ATD Chat Room VII
View Single Post
10-15-2012, 11:34 PM
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
What did ATD Arguments look like back in the day?
I found this file today, where I had saved my mid-series arguments from the LC ATD1 finals in September 2008, against the legendary spinner. It's interesting to see how arguing styles have changed, how much more and less we rely on some sources and methods of analysis, and even the rankings of some players. In fact, this series can be pointed to as the triggering moment in the "Bobrov is not actually that good when you consider who he played against" movement. Yes, I take credit for starting this. Also, this may have been the first sign of legitimately looking at merited ASG appearances as evidence of greatness. It was not well-received.
In case anyone is interested:
The rosters were:
Steve Shutt - Jean Beliveau - Charlie Conacher
Syd Howe - Doug Gilmour - Pavel Bure
Marty Pavelich - Guy Carbonneau - Danny Gare
Doug Mohns - Bobby Holik - Joe Hall
Chris Chelios - Eddie Gerard
Pierre Pilote - Fern Flaman
Butch Bouchard - Marcel Pronovost
spares: Stan Smyl, Dean Prentice, Markus Naslund
note: Prentice - Holik - Smyl was the original 4th line but when the focus of the draft seemed to turn more towards elite players and less from good role players, I took advantage of the multi-positionality of my 7th and 8th defensemen.
Vsevolod Bobrov - Frank Boucher - Gordie Howe
Bill Barber - Ted Kennedy - Alexander Maltsev
Bob Gainey - Dave Keon - Ron Ellis
Gerard Gallant - Brian Rolston - Claude Lemieux
Scott Stevens - Harry Cameron
Serge Savard - King Clancy
Vladimir Lutchenko - Jean-Guy Talbot
spares: Brad McCrimmon, (someone help if you can remember the other two)
Carrying on with the type of analysis I did in the series against Coleco's, I thought I'd take a look at where the goal-scoring is coming from in the top-6 forwards on our team. I took a look at top-10's, top-5's, and top-2's in regular season goals, and this is what I found:
Top-10 in goals, regular season:
Regina 31, Charlestown 26
My top performer in this category, Beliveau, has ten of these (32%) - Howe accounts for 19 of the 26 for Charlestown (76%)
Top-5 in goals, regular season:
Regina 21, Charlestown 18
My top performer in this category, Beliveau, has 7 of these (39%) - Howe accounts for 14 of the 18 for Charlestown (78%)
Top-2 in goals, regular season:
Regina 12, Charlestown 10
My top performer in this category, Conacher, has 5 of these (42%) - Howe accounts for 10 of the 10 for Charlestown (100%)
Top-10 in goals, playoffs:
Regina 25, Charlestown 21
My top performer in this category, Beliveau, has 11 of these (44%) - Howe accounts for 10 of the 21 for Charlestown (48%)
Top-5 in goals, playoffs:
Regina 18, Charlestown 16
My top performer in this category, Beliveau, has 7 of these (39%) - Howe accounts for 7 of the 16 for Charlestown (44%)
Top-2 in goals, playoffs:
Regina 9, Charlestown 8
My top performer in this category, Beliveau, has 4 of these (44%) - Howe accounts for 4 of the 8 for Charlestown (50%)
If we just look at total points in the playoffs, we see a similar pattern:
Top-10 in points, playoffs:
Regina 31, Charlestown 25
My top performer in this category, Beliveau, has 12 of these (39%) - Howe accounts for 13 of the 25 for Charlestown (52%)
Top-5 in points, playoffs:
Regina 22, Charlestown 16
My top performer in this category, Beliveau, has 10 of these (45%) - Howe accounts for 9 of the 16 for Charlestown (56%)
Top-2 in points, playoffs:
Regina 11, Charlestown 12
My top performer in this category, Beliveau, has 4 of these (36%) - Howe accounts for 6 of the 12 for Charlestown (50%)
My impression after seeing all of this, is that Charlestown may have issues scoring goals after Howe. Defense wins championships, but defense doesn't do it alone. There is great top-end depth but beyond Howe, nothing in the way of players who are truly elite in this context. This is what happens when you select
Scott Stevens 28th, Bob Gainey 37th, and Serge Savard 60th.
It was four solid picks after that, that saved this squad and it is a testament to Spinner and Striker's astuteness that they grabbed Clancy and Kennedy when they did.
Both their top-end depth and their lack of truly elite players can be demonstrated by looking at the recent hfboards top-100 list. Here are the players from this series who made it:
Because of those three picks, Charlestown lacks an excellent #1 defenseman, an elite #1 goalie, and a top #1 center. (Boucher was an excellent value when drafted, but IMO isn't quite a top-16 center) Charlestown recovered well throughout the course of the draft but I can't see a team picking three players who aren't even top-90 players in the top-60, and winning.
(you can jump on me for having fewer players in the top-100 if you like, But I’ve also got 5 in the top-51 and you have one. If the list were extended to 200, I’ve got 9 players who almost certainly would make it – Gilmour, Bure, Carbonneau, Howe, Bouchard, Pronovost, Gerard, Smith, Shutt) and they’ve got 4 – Gainey, Maltsev, Cheevers, and Cameron)
So anyway, as I was saying, Charlestown doesn't quite match up in goal-scoring prowess in the regular season or the playoffs, and their reliance on their best player is quite high. It's worth noting at this time, that although it is better to have your lineup's skills spread out as much as you can, this isn't the same as last round when Coleco's was leaning on Richard so high. I had a player (Pavelich) with a proven history of stifling him. I don't have that this time - I don't think there is such a player. All I can offer to you is this: Pavelich played his entire career with Howe. He is probably the LW with the best chance of shutting Howe down. He just beat the 2nd best RW of all-time and the only tougher task than that, is the one he currently has. Do I expect voters to believe that Pavelich will have the same effect on Howe that he historically had on Richard? Hardly. But, during Pavelich's career, only one top RW didn't have to face him, and that was Howe... and look which RW was posting the best numbers during that decade. Coincidence? I think not. You've gotta admit, there will be some effect.
The Russian X-factors
Those exercises regarding top-10's, top-5's, and top-2's exclude Bobrov and Maltsev because they didn't play in the NHL at all, let alone in the NHL playoffs. Now you could say you can't give them credit for something they never did, and that may be true, but with the iron curtain in place you have to give them the benefit of the doubt. That's why I looked deep into their pasts. Looking at the performances of these players in the playoff situations they encountered is the best we can do. Using the stats available at
(I'm now a paying member) I have determined that there were no playoffs in Russia for these players. That leaves us with nothing but international tournaments to go by. This was the closest thing to playoff hockey that they had.
1954 World Championships: 8 goals in 7 games. Someone named Moe Garland scored 16 goals in 7 games for Canada. A John Petro also scored 8 goals for Canada. Bobrov Did not lead the tournament in scoring, but was named top forward. Good results, but competition level was terrible. The players Canada sent to play in those events were no-names. If there were any names on Canada's roster who were even NHL-caliber and he outplayed them, I could give him some credit for this.
1955 World Championships: 4 goals in 6 games. Tied for 3rd on Russia. Not sure where he ranked in the tournament as a whole, but 7 no-name Canadians scored more goals than him. Guryshev and Shuvalov outscored him. In any case, he did not stand out. Same problem with brutal competition.
1956 Olympics: 9 goals in 7 games. Tied for the tournament lead. I haven't heard of a single Canadian player on their roster in this tournament. One Canadian tied his goal total, four matched or beat his point total. This was a good effort except for the fact that Canada again sent a no-name roster. No pros-turned-amateur, and no future pros.
1957 World Championships: 13 goals in 5 games. Led the tournament but was not named top forward. Russia scored 77 goals in 7 games and allowed only 9, so the competition level was brutal.
See, the thing with Bobrov is, if you’re a 21st century Russian hockey pundit compiling a list of top Russian players then Bobrov makes the list, maybe even tops it, because you’re looking at it from a Russian perspective, almost pretending that no other hockey existed at the time. This has the potential to “fool” some North Americans into believing he’s on the level of other Russians to make that list that we’re familiar with – guys like Valeri Kharlamov or Sergei Fedorov or Sergei Makarov. But if you look at hockey globally (which is what the ATD is about), I see no evidence that Bobrov was truly one of the best wingers in hockey at any time. As you’ve been shown, hockey around the world was still very much developing, much like today's women's hockey. If Bobrov completely dominated the nobodies in international competitions, then it's up for debate how good he was. But the nobodies sometimes dominated him! So not only can I not give him credit for being a possible playoff performer, I can't really say anymore that I agree he's any good at all.
Maltsev played in an era where there was better competition for him so it looks better for him. Here are his international experiences:
1969 World Championships: 5 goals in 10 games. Outscored by 5 other Russians (some of whom were great players) and by no Canadians (this was an almost no-name lineup, with the names Gerry Pinder, Ab DeMarco, Bob Murdoch, and Fran Huck ringing a bell)
1970 Worlds: 15 goals in 10 games. An excellent performance. Voted top forward. No info exists on the Canadian squad. If there was one, it was nobodies.
1971 Worlds: 16 points in 10 games. Outscored only by Kharlamov and Firsov. Canada did not compete. (or no info exists) Tournament all-star team.
1972 Olympics: 4 goals in 5 games. 3rd on the Russians. Voted top forward. Canada did not compete. (or no info exists)
1972 Worlds: 10 goals, 22 points. Did not lead team in goals (4th), but led in points. Again, no Canada.
1972 Summit: No goals, 5 points. Good for 6th on the Russians; 3 Canadians also topped him.
1973 Worlds: His 13 points were 8th on the Russians. Again, no Canada.
1974 Worlds: His 10 points were 6th on the Russians. Again, no Canada.
1975 Worlds: His 14 points were 6th on the Russians. Again, no Canada.
1975 Summit: His 4 points were 6th on the Russians. 6 players on their opponents, team Canada, had more points.
1976 Worlds: His 6 points were 9th on the Russians. Again, no Canada.
1976 Olympics: His 7 goals were 2nd on Russia behind Shadrin's 10. Canada and Sweden did not participate and I don't see a player on another major team's roster with more goals.
1976 Canada Cup: Maltsev's 7 points were 2nd on the Russians. 4 Canadian players had more points. Made the all-star team.
1977 Worlds: Maltsev's 10 points were 7th on the Russians, and three Canadian players matched his total. (this was the first year of non-playoff players going to the worlds)
1978 Worlds: Maltsev's 13 points led the Russians and all NHL Canadians, but not the whole tournament.
1980 Olympics: Maltsev was 6th on the Russians with 10 points. (this was the year the Miracle On Ice knocked out the Russians)
1981 Worlds: Maltsev's 13 points led the Russians and all Canadians but did not top the whole tournament. Named top forward.
1981 Canada Cup: Almost every Russian had more than Maltsev's 2 points. He was 32 by now.
1982 Worlds: Maltsev was 10th on the Russians with 4 points.
Flashes of brilliance from Maltsev for sure. A couple of times it was even against real competition. But, too often he wasn't even the best player on his team, and many times wasn't even close to the best. To summarize his performances in these 19 tournaments versus the competition he had, I would break them down into three categories – good, average, and bad.
Good: (an otherworldly performance against nobodies or a good performance against NHL talent) – (3) - 76 CC, 78 WEC, 81 WEC,
Average: (did very well against nobodies or held his own against top talent) – (9) - 69 WEC, 70 WEC, 71 WEC, 72 Olympics, 72 Worlds, 72 Summit, 76 Olympics, 77 Worlds, 80 Olympics,
Bad: (did nothing to distinguish himself) – (7) - 73 WEC, 74 WEC, 75 WEC, 75, Summit, 76 WEC, 81 CC, 82 WEC
I question how elite he was and how he really could have fared if he was in the NHL at the time. Would he have had some top-10 finishes in goals in the regular season or the playoffs? I can admit, probably a couple. But that would not be enough to swing the above-demonstrated goal-scoring gap in Charlestown's favour.
I’m going to keep this one fairly simple. The popular method of comparing defensive corps in this ATD has been to line them up one by one and compare. So, Spinner, please forgive me if I don’t rank your defensemen the way you would, but here goes.
Chelios > Clancy
Pilote > Stevens
Bouchard < Savard
Pronovost > Cameron
Gerard > Talbot
Flaman > Lutchenko
Mohns > McCrimmon
The main asset that should be pointed out for Charlestown is depth. Their trio of top defenders is so good, that I have to admit their 3rd is better than my 3rd. Savard made the HF list at 98th and Bouchard was on a lot of lists but didn’t quite make the cut. Pronovost and Cameron are both potential top-200 players but Pronovost’s all-around skill, winning history, longevity, playing in the only top league at the time, and not being a general flake puts him ahead. Gerard/Talbot and Flaman/Lutchenko don’t really need to be explained.
Mohns and McCrimmon are interesting. Mohns was amazing defensively and McCrimmon amazing defensively. McCrimmon was able to put up some points and at the same time, Mohns was never criticized as a defensive liability. Both are fairly tough. McCrimmon has no shot at the HHOF. Mohns, in theory, could be inducted one day. McCrimmon has one post-season all-star team and Mohns has none. But Mohns was also denied all-star spots because of his frequent switch-hitting. He played in 7 all-star games, McCrimmon played in one. I have to give the edge to Mohns… not that this all matters, they are our 7th defensemen anyway and Mohns is currently up at LW.
Next, I looked at the top-end achievements of the defensive corps as a whole.
Spinner is claiming to have 6 Norris trophies. This is of course based on Ultimate Hockey’s retro awards. The two for Clancy I can 100% get behind – the four for Cameron are a bit questionable to me; however, I will give those to him too. This is a total of six. Keep in mind, though, that four of these were from splinter leagues, meaning Cameron was basically the best defenseman in a conference and not necessarily all of hockey.
Regina, of course, has 7 Norrises – 3 from Chelios against extremely tough competition, 3 from Pilote, and one from Bouchard.
As I am someone who doesn’t like just looking at “you either win it or you don’t” awards, here are the runner-up totals. As criteria, I used the actual Norris runner up from 1955 onwards, and from 1931-1954 the other member of the first all-star team is reasonably judged to be the runner-up. Prior to that, I also gave two to King Clancy because he had two good seasons prior to his retro norrises and prior to when all-star teams were introduced (he was 23 and 24 in these two seasons so this is quite generous)
Charlestown has 4: two from Stevens and two from Clancy.
Regina has 8: two from Chelios, two from Bouchard, two from Pronovost, and two from Pilote. (I’m not including anything for Gerard because I think Cleghorn and Boucher mostly dominated the would-be first all-star spots those years)
If you’re counting, that’s 15 instances of being a top-2 defenseman for Regina’s guys, and 10 for Charlestown.
What if we add in the times where our defensemen have been the 3rd or 4th best in hockey?
On Charlestown, I see 8: two from Stevens, one from Savard, two from Clancy, one from McCrimmon, one from Talbot, and I can credit Cameron with one more considering he was the top defenseman in his “conference” four times.
Regina has 14: three from Pilote, Gerard, and Flaman, two from Pronovost and Chelios, and one from Bouchard.
If you’re still counting, that’s now 29 instances of being a top-4 defenseman for Regina’s guys, and just 18 for Charlestown.
I could generously throw in two 2nd all-star team nods for Lutchenko, but if the great Serge Savard only managed one 2nd team nod in that decade, even that may be too generous. But hey, why not. Maybe he could have done it. That would still be 29-20. Either way, my guys are just far more accomplished – and we don’t have a flake back there.
Speaking of flakes, Harry Cameron was not one of Coleman’s favourites as mentioned in Charlestown’s roster post. Here are a few quotes I found about him in his bio and from his best seasons in The Trail Of the Stanley Cup:
(insert quotes from the trail)
This is naturally the most important aspect of this matchup. I will start with regular season excellence because although this is the playoffs, their regular season performance still means something.
Hasek’s dominance in the regular season is well-known. He led the NHL in save% six straight years, and this was after five straight Czech league seasons in which he was the top goalie and one in the IHL as well. He earned six Vezinas, but also placed in the top-8 in Vezina voting 5 more times (1,1,1,1,1,1,5,6,7,8,8) – In total, that’s 11 of 12 seasons he played as an NHL starter, right up until age 42. These are proven, verified credentials.
With Hainsworth I am willing to give him some benefit of the doubt, because all-star teams didn’t exist in his best seasons and the Vezinas he won were strictly numerical. However, here’s what we do know about his NHL years:
: Hainsworth earned the Vezina by being the starting goalie on the team with the fewest GA. He did not lead the league in GAA, but he was very close. No goalie placed in the top-5 in Hart voting. It’s reasonable to assume Hainsworth could have won a Vezina had it been voted on.
Hainsworth again won the Vezina the same way. This time, however, Roy Worters was a Hart runner-up, hinting that he was the goalie that was truly seen as the best this season. It’s fair to say Hainsworth’s league-leading GAA could have earned him a Vezina runner-up.
Hainsworth again won the Vezina the same way. Roy Worters won the Hart this time, I think it’s clear that he was the top goalie out there. Hainsworth could have been a runner-up, though.
Hainsworth did not win the Vezina this time, and we have Hart voting results up to 8th. Chuck Gardiner made 7th place and was most likely the top goalie. Tiny Thompson or Hainsworth would have been 2nd.
Hainsworth did not make the first or 2nd AST. Only the top-2 are known.
Hainsworth did not make the first or 2nd AST. Only the top-2 are known.
Hainsworth did not make the first or 2nd AST. The top-5 vote receivers are known and he is not among them.
Hainsworth did not make the first or 2nd AST. Only the top-2 are known.
Hainsworth did not make the first or 2nd AST. The top-6 vote receivers are known and Hainsworth tied for 3rd with Tiny Thompson.
Hainsworth did not make the first or 2nd AST. Only the top-2 are known.
Hainsworth did not make the first or 2nd AST. The top-3 are known and he is not among them.
At best, had the Vezina been voted on, Hainsworth would have been looking at winning one and being a runner-up three times. Very impressive, and top-100 worthy, but not Hasek-caliber.
Looking briefly at Hart voting, there is a distinct advantage too.
Hasek has won the award twice (he is the only goalie to ever win it twice), and also finished 2nd once and 3rd twice. Hainsworth never placed in the top-5, and records do exist for all the seasons he played.
The playoffs are another story. I shall call this part
The Inconvenient Truth About George Hainsworth
Hainsworth posted an excellent pro regular season record of 294-180-79 (.603) – but in the playoffs he was just 22-27-7 (.455) – That’s a 25% decrease!
During Hainsworth’s pro career, league scoring levels averaged 2.38 in the regular season. Hainsworth did very good versus the league in the regular season, posting a career pro GAA of 2.00. However, when the playoffs arrived, league scoring dropped by 24%, to 1.81. Hainsworth’s GAA only dropped by 2%, to 1.96.
Hainsworth’s playoff record of 22-27-7 includes a respectable record of 5-5-2 (.500) versus teams that were ranked higher than his team, but he was an abysmal 17-22-5 against lower-ranked teams (.424) – that’s god-awful!
(in case you are curious, Hasek has 56 decisions against higher-ranked teams, and a 29-27 record (.518) – He also has 58 decisions against lower-ranked teams, going 36-22 (.621) – He wins the games he’s supposed to win, and over half the ones he’s not supposed to win!)
And the most damning evidence of all: In the following spreadsheet, you will see a few columns. The first is just the year. The second is the league Hainsworth was in. The third is the league’s total playoff GAA. After that, you can see Hainsworth’s playoff GAA. Next column indicates whether Hainsworth’s GAA was better or worse than the league average. Hainsworth’s minutes and goals against are posted next for calculation purposes. The last column is the number of goals an “average” goalie would have allowed, had he played the same number of minutes Hainsworth played. The formula is simple. (League GAA) * (Hainsworth’s minutes, /60) At the bottom you can see that Hainsworth allowed 122 goals during this time, and an average goalie would have allowed 113. Hainsworth has been 8% worse than an average goalie in the playoffs.
It goes beyond that, too. For 12 seasons before he became a pro, Hainsworth played OHA Junior and Senior hockey. In those 12 seasons, he compiled a record of 64-21-1 (.750) – quite impressive. However, in the 8 seasons in which he played in the playoffs, his record was 20-13-6 (.590) – still good, but 21% worse than his regular season record.
His GAA during these regular season games was a sparkling 2.67. In the playoffs, his GAA rose to 3.97. That’s 49% higher! In 7 of those 8 seasons his playoff GAA was higher than his regular season GAA. No matter where Hainsworth was, he choked in the playoffs.
The one exception to all of this is Hainsworth’s shining moment, the 1930 playoffs. He deserved a Smythe for this performance. But if you take those 6 games out, you’re looking at nothing but ordinary.
Spinner knows this too. This is why he tried endlessly to get me to trade him Billy Smith, my
, prior to the trade deadline. Since spinner loves digging up old quotes, I just may have to do that later tonight as well.
Hasek’s numbers, on the other hand, just get better in the playoffs. His goals against average drops from 2.20 to 2.02 and his save percentage rises from .922 to .925. And he did it right into his 40’s. I don’t have the exact numbers from the Czech league, but he was a two-time league champion there too. Everywhere Hasek went, he was money in the playoffs. He doesn’t lose a series he’s supposed to win… and he’s supposed to win this one.
Regina is going to make Charlestown Chew out of these guys. Howe is the best player in this series, but he alone can’t pick up all the slack. Look at the line he plays on – He has a complete nobody for a LW, and a guy who is good, but not even a top-16 center, in the middle. Howe is just one guy and he can’t carry this line on his own, at least not when his team has finally met its match.
Looking at total all-star team selections on the rosters, and assessing retro ones as accurately as I can, (I know Spinner went over this briefly and came up with similar results, though we disagree on Cameron greatly and he pointed out that Gerard had a retro Norris) I see 73 on Regina and 60 on Charlestown. In addition to this, Charlestown’s AST selections are concentrated greatly in Howe, who has 21 of them (35%) – My top player, Beliveau, has 10 of my 73 (14%). Regina relies on their best player far less than Charlestown relies on theirs. If Beliveau was to falter (not that he ever has in the playoffs) there are plenty of players to pick up the slack. With Charlestown, not so much. And again,
This is what happens when you select Scott Stevens 28th, Bob Gainey 37th, and Serge Savard 60th.
I also see 28 top-5 Hart finishes on each roster. However, Regina’s are split among 9 players and Beliveau accounts for only 9 of them, or just 32%. Charlestown’s are split among only 5 players, and Howe accounts for 16 of them, or 57%. This tells us two things – Howe is freaking amazing, and no one else on Charlestown is really that special.
Also, playoff history is important, especially in the forwards and goaltenders. I’ve gone over the goaltenders in detail already. Looking at the top-6 forwards on each team and how their points per game averages change in the playoffs as I did in my last series, I must point out that my top-6 forwards, on average, decline by just2%:
Steve Shutt LW 0.88 0.99 +13%
Jean Beliveau C 1.08 1.09 +1%
Charlie Conacher RW 0.87 0.75 -14%
Syd Howe LW 0.76 0.63 -17%
Doug Gilmour C 0.97 1.03 +7%
Pavel Bure RW 1.11 1.09 -2%
Charlestown’s forwards, on average, decline by 9.5%.
Frank Boucher C 0.76 0.65 -14%
Gordie Howe RW 1.05 1.02 -3%
Ted Kennedy C 0.80 0.77 -4%
Bill Barber LW 0.98 0.84 -14%
-9.5% is quite respectable and that is not meant as a smear to these guys at all – their numbers dropped less than those of the players around them. But my top-6 forwards, as a group, are much better equipped to keep scoring in the playoffs, at the same rate that they did throughout the regular season. Quite simply, Charlestown’s forwards can fight through the checking and put in some points, but my guys have gone the extra mile and stepped it up in the playoffs.
Just for fun, here is where Charlestown ranked in my initial regular season placements:
Forwards: 4th/16 (behind Regina, Red Rockets, Mexico)
Strengths (based on position in lineup and depth chart) – Howe, Keon, Ellis, Lemieux, Gainey
Weaknesses – Bobrov, Boucher, Gallant, Rolston
Defensemen: 4th/16 (behind Regina, District 5, Coleco’s Vision)
Strengths – Savard
Coaching: 3rd (behind Mexico and Winnipeg)
Overall, I did not think this was even the best regular season team in its division – I liked the Red Rockets better. In my own division, I liked three teams better. I was surprised that they finished first, but given that this is a playoff-built team, I am not at all surprised that they are the team I’m lining up against in the finals.
In all honesty, the toughest matchup has already been won. Coleco’s Vision was a very formidable squad, one I feel fortunate to have beaten. Coleco’s Vision, Charlestown and Regina are all somewhat fortunate that excellent opponents like District 5 and the Red Rockets were upset in round 1. In any case, Regina has already beaten a team significantly better than Charlestown.
[quote name='spinner' date='Sep 5 2008, 01:08 AM' post='2264505']
Yes, points per game
in two vastly different eras!
The league average for goals in Pavelich's era was 172 and for Ellis' era, it was 245. Pavelich's team scored well over the league average every single season while Ellis' team hovered around the average and 5 times sunk below it (despite playing against crappy expansion teams). You cannot simply take Pavelich's PPG and Ellis' PPG and compare the two, that's less than elementary. Ellis' team struggled to score goals so that means his 0.40 PPG is worth far more than Pavelich's 0.40.
You still don’t get it. I’m done with this part.
What did I say about creative use of stats? All of that means absolutely nothing when comparing matchups. Actually, it just proves how dominant Gordie Howe can be so thanks for posting it.
Well, really, it shows that my players have done more in the playoffs than yours and it shows you how little there is beyond Gordie Howe when it comes to proven playoff scoring.
Now, onto stuff that matters: Keon has proven to shut down Beliveau in real life
Umm, you mean for the last 2 games of the 1967 finals? Good history there. Beliveau scored 13 goals in the other 23 game he played against Keon.
and Gainey could certainly do the job on Conacher, better than Pavelich can on Howe (regardless of what imaginary tales you want to spin) so Regina's top line, for all intents and purposes, will be neutralized.
It’s a good checking line and they will have some effect. It won’t be anything significant – Beliveau has proven he can fight through Keon’s checking.
Moving to the second line, Teeder Kennedy absolutely dominates Doug Gilmour so this is no contest. You want to use hfboards list, be my guest. Kennedy is 72nd and Gilmour is MIA. Kennedy also has a Hart trophy, 3 Second Team All Stars, 5 Stanley Cup rings (
of them as captain), and 3 retro Conn Smythe trophies (something which
other skater has). He even led the NHL in assists one year and has the distinction of being arguably the best faceoff man of his time
What does Doug Gilmour have? One Selke trophy and one Stanley Cup (not even as captain). That's it. No AST's, no Conn Smythes. Your favourite book,
even compares Kennedy to Gilmour because they were similar in size and similar in playing style (gritty playmakers). When you factor in the age difference, Teeder gets an extra 3" and 30 lbs (Dougie gets 1" and 10 lbs), effectively making Kennedy a bigger, better Doug Gilmour.
Gilmour was also twice in assists once, was runner-up for the hart to Mario Lemieux’s most dominant performance ever, led the playoffs in points once, was top-5 in playoff points 4 times, and was top-10 in selke voting 9 times.
Kennedy’s Hart was bogus. Everyone knows this. Even a book produced just to gush over the top Leaf captains of all-time had this to say:
In 1954-55, Kennedy scored ten goals, logged 52 points, and won the Hart trophy, but it was bestowed to honor a career, not a season.
If you don’t think it was bogus, consider this:
- He had just 10 goals and 52 points. He was just 2nd on the team in points and 6th in goals.
- He was 3rd in the league in assists and just 11th in points.
- The team he led was just a 3rd place, .500 team.
- He did not make a postseason all-star team. This is the only case of a player not being voted one of the top-2 players in the league at his position, but still being voted the most valuable.
- I understand he was a leader, good on faceoffs, and responsible defensively. But is that enough to overcome the serious gap in talent between him and the likes of Richard, Geoffrion, Beliveau, Howe, Olmstead, and Harvey? (all of those players I named were also either very tough or very good defensively, or a combination of both)
Looking at the left wingers, Bill Barber has 3 AST (1 First and 2 Second) whereas Syd Howe only has 1 Second Team and that came in a war-ravaged NHL.
Good thing your 2nd line LW has some accomplishments to speak of, because your first line LW doesn’t. If you look at the scoring totals of the top LW’s throughout Syd Howe’s career, he was always right in the mix. There is no reason why a physical and defensive player like him shouldn’t have taken a few more all-star nods. Toe Blake, who played at the exact same time, was rarely significantly better but kept getting picked. I’m sure Howe’s constant position-switching had something to do with this as well. Because if you look solely at LW’s and imagine he was a LW the entire season, he should have a number of all-star teams to speak of.
The right wingers are both Russian stars but I will defer to the experts for a comparison (no offense to your efforts). THN ranks
Alexander Maltsev as the 5th best Russian player in history and has Pavel Bure sitting at #10
. Oh, and look who's sitting at #8 and also ahead of Bure, one Vsevolod Bobrov, the guy that you want to say he's not any good at all.
Maltsev is good. He’s not as good as Bure. Bobrov isn’t as good as anybody. The list you’re talking about is from a Russian perspective, it’s considering early Russian hockey as a separate entity even though it was nowhere near the caliber of hockey being played in the NHL.
Also, in their book,
A Century Of Hockey Heroes: 100 Of the Greatest All-Time Stars
, authors James Duplacey and Eric Zweig (they of
NHL's Guide and Record Book
) include Bobrov on their list. Again, I will take their research and experience over your hack assessment of Bobrov, thank you very much and no offense.
Why? Because he played in three international tournaments and got outscored by Moe Garland and Joe Petro?
If that wasn't enough, Joe Pelletier ranks Bobrov in his
Top 40 players of All Time
(and look who else makes the list if extended to 43: Frank Boucher and Teeder Kennedy).
Joe Pelletier is just one guy, with credentials no better than me. He’s just been doing a lot of research, reviewing a couple of books, and has slowly been making a name for himself online. That stuff is meaningless when we have definitive proof that Bobrov never accomplished a thing against top competition, and did not even distinguish himself against complete nobodies.
What does all this mean? Even if both first lines are neutralized, Chiefs' second line dominates Pats' second line so that's another score for Charlestown. It should also be noted here that all 3 players on Regina's second line are small and lack physicality on the wings. Chiefs, at least have Bill Barber, who will make Pavel Bure pay for every inch of ice.
Syd Howe does not lack physicality. I have a bio quote that says when he joined Detroit he improved the team by providing timely goals and solid bodychecks… maybe not in those exact words. I can post it tonight.
If we look at third lines, I have already proven that Keon and Ellis make a deadly counterattack, moreso than Danny Gare on his own so this also works in Charlestown's favour. Any counterattack will be a nightmare for Beliveau and Conacher because neither of those two guys were known as anything but offensive players. In fact, looking at their various bios, the word "defense" (or any variant) does not even come up!
Conversely, both Frank Boucher and Gordie Howe have been recognized for their defensive play (Boucher with a retro Selke and Howe for his penalty killing and 2-way play) so I would easily take them against a counterattack of Guy Carbonneau and Marty Pavelich.
Beliveau and Howe are in the same boat – both are responsible backcheckers. I’ve never heard anything about Conacher. Boucher was certainly good defensively.
Which brings us to the 4th lines. They won't play too much so won't really be a factor save for one dude. A guy who made a name for himself in the
(cough cough hint hint) by scoring very timely goals (19 of them as a matter of fact) to win hockey games. Second only to Wayne Gretzky and better than Rocket Richard. Of course, I am talking about Claude Lemieux, who can be the X-Factor in this series and gives Charlestown an added dimension of not only clutch play but of agitation of the highest degree. You thought Tik was bad in the last series? You haven't met Pepé.
Stinky’s playoff credentials came when he was a top-6 forward. He will do his job and agitate, but don’t expect him to score many, or any goals.
> Prentice-Holik-Smyl (+3 Charlestown)
Dude, the only + you have in that comparison is Lemieux… and Smyl isn’t even playing… check the lineups.
Ohh, the signs of desperation . . . breaking out the almightly hfboards list (which you yourself contributed to so there's no bias there
Oh right, cause as one of 26 members, I had TONS of influence
Even so, that's not such a bad place to be. Your extrapolations to 200 aside, Chiefs still have 8 players on the list and Pats only 5. Yes, they are a bit higher but having Mr. Hockey at the top counts for something. Also, having 3 Charlestown defensemen on the list vs. only 2 Regina defensemen makes me happy.
Naturally you would put my extrapolations to 200 aside. You wouldn’t want everyone to know I have better players than you.
LOL, as if the hfboards list wasn't bad enough, now you want us to believe that Gordie Howe's exemplary career was accomplished because he did not have to play against Marty Pavelich!
Of course not. But Howe is the only top RW who didn’t have to face him. Just like Jacques Plante never had to face the Habs, and Glenn Hall never got to face the Hawks. In a six-team league, factors like that can make a HUGE difference in stats. FWIW, I believe Gordie was the top RW in the game, and significantly better than Richard. But over the course of a decade, when he doesn’t have to face the top checking LW and everyone else does every 5th game, that adds up.
How low are you sinking here? Bobrov is lauded by those in the game as being one of the best Russian players ever. Even Rocket Richard called him one of the Top 10 players of his time. Maltsev, as well, is the highest scoring Russian ever and is highly regarded by those in the game but you would rather sink to new lows by posting garbage like this. I am really disappointed.
Of course you are disappointed to find that Bobrov has no real accomplishments to speak of. He played against garbage competition and his ranking on any Russian list is based solely on his Russian league dominance against……….. against who, exactly? You’ll have to give me the names of some great players he topped.
[quote name='spinner' date='Sep 5 2008, 01:09 AM' post='2264506']
Pronovost over Cameron is a joke. Cameron was named the "Best Offensive Defenseman on the 1910's" by
and awarded 4 retro Norris trophies. Regardless if 2 of them are "conference" trophies or not, it means that 2 times he was the best defenseman in the game and another 2 times he was at least a Top 4 defenseman so that matches Pronovost's AST's. I don't think Pronovost would be considered the "best offensive defenseman" of any decade so relatively speaking, Cameron stood out among his peers whereas Pronovost did not.[/quote]
It’s far from a joke. If you’re building a team that you want to win, do you take Harry Cameron, or Marcel Pronovost? It’s no contest. The guy has tons more experience, especially in the playoffs, is good physically and defensively – things I have never heard said about Cameron, and was a good teammate… Cameron may be one of the 5 worst teammates of all-time.
Moving right along, you are also highly underrating Lutchenko. He was one of the best, if not THE best Russian defenseman of his time. And actually, not just of his time. From the Summit Series website:
Not many can match his 7 All Star selections, goal totals (4th all time among Russian defensemen), and career achievements.
I’m not underrating him, I’m just being realistic. What would that translate to if he were in the NHL? My guess is he’s a decent defenseman and a legitimate +6. You’re selling him as though he had 7 all-star selections in the NHL.
Talbot has a 1st AST and Flaman has 3 Seconds. Talbot, however, was also a top 4 defenseman on 7 Stanley Cup championships vs. Flaman's lonely 1 Cup. Since this is the playoffs, the edge has to go to Talbot:
Top-4, really? You mean back when they almost always dressed only 4 defensemen? Wow… Where did he actually rank in terms of importance on those cup winners? 9th? 10th? 12th?
Flaman is better than Talbot. Talbot had one excellent year and would never be confused with a hall of famer aside from that. They had very similar points-per-games despite the differences in the talent level on their teams. Flaman was one of the few best defensive players in the league and one of the top-2 bodycheckers, Your own Gordie Howe said he was the toughest player he ever played against. Talbot is no comparison.
OVERPIMPING ALERT! OVERPIMPING ALERT! Now you're using All Star games as indicators of greatness.
McCrimmon with a real AST and a Stanley Cup has no shot at the HHOF yet Mohns with neither "could be inducted one day". There is nothing special about Doug Mohns except his toupée. Mohns has the same chance of being inducted as I do.
You have to look deeper to show what the opinion of Mohns was at the time. The fact that he played in 7 ASG’s (when Roster sizes were smaller and half the spots automatically went to cup winners) shows that he was frequently one of the very best players in the game. The only reason he doesn’t have postseason selections is because he didn’t count as a defenseman or forward for long enough for people to consider him just one position. McCrimmon was a 2nd AST member and was in the ASG just once, that same season. 12 defensemen get selected for the ASG and he was only selected once. No contest, Mohns is better.
Incorrect. Only the first 2 of Cameron's Norris trophies were from "splinter" leagues and the latter 2 were from the NHL.
Funny how you were accusing Lafleur's Fries of posting lies and now you're doing the same thing.
I can’t believe you made it this far and you still don’t know the history of the NHL. It was a 3 team league in those two seasons that Cameron won it. The PCHA was still running and was at least 90% as good as the NHL. The NHL, PCHA, and WCHL were all splinter leagues until the end of the 1926 season.
Charlestown Chiefs' D
Clancy: 5 First*, 2 Second*, 2 retro Norris, 3 Cups, HHOF
Stevens: 2 First, 3 Second, 3 Cups, 1 Conn Smythe, HHOF
Savard: 1 Second, 8 Cups, 1 Conn Smythe, HHOF
Cameron: 4 First*, 3 Second*, 4 retro Norris, 3 Cups, HHOF
Lutchenko: 7 Russian AST, 11 league championships, 8 WC gold medals, 2 Olympic gold medals
Talbot: 1 First, 7 Cups
McCrimmon: 1 Second, 1 Cup
Total: 13 First, 10 Second, 7 Russian AST (therefore, 30 combined), 6 Norris, 25 Stanley Cups (+11 Russian league championships for a total of 36 championships), 2 Conn Smythe trophies, 4 HHOF
There’s no way in hades Cameron puts up 7 all-star teams unless you prefer to further water down the requirements. Top-4 in the NHA or NHL, maybe. Top-4 In all of hockey, 7 times? Not a chance? But of course you’re using his splinter league performances to your advantage so why would you listen to me?
Also, you’re throwing Lutchenko’s Russian all-star teams in there as if they’re just as important. They’re not, and no one reading this and voting on this is naïve enough to believe they are.
Regina Pats' D
Chris Chelios: 3 Norris, 5 First, 2 Second, 3 Cups (still playing but most likely HHOF)
Pierre Pilote: 3 Norris, 5 First, 3 Second, 1 Cup, 1 retro CS, HHOF
Butch Bouchard: 1 retro Norris, 3 First, 2 Second, 4 Cups, HHOF
Marcel Pronovost: 2 First, 2 Second, 4 Cups, HHOF
Eddie Gerard: 1 retro Norris, 1 First*, 2 Cups, HHOF
Fern Flaman: 3 Second, 1 Cup, HHOF
Doug Mohns: 0
Total: 16 First, 12 Second (28 combined), 8 Norris, 15 Stanley Cups, 1 retro Conn Smythe trophy, 5+1 HHOF
* For Cameron, Clancy, and Gerard, AST had to be conservatively estimated because they were not applicable for some of their best years. Please see their profiles for more information.
Wow, I had no idea Gerard even had a retro Norris. He’d have had three 2nd team berths in the NHL too, though. He was easily one of the top-4 until he retired.
At this time, I would also like to bring up something here that was posted awhile back by seventieslord himself. A comparison of Pats' #1 defenseman, Chris Chelios, and Chiefs' #2 defenseman, Scott Stevens.
What’s your point? The two careers are numerically similar.
A few points that I made before and would like to stress again:
1. If Chelios is a better defenseman than Stevens than why does
rate Stevens as the "Best defensive defenseman" of the 1990's over Chelios?
He might have been. He was at least the highest profile defensive defenseman. Chelios was very highly rated there too. He’s the one that won two Norrises in that decade, though, isn’t he? And I think
called him the toughest defenseman of the 1990’s, did they not?
2. Chelios has now played two more seasons than Stevens.
The fact that Stevens still has 19 more games but two less years shows that he is far more durable than Chelios.
Basically, Chelios has missed 2 full years due to injuries compared to Stevens.
How many playoff games have they missed?
3. Chelly's edge in playoff stats come from having played more playoff games and thus, was on better teams. By "better", I mean higher scoring. No one can compare the Red Wings of the last 7 years to New Jersey in terms of offense.
Yeah, those 28 points Chelios has in 97 playoff games with the Wings REALLY help his career totals!
4. Despite Chelly's benefit of playing on some high scoring teams, his career +/- is still lower than Stevens. On average, Chelios is +14.625 and Stevens is +17.86. [b]3 points/game[b] higher is quite significant, especially when you again consider the teams Chelios played for and his higher point totals.
I think you mean “per season” – and no, that’s not significant. They both played on good teams. And nice job breaking it down to 3 decimals!
5. It depends what "higher peak" means because Stevens was not relied on for offense after his Washington days so it's hard to gauge him in terms of numbers. I don't think anyone has been more consistent than Scott Stevens defensively.
Stevens’ peak was 1994 and he was definitely still relied on for offense. He could have won the Norris that season but didn’t, and Chelios has had three seasons that good and three Norrises to show for it, over a span of 8 seasons.
6. From what I could find, in the 18 years where they went head-to-head for the Norris,
Stevens finished ahead of Chelios at least 9 times.
It would be 10 but I'm not including Chelly's rookie season. I couldn't find the stats for 03-04. Yes, Chelios won it a couple of times but Stevens wasn't far behind and the only guy he lost it too was some dude named Ray Bourque. It's impressive that he beats out Chelios half the time though.
Wow, half the time… too bad he could never be the best defenseman in the NHL though, hey?
7. Chelios may have a slight edge but remember he is Pats' #1 defenseman and Stevens is Chiefs' #2 defenseman. That puts things in a different perspective and shows you how close the defenses really are.
If by “may” have a “slight” edge, you mean “does” have a “substantial” edge, then I agree. We’re talking about guys ranked 40th and 90th all-time, for christ’s sake!
As for Cameron not being one of Coleman's favourites, that is just more lies. Check again:
Even though Cameron didn't make the final team, he was one of Coleman's Top 4 defensemen from 1893-1926, a period of 33 years.
There’s no question that Cameron was a good player. But Coleman readily acknowledges at various times that he was a flaky player and bad teammate. (I even found another passage after I posted these ones, but I’ll spare you that one) That quote about playing but not trying, I mean, come on! When has a player so blatantly not tried that he was suspended and fined? That’s unprecedented flakiness!
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by seventieslord