View Single Post
Old
08-26-2011, 04:55 PM
  #56
Velociraptor
Nucks future 1C??
 
Velociraptor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Maritimes
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,669
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
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.



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



mmm hmm. And you did nothing to answer what I said. Missed assists apply to everyone equally, Riley is not special in this regard.



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!




just as long as you know it's weak.



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.



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.



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?



as always, stickied at the top of the HOH section.



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.



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".



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)



yes, "it can be argued"... all you have to do is take away that one cup and then have at 'er!



like I said, we don't know that they didn't. Who's Louis?



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.
Re: Saleski: It's better than zero bro.

Re: Assists: Oh sure it applies to everyone, but Riley deserves more credit than the god awful play maker you're making him out to be. If he was as bad as you will die trying to prove, there would have to be something to prove that, almost as sure as there'd be something that proves he was above average. Riley is slightly not well below average as a playmaker.

Re: Weak: Not necessarily, just a rare tidbit of information on Sutter.



There's some degree of toughness to go up against Joe Kocur in a fight.

Re: Honesty: I'm being honest, McCourt is more consistent than Stumpel is. Stumpel played on a better team, and had Luc Robitaille on his wing for half a year... John Ogrodnick benefited quite a lot from having McCourt on the wing. Stumpel's team/linemates >>>>>>> McCourt's team/linemates.

Re: GYAFB? Give me one, you're not giving half the players credit that they deserve. 29, 25, 23 and 21 are also fantastic finishes for a guy who never played a full season. I know comparing eras is a no-no and that's not entirely what I'm trying to do. But Sinisalo is MUCH better than what you're trying to project him as, and I don't understand the apparent gap between Sinisalo and Warwick when Sinisalo was in a much more high-scoring era, but not so much that Warwick is clearly better in any way.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Velociraptor
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.
I value your opinion for the most part, but he has an equal bias on the players he details.

Re: Gibbs/Seabrook: Gibbs has most definitely scaled more in his career. And the fact Seabrook has a short resume is the only thing holding him back from superiority.

Re: Quinn: Pat Quinn is just as defensive as Kampman is? Kampman played in a smaller league, that's the only argument, I'm sure Quinn would get recognition if he played in a 6-team NHL in the 70's.

Re: Nicholson: Not quite, despite having a good team in front of him, Johnston maintained a 3.25 GAA in a pretty high-scoring era.

Re: Robertson: wasn't even the better goaltender in his Cup win, Normie Smith was. Being fronted by a strong team. Theodore played for very mediocre teams and remained fairly consistent throughout those years.

Re: Cook: He's not proven at the top level.

Re: An awful job? hahahahahaha not quite. I've pretty much explained the forward corps, and how they bring an obviously more dynamic offensive game than yours. Riley is better than Gracie, and his goal totals will most likely be higher than his assists, but he's not a bad point producer, neither is Gracie, but Riley is better. Richardson was a a goal scorer like Sutter in his day, and gained fame for being prolific in an early era. It's proper to say him and Sutter are similar. I've explained my reasoning on McCourt, it's hard to deny given the era and linemates. Sinisalo and Warwick is not as complex or as far off as you claim, it's actually very close, and McCourt is a good play maker for Sinisalo, raising his effectiveness as a goal-scorer. Might provide more? I think we've established it will provide more. Fourth line offense can be taken with a grain of salt, but not only do we hold the advantage, Bubnik is a weapon on the second power play and you cannot deny that advantage (that isn't for you, )

One of "those people"? I'll agree I probably have 25% of your knowledge in hockey, but I'm just pointing out what's obvious.

I'm finished debating in the series, as I hope I have accomplished what I had set out to do, I will add some key points before voting begins tomorrow. Best of luck, seventies.

Velociraptor is offline   Reply With Quote