View Single Post
08-26-2011, 03:37 PM
Student Of The Game
seventieslord's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 30,647
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Velociraptor View Post
Coming from Kindrachuk, that line did play against the other teams top lines, who cares if it was on the road, they did it and they did it effectively.
of course it matters that it was on the road, that strongly indicates that it was not Shero's decision, since he didn't have the last line change, it may have been the other coach saying "let's get the top line away from XXXXX (probably clarke) and get them against kindrachuk's line instead" - that's not complementary that it was a road thing, in all likelihood.

Not playing a lot of games is one thing, still not being effective offensively in those games is another thing. Erixon proved zero offensively in his career, he's renowned for his strong defensive play. If he's not good offensively that's something I'm going to point out.
that's ok, I'm thrilled that you spent so much time on it. And hey, Saleski provided just 15% more offense than zero per game, just remember that

Well below? Not really, there's no reason to believe that besides looking at early 1920's stats, where assists are obviously missing.
mmm hmm. And you did nothing to answer what I said. Missed assists apply to everyone equally, Riley is not special in this regard.

Bob Gracie is not a better first liner than Riley, I am sorry. You could pair me with Bernie Morris and Frank Foyston and I'd get injured, or maybe get 4 goals a season, you have to be a good first line player to score 23 goals in 24 and 29 games respectively, if he couldn't keep up with that line with chipping in assists, I'd think Pete Muldoon would find a place for him on the second line, at least.
there was no such thing as a second line.... you have to know this....

4 goals, great. what about if your linemates were Herb Cain and Gus Marker? Or Andy Blair and Frank Finnigan?

Gracie scored points (which matter more than goals, sorry) at a much better rate than Riley, and he did it with far inferior linemates, and guess what - he usually was the line's leading scorer. Riley was outscored by his linemates by embarrassing amounts most seasons. Do the math!

Honestly there's very scarce information on Sutter, at least that quote provides some evidence.
just as long as you know it's weak.

Stumpel's top-13 came in the dead puck era. McCourt's came in the early 80's of which the avalanche of offensive production began. If McCourt played in the dead puck era in his prime, I have no doubt he'd project better offensively than Stumpel. Instead he competed against Gretzky, Bossy, Dionne and several others.
hmmm, so the talent pool feeding the NHL nearly doubled in size thanks to the European invasion, BUT there were so many top-level players in the early 1980s that a 21st in the early 80s is better than a 10th-13th in 1997 or 1998? Good luck with that one! (You do know that the percentages Stumpel earned were versus Jagr and Forsberg, who peaked as high as all but a few 80s players, right? and in McCourt's best year his #2 non-outlier comparable is Kent Nilsson)

I mean, come on! McCourt scored 86 and 81 points in his best year. You would probably not want to do any sort of adjusting in this comparison, but you know damn well that 79 and 76 points in the DPE is better than 86 and 81 points 17 years earlier. Like really, now you're just being..... I don't know what you're being, but it's not honest.

How didn't that make sense? That's clearly an offensive rundown of goals-per-game? That's as simple as a statistic as it gets... You clearly missed my point completely. Not remotely close? I'll let some of the comments slide, but this is foolish. Sinisalo has some undeniable goal-scoring seasons, just as impressive or even more than Warwick's. There's honestly nothing that convinces me he is a better goal-scorer, who also played in the NHL when there was much less scoring competition.
Sinisalo has TWO impressive goal scoring seasons. He scored 36 goals, good for 32nd in the NHL and 65% of the #2 non-outlier. He feasted on the PP the next year and scored 39, which was 24th in the NHL, 67%, and 67th in ESG. His 29 and 25-goal seasons were 51st and 76th in the NHL with 54% and 45%, so where's this great goalscoring resume? There are numerous players remaining who have goalscoring and point production resumes much better than this. Tony Tanti, for example, was an add/drop pick and he has four seasons as good as Sinisalo's best. There are more where that came from.

Warwick's best goalscoring seasons?

7th, 85%
12th, 77%
13th, 61%
15th, 67%
17th, 63%
19th, 67%

GPG? compared between players 40 years apart? I didn't realize you were one of "those people". now GMAFB already.

It's just a bush league comment to claim someone has more defensive ability than 3 players who have all played in prominent defensive roles. That can't even be justified slightly, it's just gross embellishment. We get it, he's good defensively, the five or six pages of Libett/Erixon debate showed us continuously how good he was defensively, but he clearly isn't better than even two of the three players together defensively. Also in the process we learned how bad Erixon was offensively.

His information is still credible though isn't it? I know he hasn't watched every player he's documented, but his information is clearly credible.
sure, but he's just a blogger. If I start a blog with everything I have learned in the ATDs, do you quote me as a primary source?

I'm looking for the actual records themselves, I don't know where to get access to them.
as always, stickied at the top of the HOH section.

Gibbs was the best defenseman on his team in all of those situations, hence being a #1 defenseman. Currently I think Seabrook is a #1 on many NHL teams, he's just playing with a defenseman who is simply better than him, which shows that he hasn't been given the opportunity to be a #1 defenseman.
I agree, he is definitely a top-30 defenseman in the NHL. (so was Gibbs twice, probably more as well)

I said he's arguably peaked higher than Gibbs already. he just needs to keep it up now.

Kampman played in a six-team era, yes that's my argument because I think Quinn makes a similar impact in a six-team league as well.
so the NHL goes to six teams, and Quinn is suddenly recognized three times as one of its ten best defensemen? Hmm, I guess you are one of "those people".

A team in front of the goaltender can contribute to his success can it not?
Well yeah, I beat that drum daily. No goalie should ever get all the blame or all the credit for their team's successes. If you look at the lineups of the respective teams, I'm sure most would agree Nicholson deserves a higher percentage of the credit for his wins (plus there are two of them)

Well sure, it can be argued Theodore was better than Robertson, without a doubt. You even praised Theodore in the draft thread slightly after he was selected.
yes, "it can be argued"... all you have to do is take away that one cup and then have at 'er!

If he was that good, some team would want him to coach for them. Louis.
like I said, we don't know that they didn't. Who's Louis?

There's an advantage for us offensively...
hmm, well you've done an awful job demonstrating that.

Chouinard arguably has an offensive edge. Riley, McCourt and Sinisalo clearly don't. Havlat and Gingras are impossible to compare and I'm willing to call that a push. Richardson and Sutter are a tough comparison too, except Sutter is a horribly mediocre offensive performer and Richardson a HOFer, so I'm safe on that one too. Kindrachuk anchors a 3rd line that might provide more pizzazz than ours, but it certainly won't score all the goals that your 2nd line isn't.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote