HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Fantasy Hockey Talk > All Time Draft
All Time Draft Fantasy league where players of the past and present meet.

MLD11 Final: Regina Capitals vs. North Pole Dancers

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-03-2009, 09:45 PM
  #26
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafs Forever View Post
You sell Taylors competition a bit short though; just noting he was with some MLD guys and not the ATDs, when he came behind and seemingly did better than his fair share of ATD mainstays; for example, scoring only 3 less points in 12 less games than one of your favorites in Syd Howe, and being around the likes Billy Cowely, Sweeney Schriner, and Roy Conacher. Janney's competition was good, there's no denying that, but it's not like Taylor was competing with scrubs here.

It's not Taylor's fault that he played less games; and as the chart will show, he was able to do well over a longer stretch- 4th in playoff assists per game for his time, with 30+ games played, ahead of guys like Cowely is pretty impressive.
No, he wasn't competing with scrubs at all, all of those players were at least MLD-caliber, but look at who finished ahead of and around Janney. Janney was the more prolific playoff scorer of his time. Per-game? Come on. Gotta play the games to score the points.

Quote:
Gardner really only has one year where he did much of note in the playoffs offensively. I don't know about you, but for me, playoff scoring is my main evaluation of how good offensively a player is going to be in these finals. In that regard, I don't see that wide a gap. Ricci isn't a great offensive player, true, but his 10th in playoff points (plus a 15th in playoff goals in another year) has to count for something. Gardner, by comparison, has a 4th in points in one year, and that's pretty much it. He has another year where he was in a large tie for 9th in goals, but he only scored 2, and seeing how you discredit our players for high finishes with low totals, I can disrcredit this finish as well. I don't see that as that big an offensive gap.

As I noted, playoff scoring totals take a forefront in these finals. Clearly, Leroy wasn't able to bring his decent regular season scoring into the playoffs, and for that, I don't see how him being a decent regular season scorer holds much value, if any at all.
When you focus solely on playoffs, especially for older players, you will tend to grossly exaggerate how good they are, or grossly underestimate them. Gardner and Goldsworthy didn't become different players when the playoffs hit. They just didn't score as much in those games. You want to focus on a 61-game sample size, be my guest. But it's not nearly as important as his regular season accomplishments, as the regular season is where Gardner played 92% of his career games and Goldsworthy 93% of his. Saying "see, my guy did better in these 20 games than your guy did in these 20 games" is chintzy.

It's like Turk Broda and Terry Sawchuk in a playoff matchup. Broda's considered a better "playoff" goalie, but there's no doubt who the better goalie is overall. I trust Sawchuk to win me that cup over Broda.

the offensive gap between Gardner and Ricci is a chasm. Gardner was top-20 in assists five times. Mike Ricci once scored 30 goals when 54 other players did, and he once had 51 assists when 46 other players did. As far as players of his type go, he was a good offensive producer but you're crazy if you think you can count on him for much offense compared to a guy who had the 8th-most assists over the course of his career. You know who had the 8th-most assists in Ricci's career? Pierre Turgeon. (Ricci was 87th, in case you're wondering.)

Quote:
Hmm..I seem to recall Dreak and I getting burned for making assumptions in the ATD on a guys defensive ability..now the question becomes to do the same.

I guess I'll just leave it to the voters. You can assume this, I suppose, but there really isn't anything that I can see that comes right out and says "Scanalan was a good defensive player". He played on a famous scoring line; not all scoring lines have good defensive and physical players. A voter can decide how much information they want before considering a guy good defensively and good toughness.
I said all along that reading between the lines was appropriate when lack of further info necessitates it.

I'm not claiming Scanlan was "tough"; as I said, that word should not be thrown around, but he was certainly that line's glue guy.


Quote:
Are you saying Cotton's numbers don't hold any weight at all? This was a result of the era he played in- it's hardly his fault that this was the look of the era. It's how scoring went in those days. And I think it's more established than Scanalan's somewhat mysterious offensive ability, and I don't have to assume things with Cotton's defensive ability and toughness- I KNOW he was good defensively and was tough.
Was it the result of his era that he was 26th in playoff points over the course of his career despite being 7th in games? I'm pretty sure if I added up all the goals in the AHA and CAHL for 1898-1901, Scanlan would be better than the 26-best scorer in the regular season, and in the playoffs I think he is 6th, behind Trihey, Bain, Farrell, Marshall, and McGee, all deserving HHOFers.

Quote:
As I noted, I don't see the gap between Ricci and Gardner offensively as massive in the playoffs. Ricci did show he had some measure of offensive ability in the playoffs in those two decent years- I don't see the offence of our third-line as down the tubes because of Ricci.
Gardner was a star offensive player. Ricci once made the top-50 in assists. It's not close.

Quote:
However similar March and Goldsworthy are in the regular season, this isn't the regular season, this is the playoffs, and March just plain destroys Goldsworthy offensively in the playoffs. Goldsworthy being a two-time 20 goal scorer is almost meaingless considering he was never able to bring that kind of production to the playoffs.

Being in the HHOF isn't everything- some guys in that era get put in and left out mistakenly, as I think you have argued previously, Not that I am saying Scanalan is an undeserving hall of famer, just saying that Cotton has a lot more evidence to back him up.

Fact is, for their times, Cotton and March were good playoff producers, and Ricci produced well in a couple of playoffs himself. I don't see how you have a "vast offensive edge". Goldsworthy did nothing in playoff production. You said it yourself, Scanalan is not a great offensive player- his resume is still a mystery to me, and likely voters. The only clear offensive edge you have on third lines is at centre, and it's not that big in the playoffs, so I don't see how your offensive edge is vast or how your third-line will score much more than ours.
Mainly because Gardner is a significantly better offensive player than Ricci.


Last edited by seventieslord: 09-04-2009 at 12:39 AM.
seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-03-2009, 09:52 PM
  #27
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafs Forever View Post
I seem to have misread part of your bio. So now I inquire, what did he do as a forward as far as scoring leaderboards go? The defence seem to be loaded in the league, but I don't know that it was the same for forwards.
He was 6th and 9th among forwards in the ECAHA for two seasons. The league was loaded with forwards too: Harry Smith, Russell Bowie, Frank McGee, Ernie Russell, Herb Jordan, Lester Patrick, Alf Smith, Moose Johnson, and that's just in the top-10.

then there were his two stellar years as a defenseman, then for five more years he was putting up decent totals that fell short of any mention as placing on a leaderboard, aside from his 1912 season, when he was 3rd in PCHA defense scoring behind the Patricks.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-03-2009, 09:56 PM
  #28
Leafs Forever
Registered User
 
Leafs Forever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,781
vCash: 500
Quote:
- First of all, yes, that's correct. Lake was the good cop.

- When Shore was 7th in playoff scoring he was a defenseman, to answer your question. The players ahead of him were HHOFers Bruce Stuart, Marty Walsh, Gord Roberts, Fred Whitcroft, Ernie Russell, and the excellent non-HHOFer Brude Ridpath.

- I can't exactly list out a bunch of "top-5 among defensemen in playoff goals" for Shore and Lake due to the nature of playoffs in their era - generally 2-4 teams had playoff games at all, and they each had 2 defensemen and usually a sub. More often than not, five defensemen wouldn't even get on the scoresheet in these limited games.

What I can tell you, is that Shore's 1905 cup was won against the Phillips-led Rat Portage Thistles, and that his 1910 cup was defended against subpar challengers, but Ottawa was the top team in hockey and he was the top defenseman on that team. How many MLD defenseman can say that?

Let's stop the obsession with playoff figures; it's getting silly. Show me Babych's offensive placements among defensemen in the regular season; I'd like to see how they compare to Shore's 1, 2, 3, 4, 4, 6, 6 in a splinter NHA. Shore was tougher and better defensively, too. Babych steadied up later on but was brutal for the first half of his career. You're going to get the average of that, and that ain't good.

This one's not even close. Possibly the top defenseman in the MLD versus an OK #2.
Valuing playoff production in the playoffs is silly? Perhaps I am undervaluing regular season figures, but you can't deny which of the two should be taking a forefront here.

To answer your request, Babych has a good 3rd, 5th, 5th in points amongst defencemen in the regular season. Not as good as Shore, but decent.

Shore being called possible the top defenceman in the MLD is a rather bold statement, and I think you underrate Babych in calling him an OK #2. He is a rather good offensive defenceman. I already conceded the edge to you in this.

Quote:
Yes, Coutu is tougher. He was one of the toughest of his time. But I'd be interested in seeing him go up against Shore.

Coutu has better offensive credentials? Why? Because he placed 6th, 9th, and 10th among defensemen in scoring in a 4-team NHL from 1921 to 1923? Lake also played in splintered leagues and placed 3rd & 5th among D-men in his best seasons. That's an edge for Lake. Defensively? Show me something about Coutu being solid. My quotes showed that they made a "tough" and "solid" pairing; and also showed Lake laying out a good hit. He can defend. Can Coutu? Show me!

Coutu is not necessarily better than Lake, and you can't beat this real life chemistry
.

I say Coutu has better offensive credentials on the numbers Dreakmur showed in his bio for Coutu;

Top 10s:
Points for Defensemen - 8th(1918), 6th(1919), 9th(1920), 6th(1921), 8th(1922), 7th(1923), 9th(1924), 9th(1925)
Goals for Defensemen - 8th(1918), 7th(1919), 9th(1920), 5th(1921), 5th(1922), 7th(1923), 7th(1924), 10th(1925)
Assists for Defensemen - 8th(1918), 4th(1919), 6th(1921), 8th(1922), 7th(1923), 10th(1924), 10th(1925), 4th(1926)

Play-off Points for Defensemen - 5th(1919), 3rd(1927)
Play-off Goals for Defensemen - 1st(1927)
Play-off Assists for Defensemen - 1st(1919)

I tend to trust Dreakmur on his numbers; I know he spent a lot of time on them, and most of the time he is right on them. Coutu had a most of these finishes in a small league, true, but Lake played in splintered leagues as you noted, and Lake isn't an offensive whiz himself.

VanIslander covered the rest, I think (owe you one for that, VanIslander). I think Coutu is quite better than Lake is.

Leafs Forever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-03-2009, 10:01 PM
  #29
VanIslander
10 Years of ATDing
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 17,846
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafs Forever View Post
I think Coutu is quite better than Lake is.
I agree. But pairing chemistry is a factor, and Shore-Lake are a real life duo, so that boosts his value.

I think it's much better to judge PAIRINGS on a drafted team, not individuals.

VanIslander is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-03-2009, 10:18 PM
  #30
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafs Forever View Post
Valuing playoff production in the playoffs is silly? Perhaps I am undervaluing regular season figures, but you can't deny which of the two should be taking a forefront here.
No, not necessarily. Sometimes it involves taking a sample size that is 1/10 or less the size of their regular season resume. Then you project it and assume that's what you can expect of the player in his next series. That's inaccurate.

Quote:
To answer your request, Babych has a good 3rd, 5th, 5th in points amongst defencemen in the regular season. Not as good as Shore, but decent.
That's what I thought


Quote:
Shore being called possible the top defenceman in the MLD is a rather bold statement, and I think you underrate Babych in calling him an OK #2. He is a rather good offensive defenceman. I already conceded the edge to you in this.
It is rather bold, but that is what I am starting to believe, the more I compare him to other defensemen in this draft.

Quote:
I say Coutu has better offensive credentials on the numbers Dreakmur showed in his bio for Coutu;
Top 10s:
Points for Defensemen - 8th(1918), 6th(1919), 9th(1920), 6th(1921), 8th(1922), 7th(1923), 9th(1924), 9th(1925)
Goals for Defensemen - 8th(1918), 7th(1919), 9th(1920), 5th(1921), 5th(1922), 7th(1923), 7th(1924), 10th(1925)
Assists for Defensemen - 8th(1918), 4th(1919), 6th(1921), 8th(1922), 7th(1923), 10th(1924), 10th(1925), 4th(1926)

Play-off Points for Defensemen - 5th(1919), 3rd(1927)
Play-off Goals for Defensemen - 1st(1927)
Play-off Assists for Defensemen - 1st(1919)

I tend to trust Dreakmur on his numbers; I know he spent a lot of time on them, and most of the time he is right on them. Coutu had a most of these finishes in a small league, true, but Lake played in splintered leagues as you noted, and Lake isn't an offensive whiz himself.

VanIslander covered the rest, I think (owe you one for that, VanIslander). I think Coutu is quite better than Lake is.
Dreak's missing some players there. I've gone over the leaderboards of the early ECAHA, ECHA, NHA, NHL, PCHA, WCHL, and WHL so many times in the past 2 years that I have it (almost) committed perfectly to memory in which seasons each multi-positional guy played defense.

In 1918, he was 10th, in a 3-team league. Not impressive. (missed Shore and Gerard) The guy in 7th had three times as many points as him!

In 1919, the league had 3 teams. He was 6th among "pure" defensemen which wouldn't be that great to begin with, but that ignores Eddie Gerard.

In 1920, he was 10th in a 4-team league (missed Gerard) and he had less than half the points that the 9th-place guy had.

I already covered 1921, 1922, and 1923.

In 1924, he was somewhere between 10th and 12, I am unsure about Prodger and Randall - they were likely both transients that year.

In 1925, he was between 10th and 13th, depending on the positions of a couple of guys.

Seems like he was consistently 9th-13th among defensemen in a 3-6 team league, aside from when he placed 6th in 1921.

Now, what VI says about him is likely accurate, but let's not oversell his offensive abilities.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-03-2009, 10:19 PM
  #31
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,537
vCash: 500
Go to bed, LF! I don't want to have to do this all night!

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-03-2009, 10:24 PM
  #32
Leafs Forever
Registered User
 
Leafs Forever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,781
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
No, he wasn't competing with scrubs at all, all of those players were at least MLD-caliber, but look at who finished ahead of and around Janney. Janney was the more prolific playoff scorer of his time. Per-game? Come on. Gotta play the games to score the points.
Taylor played his fair share of games-33- and of course the main reason why he didn't play as many games as other would probablly be that he went to war. If you don't want to look at per game, he scored as many points as Cowely and Schriner playing 11 and 12 less games. He competed well against a number of ATD mainstays, not just MLDers. More prolific playoff scorer of his time? I already showed who placed higher in their respective times, and that's Taylor. You're only arguement is that Janney had more competition.

Quote:
When you focus solely on playoffs, especially for older players, you will tend to grossly exaggerate how good they are, or grossly underestimate them. Gardner and Goldsworthy didn't become different players when the playoffs hit. They just didn't score as much in those games. You want to focus on a 61-game sample size, be my guest. But it's not nearly as important as his regular season accomplishments, as the regular season is where Gardner played 92% of his career games and Goldsworthy 93% of his. Saying "see, my guy did better in these 20 games than your guy did in these 20 games" is chintzy.
In the case of Goldsworthy, I don't see how scoring 1 goal, which is is only point, in 24 games, doesn't show he didn't become a different player when the playoffs hit. Keep in mind March played in the same era, and was able to distginuish himself in the playoffs very well.

Never said Ricci wasn't a better offensive player than Gardner- he isn't. And Gardner didn't play 20 games- he played 61 games (just to be clear), and didn't distinguish himself as well as one would think he would in most years.

Perhaps I am undervaluing regular season finishes, but I think calling playoff numbers "not nearly important as regular season numbers" when it is indeed the playoffs, is a stretch, I think.

Quote:
the offensive gap between Gardner and Ricci is a chasm. Gardner was top-20 in assists five times. Mike Ricci once scored 30 goals when 54 other players did, and he once had 51 assists when 46 other players did. As far as players of his type go, he was a good offensive producer but you're crazy if you think you can count on him for much offense compared to a guy who had the 8th-most assists over the course of his career. You know who had the 8th-most assists in Ricci's career? Pierre Turgeon. (Ricci was 87th, in case you're wondering.)
I'm not selling Ricci's offensive game on regular season, like you are doing with Gardner- I am doing so with playoffs, where he has a couple of decent finishes.


Quote:
I said all along that reading between the lines was appropriate when lack of further info necessitates it.

I'm not claiming Scanlan was "tough"; as I said, that word should not be thrown around, but he was certainly that line's glue guy.
Some people, it would seem, don't agree with reading between the lines. I suppose it depends on the voter.


Quote:
Was it the result of his era that he was 26th in playoff points over the course of his career despite being 7th in games? I'm pretty sure if I added up all the goals in the AHA and CAHL for 1898-1901, Scanlan would be better than the 26-best scorer in the regular season, and in the playoffs I think he us 6th, behind Trihey, Bain, Farrell, Marshall, and McGee, all deserving HHOFers.
Fair enough, but I still think Cotton is a decent playoff producer.

Quote:
Gardner was a star offensive player. Ricci once made the top-50 in assists. It's not close.

Mainly because Gardner is a significantly better offensive player than Ricci
Again, I suppose this depends on your outlook on things, considering the playoffs.

And as it is playoffs, I would say March is a signficantly better offensive player than Leroy Goldsworthy.

Leafs Forever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-03-2009, 10:27 PM
  #33
Leafs Forever
Registered User
 
Leafs Forever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,781
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Go to bed, LF! I don't want to have to do this all night!
I am riding out the last of my summer days of staying up late and sleeping in- I like it that way. Although I'd glady resumse this tomorrow (although I'll likely be busy tomorrow)- I don't want to do this all night either. Debating with you is tough.

Leafs Forever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-04-2009, 12:38 AM
  #34
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafs Forever View Post
Taylor played his fair share of games-33- and of course the main reason why he didn't play as many games as other would probablly be that he went to war. If you don't want to look at per game, he scored as many points as Cowely and Schriner playing 11 and 12 less games. He competed well against a number of ATD mainstays, not just MLDers. More prolific playoff scorer of his time? I already showed who placed higher in their respective times, and that's Taylor. You're only arguement is that Janney had more competition.
You're talking about season-by-season again. 1989, 1992, 1993, 1994, there wasn't a lot more Janney could have done. He put up the numbers. Of course, his team didn't get far enough for him to "place" higher in the playoffs. Look at the whole sample size, he scored the 11th-most playoff points of his era. Taylor was 18th. Fewer teams in the playoffs, fewer players per team, of course it was easier for Taylor to "place" higher.


Quote:
In the case of Goldsworthy, I don't see how scoring 1 goal, which is is only point, in 24 games, doesn't show he didn't become a different player when the playoffs hit. Keep in mind March played in the same era, and was able to distginuish himself in the playoffs very well.
So, you take Claude Lemieux over Marcel Dionne, then?

Not that these two in any way relate to those two. But it sounds like you're ready to completely disregard everything that happens in the season, and look solely at playoff numbers, particularly placements, to determine a player's playoff worthiness.

No. You take who the better player is, with some consideration to their playoff records.

In the case of March vs. Goldsworthy, it's a moot point because March is much better.

Quote:
Perhaps I am undervaluing regular season finishes, but I think calling playoff numbers "not nearly important as regular season numbers" when it is indeed the playoffs, is a stretch, I think.
Look at it this way - the playoff games are more important games, but most players have only about 10% as many playoff games as regular season. Weigh them higher all you like, two, even three times higher, but the playoff resume doesn't outweigh the regular season. the best estimate of what you'll get from a player in a playoff series comes from looking at the whole package. not just the playoffs.

Quote:
And as it is playoffs, I would say March is a signficantly better offensive player than Leroy Goldsworthy.
And you wouldn't need to isolate their small sample sizes in the playoffs to prove that.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-04-2009, 08:01 PM
  #35
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,768
vCash: 500
The series basically boils down to North Pole offense vs. Regina goalie.

Coaching is basically a wash, and the defense is pretty close. Though I think our 1st defense pair has the slightly better players, the chemisty factor helps Regina, and the 1st pairs are about equal. The Fraser is the best 2nd pair guy.... but Rouse is the weakest, and I'd give a slight edge to Regina's 2nd pair. Our 3rd pair is better than Regina's.

Craig Janney is well known as a soft player, and while Mike Ricci isn't a goon, he does play a tough, aggressive, in-your-face style that will make life very hard on Janney. I really like that match-up in our favour. Cotton and March are excellent two-way forwards who can also deal some damage in the physical play. Regina's 3rd line is just "OK", but we have one of the most dangerous 1st lines in the MLD, so an average checking line just won't do the job.

With a better 1st line going against a weaker 3rd line, we'll be able to barrage Barrasso and wear him down.... hopefully

When the 2nd lines go head to head, Smokey Harris will steal the show. He's by far the best 2nd liner in this series.

The offensive edge continues on the powerplay aswell. With Bryan McCabe, we again have the best powerplay trigger-man. You can leave McCabe open for one-timers of leave an odd-man advantage down low for Patrick, Taylor, and Harris to dominate. It's really unfailr how disgusting our powerplay is....

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-04-2009, 09:47 PM
  #36
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,537
vCash: 500
Whch reminds me: I should probably post Regina's PP and PK units.

PP1: Smyth-Janney-B.Goldsworthy-Shore-Stackhouse
PP2: Gagne-Himes-Loktev-Redden-Smaill
PK1: Gardner-L.Goldsworthy-Shore-Lake
PK2: Himes-Gagne-Dupont-Munro

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-04-2009, 09:59 PM
  #37
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,537
vCash: 500
I know we never really got to the rest of the defense corps, but the series must move on. Voting will start tonight. In the meantime we are of course free to discuss.

I just want to point out the massive advantage Regina has in net. Barrasso is probably the best player in the draft. His regular season and playoff credentials are the best in the draft, and he got the job done for a long time, too. He has excellent size, won a Vezina, was runner-up three times, always had a very good sv% in both the regular season and playoffs, and faced a barrage of pucks to help the high-flying Pens win two cups.

Mowers has a really good playoff record. Aside from his epic collapse in the 1942 finals, he's 19-9 in the playoffs. Is a four year track record really enough, though, to take this team through the finals against a goalie who should be an elite ATD backup?

North Pole is claiming an advantage at forward. I disagree and see these units as mostly even. The goaltending advantage is huger than any advantage at forward could ever be.

On defense, Dupont is a really rich man's Rouse and Stackhouse is a Fraser with a longer career and less physicality. Redden easily trumps McCabe at both ends of the ice, and Munro and Arbour are as similar as they come. Regina's defense is better.

North Pole will need some timely PP scoring and goaltending heroics to take this one.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-04-2009, 10:27 PM
  #38
Leafs Forever
Registered User
 
Leafs Forever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,781
vCash: 500
Mowers took 3 teams to the cup finals (two of which weren't that great, based on the regular seasons), won a cup. That 1942 collapse seemed to be more of a team thing to me- I highly doubt the blame could fall on one man, and Detroit barely provided any offence in Games 6 and 7. In his cup win in 1943, he put in a Conn-Smythe worthy run by the sounds of things; and he was the best goalie of the 1943 year with his playoff run and first all-star team over Brimsek and Broda. Mowers won't lose us any games.

Leafs Forever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2009, 12:14 AM
  #39
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,537
vCash: 500
Not that Mowers is bad, but I don't want to see him categorized as a guy who carried bad teams to the finals:

1941: Detroit was .552. they beat the .521 Rangers 2-1 and then the .406 Hawks 2-0 before losing to the .698 Bruins 4-0.

1942: Detroit was .438. They beat the .406 Habs 2-1, then the .583 Bruins 2-1 before losing to the .625 Leafs 4-3 (as everyone knows)

1943: Detroit was first overall, at .610. They beat the .530 Leafs 2-1 and the .570 Bruins 4-0.

The 1942 upset of Boston was the only time Mowers' wings did something other than they were supposed to do. Other than that, they always beat underdogs and lost to better teams. Still, that's a +1 overall for Mowers.

This was not a common occurrence, that's all.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2009, 12:32 AM
  #40
Leafs Forever
Registered User
 
Leafs Forever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,781
vCash: 500
Hmm..the Red Wings finished 3rd in 1941 and 5th in 1942 according to hockey reference, so I assumed..

Leafs Forever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2009, 08:54 AM
  #41
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,768
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
I just want to point out the massive advantage Regina has in net. Barrasso is probably the best player in the draft. His regular season and playoff credentials are the best in the draft, and he got the job done for a long time, too. He has excellent size, won a Vezina, was runner-up three times, always had a very good sv% in both the regular season and playoffs, and faced a barrage of pucks to help the high-flying Pens win two cups.

Mowers has a really good playoff record. Aside from his epic collapse in the 1942 finals, he's 19-9 in the playoffs. Is a four year track record really enough, though, to take this team through the finals against a goalie who should be an elite ATD backup?
Agreed. Regina has a big edge in net.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
North Pole is claiming an advantage at forward. I disagree and see these units as mostly even. The goaltending advantage is huger than any advantage at forward could ever be.
Our advantage up front is as big as your advantage in net... maybe bigger...

In addition to having a stronger unit of top-6 forwards, we also have the better checking line.

The Taylor-Patrick combo is the strongest offensive duo in the draft. Ricci is arguably the best defensive player in the MLD, and is flanked by Cotton and March, who are two of the strongest checking wingers in the MLD.

As I said before, I really like how our 3rd line matches up against Janney, and I think it's pretty fair to say he will be totally ineffective.

Ricci is an aggresive, in-your-face player, and both Cotton and March are known for their rugged play.... and all 3 guys have very strong play-off records.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
On defense, Dupont is a really rich man's Rouse and Stackhouse is a Fraser with a longer career and less physicality. Redden easily trumps McCabe at both ends of the ice, and Munro and Arboudefense r are as similar as they come. Regina's defense is better.
As I said, Fraser is the best guy between the two 2nd pairs, but with Rouse being the weakest, Regina gets the slight edge.

Redden, at his best was an average defensive player. While he was steadier than McCabe, he was pretty much a joke in the corners and in front of the net. I have always thought Redden and Tomas Kaberle were quite similar - smart hockey players who made good decisions, but when it's time to play real hockey, they both wilted under the physical pressure.

While Munro and Arbour are similar, they aren't equal. As you said earlier, Arbour is good enough to be a 1st pairing guy on one of the former winning MLD teams. As a PK specialist, there are few better.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
North Pole will need some timely PP scoring and goaltending heroics to take this one.
Luckily for us, we put the POWER in powerplay.

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2009, 02:01 PM
  #42
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
Our advantage up front is as big as your advantage in net... maybe bigger...

In addition to having a stronger unit of top-6 forwards, we also have the better checking line.

The Taylor-Patrick combo is the strongest offensive duo in the draft. Ricci is arguably the best defensive player in the MLD, and is flanked by Cotton and March, who are two of the strongest checking wingers in the MLD.

As I said before, I really like how our 3rd line matches up against Janney, and I think it's pretty fair to say he will be totally ineffective.

Ricci is an aggresive, in-your-face player, and both Cotton and March are known for their rugged play.... and all 3 guys have very strong play-off records.
Cal Gardner has 4 inches and 22 pounds on Billy Taylor, who's not known for Grit or physicality. It works both ways.


Quote:
As I said, Fraser is the best guy between the two 2nd pairs, but with Rouse being the weakest, Regina gets the slight edge.
I'm not sure that he is. Stackhouse is probably better. A lot of Fraser's case rests on that one big season, but all indications are that he was a forward that season (unlike the Hap Day thing, I am right about this one. )

Quote:
Redden, at his best was an average defensive player. While he was steadier than McCabe, he was pretty much a joke in the corners and in front of the net. I have always thought Redden and Tomas Kaberle were quite similar - smart hockey players who made good decisions, but when it's time to play real hockey, they both wilted under the physical pressure.
I won't lie; that's a pretty fair assessment. Redden, at his best, was better than average; much better. Physically, he was better than Kaberle, who was a non-factor, but it's not the worst comparison I've ever heard. He, of course, got a lot more norris recognition than Kaberle (who finished 11th, 13th, 13th, 15th), who, thanks to Leaf Lander, is an ATD player

Quote:
While Munro and Arbour are similar, they aren't equal. As you said earlier, Arbour is good enough to be a 1st pairing guy on one of the former winning MLD teams. As a PK specialist, there are few better.
That's a bit out of context. While he was a 1st pairing guy on an MLD winning team, I've always said that we, as a group, get way better at drafting in the MLD every time. Arbour's role in the MLD has shrunk to the point where he is now exactly where he belongs. I talked about this in AA10 as well, when chaosrevolver drafted 5-6 guys from the MLD8 finalist squad. that's how far we've come.

Munro is better offensively. Both are similar in the defense, physicality, and leadership departments. Both have similar career trajectories, with the exception that Arbour's NHL viability was revived thanks to expansion.

Good luck, fellas, I'm outta here for 2 days.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2009, 03:05 PM
  #43
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,768
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Cal Gardner has 4 inches and 22 pounds on Billy Taylor, who's not known for Grit or physicality. It works both ways.
1. Taylor was not known for toughness, but he wasn't known for being soft either. That means he was probably average toughness.... and that makes him way tougher to shut-down that Janney.

2. Gardner is not the defensive player that Ricci is. It's all well and good to be big and strong, but there's more too it than that. That Ricci vs. Janney match-up is absolutely perfect for us.....

Offensively, Janney and Taylor are similar. Janney, however, is easier to shut down.... and that's even before we account for the fact that our shut-down line is probably the best in the draft.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
I'm not sure that he is. Stackhouse is probably better. A lot of Fraser's case rests on that one big season, but all indications are that he was a forward that season (unlike the Hap Day thing, I am right about this one. )
Fraser had 4-5 solid offensive seasons. He also lead defensemen in scoring for the 1925 play-off run. Asside from that, Fraser was more of a hard-rock defensive guy. He's good defensively and very strong physically -- his offensive abilities are just gravy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
I won't lie; that's a pretty fair assessment. Redden, at his best, was better than average; much better. Physically, he was better than Kaberle, who was a non-factor, but it's not the worst comparison I've ever heard. He, of course, got a lot more norris recognition than Kaberle (who finished 11th, 13th, 13th, 15th), who, thanks to Leaf Lander, is an ATD player
On a second pairing, Redden might be a tad better than McCabe. As a 3rd pairing guy, McCabe will be a PP specialist, and in that role, he will thrive. McCabe has a half-dozen top-5s in PP goals for defensemen, so he's probably the best PP point man in the draft, and he's certainly the best one in this series.

He'll be used in specific roles, so his strengths are magnified and weaknesses are limited.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
That's a bit out of context. While he was a 1st pairing guy on an MLD winning team, I've always said that we, as a group, get way better at drafting in the MLD every time. Arbour's role in the MLD has shrunk to the point where he is now exactly where he belongs. I talked about this in AA10 as well, when chaosrevolver drafted 5-6 guys from the MLD8 finalist squad. that's how far we've come.

Munro is better offensively. Both are similar in the defense, physicality, and leadership departments. Both have similar career trajectories, with the exception that Arbour's NHL viability was revived thanks to expansion.
Arbour, like McCabe will be placed in roles where he will thrive. As a PK specialist, Arbour can do what he's best at - block shots and play a steady, relaible defensive game.

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2009, 04:53 PM
  #44
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,537
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
1. Taylor was not known for toughness, but he wasn't known for being soft either. That means he was probably average toughness.... and that makes him way tougher to shut-down that Janney.

2. Gardner is not the defensive player that Ricci is. It's all well and good to be big and strong, but there's more too it than that. That Ricci vs. Janney match-up is absolutely perfect for us.....

Offensively, Janney and Taylor are similar. Janney, however, is easier to shut down.... and that's even before we account for the fact that our shut-down line is probably the best in the draft.
Just think, all the times Janney was shut down by a physical center.... and he still put up numbers like that. Not too shabby!


Quote:
Fraser had 4-5 solid offensive seasons. He also lead defensemen in scoring for the 1925 play-off run. Asside from that, Fraser was more of a hard-rock defensive guy. He's good defensively and very strong physically -- his offensive abilities are just gravy.
I'm not sure I see what makes him significantly better than his old teammate and our #7 defenseman, Slim Halderson, who had almost the exact same PCHA numbers (one more point in one fewer game), was a two-time all-star, and played in what was likely the next-best league for nearly another decade. Halderson was also a defensive and physical player, as shown by the quotes... and he had much better size. 3 inches and 20 pounds on Fraser!

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2009, 05:20 PM
  #45
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,768
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Just think, all the times Janney was shut down by a physical center.... and he still put up numbers like that. Not too shabby!
Playing with Neely, Hull, and Shanahan didn't hurt....

Janney is playing with guys significantly worse than he's used to..... while Taylor and Patrick are playing with guys significantly better than their used to.

In these finals, Janney is the "go-to-guy".... and for the first time ever, he will be the primary target of our checking line. He can't handle that pressure.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
I'm not sure I see what makes him significantly better than his old teammate and our #7 defenseman, Slim Halderson, who had almost the exact same PCHA numbers (one more point in one fewer game), was a two-time all-star, and played in what was likely the next-best league for nearly another decade. Halderson was also a defensive and physical player, as shown by the quotes... and he had much better size. 3 inches and 20 pounds on Fraser!
Fraser had more All-Star selections in the PCHA, and he was better as an NHLer.

Again, size is basically meaningless. Fraser was has been described as "an intimidating presence", which tells me he was one of the most physical guys of his era.

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2009, 05:48 PM
  #46
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,537
vCash: 500
Frasaer and Halderson had the same amount of PCHA all-stars - a first and a second eaach.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2009, 08:37 PM
  #47
VanIslander
10 Years of ATDing
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 17,846
vCash: 500
North Pole Dancers win the MLD11 championship final series in 6 games.

Three stars:

1. Lynn Patrick
2. Billy Coutu
3. Hamby Shore

VanIslander is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-05-2009, 08:50 PM
  #48
Leafs Forever
Registered User
 
Leafs Forever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,781
vCash: 500


Great series Regina. Your team was championship worthy as well. You put up a great fight, and I'll take a lot from this experiemce. I'll see you in the ATD!

Thanks to my partner Dreakmur for doing this with me, and helping to get us this victory.. It was a blast..and I hope to see you in the ATD as well.

Thanks to to everyone who took the time to vote us to this championship. Couldn't have done it without you!

And thanks to everyone who took part in MLD11 and made it such an enjoyable experience. It was a lot of fun, and I learned a lot from it. I am honored to be apart of this win my first time through and I hope to see you all in future MLD's!

Leafs Forever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-06-2009, 04:44 PM
  #49
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,537
vCash: 500
Denied!

Eh, what can you do. It was a hell of a series. You guys put up a wicked fight. And you had the only player in the draft I really wanted, and expected to get, and didn't get - Alf Skinner.

I'm pretty proud of this team. I'm proud that we got this far, I'm proud that we lost to a team as good as this, and I'm proud that I was able to bring up two AAA players (Wilson and Janney) into major roles and still see them contribute to a successful team. I know this team wasn't impeccable at all positions, but I was hoping it was good enough in those spots - particularly Janney, Himes, and Leroy Goldsworthy.

But, give me Skinner on the right side over Leroy Goldsworthy, any my team looks vastly different right there. That Skinner pick turned out to be more valuable and strategic than you ever imagined!

Having two forwards better than any of mine (Patrick and Harris) unboubtedly was a major factor too! But I'll always wonder what could have been, if I could have snagged Alf Skinner, pre-merger clutch scorer extraordinaire, before you guys and still put the rest of this team together the same.

Dammit!

Great job on putting together your team. A very worthy winner indeed. I hope you both are going to be ATD/MLD mainstays going forward, having proven your mettle. As for this two-time bridesmaid, it's back to the drawing board.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:55 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.