HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   All Time Draft (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=181)
-   -   ATD2011 Jim Coleman Semi: New Jersey Swamp Devils vs. Guelph Platers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=914626)

Dreakmur 05-16-2011 09:39 AM

ATD2011 Jim Coleman Semi: New Jersey Swamp Devils vs. Guelph Platers
 
New Jersey Swamp Devils



Spares: Gregg Sheppard (C/LW), Jiri Lala (RW), Alexei Zhitnik (D)

Powerplay (Click Link):
PP1: H Richard*- Starshinov - M Richard - Pratt - Boyle
PP2: Smith* - Bertuzzi - Palffy - Quackenbush - Boyle/Coulter
*faceoff

Penalty Kill:
F: MacKell - Lewis, Handzus - Doan, H Richard - Phillips
D: Quackenbush - Coulter, Bilyaletdinov - Pratt, extra: Ley

Shutdown lines (end of game / defensive draw in last minute of period): Lewis - H Richard - Phillips, MacKell - Handzus - Doan

Strategies (Please click)

Minutes charts (Please click)


VS.


http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/1...lphplaters.png

Guelph Platers
1986 Memorial Cup Champions

Home Rink: Guelph Memorial Gardens (1948)
GM: BraveCanadian
Coach: Al Arbour
Captain: Dave Poulin
Alternates: Clark Gillies, Bryan Trottier
Player Development Consultant: Gary Roberts

Clark Gillies - Bryan Trottier - Rick Middleton
John Ogrodnick - Rick MacLeish - Rene Robert
Mike McPhee - Dave Poulin - Yuri Lebedev
Martin Gelinas - Jason Arnott - Rick Vaive

Mike Ramsey - Guy Lapointe
Steve Smith - Eric Desjardins
Jamie Macoun - Reijo Ruotsalainen

Walter "Turk" Broda
Felix "the Cat" Potvin

Reserves
Craig Simpson - Sylvain Lefebvre - Dmitri Khristich

Powerplay:
PP1: Rick Middleton - Bryan Trottier - Rick Vaive - Guy Lapointe - Eric Desjardins
PP2: John Ogrodnick - Rick MacLeish - Rene Robert - Steve Smith - Reijo Ruotsalainen

Penalty Kill:
PK1: Dave Poulin - Rick MacLeish - Mike Ramsey - Guy Lapointe
PK2: Bryan Trottier - Rick Middleton - Steve Smith - Eric Desjardins

Spare PK Jamie Macoun if any of the top stringers are logging too many minutes in the game

TheDevilMadeMe 05-16-2011 11:22 AM

Congratulations for winning your division, BC. It's very rare for a first time GM to get out of his division, so quite impressive.

By the way, the estimated minutes chart in from roster is for regular season.

TheDevilMadeMe 05-16-2011 11:57 AM

First thoughts:

• Forwards: NJ has fairly large advantage in primary scoring due to the wings on the first line. NJ has an enormous advantage in secondary scoring, as Guelph appears to rely on Roberts digging the puck out of the corners and getting it to MacLeish for the bulk of their secondary scoring. Defense among forwards seems close.

•Defensemen: I think NJ has the advantage here, mainly for two reasons: Coulter is much better than Ramsey and Boyle is better than Guelph's 4/5.

•Goaltending: I think this is extremely close, but I'd give a very small advantage to Broda in the playoffs. In my opinion, the gap between the goaltenders is probably too small to make a difference, but Broda does get the small edge.

•Coaching: The one clear advantage for Guelph. Pitner is very good coach, but Arbour is one of the very best ever. Larry Robinson helps (especially with getting defensive matchups), but an assistant coach can only do so much.

•Intangibles: NJ beat an extremely physical club in 5 games, while Guelph survived a less physical team, but one featuring an angry Larry Robinson, in 7 games. NJ comes into the series a little better rested and probably just a tad healthier.

TheDevilMadeMe 05-16-2011 12:35 PM

Swamp Devils strategies and desired matchups:

•Strength vs strength matchups preferred: first unit vs first unit, second unit vs second unit, third unit vs third unit

•Handzus's even strength roll will be to take a fair number of defensive zone draws.

•Boyle will again see some shifts with Pratt for offensive zone face-offs, particular at the end of periods or when trailing. Overall, given his large PP role, Boyle will see similar minutes to Bilyaletdinov.

BraveCanadian 05-16-2011 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe (Post 33071846)
Congratulations for winning your division, BC. It's very rare for a first time GM to get out of his division, so quite impressive.

By the way, the estimated minutes chart in from roster is for regular season.

Thanks TDMM.

Looking at how both our teams are constructed compared to some of the other remaining teams - which appear more "stacked in one area, deficient in other" type teams - it is a bit like looking in the mirror.

I think this one is going to be very close.

Both our teams seem to be constructed in a balanced fashion without any real glaring weaknesses.

Reds4Life 05-16-2011 01:33 PM

Two of the top four teams in the draft (IMHO). Should be a close one :)

BraveCanadian 05-16-2011 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe (Post 33072377)
First thoughts:

• Forwards: NJ has fairly large advantage in primary scoring due to the wings on the first line.

I'd have to agree that for pure scoring talent it is pretty hard to beat Maurice Richard and Phillips on the wings.

We do gain ground in the center and physically though. As great and under appreciated a player as Henri Richard was - Trottier is better as an all around player.

Middleton is a very good all around player, smart and a smooth skater - not unlike the player he faces off against, Phillips.

And while Maurice is a more talented goalscorer than Gillies any day of the week by a large margin, Gillies will be trying to set off that temper with physical play and harassing defensive play. We want an ATD riot and Richard suspension! Or at least some nice PP opportunities from Gillies provoking the Rocket.

Quote:

NJ has an enormous advantage in secondary scoring, as Guelph appears to rely on Roberts digging the puck out of the corners and getting it to MacLeish for the bulk of their secondary scoring. Defense among forwards seems close.
I think this makes it officially the most repeated line of the draft, but I still believe that Robert is an almost perfect compliment to MacLeish.

His strengths work to fill MacLeish's weaknesses - Robert is just a notch lower than I would have preferred in an ideal world as a pure playmaker rather than primarily as a puckwinner that he is..

I also find Ogrodnick is being woefully underrated by the crowd here. He was a very good offensive player playing for very bad teams (Dead Wings). I was genuinely surprised when I drafted him that many here on a history board didn't even know who he was when he played primarily in the 80s.

Ogrodnick was 3rd in goals and 3rd in points among left wingers during the span of his 13 year career - behind only Goulet and Propp - in a similar number of games. http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...rder_by=points

Quote:

•Defensemen: I think NJ has the advantage here, mainly for two reasons: Coulter is much better than Ramsey and Boyle is better than Guelph's 4/5.
Looking at our defense I think they are very close even in construction with a primary puck mover and primary physical type guy on each line.

I think the gap between Coulter and Ramsey gets possibly exaggerated by the big war years for Coulter, and relative anonymity of a defensive guy like Ramsey playing for the 80s Sabres. I agree he is better though, but Ramsey isn't actually my second best defenseman all around - that is Desjardins.

Boyle I agree with you has been a bit underrated in his career but you keep pushing.. ;)

Quote:

•Goaltending: I think this is extremely close, but I'd give a very small advantage to Broda in the playoffs. In my opinion, the gap between the goaltenders is probably too small to make a difference, but Broda does get the small edge.
Poor Turk Broda. Hands down a premier money goaltender in the history of hockey until he is on my team. ;)

I agree that he isn't a lot better than Gardiner, of course, but if I'm picking an advantage to have in the playoffs, I could do worse than having the advantage in the pipes - especially if this series is as tight as it looks like it should be!

Quote:

•Coaching: The one clear advantage for Guelph. Pitner is very good coach, but Arbour is one of the very best ever. Larry Robinson helps (especially with getting defensive matchups), but an assistant coach can only do so much.
Agreed, very few coaches are on Arbour's level. Every time I read that quote in the bio of him about benching any player on his 93 Isles team that didn't believe they could beat that stacked 93 Pens team going for a dynasty, I wish he was still coaching.

This gets to me too, although it is kind of completely unrelated:



Around 3:40 he wells up when told that Kelly Hrudey (or was it Healy? no sound right now) sees him as a father figure. You can tell that making young men into men was very important to him. Who wouldn't bust their ass playing for a guy like that!

Quote:

•Intangibles: NJ beat an extremely physical club in 5 games, while Guelph survived a less physical team, but one featuring an angry Larry Robinson, in 7 games. NJ comes into the series a little better rested and probably just a tad healthier.
We have the eye of the tiger and we put the grrr in swinger.

seventieslord 05-16-2011 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BraveCanadian (Post 33073303)
Both our teams seem to be constructed in a balanced fashion without any real glaring weaknesses.

*cough2ndlineLWcough*

Quote:

I was genuinely surprised when I drafted him that many here on a history board didn't even know who he was when he played primarily in the 80s.
Well, yeah, I'd be genuinely surprised too, if that actually happened. Only Boy Wonder said he didn't know who he was, and I'm not actually sure he was 100% serious as he's participated in the MLD.

BraveCanadian 05-16-2011 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seventieslord (Post 33075161)
*cough2ndlineLWcough*

Theirs:
Top 25 finishes:
1930: 18th in goals, 24th in points
1931: 20th in goals
1932: none
1933: 7th in goals, 14th in points
1934: 15th in goals, 24 in assists, 16th in points
1935: 18th in goals, 4th in assists, 5th in points (only 4 points behind 1st)
1936: 20th in goals, 4th in assists, 9th in points
1937: 23rd in goals, 15th in assists, 16thin in points
1938: 22nd in assists, 23rd in points

Mine (don't have much time so hopefully I get it right):
Top 25 Finishes
82-83: 20th in goals, 23rd in points
83-84: 14th in goals (in 64 games)
84-85: 4th in goals, 7th in points
89-90: 14th in goals
and two more finishes at 26-28 where he just missed for goals which probably count if we're comparing to top 25s from the 1930s anyways.

When you figure the difference between being 15-25th in offensive categories in the 30s compared to the 80s.. I think Ogrodnick is a better goal scorer at the very least.

seventieslord 05-16-2011 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BraveCanadian (Post 33075428)
Theirs:
Top 25 finishes:
1930: 18th in goals, 24th in points
1931: 20th in goals
1932: none
1933: 7th in goals, 14th in points
1934: 15th in goals, 24 in assists, 16th in points
1935: 18th in goals, 4th in assists, 5th in points (only 4 points behind 1st)
1936: 20th in goals, 4th in assists, 9th in points
1937: 23rd in goals, 15th in assists, 16thin in points
1938: 22nd in assists, 23rd in points

Mine (don't have much time so hopefully I get it right):
Top 25 Finishes
82-83: 20th in goals, 23rd in points
83-84: 14th in goals (in 64 games)
84-85: 4th in goals, 7th in points
89-90: 14th in goals
and two more finishes at 26-28 where he just missed for goals which probably count if we're comparing to top 25s from the 1930s anyways.

When you figure the difference between being 15-25th in offensive categories in the 30s compared to the 80s.. I think Ogrodnick is a better goal scorer at the very least.

I think using percentages works fine and I think if you don't like that, then doubling the placements is a reasonable starting point too. I also think that using points, and not goals, actually shows who the more capable offensive player is, although I can totally see why you'd want to do the latter for Ogrodnick.

Best 6 percentage seasons (outliers and creations removed of course):
Ogrodnick: 83 70 66 64 58 57
Lewis: 93 91 77 71 67 62

or, double Lewis' 6 best points finishes vs. Ogrodnick's raw*:
Ogrodnick: 7 23 44 48 48 58
Lewis: 12, 18, 28, 30, 32, 46

*this is a quick overview from a spreadsheet, it doesn't account for ties, it means that when Ogrodnick was 48th, for example, he may have actually been in a 4-way tie for 45th.

I would not hesitate to say that Lewis is a significantly better offensive player by any measure, plus he brings a lot more to the table in other areas.

But that's what "bargain basement" is about. You took him super late and Lewis is a deserving earlier pick.

BraveCanadian 05-16-2011 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seventieslord (Post 33075650)
I think using percentages works fine and I think if you don't like that, then doubling the placements is a reasonable starting point too. I also think that using points, and not goals, actually shows who the more capable offensive player is, although I can totally see why you'd want to do the latter for Ogrodnick.

Best 6 percentage seasons (outliers and creations removed of course):
Ogrodnick: 83 70 66 64 58 57
Lewis: 93 91 77 71 67 62

or, double Lewis' 6 best points finishes vs. Ogrodnick's raw*:
Ogrodnick: 7 23 44 48 48 58
Lewis: 12, 18, 28, 30, 32, 46

*this is a quick overview from a spreadsheet, it doesn't account for ties, it means that when Ogrodnick was 48th, for example, he may have actually been in a 4-way tie for 45th.

I would not hesitate to say that Lewis is a significantly better offensive player by any measure, plus he brings a lot more to the table in other areas.

But that's what "bargain basement" is about. You took him super late and Lewis is a deserving earlier pick.

So basically they are within what, 15% for the most part of one another?

Put another way in Lewis best season (34-35) if Ogrodnick was playing at 15% less capability than Lewis.. hell make it 20%, he would have scored 34-35 points compared to Lewis' 43.

Which would still have put him top 20 in that league. :)

This is the issue when looking at players from eras with so little competition that one hot streak can change you 10 placings in the standings. It skews so quickly compared to modern players with longer seasons etc. There is so little separation in the early years it makes it very difficult to compare scoring.

Yes, Lewis is a better overall player and worth the earlier pick, but Ogrodnick is not going to be "*cough2ndlineLWcough*" in this series in comparison - he can do the job that he was put there to do - put the puck in the net with regularity.

TheDevilMadeMe 05-16-2011 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by seventieslord (Post 33075650)
I think using percentages works fine and I think if you don't like that, then doubling the placements is a reasonable starting point too. I also think that using points, and not goals, actually shows who the more capable offensive player is, although I can totally see why you'd want to do the latter for Ogrodnick.

Best 6 percentage seasons (outliers and creations removed of course):
Ogrodnick: 83 70 66 64 58 57
Lewis: 93 91 77 71 67 62

or, double Lewis' 6 best points finishes vs. Ogrodnick's raw*:
Ogrodnick: 7 23 44 48 48 58
Lewis: 12, 18, 28, 30, 32, 46

*this is a quick overview from a spreadsheet, it doesn't account for ties, it means that when Ogrodnick was 48th, for example, he may have actually been in a 4-way tie for 45th.

I would not hesitate to say that Lewis is a significantly better offensive player by any measure, plus he brings a lot more to the table in other areas.

But that's what "bargain basement" is about. You took him super late and Lewis is a deserving earlier pick.

Keep in mind that Lewis was a pass-first player who played at a time when assists were given out much less liberally than after World War 2, so his points finishes will underrated him a tad. I'm also not entirely certain about the reasons to double scoring finishes between the 30s and 80s - yeah the 80s had more competition, but doubling seems a bit extreme IMO as the Europeans really hadn't come over en mass yet.

And of course, that's just regular season scoring. Lewis was an excellent defensive player and good playoff producer, while Ogrodnick was poor defensively and not very good in the playoffs.

Not to mention that Lewis is in his comfort zone - playmaker to a goalscoring center, while Ogrodnick is a triggerman without anyone to get him the puck in scoring position.

TheDevilMadeMe 05-16-2011 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BraveCanadian (Post 33073778)
As great and under appreciated a player as Henri Richard was - Trottier is better as an all around player.

Overall, yeah Trotts is probably a bit better than Henri. At even strength? I'm not so sure.

Quote:

Middleton is a very good all around player, smart and a smooth skater - not unlike the player he faces off against, Phillips.
Yeah, they are similar . Both are great complimentary players for a first line (I think Phillips gets a little bit of an edge here though). I wouldn't want either to be the primary triggerman on a top line though, which is what you have Rick doing.

Quote:

And while Maurice is a more talented goalscorer than Gillies any day of the week by a large margin, Gillies will be trying to set off that temper with physical play and harassing defensive play. We want an ATD riot and Richard suspension! Or at least some nice PP opportunities from Gillies provoking the Rocket.
Come on now. You know that Gillies wasn't an agitator. He was a defensively responsible power forward who played with dignity. I'd be worried about someone like Tikkinen getting to Richard, not Gillies.



Quote:

I think this makes it officially the most repeated line of the draft, but I still believe that Robert is an almost perfect compliment to MacLeish.

His strengths work to fill MacLeish's weaknesses - Robert is just a notch lower than I would have preferred in an ideal world as a pure playmaker rather than primarily as a puckwinner that he is..
I like the MacLeish / Robert combo. I think it works. But it provides significantly less secondary scoring than NJ's 2 secondary scoring lines.

Quote:

I also find Ogrodnick is being woefully underrated by the crowd here. He was a very good offensive player playing for very bad teams (Dead Wings). I was genuinely surprised when I drafted him that many here on a history board didn't even know who he was when he played primarily in the 80s.

Ogrodnick was 3rd in goals and 3rd in points among left wingers during the span of his 13 year career - behind only Goulet and Propp - in a similar number of games. http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...rder_by=points

Ugh. There were only four notable LWs who played this whole period - Ogrodnick, Propp, Goulet, and Tonelli. Ogrodnick is barely ahead of Tonelli or 4th, and Tonrlli isn't drafted for his (regular season) offense alone like Ogrodnick.

Ogrodnick was 14th in Goals per game and 15th in Points per game over his career among left wings who played at least 200 games. In an extremely poor era for left wings to boot.

Not to mention that Ogrodnick is a triggerman without a playmaker to get him the puck in prime scoring position.


Quote:

Looking at our defense I think they are very close even in construction with a primary puck mover and primary physical type guy on each line.
Similar in construction, yes.

Quote:

I think the gap between Coulter and Ramsey gets possibly exaggerated by the big war years for Coulter, and relative anonymity of a defensive guy like Ramsey playing for the 80s Sabres. I agree he is better though, but Ramsey isn't actually my second best defenseman all around - that is Desjardins.
What big war years for Coulter? Are you thinking about Pratt? Coulter played at the same time as Eddie Shore and Earl Seibert. I know Desjardins is your 2nd best guy but I think he's more comparable to Pratt in terms of talent and role than he is to Coulter.

Quote:

Boyle I agree with you has been a bit underrated in his career but you keep pushing.. ;)
I don't think it's a stretch to say that Boyle has clearly surpassed Steve Smith by now in terms of overall impact. He's much better than your bottom pairing guys, as well.


Quote:

Poor Turk Broda. Hands down a premier money goaltender in the history of hockey until he is on my team. ;)
Eh... Forgetting about Patrick Roy? Regardless, I have a lot of respect for Broda's work in the playoffs. That's why I'm graciously giving you a very small edge in goal for the playoffs,, despite Gardiner's likely superior regular season resume and the fact that he was outstanding in the playoffs, as well.

BraveCanadian 05-16-2011 07:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe (Post 33077138)
Overall, yeah Trotts is probably a bit better than Henri. At even strength? I'm not so sure.

Overall he is easily better. Even strength is debatable.

Quote:

Yeah, they are similar . Both are great complimentary players for a first line (I think Phillips gets a little bit of an edge here though). I wouldn't want either to be the primary triggerman on a top line though, which is what you have Rick doing.
Trottier is a 500 goal scorer in his career. I think he knows his way around the net a little bit, too. I'm not sure why he is constantly discounted as a goal scorer in this, even if he was a better playmaker.


Quote:

Come on now. You know that Gillies wasn't an agitator. He was a defensively responsible power forward who played with dignity. I'd be worried about someone like Tikkinen getting to Richard, not Gillies.
Let us not pretend that you need to speak Tikanese to get under the Rocket's skin. Gillies running into him at every opportunity is going to give us PP chances. No doubt about it. Apart from being one of the greatest goalscorers ever, Richard was a loose canon (thanks seventies :) ):

http://i182.photobucket.com/albums/x...2009_00001.jpg


Quote:

I like the MacLeish / Robert combo. I think it works. But it provides significantly less secondary scoring than NJ's 2 secondary scoring lines.
That depends on how people rate your 60s Russians compared to NHLers.

Your third line definitely has more offensive upside than mine, but mine wasn't designed to have much. That is one place our blueprints differed for sure.

Quote:

Ugh. There were only four notable LWs who played this whole period - Ogrodnick, Propp, Goulet, and Tonelli. Ogrodnick is barely ahead of Tonelli or 4th, and Tonrlli isn't drafted for his (regular season) offense alone like Ogrodnick.

Ogrodnick was 14th in Goals per game and 15th in Points per game over his career among left wings who played at least 200 games. In an extremely poor era for left wings to boot.
200 games over a 13 seasons?

Set it at even 400 games over an equal 10 year span and Ogrodnick is still 5th.

If we look at the span of Herbie Lewis career (which also favours him being 10 seasons) he is 6th in points per game among left wingers and that is being maintained over 3 less seasons.

There is really no way around the fact that not much separates them in overall offensive production: 10-15%. Lewis gets the nod for sure as a playmaker and a bit overall.. but he is winning by a bit, not a lot.

Quote:

Not to mention that Ogrodnick is a triggerman without a playmaker to get him the puck in prime scoring position.
Not an ideal one, true. He does have two decent ones though.

Quote:

What big war years for Coulter? Are you thinking about Pratt? Coulter played at the same time as Eddie Shore and Earl Seibert. I know Desjardins is your 2nd best guy but I think he's more comparable to Pratt in terms of talent and role than he is to Coulter.
Whoops yes, I was mixing him up with Pratt!

Quote:

I don't think it's a stretch to say that Boyle has clearly surpassed Steve Smith by now in terms of overall impact. He's much better than your bottom pairing guys, as well.
That depends if his talents match up with the role he is playing. I don't think he brings an awful lot more to the table playing #6 and PP then the guys I have in their roles.

Quote:

Eh... Forgetting about Patrick Roy? Regardless, I have a lot of respect for Broda's work in the playoffs. That's why I'm graciously giving you a very small edge in goal for the playoffs,, despite Gardiner's likely superior regular season resume and the fact that he was outstanding in the playoffs, as well.
Well I did say "a" premier money goalie.. not the only one. :)

TheDevilMadeMe 05-16-2011 07:43 PM

I find the multiquote thing annoying, so I'm responding with bullet points.

•Yeah, Trottier can score goals. So can Henri Richard. It's not what either man is best at, though.

•Lol, the infamous seventieslord Maurice Richard rapsheet. Im surprised it didnt come up sooner. It might actually be relevant if you had an agitating fellow who could take him off his game, but of course you don't. I mean, Gillies is responsible defensively and all, but could he even catch The Rocket in the neutral zone?

•Anyway, I think I did a fairly good job at insulating Maurice from foolishness. I honestly blame much of the Rocket's hyjinks on Dick Irvin, who loved smashmouth old school (even for his era) dirty hockey. His attitude with Maurice was basically "rile him up and let him go wild.". Once Toe Blake became coach, the Rocket really calmed it down. Pitner is a European coach who ran a disciplined system and Larry Robinson was a Bowman discipile like lemaire and was part of the NJ Devils when they were the most disciplined team in the league.

I also gave the captaincy to Henri over Maurice because I wanted his more disciplined version of win-at-all-costs to be the model the team follows. Sure Maurice will take a dumb penalty here and there. Luckily for me, you didn't draft anyone annoying enough to actually make it an issue.

•Starshinov was a Soviet All-Star (apparently at LW) in 1970 over Firsov and a young Kharlamov. I think he'll be just fine.

•Your use of statistics in the Lewis / Ogrodnick comparison is horrendous. The talent pool of LWs in the NHL was at an all-time low in the 1980s (speculation - did rapid expansion result in many wings being converted to center?) and yet you're only comparing them to other LWs of their eras? Brutal. Lewis is in the Hall of Fame, albeit by the Veterans' Committee. Ogrodnick had one pretty good year, but overall was a significantly worse player than Shane Doan and Rene Robert.

•If MacLeish and Robert are "decent" playmakers at this level, then who isn't? I mean, they're no Bondra or anything, but... I really wouldn't want either of them to set up a pure shooter at this level. I mean, if Ogrodnick was anything close to balanced, it would work. But he isn't.

•if Dan Boyle was my #6, I'd have the deepest defense in the draft probably. Heh. Luckily for everyone else, he's my #5 on paper but probably #4 in skill. He'll often play more minutes than Bilyaletdinov, especially if trailing.

pappyline 05-16-2011 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe (Post 33079786)
I also gave the captaincy to Henri over Maurice because I wanted his more disciplined version of win-at-all-costs to be the model the team follows. Sure Maurice will take a dumb penalty here and there. Luckily for me, you didn't draft anyone annoying enough to actually make it an issue.

Very Dumb move. Rocket had a lot of pride. Making his kid brother captain (kid brother by a number of years) kills the morale on your team. Rocket is your best player but you have put out his fire.

TheDevilMadeMe 05-16-2011 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pappyline (Post 33079891)
Very Dumb move. Rocket had a lot of pride. Making his kid brother captain (kid brother by a number of years) kills the morale on your team. Rocket is your best player but you have put out his fire.

It's the All Time Draft. Everyone is the same age.

BraveCanadian 05-16-2011 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe (Post 33079786)
I find the multiquote thing annoying, so I'm responding with bullet points.

•Yeah, Trottier can score goals. So can Henri Richard. It's not what either man is best at, though.

True, I do think Trottier is a little better than H. Richard in that respect though.

Quote:

•Lol, the infamous seventieslord Maurice Richard rapsheet. Im surprised it didnt come up sooner. It might actually be relevant if you had an agitating fellow who could take him off his game, but of course you don't. I mean, Gillies is responsible defensively and all, but could he even catch The Rocket in the neutral zone?
I guess that depends on whether or not he was already waiting in the neutral zone for him or trying to catch him. ;)

I think that is where the coaching comes in to maybe have him err on the side of caution considering who it is.. hahah

Quote:

•Anyway, I think I did a fairly good job at insulating Maurice from foolishness. I honestly blame much of the Rocket's hyjinks on Dick Irvin, who loved smashmouth old school (even for his era) dirty hockey. His attitude with Maurice was basically "rile him up and let him go wild.". Once Toe Blake became coach, the Rocket really calmed it down. Pitner is a European coach who ran a disciplined system and Larry Robinson was a Bowman discipile like lemaire and was part of the NJ Devils when they were the most disciplined team in the league.
I think the Rocket also mellowed quite a bit as he got older, too.

He was still a loose canon for a number of years though.

Quote:

I also gave the captaincy to Henri over Maurice because I wanted his more disciplined version of win-at-all-costs to be the model the team follows. Sure Maurice will take a dumb penalty here and there. Luckily for me, you didn't draft anyone annoying enough to actually make it an issue.
I think Henri is a great choice over Maurice as captain for exactly the reasons you specified. I would have done the same for sure.

Quote:

•Starshinov was a Soviet All-Star (apparently at LW) in 1970 over Firsov and a young Kharlamov. I think he'll be just fine.
And only two years later he wasn't good enough to go best on best in the Summit Series, playing one ineffectual game.

So, maybe, maybe not. It isn't an easy thing to determine that is for sure.


Quote:

•Your use of statistics in the Lewis / Ogrodnick comparison is horrendous. The talent pool of LWs in the NHL was at an all-time low in the 1980s (speculation - did rapid expansion result in many wings being converted to center?) and yet you're only comparing them to other LWs of their eras? Brutal. Lewis is in the Hall of Fame, albeit by the Veterans' Committee. Ogrodnick had one pretty good year, but overall was a significantly worse player than Shane Doan and Rene Robert.
It is no more horrendous than you using top 25 finishes to pimp up a guy from the 30s, really.

You're the one who brought up the point per game thing, you just chose a absurdly low minimum of 200 games over 13 seasons (20% of the games).

As soon as you bump it to even 50% of the games Ogrodnick is top 5 in PPG at LW over an equal 10 year span from his start.

I didn't even know that Ogrodnick would end up rating higher over his peers over his career than Lewis in PPG until after you brought it up. :)

Secondly, while I agree that often LW is one of the weaker positions offensively, if we start into the "Era" thing, we just end up with newer players are by and large much better than older ones.

That is why we compare them to their peers in the first place.

I'm not saying Ogrodnick belongs in the Hall (veterans committee or no) or even that he is better than Lewis. Just that he is a productive offensive left winger.

(As an aside, Goulet *is* in the Hall and Propp is criminally underrated and should be)

Quote:

•If MacLeish and Robert are "decent" playmakers at this level, then who isn't? I mean, they're no Bondra or anything, but... I really wouldn't want either of them to set up a pure shooter at this level. I mean, if Ogrodnick was anything close to balanced, it would work. But he isn't.
If we stick to the ATD cookie cutter then you may be right. At this point I almost consider my second line the little engine that could for coming through two rounds of constant abuse. ;)

Quote:

•if Dan Boyle was my #6, I'd have the deepest defense in the draft probably. Heh. Luckily for everyone else, he's my #5 on paper but probably #4 in skill. He'll often play more minutes than Bilyaletdinov, especially if trailing.
That is kind of what I mean. Boyle is probably more purely skilled than some guys playing in positions ahead of him on both teams because different roles need different skillsets.

BraveCanadian 05-16-2011 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pappyline (Post 33079891)
Very Dumb move. Rocket had a lot of pride. Making his kid brother captain (kid brother by a number of years) kills the morale on your team. Rocket is your best player but you have put out his fire.

I gotta go with TDMM on this one, I don't subscribe to the "most talented player has to be captain" theory.

Too many incidents.

TheDevilMadeMe 05-16-2011 08:25 PM

•Starshinov was the Soviet equivalent to a power forward and was 32 years old in 1972. When Trottier was 32, he scored 45 points, his last season of more than 30 points...

•yeah, we compare players to their peers. Peers meaning all players, not just guys who happened to play LW...

TheDevilMadeMe 05-16-2011 08:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BraveCanadian (Post 33080281)
I gotta go with TDMM on this one, I don't subscribe to the "most talented player has to be captain" theory.

Too many incidents.

Thanks. Payback for agreeing with you that MacLeish - Robert will be effective? Heh.

BraveCanadian 05-16-2011 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe (Post 33080350)
Thanks. Payback for agreeing with you that MacLeish - Robert will be effective? Heh.

Nah, I believe it is true.

I have Dave Poulin as my captain, after all.

Great leadership and work ethic etc., yes. Best player on the team, no.

TheDevilMadeMe 05-16-2011 10:34 PM

NJ's 3rd line wingers are better offensively than Guelph's second line wingers, even before taking chemistry into account

I wasn't planning on doing this yet, but since this is John Ogrodnick Day (Thanks 70s!) I'll take a look at some secondary scorers. In a previous post, I concluded that Shane Doan was better offensively than Ogrodnick and too close for me to call at the time with Robert in terms of offense, based in top 30 finishes, competition level, and linemates. Here, I'll compare them, along with Palffy, based on percentages.

My method is slightly different from 70s'. First, I looked at #2. If #2 was an outlier player or teammate, the comparable became the next non-influenced player. Then, If the comparable was more than 10 % over the next player, the comparable became the next player. Anyway, these are the results:

Ogrodnick: 81,69,65,64,62,57,52
Robert: 83,80,75,73,70,59,59

Doan: 78,74,66,66,62,61,56,54,54,50
Palffy: 96,93,83,82,73,70,66, (77*)

*this is what Palffy was on pace for, the season he missed 32 games holding out. Not an injury, a holdout. I'm sure opinions vary as to whether it matters or not. In 50 games, he just missed the 50% cutoff.

IMO, Robert's numbers are grossly inflated by being the third best member of his line with Perreault and Martin, while the other three guys compared were generally the offensive engines of their teams. By how much? Who knows? If you knock 5 off all his percentages (arbitrary number), he's marginally better than Doan at offense. My guess is the effect is more than that, but again, who knows?

Regardless, I think it's clear that the Palffy / Doan combo would provide significantly more offense than the Robert / Ogrodnick combo, as Palffy is the best and Ogrodnick the worst of the four offensively, both by fair margins.

I'm not going to bother comparing their centers because 1) the percentage method is questionable before expansion when Smith played and 2) MacLeish's value lies largely in his playoff offense. I think it's clear from scoring finishes that Clint Smith was somewhat better in the regular season and MacLeish more accomplished in the playoffs. Even if I give the edge to MacLeisch:

1) Does any advantage MacLeish may have over Smith in the playoffs make up for the much higher quality of offense that comes from Smith's wingers?

2) Remember, this is a comparison of Guelph's 2nd line and NJ's 3rd line. NJ still has Starshinov, the leading Soviet goalscorer of the 1960s (and easily the second best overall Soviet forward of his generation after Firsov) on our 2nd line with two wingers who can get him the puck.

3) Guelph's third line is very weak offensively. Poulin is a great defensive center, but IMO his ability to chip in points depends largely on his linemates. And MacPhee and Lebedev are a pair of offensive black holes at this level - both quite a bit worse than NJ's worst offensive forward, Handzus. (IMO Lebedev is even more out of place than Ogrodnick in that I can at least understand why Ogrodnick was drafted even if I don't like the fit).

Conclusion: NJ's 3rd line is at least as good, and probably better offensively as Guelph's second line, which is their only source of secondary scoring. And this is before taking chemistry into account.

The gap in secondary scoring is the single biggest difference in this series.

TheDevilMadeMe 05-16-2011 11:02 PM

BC will point to the defensive abilities of his depth forwards, but I'm not sure they are actually better.

•Herbie Lewis is significantly better defensively than anyone on Guelph's second line. MacLeish is defensively responsible, but that just covers for Ogrodnick.

•Who is better defensively, McPhee or Doan? I could be out to lunch here, as I never saw McPhee and he doesn't appear to have a Selke record. I guess McPhee is more proven in the playoffs at least (though Doan was excellent in a defensive role in international play). BC, you could change my mind with this one.

•Lebedev's a "grinder," but his defensive play appears completely unknown.

•Poulin is an excellent 3rd line checking center. He was an elite penalty killer, but how much better was his even strength defense than Selke runner up Handzus who was merely a good PKer? Edit: I realized this may not be fair to Poulin who was much more prolific in the playoffs than Handzus. And he's a third liner vs. 4th liner so he'll have more of an impact. So yeah, Poulin is definitely the most impactful defensive player in the bottom 6.

•MacKell and Gelinas are both "responsible" at even strength (MacKell being a top notch PKer).

BraveCanadian 05-17-2011 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe (Post 33082203)

Conclusion: NJ's 3rd line is at least as good, and probably better offensively as Guelph's second line, which is their only source of secondary scoring. And this is before taking chemistry into account.

The gap in secondary scoring is the single biggest difference in this series.

There is no doubt that your third line is very strong offensively for a third line. That is definitely the biggest difference between our teams - your third line is an offensive one and mine is a defensive one.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:55 AM.

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.