer
Rick Nash - Jason Allison - Alexei Kovalev
Patrik Sundstrom - Keith Acton (C) - Jimmy Peters
Kelly Miller - Jiri Hrdina - Mark Hunter
Joe Carveth Dave Hunter

Bob Murray (A) - Lee Fogolin, Jr.
Colin White - Darryl Sydor
Lou Fontinato - Albert Langlois
Roman Hamrlik

Wilf Cude
Roman Cechmanek

VanIslander
02-05-2008, 07:29 PM
Phoenix Roadrunners

PP1: Scanlan - Trihey - Farrell - Wilson - Driver
PP2: Deadmarsh - Zetterberg - Sheppard - Buller - Galley

PK1: Berry - Prystai - Lewis - Galley
PK2: Larose - Deadmarsh - Driver - Ruttan

vs.

Dysart Fighting Kugels

PP1: Nash - Larouche - Richer - Murray - Fogolin
PP2: Kozlov - Allison - Kovalev - Sundstrom - Sydor

PK1: Sundstrom - Acton - White - Fogolin
PK2: Miller - Hrdina - Fontinato - Langlois

Diving Pokecheck*
02-05-2008, 07:43 PM
1 This series will feature 2 of the very best goaltenders in the draft.
I should also be known that Wilson and Driver were switched.

Arguments for the Roadrunners
Career playoff records:
Carlyle: 25-13 .658
Crawford 43-40 .518

Shutdown Line
Metro Prystai is without a shadow of a doubt the best defensive forward in the draft, and Crawford knows how to make a shutdown line effective in the playoffs.

First Line
This was a trio that dominated the regular season and playoffs.

Clutch Scoring
After three periods, Deadmarsh, Hill, Murphy, and Trihey will make sure that it is game over.

Leadership
Trihey and Wilson are remembered for their leadership and contribution to early hockey, and Lewis was a long-time captain.

Hawkman
02-05-2008, 08:02 PM
I voted for Metro & Slava for the MVPs. I like the winner of this match to go to the Division Final. :thumbu:

Diving Pokecheck*
02-05-2008, 10:13 PM
any other opinions?

seventieslord
02-05-2008, 11:09 PM
First, my PP and PK units, as requested:

PP1:
Nash-Larouche-Richer
Murray-Fogolin

PP2:
Kozlov-Allison-Kovalev
Sundstrom-Sydor

PK1:
Sundstrom-Acton
White-Fogolin

PK2:
Miller-Hrdina
Fontinato-Langlois

seventieslord
02-06-2008, 12:29 AM
First, in case it got lost and buried in the lineup assassination thread, here is my assessment of my lineup. As you can see, I like it a lot:

Offense: I think my team can score with the best of them - perhaps better. Pierre Larouche is a top-3 offensive first line center in this draft, and has a top-10 finish in the NHL to prove it, as well as six PPG seasons and a PPG career average. Stephane Richer has finished 6th and 7th in the NHL in goals. Kozlov has been a very solid first and second line player for 14 years and complements their skills well. Allison as a second-line center will prove to be a good choice. His speed should not be a major concern. Many of you will remember the big fuss that was made about his slowness in his last NHL season, which was played after being inactive for 34 months. Prior to that, Allison was at least an average skater and won Los Angeles' fastest skater competition. He has finished in the top-10 in NHL scoring on two occasions. Allison can score, but is mostly a pure setup guy who is most effective with dynamic wingers with similar puck skills, and he has that and more in Rick Nash and Alexei Kovalev. Is there a better stickhandling line in the league? Is there even one close? Nash is a pure scorer who has led the NHL in goals once. Kovalev has been top-10 in goals and points twice each, and has equal scoring and playmaking ability. My third line is constructed to defend, however, it can and will make the one-dimensional first lines pay for their mistakes. Sundstrom is a three-time PPG'er, and Acton has been once. Jimmy Peters had decent offensive numbers too. The fourth line also is made up of defensive players but is far more modest offensively, as is our one spare, Hunter. Our other spare, Carveth, can step in and provide more offense if needed, as he also is a top-10 finisher. On the blueline, Bob Murray and Darryl Sydor are great offensively but won't put me any further ahead of or behind any other high-scoring bluelines in that department. The other four are mainly there to defend. A wildcard is Roman Hamrlik, someone I would switch up with Colin White or Albert Langlois in a heartbeat if the offense appeared to be drying up. With over 500 career points and a wicked shot, he can inject more punch into the lineup if it ever lacks.

Defense: My first line is made up of two players who do not play very good defense, and one who is great on defense. I don't expect Kozlov to be able to fully make up for their deficiencies, but he will be the line's defensive conscience. The second line, as dynamic offensively as it can be, will be a defensive liablity and will try to outscore the other team while they are out there. The fourth line contains a three-time Selke vote-getter, an all-around threat in Acton who is excellent on faceoffs, and a proven shutdown guy in Peters. On the fourth, we have two more selke vote-getters in Hrdina (another excellent faceoff guy) and Miller, and our token tough guy who won't hurt us in any way, Mark Hunter. Dave Hunter also wouldn't hurt us if inserted into the bottom six. I don't see a single defenseman who would hurt us defensively. There is no standout shutdown guy, but they are all at least adequate.

Goaltending: I believe Wilf Cude to be a top-5 starter in this draft. His modest credentials were some of the best in any available draft when it opened. He was a Stanley Cup finalist and has been on the 2nd team all-star twice - equivalent to being a vezina runner-up twice nowadays. This four-year period of being (roughly) the 2nd best goalie in the NHL gives him the best peak of all goalies aside from Mowers. Cechmanek is, IMO, almost as good. His NHL credentials in four short seasons are excellent (top 3 in GAA and sv%, vezina runner up, jennings), and before you criticize him for his short NHL career, remember he was simply Hasekian in the Czech league, with five straight league titles and 38 international games played in various tournaments.

Size/Toughness: I wanted forwards who were at least big, if not strong too. My top six won't disappoint. Larouche was average size for his time, but Richer had great size and took poundings in the corner and in front of the net. He was not afraid to get his nose dirty. Kozlov's small stature precludes him from getting too physical, but he has never been called a shrinking violet either. He gets the job done without being intimidated. The entire second line are all the same: Big and strong, and very willing to be physical when needed. All three players have thrown big hits from time to time and Kovalev will even get dirty to protect himself. All three prefer not to, but will stand up for themselves. The third line is a mixed bag in this area but overall, it's no pansy line. The fourth features two potential lady-byngers, but they were both guys who could check effectively without being penalized. And Hunter is.... a Hunter. On the sidelines, Carveth is nothing special and Hunter is.... another Hunter. On the blueline, Sydor and Brown are merely adequate phyically (at best), but the others are all imposing guys who will make you pay. White, Fogolin, Fontinato, and Langlois are all able to hit, facewash, or fight.

Playoffs: I picked this team with an emphasis on playoff performance and stanley cups. Out of my scoring forwards, I would consider only one to be disappointing in the playoffs, and that is Nash, who has never appeared in a playoff game. Allison has 25 in 25, Kovalev, Kozlov, and Richer have GPG and PPG averages that are either higher or slightly lower than their regular season averages. Kovalev has only been eliminated in round 1 once. Larouche is only a touch below his regular season production too. Kozlov is the Red Wings' all-time leader in playoff GWG, on a team that featured Yzerman and Howe for over 20 years each. On the blueline, there are four defensemen who were very solid in helping their teams win multiple cups (Langlois, White, Sydor, Fogolin). Murray exceeds his regular season output in the playoffs and Sydor's has gone down only minimally, while maintaining excellent defensive play. As for cups, who has more cups than this team? I count 25, including nine multiple winners and four who did it on multiple teams (Peters, Richer, Sydor, Hrdina)

Leadership/Intangibles: The team has adequate leadership in captain Keith Acton, a solid all-around citizen who will provide an example of hard work on every third-line shift he takes. Murray and Kozlov are assistants due to the lengths of their careers relative to their linemates. Kozlov is known as the professor, a great student of the game and an excellent mentor to younger players. He has worked wonders with Ilya Kovalchuk. The bottom six is filled with solid people who all give honest efforts. I understand the team will be criticized for its "head cases" - Kovalev, Larouche, Richer, and to a lesser extent, Allison. Allison made a bit of a stink about ice time in his last season but aside from that, was low maintenance. Larouche saw limited ice time in Montreal due to the star power and his lack of defensive responsibility. His offense-first attitude will be embraced by the Fighting Kugels. Kovalev and Richer are both immenseley talented on-and-off guys. I believe when you average out their times spent on and off over their careers, both their careers wash out as quite excellent. And it should be noted that, head cases or not, they all produce in the playoffs. Nash is not a head case, per se, but he is a bit of a "wild kid" who will need to be reigned in to be effective and not a defensive liability. On defense, no player has been criticized as a bad dressing room guy, but many are/were popular teammates. In goal, Cude will not be an issue, and Cechmanek will wait for Cude's first bad game before trying to prove in his first start, that he should be the starter. His pride and swagger will make for an interesting duel should Cude show any cracks.

Coaching: Marc Crawford is an intense coach that demands solid efforts from all four lines. He may clash with Kovalev and Richer, but he managed to reign in the biggest malcontent of all-time, Todd Bertuzzi, and turn him into a top-5 player for two seasons. He is loyal to his goaltender to a fault, so let's hope he has the stones to turn to Cechmanek if he finds himself down two games to none in a series.

Well, ADC, As I learned last time, it's a cutthroat business winning these series by swaying the other GM's opinions, so I am not going to pull any punches. Don't take anything personal, and keep it as clean as I do! I'm going to start by saying I like this matchup a lot. I know it is as an apparent underdog, but I am glad I am facing you.

A lot of GM's apparently liked your first line. I am not thrilled. None of them have been selected in any draft before, and the last one went 936 picks deep. That said, I must say Harry Trihey looks like a HUGE steal - based on his bio at legendsofhockey I can't believe he doesn't go in the main draft. Scanlan and Farrell, despite being hall of famers, appear to be quite ordinary in comparison. A thinker like Trihey could have played with any winger, so I don't feel there was the need to get those two. Deadmarsh would make a better third-liner in this draft - in his full NHL seasons, he was #2, 4, 4, 5, 6, 6, 10 among forwards on his team. That's an average of 5th each season. Surely for a second line in an all-time draft you would want to have a guy who was a top forward on your scoring line, not a guy playing essentially the same role he did in real life, no? Zetterberg is an amazing talent and a great all-around player but he is in just his third season as a premier NHL forward, and this season will be the first that he finishes top-10 in goals or points. A guy with his two-way ability, I'd want him on the third line until he has more proven offensive credentials. Sheppard has the talent to be on the first or second line in this draft. Despite being slower forwards than Dave Andreychuk skating backwards barefoot, he was the league's 5th and 3rd top goal scorer (three-way tie both times) for a two year period.

On the other hand, my top six forwards contain five elite, top-line NHL forwards who led their teams in scoring more often than not. In other words, my second line has three first-liners and yours has an actual second-liner.

Your third line is excellent. I like Prystai. I had him on my shortlist after doing my initial research, only to find that he was selected during the couple of hours I spent researching. (How much better is he than my steal, Jimmy Peters, though?) You've surrounded him with complementary wingers and there is no question that this line will make life difficult for one of my top two lines. But what about the other one? Your 4th line won't do it. In all honesty I think it's a useless line. Brylin is a proven winger who is responsible, though not a true shutdown guy. Murphy is a headcase of the highest order, and contributes nothing to a team besides offense, so he will be scratching his head at being placed on the fourth line, and will pout. Mel Hill is more of a novelty pick for his playoff heroics that are well-documented. His regular season numbers look OK too, but he had seasons of 20, 20, 9, and 12 points when the best talent wasn't in the war, and seasons of 37, 44, 19 (in 17 games) and 35 when the war was on. He won't hurt you too much, but he's certainly nothing special and has not been picked before. Your 4th line has no clear role and will either have to play 5 minutes, tiring out the other lines, or be a serious liability against one of my top 2 scoring lines, each of which are stacked.

With a pairing of Galley and Driver, my top 6 forwards are licking their chops. Neither is a defensive stalwart. There is some serious talent at all six forward spots, and they will have trouble containing them. Your other four will make life hell for them as much as they can, but these guys aren't going to get the minutes my top forwards get.

My defensemen will handle your forwards better than yours will handle mine, not because my defensemen are that much better, but because my forwards are. For the record, Murray and Sydor are maybe a 10% upgrade on Driver and Galley, and my other four vs. your other four is a virtual wash. (although Phat Wilson is ipressive)

I also consider goaltending to be a wash. Cude and McNeil both have modest accomplishments, but very strong resumes for the MLD. Cude had a four year period in which he did something of significance in three of them. McNeil did the same in a three year period, including winning the cup. I seriously considered him as his peak is equal or 10% better, but with just four seasons as an NHL starter, I wasn't sure how it would be received. Not to mention, he did what he did behing an extremely stacked team... Cude, not so much. As for the backups, I don't see either of them being a factor simply because neither will probably play. I have great respect for the abilities of both of them. Both had a three-year period in which they were top-5 in the NHL. Hebert had ten more seasons in which he was a decent NHL goalie, and Cechmanek had ten more seasons as an excellent Czech league goalie. Sounds about even to me!

You've got 23 cups (by my rough count) to my 25, and I am not going to go and claim that is a huge difference. However, Four of my top 6 forwards have outstanding playoff resumes when compared to their regular season talent. (Kozlov's GPG goes from .31 to .36 and PPG goes from .73 to .67, Richer goes from .4 to .4 and from .78 to .73, Allison goes from .28 to .28 and from .88 to 1.00, Kovalev goes from .34 to .37 and from .81 to .84. Even if you include Larouche in this group, who goes from .49 to .31 and from 1.01 to .84, on average, these five players experience 5% drops in goals and points in the playoffs, which is amazing when you consider how much scoring generally drops in the playoffs.) Two of my bottom six have been huge in shutdown roles on cup winners and two others have received Selke votes. Out of your top-6 forwards, I can't exactly rate the top 3 due to lack of avaialble statistics, but I can assume they were all adequate enough to win two cups. The next three all have playoff numbers that go south in April, (Deadmarsh goes from .32 to .25 GPG and from .66 to .63 PPG in the playoffs, Zetterberg goes from .43 to .37 and from .93 to .63, Sheppard goes from .44 to .37 and from .80 to .62 - drops of 22%, 16%, and 14% in GPG, and drops of 5%, 32%, and 22% in PPG!) and it will only be compounded by who they have to play against in this series. I will be matching my 3rd line, the premier shutdown pair, against your top line out of necessity, but my fourth will do just fine against your second. Hunter/Deadmarsh will have some epic battles in the corners. As for production from the defense in the playoffs, we are each only dressing two guys with experience producing NHL-level offense - Sydor and Murray for me, and Driver and Galley for you. The former have career playoff PPG drops of 4% and 11% while the latter have experienced drops of 13% and 36%. Not too promising for those two, considering neither is a defensive stalwart by any stretch.

Coaching: All Carlyle has on Crawford is the winning percentage, due to having only two playoff runs in his career. Both have a cup so they know how to get there. But there is no substitute for experience. Crawford has coached 83 playoff games to Carlyle's 38. Also, Carlyle's trademark so far has been a relentless checking game and I don't think you have the lineup to play that game.

Plus, Kovalev has only a one in eight chance of being eliminated in the first round, according to history :D

Sorry man, I think you drew the wrong team.

Diving Pokecheck*
02-06-2008, 12:51 AM
Deadmarsh would make a better third-liner in this draft
Deadmarsh was a second line LW and assistant captain of last year's minor league champions.
Despite being slower forwards than Dave Andreychuk skating backwards barefoot
I don't think a G.M. with Jason Allison on their second line is in any position of strength when criticizing speed.


On the other hand, my top six forwards contain five elite, top-line NHL forwards who led their teams in scoring more often than not. In other words, my second line has three first-liners and yours has an actual second-liner.
Rick Nash's career high in points is 57, which is less than any of our second liners. He would not lead any team in scoring save a woeful expansion squad.
As for a headcase, I think that there is a reason that a 32-year old Jason Allison did not find a place in the NHL after putting up 60 points in 66 games. In LA he was infamous for milking injuries to the fullest. I do not think that Kovalev is a guy that can be counted on to bring his A game every night.
I like Prystai. I had him on my shortlist after doing my initial research, only to find that he was selected during the couple of hours I spent researching. (How much better is he than my steal, Jimmy Peters, though?)
I do not think that anyone would get this riled up about Jimmy Peters:
The Phoenix Roadrunners select their shutdown centerman, Metro Prystai
Son of an (explitive). raleh is gong to be ticked. We had him pegged for our fifth round pick.

The class of defensive forwards in the ATD. Maybe the most valuable forward in the draft, when you consider all he brings to the table. Three time Cup champ. Two-time 50-point forward. (At a time when only a couple players got a point-per-game). He's better than at least a quarter of the defensive centres picked in the main draft.

As for defense, Hy Buller may have had the highest peak of any defenseman in the draft, and Dave Lewis was a solid shutdown D-man. Buller was seriously considered by Hockey Outsider for the 7th defenseman on his ATD-winning team.
Daryl Sydor, when he was in LA, was well-known for making bone-headed defensive plays, and I do not think that being a passenger on 2 cups will change that.

my other four vs. your other four is a virtual wash. (although Phat Wilson is ipressive)
I disagree. My "other four" has two Hall of Fame defensemen, 1 2nd all-star team, and a veteran defensive d with leadership qualities.
Yours has a solid 2nd-3rd on a cup winner, a 1950's enforcer, Langlois (a solid player), and the aforementioned Sydor.

Hawkman
02-06-2008, 01:41 AM
I do not think that anyone would get this riled up about Jimmy Peters:Agreed. Metro Prystai put in three full seasons with the Moose Jaw Canucks of the SJHL between 1944 and 1947. During that time he became a local sports icon, leading his team to three straight provincial championships plus a trip to the Memorial Cup finals. He also led his league in scoring for two of his three seasons with the Canucks. His fame reached its peak when his picture was hung in the window of Thatcher's hardware store on Main St.

Prystai joined the NHL in 1947 with the Chicago Blackhawks. He was excited to join fellow Saskatchewan natives Max and Doug Bentley. But Prystai lasted only three seasons with the Hawks when he was traded to the Detroit Red Wings. Feeling that Chicago was on the rise, he was sorry to leave until he realized the lineup he was joining and winning prospects awaiting him in the Motor City. There, he skated with Ted Lindsay and Gordie Howe. He then settled in for much of his time on the checking line with Marty Pavelich and Tony Leswick.

The most exciting event of his career came when, in 1952, the Wings swept the entire playoffs, winning all eight contests, four against Toronto and four against Montreal. Terry Sawchuk had four shutouts as the Wings never gave up a goal in their own rink. As for Prystai, he scored two goals and an assist in the final game.

By 1954-55, Prystai was given a return ticket to play in Chicago again. He plugged away in the Windy City for just over one season before he was hustled back to Detroit where he remained until...1957-58.

seventieslord
02-06-2008, 10:37 AM
Deadmarsh was a second line LW and assistant captain of last year's minor league champions.

Great, but that is an imaginary credential. What are his real ones? Great player for the third line, but he is not skilled enough to be taken seriously as a second line player in this draft, as I have already demonstrated. If his team won, I am sure he contributed, but no more than the team's actual best players.

I don't think a G.M. with Jason Allison on their second line is in any position of strength when criticizing speed.
As I said earlier: "His speed should not be a major concern. Many of you will remember the big fuss that was made about his slowness in his last NHL season, which was played after being inactive for 34 months. Prior to that, Allison was at least an average skater and won Los Angeles' fastest skater competition." I'm backing this up with fact. you're backing it up with what, exactly?

As I said, Shep is a good second-liner, even first. As a two-time top-5 guy in goals, he accomplished good things despite his speed. He did not make his linemates any better in the way Allison did, though.

Rick Nash's career high in points is 57, which is less than any of our second liners. He would not lead any team in scoring save a woeful expansion squad.
How many of those points were goals? Yeah, exactly... I have Allison and Kovalev on that line, and they can easily feed him pucks.

As for a headcase, I think that there is a reason that a 32-year old Jason Allison did not find a place in the NHL after putting up 60 points in 66 games.
The reason was that he clearly was not fast enough anymore. His +/- was terrible that final season.

In LA he was infamous for milking injuries to the fullest.
That's quite the allegation. Your source?

I do not think that Kovalev is a guy that can be counted on to bring his A game every night.
Well, you're wrong. Kovalev's career playoff numbers prove it.

I do not think that anyone would get this riled up about Jimmy Peters:
Riled up, no. Is he great for the third line in this draft? I have no doubt. Is he as good as Prystai? Of course not. Will he help to offset Prystai's performance? Yes.

As for defense, Hy Buller may have had the highest peak of any defenseman in the draft, and Dave Lewis was a solid shutdown D-man. Buller was seriously considered by Hockey Outsider for the 7th defenseman on his ATD-winning team.
Yes, great peak, but he played three full NHL seasons, if you generously consider 41 games a full season. For eight more years, he was an AHL defenseman, which I can only assume meant he was not one of the top 25 defensemen in North America. After those years, he finally managed to crack the lineup of the 2nd worst, and then by far worst, lineup in the NHL. Dave Lewis was solid, but was he any more solid and tough than Colin White? It's things like this that make me say it's a wash.

Daryl Sydor, when he was in LA, was well-known for making bone-headed defensive plays, and I do not think that being a passenger on 2 cups will change that.
And we base their performances on career averages. Over the course of his career, Sydor has been considered a solid, steady veteran presence more often than not. Being a #2 defenseman on a cup winner and being on the second pairing of another, is not being a passenger.

I disagree. My "other four" has two Hall of Fame defensemen, 1 2nd all-star team, and a veteran defensive d with leadership qualities.
Yours has a solid 2nd-3rd on a cup winner, a 1950's enforcer, Langlois (a solid player), and the aforementioned Sydor.

Not to take away from their abilities, but the hall was pretty easy to get into for a while there. I think Phat Wilson is another guy who was a steal and I would go as far as to say he's the best out of our combined "bottom 8" - the rest wash out and don't really give either of us an advantage or disadvantage from the blueline.
From a playoff standpoint, Murray and Sydor > Driver and Galley. Proven by playoff production, which is more important than their collective modest defensive abilities.
White = Lewis.
Langlois > Buller, Langlois stuck on as the fourth guy on the top team in the league for years. Buller was in the AHL more often than not and finally made it with the Rangers. Sounds like the modern day Brad Werenka.
Wilson > Fogolin.
Fontinato was more or less a physical player, not necessarily a goon, and it's hard to get a read on how he compares to a guy like Ruttan who was amateur his entire career. That is for the other GM's to judge. Even if you assume he is better than a guy who played 500 NHL games, that still gives me the edge overall.

You also haven't addressed the drop in playoff production from your 2nd line and two best offensive defensemen.

seventieslord
02-06-2008, 10:39 AM
Agreed.

Hey! You listed Peters as one of the best picks before.

chaosrevolver
02-06-2008, 01:16 PM
I feel McNeil will make it tough on Dysart so I have to go with the Roadrunners. They're sound defensively and then add in arguably the best goalie in the draft.

seventieslord
02-06-2008, 01:25 PM
I feel McNeil will make it tough on Dysart so I have to go with the Roadrunners. They're sound defensively and then add in arguably the best goalie in the draft.

Maybe, but no tougher than Cude will make it on the Roadrunners! They're practically identical. One has a slightly better peak, the other a longer career.

chaosrevolver
02-06-2008, 01:41 PM
Maybe, but no tougher than Cude will make it on the Roadrunners! They're practically identical. One has a slightly better peak, the other a longer career.True, True. I will be interesting.

Hawkman
02-06-2008, 02:51 PM
For eight more years, he was an AHL defenseman, which I can only assume meant he was not one of the top 25 defensemen in North America.I'm glad you said this. I've been meaning to address this point on the board. I don't disagree with it, but so what. This is not a valid criticism of a player. In the O6 many great players played their entire careers in the AHL, because there were only 6 teams. I'm hoping one AAA team will have the guts to draft one for their first team in the first six rounds. Today there are 30 teams so 80% of todays players would have been career AHL players. Does this mean they suck? Of course not. I don't consider Ed Jovanovski as one the top 25 active defensemen for his career, but he was taken in ATD #8 - "537 cottonking - Dallas Blackhawks - Ed Jovanovski". He's also having the seventh best season of any defenseman in the NHL. :)

seventieslord
02-06-2008, 03:04 PM
I'm glad you said this. I've been meaning to address this point on the board. I don't disagree with it, but so what. This is not a valid criticism of a player. In the O6 many great players played their entire careers in the AHL, because there were only 6 teams. I'm hoping one AAA team will have the guts to draft one for their first team in the first six rounds. Today there are 30 teams so 80% of todays players would have been career AHL players. Does this mean they suck? Of course not. I don't consider Ed Jovanovski as one the top 25 active defensemen for his career, but he was taken in ATD #8 - "537 cottonking - Dallas Blackhawks - Ed Jovanovski". He's also having the seventh best season of any defenseman in the NHL. :)

It's quite valid though. That's why I made sure to use the number 25. Most teams were using just 4 defensemen at the time. Still, I'd take one who managed to last in the NHL a long time versus one who was mostly an AHL player. Assuming he was the top AHL defenseman all those years, he still wasn't in the NHL and 25+ other defensemen were. Had he won a variety of AHL awards, I could see him being a great defenseman. But he was a First All Star Team member twice in those 8 years and that's it. He peaked well, and if he had a whole NHL similar to what he did in those two years, he'd probably go in round 10 of the ATD. Based on his actual performance, he's worthy of being picked in this draft too, but I don't want him overpimped on my watch either.

Hawkman
02-06-2008, 03:10 PM
It's quite valid though. That's why I made sure to use the number 25. Most teams were using just 4 defensemen at the time. Still, I'd take one who managed to last in the NHL a long time versus one who was mostly an AHL player. Assuming he was the top AHL defenseman all those years, he still wasn't in the NHL and 25+ other defensemen were. Had he won a variety of AHL awards, I could see him being a great defenseman. But he was a First All Star Team member twice in those 8 years and that's it. He peaked well, and if he had a whole NHL similar to what he did in those two years, he'd probably go in round 10 of the ATD. Based on his actual performance, he's worthy of being picked in this draft too, but I don't want him overpimped on my watch either.Fair enough. I was more making my own point than disagreeing with you anyways. :)

MXD
02-06-2008, 04:23 PM
Had he changed his D-Pairing 2 days earlier, ADC would have won the division instead of me, as I'm interpreting the difference of one point as the "smallest possible gap" between two teams. And ADC would have won a rank in my rankings....

What does this have to do in the matchup thread... i don't know.

Diving Pokecheck*
02-06-2008, 05:35 PM
About Hy Buller:
from my research, his lengthy stay in the AHL was more due to antisemitism than any lack of playing ability.

Diving Pokecheck*
02-06-2008, 06:42 PM
About the 2 members of the LAPD line in this draft.
Deadmarsh was all that is right with hockey and Allison is all that is wrong with hockey.
-little bunny foo foo
Jason Allison's nickname was JA, and it should've stood for Jack Ass and not Jason Allison. He was the epitome of a poor teammate, lockerroom cancer whatever you may want to call him. He complained about playing with rookies, most noticably Mike Cammalleri and went to war with Andy Murray through the media over his injury. Apathetic at best to fans. The guy was talented as all hell in the old NHL, but there is a reason a guy that's as talented as that was dealt as many times as he was.

Deadmarsh was hockey. He is everything I wish every hockey player on the Kings could be.
-reaper45

Diving Pokecheck*
02-06-2008, 06:52 PM
Coming from a Kings fan, and a supporter of the Marc Crawford hire, I do not think that his run-and-gun style and seemingly random line combinations (Anze Kopitar, when he was the rookie scoring leader, was placed on set lines with such offensive dynamos as Jason Ward, Jeff Cowan, Tim Jackman, and Noah Clarke) will match up well against Carlyle's strong defensive style

seventieslord
02-06-2008, 06:52 PM
About Hy Buller:
from my research, his lengthy stay in the AHL was more due to antisemitism than any lack of playing ability.

And from my research, Alexandre Daigle's lack of sustained NHL success was more due to his lack of desire than any lack of playing ability.

Also, from my research, Michel Briere's lack of sustained NHL success was more due to his death than any lack of playing ability.

What the three have in common is lack of sustained NHL success, and it doesn't matter what caused it.

Diving Pokecheck*
02-06-2008, 06:57 PM
A big advantage that the Roadrunners have is clutch playoff scoring. Say what you want about Murphy, he is
tied for third overall in career overtime goals in the playoffs
Hill, of course, scored 3 overtime playoff goals in a single series. Adam Deadmarsh assisted on Eric Belanger's game winning goal at the "Frenzy on Figueroa" and later scored the series-winning goal. Harry Trihey is 2 goals per game in the playoffs. Metro Prystai has a higher point per game in the playoffs than in the regular season.

All of this is, of course, on top of the fact that it is the second in the division facing the team in the basement.

seventieslord
02-06-2008, 07:09 PM
About the 2 members of the LAPD line in this draft.

-little bunny foo foo

-reaper45

Well, good for you. You have two sources, which is two more than you had before. Your posing of the question to Kings fans was interesting to say the least.

see http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?p=12381262&posted=1#post12381262

I suppose it is up to the other GMs how important this really is.

On the other hand, I went back to late 2005-06 when Allison underwent surgery while a Leaf, and here is what they had to say:
http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=236510

Jason Allison will finish the season with more points than Luc, Roenick and Bure combined.

True enough.

The guy's become a whipping boy in TO, but he's performed well. Also, he's shown that he has the ability to kick up his game when he's criticized.

Allison may even finish the season with more points than Demitra. So kick him all you want he was more productive than the guys DT brought in.

See how easy that is to do?

I have nothing against Deadmarsh. Solid citizen all-around. The fact remains, that he has zero in the way of impressive offensive credentials considering he averaged 5th on his team among forwards in the full seasons he played. He does not have the offensive talent to fulfill the role of scorer on a second line. All other aspects of his game are great, and it is no surprise that they'd say things like that about him.

In the end, jerk or not, Allison produces 1.00 PPG in the playoffs and Deadmarsh produces .63.

seventieslord
02-06-2008, 07:11 PM
Coming from a Kings fan, and a supporter of the Marc Crawford hire, I do not think that his run-and-gun style and seemingly random line combinations (Anze Kopitar, when he was the rookie scoring leader, was placed on set lines with such offensive dynamos as Jason Ward, Jeff Cowan, Tim Jackman, and Noah Clarke) will match up well against Carlyle's strong defensive style

Well, those seemingly random line combinations are a snapshot of one NHL season of 13 in his career. I think the other lines he made did quite well.... Sakic.... Forsberg.... Bertuzzi....

Also, to say Carlyle has the edge by virtue of winning percentage would be like saying Sidney Crosby is a better ATD center than Joe Sakic because he has a higher points-per-game.

seventieslord
02-06-2008, 07:16 PM
A big advantage that the Roadrunners have is clutch playoff scoring. Say what you want about Murphy, he is

Hill, of course, scored 3 overtime playoff goals in a single series. Adam Deadmarsh assisted on Eric Belanger's game winning goal at the "Frenzy on Figueroa" and later scored the series-winning goal. Harry Trihey is 2 goals per game in the playoffs. Metro Prystai has a higher point per game in the playoffs than in the regular season.

All of this is, of course, on top of the fact that it is the second in the division facing the team in the basement.

Murphy is actually in a tie for fourth. With four. Yes that is a nice stat, but we're talking about four goals here. On your fourth line he won't get many chances to score, and even on better lines, he hasn't produced well in the playoffs, aside from some clutch goals. As I said, Mel Hill is more of a novelty pick selected for that exact reason. He doesn't concern me.

Deadmarsh is clutch, I've got nothing against him except that he belongs on a third line.

Trihey's playoff numbers mean little to me unless they're put into context. Whatever 2 GPG meant back then, may have been good, great, or outstanding.

Prystai's playoff numbers are good based on his role, but scoring is not his role on your team. So what if he goes from 0.49 PPG to 0.6? It's still just 0.6.

LAX attack*
02-06-2008, 07:25 PM
The Roadrunners have some of the most clutch and leadership in the entire draft. With guys like Trihey and Dave Lewis playing good minutes, the team can will be effective in the playoffs.

Diving Pokecheck*
02-06-2008, 07:31 PM
I would like to ask raleh why he thinks that Rick Nash is a lockerroom liability. If anything, he seems like a good young leader to me.

raleh
02-06-2008, 07:37 PM
You're probably right since Hitch got a hold of him. But I said they either do nothing or are harmful to the locker room. He would fall into my does nothing category. Up until very recently he was a completely one dimensional player who gave me the impression that he was out there for himself and himself only. This year has been different, but it hasn't lasted long enough to effect my voting too much, and honestly I think that's a product of coaching rather than his own maturation. Nash is the kind of guy that in a draft like this he better be putting up absolutely huge numbers for me to count him as a plus.

I would like to ask raleh why he thinks that Rick Nash is a lockerroom liability. If anything, he seems like a good young leader to me.

MXD
02-06-2008, 07:58 PM
About Hy Buller:
from my research, his lengthy stay in the AHL was more due to antisemitism than any lack of playing ability.

Nothing against your source, but Bill Ezinicki and Bill Juzda were in the NHL during Buller's career.

Diving Pokecheck*
02-06-2008, 08:29 PM
I guarantee he gets drafted in the main draft next time.
I just may be the man to make it happen. Come to think about it, he makes Steve Kasper look like an astonishingly stupid pick.

seventieslord
02-06-2008, 10:08 PM
You're probably right since Hitch got a hold of him. But I said they either do nothing or are harmful to the locker room. He would fall into my does nothing category. Up until very recently he was a completely one dimensional player who gave me the impression that he was out there for himself and himself only. This year has been different, but it hasn't lasted long enough to effect my voting too much, and honestly I think that's a product of coaching rather than his own maturation. Nash is the kind of guy that in a draft like this he better be putting up absolutely huge numbers for me to count him as a plus.

I don't think that's too far from the truth. I think they probably have him tagged as a future captain and he can do it, once the team is better and he has a cast of supporting leaders. Is he a cancer? No, but you weren't really saying that either. At this inexperienced point in his career he's not considered the glue guy either. Since I like to stress this is about what the player has done, your comments are fair. As for his numbers, I thought they were good enough as a one-time goal leader and then was on pace to 47 in 05-06 and 43 this year. I could be off on that, but Allison and Kovalev do produce in the playoffs.

When voting, keep in mind this is the playoffs, think: who is going to score for the Roadrunners? Who on the Kugels is a playoff choker?

Diving Pokecheck*
02-06-2008, 10:18 PM
When voting, keep in mind this is the playoffs, think: who is going to score for the Roadrunners? Who on the Kugels is a playoff choker?
I think that the Shamrocks will do a fair amount of scoring, as well as Zetterberg and Sheppard. Deadmarsh, Hill, and Murphy will chip in with timely goals.
With Buller, Wilson, Galley, and Driver, we have no shortage of puck movers from the blueline (this is something that killed the T-Birds)

seventieslord
02-06-2008, 10:26 PM
A few things:

1) I haven't heard much about my third and fourth lines - personally I think they are great. Guys with proven playoff shutdown ability and selke vote-getters. All at their natural positions too. No one has commented. Is Jimmy Peters a discovery, or am I out to lunch?

2) No one but me has mentioned Phoenix's 4th line is quite useless. Am I alone here? Does this not hurt his team?

3) Comments on my six offensive forwards' playoff output, anyone? 340 pts in 441 games = 0.77. The three on Phoenix that have NHL totals to go by, have 141 in 226 for 0.62, or 20% lower. My two top offensive blueliners have 111 in 263 for 0.42 and their two have 80 in 207 for 0.39. Not a huge per-game difference, but a significant difference in absolute terms, both in games and points.

4) Those top 6 forwards of mine have a combined 15 seasons spent (including this year) as premier, top-line NHL forwards. That is counting 3X for Nash, 4X for Allison, 4X for Kovalev, 2X for Richer, 2X for Larouche. Obviously Phoenix's top line is impossible to compare that way, but the next three have a combined 5. 3X for Zetterberg and 2X for Sheppard. There's just not enough there in the way of long-term established offensive eliteness.

MXD
02-06-2008, 11:10 PM
A few things:

1) I haven't heard much about my third and fourth lines - personally I think they are great. Guys with proven playoff shutdown ability and selke vote-getters. All at their natural positions too. No one has commented. Is Jimmy Peters a discovery, or am I out to lunch?

2) No one but me has mentioned Phoenix's 4th line is quite useless. Am I alone here? Does this not hurt his team?

3) Comments on my six offensive forwards' playoff output, anyone? 340 pts in 441 games = 0.77. The three on Phoenix that have NHL totals to go by, have 141 in 226 for 0.62, or 20% lower. My two top offensive blueliners have 111 in 263 for 0.42 and their two have 80 in 207 for 0.39. Not a huge per-game difference, but a significant difference in absolute terms, both in games and points.

4) Those top 6 forwards of mine have a combined 15 seasons spent (including this year) as premier, top-line NHL forwards. That is counting 3X for Nash, 4X for Allison, 4X for Kovalev, 2X for Richer, 2X for Larouche. Obviously Phoenix's top line is impossible to compare that way, but the next three have a combined 5. 3X for Zetterberg and 2X for Sheppard. There's just not enough there in the way of long-term established offensive eliteness.

2) I did. But I excluded playoffs.

Ray Sheppard might be the worst offensive RW of the whole draft - supposed to be the offensive specialist of his line, but could be the weakest offensive player on it(there were better offensive players left, and I'd take Stephane Richer defensive play before Sheppard's one, seriously), but the remaining of Phoenix top-6 can get the job done for sure.

raleh
02-08-2008, 01:55 PM
I don't think that's too far from the truth. I think they probably have him tagged as a future captain and he can do it, once the team is better and he has a cast of supporting leaders. Is he a cancer? No, but you weren't really saying that either. At this inexperienced point in his career he's not considered the glue guy either. Since I like to stress this is about what the player has done, your comments are fair. As for his numbers, I thought they were good enough as a one-time goal leader and then was on pace to 47 in 05-06 and 43 this year. I could be off on that, but Allison and Kovalev do produce in the playoffs.

When voting, keep in mind this is the playoffs, think: who is going to score for the Roadrunners? Who on the Kugels is a playoff choker?

I feel like I need to be fair here. Nash has impressed the hell out of me this year- and imagine how good he's gonna be feeding Shaq!


But seriously-Rick Nash is making his way into my good books.

Diving Pokecheck*
02-08-2008, 06:12 PM
Closing statements: There is no better shutdown line in this draft, and there is not better coach for a shutdown line than Carlyle. He turned Niedermeyer's kid brother and two virtual unknowns and put them together into the best line for a cup winner.
He has much more to work with here. Metro Prystai is the best defensive forward in the draft, and is arguably the most valuable all-around forward. Saying that he is not much better than Jimmy Peters would be like, in the major league draft, saying that Guy Carbonneau is not that much better than Mike Peca.
We have 5 Hall of Fame players on our roster, all of whom had an influence on the development of the game.
Our goaltender, Gerry McNeil, was the first goalie selected in the last draft, and is at least in the top two or three available.
A person in the organization that no one has talked about is goaltending coach Warren Strelow. His greatest achievement was his work as the goaltending coach of the 1980 Miracle U.S. team. Jim Craig was a bust as a pro, but for 60 minutes he was the best player in hockey. Strelow was also instrumental in turning the San Jose Sharks into a goaltending factory, influencing the careers of Kiprusoff, Nabokov, and Toskala.
Our defense is a combination of two HOFer's, two solid, veteran defensemen, one rock of a defensive defenseman with good leadership, and Hy Buller.
It has been questioned whether he was a NHL caliber player. However, he had a season in which only Red Kelly and Doug Harvey were considered better than him.
Our first line is extremely old, but they knew how to dominate a game. Our second line, the "Classic Rock Line" (Led Zetterberg and Grateful Deadmarsh) is well-rounded, with decent scoring abilities.
The fourth line will not see much time, but will chip in with timely goals when they are needed the most.

Hockey Outsider
02-09-2008, 06:18 PM
Hope I'm not too late with these comments...

I think Hy Buller is a great MLD defenseman. Obviously, his short career is a mark against him, but he was outstanding during his prime. In 1952, he was named the 3rd-best defenseman in the league, ahead of guys like Gadsby, Quackenbush, Pronovost and Mortson.

I don't think that Buller's long stint in the minors should be held against him--the AHL Cleveland Barons held his rights and they weren't affiliated with any NHL team. When the Rangers traded for him (and Wally Hergesheimer), they had to give the Barons four players plus cash. Buller was the first rookie defenseman in NHL history named to the all-star team, and was runner-up in Calder voting to Bernie Geoffrion. I think this shows that he was easily an NHL calibre player.

During the 1950s, he ranked 4th among defensemen in goals per game (source: Evil Speaker's defensemen charts) and was 5th in assists and points per game. Only Kelly, Gadsby, Harvey and Mohns were better.

There are two theories behind Buller's retirement ("Who's Who in Hockey" page 52). One says that he got a debilitating injury and chose to "gracefully leave the NHL" rather than hanging around and being mediocre. The other theory says that he was "disenchanted with the game's violence". So one reason is quite favourable, while the other isn't. Still, he could "deliver jolting bodychecks and play with a chip on his shoulder", and finished 6th in the NHL in PIM as a rookie, so I doubt that toughness was his weakness.

MXD
02-10-2008, 01:58 PM
Hope I'm not too late with these comments...

I think Hy Buller is a great MLD defenseman. Obviously, his short career is a mark against him, but he was outstanding during his prime. In 1952, he was named the 3rd-best defenseman in the league, ahead of guys like Gadsby, Quackenbush, Pronovost and Mortson.

I don't think that Buller's long stint in the minors should be held against him--the AHL Cleveland Barons held his rights and they weren't affiliated with any NHL team. When the Rangers traded for him (and Wally Hergesheimer), they had to give the Barons four players plus cash. Buller was the first rookie defenseman in NHL history named to the all-star team, and was runner-up in Calder voting to Bernie Geoffrion. I think this shows that he was easily an NHL calibre player.

During the 1950s, he ranked 4th among defensemen in goals per game (source: Evil Speaker's defensemen charts) and was 5th in assists and points per game. Only Kelly, Gadsby, Harvey and Mohns were better.

There are two theories behind Buller's retirement ("Who's Who in Hockey" page 52). One says that he got a debilitating injury and chose to "gracefully leave the NHL" rather than hanging around and being mediocre. The other theory says that he was "disenchanted with the game's violence". So one reason is quite favourable, while the other isn't. Still, he could "deliver jolting bodychecks and play with a chip on his shoulder", and finished 6th in the NHL in PIM as a rookie, so I doubt that toughness was his weakness.

About his "faith"... Do your really think that Hy Buller got somehow victim of antisemism? My hypothesis was that it wasn't really relevant, as there were a few jewish guys playing in the NHL at this era, and there was nothing is their bios in regards to anti-semitism... And managed to have sustained career nonetheless. Two of them were drafted in this MLD -- Ezinicki and Juzda.

seventieslord
02-10-2008, 02:10 PM
Obviously my political knowledge of those times is very poor, because I thought from ADC's comments, that it was Buller who was the Antisemite, and that kept him from being "accepted" into the NHL.

VanIslander
02-10-2008, 02:16 PM
The greatest Jewish hockey player ever is on the Atd#8-ML McGill Redmen. Guess who.

MXD
02-10-2008, 02:48 PM
Obviously my political knowledge of those times is very poor, because I thought from ADC's comments, that it was Buller who was the Antisemite, and that kept him from being "accepted" into the NHL.

http://www.jewsinsports.org/profile.asp?sport=hockey&ID=11

Buller was jewish, as were Ezinicki and Juzda.
By a strange twist of events, both Ezinicki and Buller had some kind of violent stick-swing interaction with Ted Lindsay, and both were at the "receiving" end of the swing.

MXD
02-10-2008, 02:49 PM
The greatest Jewish hockey player ever is on the Atd#8-ML McGill Redmen. Guess who.

Moose Goheen?

Most people would answer Matthieu Schneider to this question anyways.

And a good argument could me made for Yuri Liapkin as well.

Hockey Outsider
02-10-2008, 03:39 PM
http://www.jewsinsports.org/profile.asp?sport=hockey&ID=11

Buller was jewish, as were Ezinicki and Juzda.
By a strange twist of events, both Ezinicki and Buller had some kind of violent stick-swing interaction with Ted Lindsay, and both were at the "receiving" end of the swing.

Actually I've done some research on the Buller/Lindsay incident. If nothing else, it's produced one of my all-time favourite hockey quotes.

Basically, Lindsay wildly swung his stick at Buller's head twice, narrowly missing both times. (Sources say he was trying to goad Buller into a fight). Years later, Lindsay said he didn't remember the incident but vehemently denied targeting Buller because of his religion. Lindsay insisted that he didn't hate Jews, and simply said, "I hated everyone!"

I just spoke to my grandfather (who often talks to me about the NHL of the 1930s) and, unfortunately, he has no memories of Buller (and didn't even recognize the name).

VanIslander
02-10-2008, 06:27 PM
Most people would answer Matthieu Schneider to this question anyways.
:rolleyes: If you are talking best NHL career, yeah. But he didn't dominate, wasn't top-3 or have anywhere near the sort of success as this Jew...

is jewish according to note 14:
http://books.google.com/books?id=t0KzECrIQDQC&pg=PA254&lpg=PA254&dq=evgeny+babich+jewish&source=web&ots=hr772m0iqa&sig=ASyF2EFRBcSIkqk0pzL2meHKhSE

Yevgeny Babich

http://hfboards.com/imagehosting/2144847af870800c1a.jpg (http://hfboards.com/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=12822)

"fast and fearless"

Olympic gold medalist
IIHF World Champion
9-time Soviet hockey all-star
on 8-time Soviet league championship team
played a long time on one of the greatest lines in Soviet hockey history
coach Tarasov wrote in his book Road to Olympus that Babich was more valuable and multiskilled than linemate Bobrov

As a multi-sport athlete, Babich also scored the first goal ever in football/soccer in the Moscow Dynamo vs. Red Army (CDKA) rivalry.
http://www.cska-football.ru/index.pl?s=9&l=en

Yevgeny Babich is in the Russian Ice Hockey Hall of Fame.

a good argument could me made for Yuri Liapkin as well
Very overrated in these drafts (probably because of what's said by that chidlovski guy who made the 72 series website). Liapkin isn't even in the Russian Ice Hockey Hall of Fame. Babich is. So is my Redmen's extra forward Andrei Khomutov (1980's star, 1990 Soviet MVP). Plenty of defensemen are in the hall, like Fetisov, Ragulin, Kuzkin, Vasiliev. No Liapkin.

Was Liapkin ever on the 1st team all-star as a top-2 Soviet blueliner? No. Even my Redmen Vasili Pervukhin was a 1st team all-star (alongside Fetisov). Though both Liapkin and Pervukhin are Top-10 in all-time Soviet league scoring by defensemen (Liapkin 126, Pervukhin 93). Liapkin was an offensive defenseman in the 70's who scored a goal and had five assists in the 1972 Summit Series and thus is remembered in North America. Overall, he is not clearly any better than two defensemen on my Redmen, certainly not one of the most esteemed, best of all-time at his position among Soviet greats as Babich is at his position.

Yevgeny Babich is the greatest Jewish ice hockey of all time based on accomplishments, esteem and skill relative to his peers, in an all-time context.

MXD
02-10-2008, 06:34 PM
Yevgeny Babich is the greatest Jewish ice hockey of all time based on accomplishments, esteem and skill relative to his peers, in an all-time context.

Well, I just said most people would answer Schneider... Which doesn't includes myself.

Babich is actually an ancestor of the Babyches. :)

seventieslord
02-10-2008, 10:40 PM
Babich is actually an ancestor of the Babyches. :)

Seriously? I always wondered that.

VanIslander
02-10-2008, 10:42 PM
Seriously? I always wondered that.
he told me via PM that he is :jk:

Diving Pokecheck*
02-10-2008, 11:05 PM
Good luck, 70slord.
It shall be a good series.

John Flyers Fan
02-11-2008, 07:31 PM
Phoenix wins the series in 5 games


3 stars

1. Mcneil
2. Prystai
3. Trihey

Diving Pokecheck*
02-11-2008, 07:32 PM
victory!
You had a very good team, 70slord.

Diving Pokecheck*
02-11-2008, 07:33 PM
are there going to be writeups?

John Flyers Fan
02-11-2008, 07:35 PM
are there going to be writeups?

Not for this round. I only had one volunteer, and I didn't have time to do that many series myself.

I already have a few people volunteering to do write ups for rouns 2 .. so going forward there will be write ups.

seventieslord
02-13-2008, 02:25 PM
Sorry, I should have said something earlier... I replied to a PM from ADC a few days back but then you all wouldn't know that....

Thanks for all your comments, and I look forward to coming back strong in the AAA and next MLD.