View Single Post
09-24-2012, 01:34 PM
Student Of The Game
seventieslord's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 30,371
vCash: 500
I’m glad you went over everything with your comb. You make some good points.

Originally Posted by Hedberg View Post
Duchesne never had any year with significant voting, but he did hover around the 14th place (getting an average of 2 votes per year) in 82-83, 83-84, 84-85, 85-86, 86-87, 87-88, 90-91, 91-92, 92-93 and 93-94. Nothing of any real merit other than consistent appearances. His two-way game was probably too lacking to get him much appeal for voters.
Interesting; I only keep a record of top-15s personally as it gets pretty sketchy beyond that, but it is interesting he always had a vote or two.

Because God will hate your team (really, it's because modern Europeans without championships suffer in the ATD)
But he was a cup! And he was, like, the 12th or 13th-most important player too!

I'm not sure why this criticism isn't equally relevant to your 1st line?
Well, it can be. No doubt. Let’s say that I think that my 1st line is just a tad above that line and your 2nd line is just a tad below it.

- Gagnon and Himes wash out as small, courageous, absolutely untimidating players.
- Small edge to Watson for being called “Moose” but my line about Richardson pretty much applies to him as well, granted
- Kopitar is bigger and, I think, more physically inclined than Bellows, which would push the line a visible level above in this regard.

I definitely realize it isn’t ideal from a toughness perspective though.

Why? What possible reason would there be for his non-offensive skills to fall off if he had not died?
Well, basically this:

- If some player came in and beat the living snot out of every top heavyweight next season, we wouldn’t draft him on ATD 4th lines and call him “the best figher ever”
- If a guy came in and led the NHL with 450 hits including some absolutely devastating highlight reel textbook hits, we wouldn’t put him in the ATD right away as “the best bodychecker ever”
- If a rookie came in and won the selke with a suffocating defensive game, regardless of how strong (let’s say anecdotally superior to Nighbor and statistically superior to Clarke’s best season), we would not see him on ATD 3rd lines as “the best defensive forward ever”

It’s no different from if a rookie came in and scored 96 goals next season despite leaguewide offense dropping even further. This would be the most impressive goal scoring season ever, but we would not put him on an ATD 1st line right away as “the best goalscorer ever”. We would want to see an established track record of such success. Whether we’re talking about goal scoring, playmaking, defense, physicality or fighting, it should apply across the board.

Now, other people may see things differently, but typically you see 5-6 years being thrown around as an appropriate time frame for a “prime” where we get a true sense of what a player is capable of. Given the circumstances, you, different people and I may draw the line differently but I think it’s safe to say that most would draw that line beyond two years.

Basically if there was a player who was similar to Davidson at his best, but did it for a dozen years I would consider him infinitely more suited to be a physical presence on a line. Or, even a guy who was only ¾ as physical at his best, but did it for a dozen years. I’d probably consider that guy to win out via longevity. (we would think the same if there was a guy who scored 35 and 40 goals in his only two seasons, compared to a guy who played 12 seasons at an average level of 28 goals, wouldn’t we?)

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote