View Single Post
12-01-2009, 11:11 AM
God Bless Canada
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,793
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Leafs Forever View Post
And I'll contest that, again, Selanne did have a decent run in that precious
best of seven playoff format. And again that he showed he could up his game, which is the point.

And I notice you never asked the question of: If we don't value international accomplishments, why do we draft the russian league stars?

Carlyle a fringe no.2 with only 2 particularly good seasons? Really?

But it's relativity; every defenceman back then is recieving the the same benefits and disadvantages. They all "look over their own zone" more-so, as you put it. Mortson, despite this, is still describes as a fine rusher and D-man. I can find you quotes on plenty of defenceman describes like that from that time period- describes still ctonributing lots to offence.

A top-25 as impressive as a top-5? Really? That's a reach if I ever saw one. If you placed top-5 in that time, you are one of the best defenceman offensively in the world that year. If you place top-25 in the time period you talk about, it's not an ATD calibre season- aren't you a guy that doesn't like reaching that far down for scoring seasons?

And how does the offensive defenceman factor make such a huge thing? Yes, defenceman on a whole played more offensively, but every D-man will be playing more offensively- perhaps Desjardins wouldn't have been so offensive and not score as well in a diffferent time.

It's not a good arguement to me.

Really? Yet you want to show this by..philisophical arguements. Ok, my philosphy is that evalute relatively (wait..isn't that the ATD philosphy?) and dominating a ton more offensively in your own era than another guy does in another era (which is the case here) to the point where competition can't make up the differences make you better offensively.

I don't see it as particularly close. I've showed plenty; you haven't showed a ton but, again, philosphy and personal perceptions of your players. At this time, somewhat bias perceptions. My bias perception is that Mortson is a fair gap ahead of both of them. I guess that cancels things out so we should actually look at the facts, right?

You know what I notice in this post? You don't give me what I want- you don't give anything that lets people who never watched him know how supposedly well-rounded he was- you post an interesting side story that distracts people and then pass your perceptions of the guy upon watching as particularly valuable. Ok, if he was going up agaisnt the high scoring guys and it was just the teams he played on, surely something would be written about it right? Surely someone would have said something about is defensive play irght?

This is a story about how tough a division he played in. It doesn't prove he was good defensively or tough, which is what we all want to see. Proof. I notice you try to get by not using proof, not using anything but your own bias perceptions, philosophies and circumstantial evidence to get by to make your players look better than they are, but that doesn't cut it for me and, I hope, the voters. It's an interesting story, but it's value is minimal at best.

That last bit shows good leadership; Pulford captained 4 stanley cup teams- he brought leadership as well. I want to know defensive play and toughness, please. And don't give me "I saw, therefore he is" show me what other people saw too. People argue about how guys played all the time; people disagree about how good or bad a guy played in a game all the time. Perhaps there are people out there who'd argue against what you saw. And, you are bias because he is your player too. Yes, I can believe he was a good player- so is everyone in the ATD.

Let's see the real evidence.
I don't look at World Championships or Olympics when talking about a player's ability to deliver in the clutch. I'll rave about how great of a player Valeri Kharlamov was, but his performances in World Championships and Olympics don't change my perceptions of him being a clutch guy.

We draft international players because they deserve to be drafted. But you can't look at a guy's performance in the Worlds and say he'll be a clutch player in a best-of-seven. In Selanne's case, he proved that the two are very different things.

If we were playing a one-off series on big ice, then I might put credence into Selanne's performances in the World Championships and the Olympics. But we're not. We're playing a best-of-seven. Comparing World Championship and Olympic performances to Stanley Cup playoff performances is damn close to comparing apples and oranges, because there's a very big difference.

And you put way too much emphasis on relativity. It only goes so far. In those eighth, ninth and 10th place finishes, how many points did he have? An eighth place finish in 54 for defenceman scoring is a completely different story from an eighth place finish for defenceman scoring in 1984. I see two seasons above 20 points for Mortson. Like I said before, I really like Mortson, especially because of the protection element he brings to a No. 3 role. But you're letting relativity jerk you around. You say you've shown plenty? I say you've shown nothing that I didn't know before because you're overly reliant on stats-based relativity.

I gave you plenty on Carlyle. I told you that Winnipeg wanted him out there against the opposition's best players. He was the best player on a team that, in a couple years, was one of the best in the game, and probably would have been to the Stanley Cup final on a couple times if not for the overwhelming strength of the other teams in the division. In an all-out, ultra-aggressive division that for six years was head and shoulders above every other division in the league, the Jets used Carlyle to play against the opposition's best players. If Carlyle wasn't playing at a high level, if he wasn't strong defensively, he wouldn't be used in that situation, he wouldn't be counted on to have the responsibility that he had.

God Bless Canada is offline   Reply With Quote