View Single Post
Old
10-12-2012, 12:58 PM
  #75
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 32,106
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Farkas View Post
- Maxwell averaged 4:30 PK ice time per game for his career? I must have the wrong spreadsheet or your cherry picking.
I don't have your spreadsheet so I can't confirm the validity of your numbers.

What I do know is that Maxwell averaged 4:30 of PK time on a division-winning, conference champion team. That's more meaningful than a career average, as far as measuring his defensive ability is concerned. I'm not portraying him as an incredible defensive rock, nor am I using him in that kind of role, but I don't think he is a serious question mark in normal defensive conditions either.


Quote:
- In his bio, seventies broke it down about the d-men of the era. Trapp was reflected positively in it, plus his accolades.
I see that part of his bio, but there are still significant questions to be asked.

First question is, when Trapp finished 3rd in AS voting in the WCHL, who was 4th? When he made the 1st AS team, who was on the 2nd? That's just about the only way to validate the quality of the accolades.

Second question, when we say he was the 10th best defenseman in hockey, who was 11th? If it was someone we consider high-quality, great. But if it was some forgotten riff-raff, there is an issue. Again, simply trying to validate the quality of his ranking.

Third question, how did seventies calculate his rankings when he combined the NHL with the WCHL? IE, when he says "X, Y and Z were better", how does he come to that conclusion? We're fortunate that he is here and can hopefully shed light on this and possibly the other two questions.


Quote:
I'm sure Scanlan and Dornhoefer would be the first to the corner...I just wonder how they propose to get out of there with the puck. Not a ton of skill or playmaking from those guys as I understand it.
You would be wrong about Scanlan, who was quite skilled. Dornhoefer was more of a goal scorer so he was skilled enough to get results.


Quote:
Which means you need some good board play, which you won't get from a lot of those other top-sixers, I wouldn't imagine. And even if you did, my team has a noteworthy advantage along the boards.
So I need good board players to back up my good board players, but even if I had them you still have more good board players? I guess the ideal team is one composed of nothing but board players?

If you have a winger who is effective at jamming on the boards, what you really need is a center with a good stick who can pull the puck out and do something productive with it. I have Nilsson, Horvath, and Bernier; you have Bodnar, Bergeron and Crisp. To be honest, I think you may be overestimating your team's abilities in this part of the game. If you have an advantage, it's certainly not the blowout you seem to envision.


Quote:
Manufacturing offense is a much different animal than organic creation of offense (the foundation of your team). Can't be viewed in "shootout terms", hands, skill, dekes, etc. You have a top-to-bottom advantage there, which is by both of our own designs. How it will be a big advantage to you in a series like this is another story...
This goes back to team roundedness. While you certainly have a more specialized group in the Claude Julien style of play, my group isn't limited to one skill set. If you want to jam in the corners, we can do that (see above). But if a lane opens up, I have guys on every line who can take advantage. Do you?


Quote:
Balanced approach. Campbell covers enough ground against not-very-intimidating forwards, so he'll be fine.
"Fine" is a lot different than the "perfect" you were pushing earlier. If your team loses the game when it allows more than 2.5 goals, you need better than "fine" defense from your #1 minute-muncher.


Quote:
Bodnar and the top unit go out at the right times, and with the home ice advanatge in the series it won't be an issue. Bodnar won't be spending 30 minutes on the rink...he's not Esposito...
I assume Bodnar will be skating 20+ minutes a game considering he's the center of your only scoring line. (Bear in mind that we already know, based on his career, that a considerable amount of that time will be offensively unproductive) I would also assume that Campbell will be out there around 25-27 minutes, based on his #1 position and the fact that you've been pushing his ice time as a positive. So assuming Bodnar and Campbell overlap for the most part, you're looking at around a third of the game that will be spent with a weak defensive center and a suspect defenseman on the ice together. We haven't heard much about Kozhevnikov's defense yet either.

This just doesn't cohere with your image of a team that never makes defensive mistakes. That group WILL make mistakes, and given the scoring ability of my depth players you won't be able to use home-ice matchups to mask them. Sure, put Bodnar against Bernier in defensive transition and see who gets to your net faster. I'll take that matchup in a heartbeat.


Quote:
You have some players that can backcheck throughout your lineup (as you should), but a lot more is going to be asked of them than you initially think. Let's hope they can keep their head on swivel defensively to support your offensive forays...or odd-man rushes could be a thing that dooms your squad.
Again -- odd-man rushes are a function not only of turnovers, but also team speed in transition. It's pretty obvious which of these teams is faster up and down the ice.

And at the end of the day, odd-man rushes don't mean a whole lot if you can't put the puck in the net.


Quote:
I just think that may be what I'm saying doesn't really belong in this context and the only reason I started to is because defending a team of defensive players is not very quantifiable...there is no defensive statistic in hockey, no number that can be adjusted, ranked, scaled, or extrapolated that gives a consistent measure of an individual's defensive abilities.
On the other hand, our lack of defensive statistics means it's a whole lot easier to arbitrarily claim that a player will have a perfect series on defense. Imagine if I were making a similar claim about my team's offensive abilities.

tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote