HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   All Time Draft (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=181)
-   -   Bob Cole Divisional Quarterfinals: Rögle vs. Hamilton (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1157173)

Sturminator 04-07-2012 08:49 AM

Bob Cole Divisional Quarterfinals: Rögle vs. Hamilton
 
http://www.roglebk.se/page/ladda/Logo2006_black.jpg

Coach: Barry Trotz
Assistant coach: Larry Robinson

Frank Foyston - Peter Forsberg - Owen Nolan
Smokey Harris - Nels Stewart - Alf Smith
Tony Leswick - Mike Peca - Johnny Peirson
Ilya Kovalchuk - Red Sullivan - Bill Goldworthy

Nicklas Lidström - Larry Murphy
Harvey Pulford - Teppo Numminen
Kevin Hatcher - Jack Portland
Wade Redden

Martin Brodeur
Roger Crozier

Vs.



Coach: Dick Irvin Sr.
Assistant Coach: Eddie Gerard
Captain: Eddie Gerard
Assistant Captains: Doug Harvey, Doug Gilmour

Vladimir Krutov-Doug Gilmour-Rick Middleton
Jack Walker-Dave Keon-Shane Doan
Keith Tkachuk-Jeremy Roenick-Tony Amonte
Lynn Patrick-Dick Irvin Sr.-Corey Perry
Ex: Corb Denneny, Fred Lake

Doug Harvey-Glen Harmon
Eddie Gerard-Ott Heller
Ed Van Impe-Reijo Ruotsalainen
Ex: Fred Lake, Jack Evans

Clint Benedict
Charlie Hodge

PP:
Krutov-Gilmour-Middleton
Harvey-Ruotsalainen

Tkachuk-Roenick-Patrick
Harmon-Gerard

(Keon will get spot PP duty as well)

PK:

Forwards:
PK1: Keon- Walker
PK2: Middleton-Gilmour
PK3: Amonte-Doan (will not take face offs ever)

Defensemen: PK1: Harvey-Heller
PK2: Gerard-Van Impe

Playoff TOI totals (Regular season ones will be a little more evened out)

NameESPPSHTotal
Gilmour143.52.520
Middleton143.52.520
Krutov143.5017.5
Walker1303.516.5
Keon141318
Doan130215
Tkachuk123.5015.5
Roenick122.5015.5
Amonte1201.513.5
Irvin7008
Patrick83.5011.5
Perry8008

NameESPPSHTotal
Harvey185427
Harmon182020
Gerard182323
Heller180422
Ruotsalainen105015
Van Impe100313


Sturminator 04-07-2012 08:59 AM

I'll get in the first comments of the playoffs here.

- This is a matchup that I was hoping would eventually happen. I like it when two extremely different philosophies of team building go head-to-head.

- Rögle is a team that has perhaps become underrated by this point. I think all the discussion/controversy about Ilya Kovalchuk and Stewart at the wing maybe masked the fact that Rögle was putting together a lot of talent in spite of whatever chemistry issues there may be. I like the Forsberg line, and think that it will be somewhat better than the sum of its parts. All three are solid two-way players, and it should enjoy a territorial/puck-control advantage in a lot of matchups. I see Forsberg - Foyston having good chemistry together. Both liked playing the quick passing transition game.

- Hamilton has easily the better coaching here, and insofar as Irvin gets the matchups he wants (Keon vs. Forsberg and Gilmour vs. Stewart, I think), they're going to cause Rögle a lot of problems. Should be a very interesting series.

Dreakmur 04-07-2012 09:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sturminator (Post 47461603)
- Hamilton has easily the better coaching here, and insofar as Irvin gets the matchups he wants (Keon vs. Forsberg and Gilmour vs. Stewart, I think), they're going to cause Rögle a lot of problems. Should be a very interesting series.

Agreed that Hamilton has the better coaching, but home ice advantage helps Rogle. Home team has last change regardless, so there will still be lots of time where Hamilton doesn't get their match-up.

Also, as I've said before, Rogle's flexibiltiy comes in handy when we're looking to avoid match-ups. It's tough to keep your matches when the lines keep coming out in different configurations.

BenchBrawl 04-07-2012 10:02 AM

Interesting series , looking forward to read the discussions.

Hawkman 04-07-2012 11:42 AM

I like not listing the GMs, because I don't have most of them memorized so I can just concentrate on the teams. :)

vecens24 04-07-2012 11:50 AM

Should be a fun matchup Dreak and Hobnobs. Good to see it!

First impressions:

-Lol good to see that after I was one of the biggest Trotz critics he is my matchup in Round One lol. I deserve that. I definitely have a coaching advantage. I have Dick Irvin as 5th all time. I like my matchup there.

-One of the reasons I'm mad I'm playing you is because you're one of the few teams in the division that I don't have a goaltending advantage on. Brodeur has the advantage on Benedict. Benedict's biggest strength is playoff play, but Brodeur is strong there. Not a big advantage, but one nonetheless.

-You are also a team I won't have a depth offense advantage against. I mean, I think my 3rd line obviously has a big advantage offensively, but my 4th doesn't with Kovalchuk sitting there.

-One thing I'm very curious about now is just how often exactly you're planning on line shifting throughout the series. You said you're planning on running kind of a fluid line system, where people play different lines throughout the game. How often is this going to happen?

-Harvey vs. Lidstrom. Awesome matchup.

Should be a fun series!

vecens24 04-07-2012 12:43 PM

By the way Sturm, I abused my Mod powers to put my team with bios in there just as a heads up.

Dreakmur 04-07-2012 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vecens24 (Post 47467255)
-Lol good to see that after I was one of the biggest Trotz critics he is my matchup in Round One lol. I deserve that. I definitely have a coaching advantage. I have Dick Irvin as 5th all time. I like my matchup there.

Can't deny the advantage here. I think 5th is pretty generous for Irvin - I think the 10-12 range is more suitable. Trotz unfortunately, it is probably a bottom 10 guy, but maybe with Robinson's help, he can be close to the "below average" catergory.

Home ice for Rogle should mitigate some of that advantage - mostly in the match-up game - but I can only argue so much..... Irvin is just better than Trotz :(

Quote:

-One of the reasons I'm mad I'm playing you is because you're one of the few teams in the division that I don't have a goaltending advantage on. Brodeur has the advantage on Benedict. Benedict's biggest strength is playoff play, but Brodeur is strong there.
I was hoping to have a big goaltending edge in the 1st round. I'll have to settle for a small, but difinitive advantage in net.

Quote:

-You are also a team I won't have a depth offense advantage against. I mean, I think my 3rd line obviously has a big advantage offensively, but my 4th doesn't with Kovalchuk sitting there.
The way I look at it is that your Keon line is your primary match-up line. Same goes for my Peca line. Your Roenick line is your secondary scoring line, and so to is my Stewart line.

In that case, you would have a significant edge in your shut-down line, and I'd have a significant edge in my secondary scoring line.

Quote:

-One thing I'm very curious about now is just how often exactly you're planning on line shifting throughout the series. You said you're planning on running kind of a fluid line system, where people play different lines throughout the game. How often is this going to happen?
Honestly, it's tough to say. If things are going well, why change, right? If you are stutting us down, it's time to shuffle the deck a little bit.

Unless things go really wrong, you won't see the huge fluid changes in the lines that we are capable of. It will probably be more subtle changes.

In terms of ice time, my top 5 forwards will be Forsberg, Fosyton, Stewart, Smith, and Kovalchuk. The switches will always have one of those 5 guys knocking somebody else out.

With an offensive zone face-off, we'll probably load up. If you've got smaller players on the ice, a line of Forsberg-Stewart-Smith would be a load. Kovalchuk-Forsberg-Foyston would be common as well.

Defensively, we can bump Sullivan into RW with Peca, which would allow Peca to cheat like mad on the face-off.

Quote:

-Harvey vs. Lidstrom. Awesome matchup.
Would it be unfair to say that Harvey is Lidstrom+toughness? Both have are among the absolute best defensively. Both have very good offensive numbers, though neither is really a leader of the rush.

Actually, this looks like a series that is better suited to having Wade Redden instead of Jack Portland.

Quote:

Should be a fun series!
Let's both try to fight fair :)

May the best european team win.

vecens24 04-07-2012 01:58 PM

I'm actually going to make one minor change to my lineup:

Due to Rogle's depth in my opinion down the LW, I'm going to switch Jack Walker and Shane Doan. If you read my bio, I feel very confidently that Walker is fully capable of moving to RW and being just as effective on the RW as he is on the left. We clearly know that Doan is just as effective on both wings from our own eyes.

This way, I can use Walker to frustrate Kovalchuk, Foyston and Harris as opposed to Nolan, Smith and Goldsworthy.

If anyone has any concerns about this, please voice them, but I doubt you will.

vecens24 04-07-2012 02:28 PM

Just to start out the arguments a little outside of the pleasantries exchanged already, the thing my team I think will be effective at most will be disrupting the already present chemistry issues of your top lines (i assassinated your team earlier, you know my issues). With a tough defensive team like I have, I think I have a good matchup advantage there being able to do that. Again, the coaching disadvantage will be accentuated in this realm.

Hobnobs 04-07-2012 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vecens24 (Post 47467255)
Should be a fun matchup Dreak and Hobnobs. Good to see it!

First impressions:

-Lol good to see that after I was one of the biggest Trotz critics he is my matchup in Round One lol. I deserve that. I definitely have a coaching advantage. I have Dick Irvin as 5th all time. I like my matchup there.

-One of the reasons I'm mad I'm playing you is because you're one of the few teams in the division that I don't have a goaltending advantage on. Brodeur has the advantage on Benedict. Benedict's biggest strength is playoff play, but Brodeur is strong there. Not a big advantage, but one nonetheless.

-You are also a team I won't have a depth offense advantage against. I mean, I think my 3rd line obviously has a big advantage offensively, but my 4th doesn't with Kovalchuk sitting there.

-One thing I'm very curious about now is just how often exactly you're planning on line shifting throughout the series. You said you're planning on running kind of a fluid line system, where people play different lines throughout the game. How often is this going to happen?

-Harvey vs. Lidstrom. Awesome matchup.

Should be a fun series!

I find Sullivan vs Harvey more awesome. ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doug Harvey
I hope the son-of-a-***** dies. Put that in your papers.


Sturminator 04-07-2012 02:45 PM

Walker vs. Foyston is an interesting matchup considering that they were longtime linemates in Seattle. It's hard to say in situations like this which side has the advantage. In general, I think the Forsberg line is going to be a tough one to "shut down" because it will control the puck well and be good at winning it back.

Gilmour vs. Stewart is a much more interesting matchup for Hamilton. Killer is one of the few two-way centers in this thing that can really match up with Stewart physically, not because he was as big as Nels, but because he was a goddamned honey badger. Gilmour at his peak was awesome, and he definitely got up for the playoffs, while Stewart's postseason record is pretty meh.

seventieslord 04-07-2012 06:23 PM

Gilmour just takes what he wants.

vecens24 04-07-2012 06:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seventieslord (Post 47497287)
Gilmour just takes what he wants.

Honey Badger just don't give a ****?

TheDevilMadeMe 04-07-2012 07:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vecens24 (Post 47467255)
-One thing I'm very curious about now is just how often exactly you're planning on line shifting throughout the series. You said you're planning on running kind of a fluid line system, where people play different lines throughout the game. How often is this going to happen?

More specifically, can Trotz pull it off? A system like that is very coaching intensive, and if Trotz is busy juggling the lines all game, it gives Irvin an even greater advantage if he chooses to focus on the matchup game.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dreakmur
Would it be unfair to say that Harvey is Lidstrom+toughness? Both have are among the absolute best defensively. Both have very good offensive numbers, though neither is really a leader of the rush.

That's basically how I see it. I think Harvey controlled the play from the backend more than Lidstrom, while Lidstrom was more involved in neutral ice at even strength, but that might just be a function of their eras.

Dreakmur 04-07-2012 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe (Post 47501341)
More specifically, can Trotz pull it off? A system like that is very coaching intensive, and if Trotz is busy juggling the lines all game, it gives Irvin an even greater advantage if he chooses to focus on the matchup game.

Who can't pull it off? Put me in the draft, and I'll do it easily. It's not hard to see where the face-off is and decide who you want on the ice. It's even easier when you have last change.

Matching lines is tough. That takes some talent!

Dreakmur 04-07-2012 09:47 PM

Ok, I'll do the easy stuff first.....

Coaching:
I think we cna both agree that you have an advantage in coaching. We may disagree slighty on how much of an advantage, but it's there are it will definately be to Hamilton's advantage.

Goaltending:
I also think we can both agree that we have an advantage in net. Again, I'm sure we'll disagree somewhat on the difference between the two, but the advantage is clearly in favour of Rogle.

Bluelines:
Doug Harvey and Nicklas Lidstrom are both among the elite of the elite. Oddly enough, both guys are perfectly suited to playing against their opponent this round. Harvey has the size, toughness, and nastiness to deal with the rather large and intimidating group of Rogle forwards. Lidstrom, on the other hand, plays the perfect passive style to match up against the smaller Hamilton forwards. With this in mind, I think they'll be equally effective in this series. Harvey will be slightly better, but Lidstrom will play slightly more minutes, so I think it makes them pretty even.

Eddie Gerard is an excellent #2. While I think some over-rate him, I think he first nicely around 35th on an all-time list of defensemen. When building a team, however, I think he's more valuable than his ranking. He's the perfect team player, and the perfect partner for anybody. Larry Murphy is just an average #2. He's not bad defensively, but he certainly isn't drafted for that part of his game. He brings very good puck-moving ability for a #2 defenseman. Gerard is definately better than Murphy overall.

Harvey Pulford will be polarizing, but I think the results of the recenlty completed top-60 defensemen study speak volumes. Pulford was ranked 60th all time, which puts him in bargain basement #2 territory. In Pulford, I have one of the most imposing and dominant physical forces in the draft - he's right up there with Chara. Ott Heller is more of a lower end #3, maybe even a closer to a #4. He had some good (not great) seasons in a relatively weak era for defensemen. He's paired with Gerard, so he's insulated, but on his own, he's pretty unspectacular. Harvey Pulford has a significant edge over Heller.

Teppu Numminen is kind of a poor-man's Lidstrom. He plays steady and reliable defensive hockey, and he also makes very smart break-out passes that start the attack. Beside Pulford, he's just there to be a steady presence. Glen Harmon was actually one of the guys we were looking at when we decided on Numminen. It basically came down to two things: weak era and lack of lngevity. Harmon probably peaked slightly higher than Numminen, but the massive longevity edge is in Teppo's favour. I think Numminen has a small, but distinct, advantage over Harmon.

Kevin Hatcher is actually better than Numminen. I'm just more comfortable with Numminen beside Pulford. Hatcher's voting record is much more impressive than I thought it would be - considering competition level, I think a fair argument could be made that he's better than Ott Heller. Whoever your #5 defenseman is doesn't even approach Hatcher.

Wade Redden will probably take Jack Portland's place for this series. His skating and more cerebral style fits your team a lot better than Portland's killing power ;) Either way, regardles of who dresses, I feel that we have one of the best #6s in the draft, and we're going to have an advantage over just about anyone, which includes whichever guy is your #6.

Overall, I think the depth of the Rogle blueline will give us an edge on the blueline in this series. I think the advantages at #3, #4, and #5 outweight the disadvanatge at #2.

Forwards:
This is the tough part.

Rogle, clearly, has the edge in terms of offensive firepower. At the same time, though, Hamilton has just as much edge in terms of defesive ability. Funny that we are going to rely on Nels Stewart and Ilya Kovalchuk, who are probably 2 of the worst defensive players, and you are going to rely on Keon and Gilmour.

I'lll dig into this one tomorrow....

Powerplay:
With the significantly better offensive weapons, it's pretty obvious that Rogle will have a huge edge in terms of PPs.

Penalty Kill:
Hamilton has some of the best PK around, so Hamilton will have the edge here.

Team Toughness: Rogle
Team Speed: Hamilton

vecens24 04-08-2012 03:40 PM

Let's just piggy back off of some of the stuff you said on defense to start.

-I'm okay with basically calling Harvey and Lidstrom a wash this series. I think if you're planning on playing him more than the 27 minutes I'm already playing Harvey, then that might wear him down, but the difference in their ability is small, with a slight edge to Harvey, but these two will have similar impacts in the series.

-Gerard is better than Murphy as you admitted. Pretty fair there in the level of their difference. Gerard to me is somewhere in that 30-35 range. Murphy I've got somewhere around 50 (his spot in the HOH Defenseman project). Definitive advantage there for me.

-Pulford is certainly better than Heller. I like Heller a lot, he brings a lot of different things to the table, but that's a definite advantage to you.

-Harmon vs. Teppo is one issue we're going to have. Numminen is decent #4, but he's nothing special. The guy has two top-10s all time in All-Star voting, a 6th and a 10th. Harmon has two Second-Team All-Stars as well as three other appearances in the top 10. You can point to longevity as much as you want, that's a pretty clear, definitive peak advantage to me. I know Numminen played forever, but longevity only counts for so much to me. You can throw weak era out there for Harmon, but at some point the voting becomes too great to overcome. I see the #4s as an advantage to me personally.

-Yep, Hatcher is better than Van Impe. No ifs ands or buts about it. Yep, whoever you have at 6, be it Portland or Redden, is better than Ruotsalainen. You defintiely have the bottom pairing advantage, but how much is the bottom pairing truly going to affect the series?

-I think I have an advantage on defense overall because of my advantage in the top 4. I think Harvey is better than Lidstrom by a little (even if their impact will be similar throughout the series), Gerard is better than Murphy, and Harmon is better than Numminen. Pulford is defintiely better than Heller, but I don't think advantage outweighs my being better at the other three spots in the top 4.

Dreakmur 04-08-2012 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vecens24 (Post 47569545)
Let's just piggy back off of some of the stuff you said on defense to start.

-I'm okay with basically calling Harvey and Lidstrom a wash this series. I think if you're planning on playing him more than the 27 minutes I'm already playing Harvey, then that might wear him down, but the difference in their ability is small, with a slight edge to Harvey, but these two will have similar impacts in the series.

-Gerard is better than Murphy as you admitted. Pretty fair there in the level of their difference. Gerard to me is somewhere in that 30-35 range. Murphy I've got somewhere around 50 (his spot in the HOH Defenseman project). Definitive advantage there for me.

-Pulford is certainly better than Heller. I like Heller a lot, he brings a lot of different things to the table, but that's a definite advantage to you.

-Harmon vs. Teppo is one issue we're going to have. Numminen is decent #4, but he's nothing special. The guy has two top-10s all time in All-Star voting, a 6th and a 10th. Harmon has two Second-Team All-Stars as well as three other appearances in the top 10. You can point to longevity as much as you want, that's a pretty clear, definitive peak advantage to me. I know Numminen played forever, but longevity only counts for so much to me. You can throw weak era out there for Harmon, but at some point the voting becomes too great to overcome. I see the #4s as an advantage to me personally.

-Yep, Hatcher is better than Van Impe. No ifs ands or buts about it. Yep, whoever you have at 6, be it Portland or Redden, is better than Ruotsalainen. You defintiely have the bottom pairing advantage, but how much is the bottom pairing truly going to affect the series?

-I think I have an advantage on defense overall because of my advantage in the top 4. I think Harvey is better than Lidstrom by a little (even if their impact will be similar throughout the series), Gerard is better than Murphy, and Harmon is better than Numminen. Pulford is defintiely better than Heller, but I don't think advantage outweighs my being better at the other three spots in the top 4.

Looks like we agree on everything except Glen Harmon vs. Teppo Nimminen, so we may as well try to tackle that.

I'll tell you why I passed on Harmon, and we'll see if we can agree.

First, Harmon played in one of the weaker eras for defenseman, while Numminen played in a strong one. Here is Harmon' top competition for hi all-tar votes: Babe Pratt, Ken Reardon, Jack Stewart, Flash Hollett, Pat Egan, and Jack Crawford. Compare that list to the following guys who finished ahead of Numminen in Norris voting: Ray Bourque, Nicklas Lidstrom, Chris Chelios, Al MacInnis, Chris Pronger, Scott Stevens, Scott Niedermayer, Larry Murphy, Sergei Zubov, Rob Blake, Sergei Gonchar, Kevin Hatcher, and Derian Hatcher.

Second, voting numbers during Harmon's career make it tough to really determine where some of thee guys belong. During his entire career, Glen Harmon received a gand total of 13 all-star votes. I know there were a lot fewer voters in those day, but that just meant that 1 or 2 votes could make huge difference, epecially when thoe votes may have been of the "homer" variety. He received votes only 4 times during his career - twice he received 2 lower end votes, but still landed in the top-10. He maxed out at 5 votes in a single season.

Third, Glen Harmon's 2nd Team All-Star from 1944 appears to be a mistake. Looks like he was 6th or 7th. Here is the voting results:

Quote:

DEFENSE: Butch Bouchard, Mtl 340.5 (15-10-1-0); Flash Hollett, Det 273 (1-12-5-7); Babe Pratt, Tor 93.5 (1-1-5-9); Glen Harmon, Mtl 60 (2-1-1-0); Frank Eddolls, Mtl 58.5 (1-0-2-1); Jack Crawford, Bos 57 (3-2-4-0); Earl Seibert, Chi 45 (0-1-6-2); Leo Lamoureux, Mtl 30 (3-0-1-0); Dit Clapper, Bos 30 (1-0-2-5); Reg Hamilton, Tor 13.5 (0-0-0-2); Ott Heller, NYR 7 (0-0-0-1)
First, I went through the votes to make sure there were none missing. Adding them all up looks like this: 27-27-27-27. All the votes are accounted for.

Jack Crawford should definitely be ahead. Same with Leo Lamoureux. Earl Seibert and Dit Clapper would depend how they calculate the numbers. That would leave Harmon in 6th spot at best.

Lastly, I believe that Teppo Numminen's voting record under-rates him. He played in Winnipeg and Phoenix for his entire prime, which really reduced his exposure. Numminen is the kind of player that you have to watch a lot to truly appeciate the simple effectiveness of his game. Combined with the small market was the fact that he was never in a highlight reel, so most people wouldn't have ever thought of him.

vecens24 04-08-2012 05:46 PM

Just first I'm going to throw this out there before attacking the rest of it in general, later on tonight.

I would assume that the NHL would be less likely to make a mistake than a newspaper or BM67 copy and pasting the words (not making light of you BM, your work is awesome and always is). I would agree with you if he wasn't actually on the team and we were looking through the deeper voting records for the 6-8 range of defensemen. But I'm guessing that's a mistake in the file, not in whether or not Harmon was actually voted a second team all star.

Dreakmur 04-08-2012 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vecens24 (Post 47575729)
Just first I'm going to throw this out there before attacking the rest of it in general, later on tonight.

I would assume that the NHL would be less likely to make a mistake than a newspaper or BM67 copy and pasting the words (not making light of you BM, your work is awesome and always is). I would agree with you if he wasn't actually on the team and we were looking through the deeper voting records for the 6-8 range of defensemen. But I'm guessing that's a mistake in the file, not in whether or not Harmon was actually voted a second team all star.

If it was a typo, the votes wouldn't add up, would they?

vecens24 04-08-2012 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dreakmur (Post 47575845)
If it was a typo, the votes wouldn't add up, would they?

It's just as possible that they add up in that circumstance than them not adding up in my opinion.

Like I said, if we were attempting to calculate the voting points for someone in the 6th-8th range, then I'd be more willing to actually go with this idea. But we're not. The guy actually made the All-Star team. I'm assuming those totals are triple and quadruple checked to make sure they're correct before the teams are released. It is much more likely that it is an error within the newspaper or a copy/paste error by the poster than an error by the NHL releasing the team.

TheDevilMadeMe 04-08-2012 06:17 PM

This was probably during the period of "weighted voting." Some cities (like Montreal) had far more accredited members of the press than other cities, and they weighed the votes so every city had equal say. So if Montreal had 20 voters and Chicago just 2, each Chicago writer got 10 times the say of each Montreal writer.

So I don't think there are any mistakes there, just... an interesting way of counting votes.

overpass 04-08-2012 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe (Post 47577077)
This was probably during the period of "weighted voting." Some cities (like Montreal) had far more accredited members of the press than other cities, and they weighed the votes so every city had equal say. So if Montreal had 20 voters and Chicago just 2, each Chicago writer got 10 times the say of each Montreal writer.

So I don't think there are any mistakes there, just... an interesting way of counting votes.

This. Harmon's votes came from writers from less represented market so each vote received more weight on average.

vecens24 04-08-2012 06:38 PM

That makes a lot more sense about how voting worked.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:25 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.