View Single Post
Old
09-10-2012, 04:02 PM
  #125
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Tally the numbers for the top 9 of each team and we have Orfuns 3121 vs Mania 3123.
The only problem with that, is that their top-9 forwards are almost entirely pre-expansion players, and the reason those two lists are separate is, as I said, because percentage scores tend to favour modern players by about 15%. If you were to give 15% credit to all their pre-expansion players they would hold an edge in the 12% range.

Also - and this is important - three of your weakest four are in your top-6 including one on the top line.

Quote:
Plus the Orfuns have the two top centers, the position that generates offense amongst the forwards. While the Mania has by far the weakest - Gilmour who would drag a teams offense.
I disagree that you have the two top centers, and the standings indicate that a lot more people probably disagree as well.

While it is probably impossible to spin Billy Gilmour in any way other than he is the weakest offensive player in either team’s top 9 (although I would love to see them attempt it), his score of 89, if taken literally, would mean that the player holding the next-lowest score (Jordan Staal) is about 2.6 times as likely to generate offense. That is simply not realistic. Gilmour’s score breaks the mold somewhat.

Quote:
Add the 4th line and defensemen's contribution and the Orfuns offense is more than sufficient.
As I demonstrated last draft, the offensive differences from 4th line to 4th line, unless one drafts a line of enforcers or specifically seeks out offensive ringers, is almost negligible. Keep in mind that the 4th line will play 8-12 minutes a game and will not play on the power play.

Adjusted ESP/season, counting best 6 seasons

Jim Roberts: 31 (probably skewed down somewhat thanks to pinch hitting)
Todd Marchant: 41
Dan Maloney: 45
Erik Cole: 56
Robert Lang: 59
Mud Bruneteau: 40-46 (depends on what his PP/ES breakdown was)

In your case you did, in fact, go after offensive ringers. While Cole plays a 4th line type of game, Lang and Bruneteau are primarily scorers. So you can claim to have an offensive edge on the 4th line. But, to what effect? Your 4th line may enjoy an offensive edge in the 8-12 minutes that it plays against Zambia’s 4th line, but how many extra goals is that in the series? Two, maybe? And if your 4th line isn’t out there causing a ruckus, keeping opponents honest, and generating momentum for other lines to build on, then is it a useful 4th line?

As for defensemen… here are all the instances of defensemen in this series scoring at least 75% of the #2 defenseman in the NHL (by my system which occasionally changes the #2 depending on large gaps between them and “the pack”)

Karlsson 147
Green 129
Green 114
Streit 95
Streit 88
Green 86
Streit 83
Young 81
Letang 81
Letang 79
Murray 79
Buswell 77

There is some offensive consistency among your guys (especially Murray and Cote) but as for who has the guys who have put up big numbers, your opponents have 7 of the 8 biggest seasons (and 8 of 12)

This is also based on 7 defensemen for you, and 5 defensemen for your opponents (as there is no easy way to translate Dvorak into such a comparison)

Defenseman offense can be so PP-driven, however, and the PP is a whole other discussion. If we are just talking about which defensemen are going to be able to get the puck to the forwards in everyday situations with regularity, based on the ES points generated throughout their careers, we have 3 tiers of players here:

- The puck movers (29-41 ESP/season): Karlsson, M.Green, Streit, Letang

- The average guys (17-22 ESP/season): Murray, Cote, Sweeney, Hannan, R.Green

- Brad Marsh (12 ESP/season)

Your opponents likely know Buswell and Young better than we do, but I think they’d agree that they are in the middle tier with those guys. Likely Dvorak as well.

What does that all mean? The distribution is pretty much even. I don’t see that either team has significant edge offensive ability on their blueline. It’s interesting to note that the four “puck movers” have just 216-443 NHL games each (in other words, these per-game averages aren’t as impressive as if they had been maintained for longer), and if they had 900-1100 like the guys in the next tier, their numbers would be a lot closer to theirs. So although one would still prefer to consider these the four blueline catalysts in this series, their far less-established track records will likely mean that there will be some puckhandling adventures mixed in with those tape-to-tape passes and the gap in their abilities is certainly not in the 100% range as those figures imply.


Last edited by seventieslord: 09-10-2012 at 04:17 PM.
seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote