View Single Post
09-28-2012, 02:54 PM
Mike Farkas
Grace Personified
Mike Farkas's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 6,404
vCash: 500
There's no doubt that it's a formidable bottom-six, but yours obviously will be serving a bit different role than mine. Mine is all about defensive, smart, tough hockey...if yours wants to take off on scoring exploits, go for it, that'll give my top unit plenty of room to operate and the other three lines (and all three defensive pairs) are more than capable of handling them.

While you focus on the potential goals of your bottom-six, I'll focus on the defense of it.

Andre Pronovost: "Andre Pronovost once worried about the likes of Gordie Howe, George Armstrong, Leo Labine and Frank Mahovlich. As a left winger Pronovost had the unenviable job of holding players like Gordie Howe in check."

Terry Crisp: " was Crisp's job to shut down the likes of Ken Hodge and Phil Esposito."

Dave Tippett: "...Dave Tippett cast a long shadow over the United States with his defensive checking of Pat Lafontaine in the opening game"

Rob Zamuner" "Rob Zamuner, who made Canada's 1998 Olympic team because of his checking skills..." [vs. the world's best players]

So while some post-expansion scoring numbers are terrific (really, I'm not being facetious, I have a lot of respect for your team), and maybe even in the company of some guys made a living shutting down elite ATDers...I surely don't believe that Slava Kozlov will be much of a match for these tenacious checkers, much less Anders Kallur or Peter Zezel...

So, while your bottom six players can pot an extra goal over mine in a 7-game series, are they a great success overall?

Even with an outlier like Kallur who basically only played during the Isles dynasty years and removing the fact that Green played in the pre-NHL era. I think the Finals appearances are still 14-12 for my guys, and I think Green may have played in 2 or 3 championships in his pre-modern NHL leagues. It also doesn't include Zamuner playing in a best-on-best tournament for Canada (though Eriksson did represent Sweden once, to be fair).

The top-four in those scoring numbers on your team don't seem to appear on a lot of successful teams...they have one Cup between them, right? So while Eriksson, Drake, Zezel and Bonk may marginally outscore some of my guys (though Young is right there, and Shorty Green is the only one with a top-10 finish in the whole group, right?). My bottom-six has a lot of experience on winners. Drake - among those top-4 point getters - has the only Cup and it was when he had the least amount of ice time of his career.

So, of those somewhat skewed numbers (as the best player overall [Green] and probably third or fourth best player overall [Pronovost] are not included) I'm not sure I get much of an offensive advantage - at least not one that would be noticeable over seven games or less...and moreover, the defense of my bottom-six blows that bottom-six out of the's a group that could challenge any MLD team I feel.

In sum, I don't need to create tables that indicate how much my bottom-six can score because they aren't out there to do so. Especially when said tables leave off 2 of the top 3 players on my end of that spectrum anyhow. It would appear that Medicine Hat boasts one of the most formidable bottom-sixes in this league (maybe the best, as the voters must have been impressed by something) and perhaps the finest top offensive unit (again, our fellow GMs seem to feel this way). It would be concerning to me if Radek Bonk's (a former 3rd overall pick) 7% advantage in even strength scoring over Rob Zamuner was enough to sway this series in Pittsburgh's favor. Or sway anything in Pittsburgh's favor, to be quite frank.


YouTube Channel: The Two-Line Pass - Hockey news, knowledge, video breakdowns and more:

Latest installment:Ep. 4 - Brady Skjei Evaluation
Mike Farkas is offline   Reply With Quote