HFBoards

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

ATD 12 Bob Cole Quater-Finals: 4 Cairo Desert Dogs vs. 5 Syracuse Bulldogs

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-27-2009, 10:57 AM
  #76
Canadiens Fan
Registered User
 
Canadiens Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 735
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jareklajkosz View Post
For what it's worth, Tretiak played behind equally as stacked teams in the '72 Series, and the other tournaments his team was far, far better, as evidenced by the dismantling of Canada in '76.
I don't quite understand.

In 1976 Canada defeated the Russians in the Canada Cup.

And the Russian team in that tournament was by no means a stacked team since the following players at were left at home - Gennady Tsygankov, Yuri Lyapkin, Valeri Kharlamov, Boris Mikhailov, Vladimir Petrov, Vladimir Shadrin, and Alexander Yakushev, all of whom were part of their 1976 Olympic gold medal winning squad.

Canadiens Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2009, 11:20 AM
  #77
jarek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens Fan View Post
I don't quite understand.

In 1976 Canada defeated the Russians in the Canada Cup.

And the Russian team in that tournament was by no means a stacked team since the following players at were left at home - Gennady Tsygankov, Yuri Lyapkin, Valeri Kharlamov, Boris Mikhailov, Vladimir Petrov, Vladimir Shadrin, and Alexander Yakushev, all of whom were part of their 1976 Olympic gold medal winning squad.
1976 Summit Series, or 1974 I guess. Whichever year it was. Either way, Tretiak played behind some very very good teams internationally, so saying that he had to play against some highly stacked teams without context is very misleading. I think Hall's achievements against those stacked Habs teams is more impressive than what Tretiak did to be honest.

jarek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2009, 03:25 PM
  #78
Leafs Forever
Registered User
 
Leafs Forever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,781
vCash: 500
Quote:
No one is arguing with the greatness of Cyclone Taylor. I'm disagreeing with how much of a gap you have between Taylor (your first line center) and Frederickson and Dunderdale (my second & third line centers).

Best Five Finishes in Goals PCHA

Cyclone Taylor - 1, 1, 1, 2, 2
Tommy Dunderdale - 1, 1, 1, 3, 6
Frank Frederickson - 1, 3, 4, 4 (only played 4 years)

Taylor and Dunderdale each led the PCHA in goals 3 times. That would be as close as one could get.
an extra 2-2 is quite a bit better than the 3-6. And I can't help but be curious as to how much Taylor was ahead of the next guy in said years. Not as close as it could get. The reason Taylor didn't have more of a goalscoring record was his time as a defenceman most likely.

Another thing to consider here: as this was the split-league era, differences in scorings are within a league wider than they appear. For example, if you were first in goal-scoring in your league, you were likely top-2 in the world at the year. If you were second, you were only assured top-4. Or if you were, say, 3rd, you were likely top-6, wheras if you were 6th, you were likely top-12 only. The 6th being only 3 spots behind 3rd would suggest things being closer than they really were.

As for Fredrickson's record; as I noted in the matchup earlier, I question his ability to score goals on the line he is playing, flanking two pretty much pure goalscorers.

Quote:
Best Five Finishes in Assists PCHA

Cyclone Taylor - 1, 1, 1, 1, 1
Tommy Dunderdale - 3, 4, 5, 6, 6
Frank Frederickson - 1, 2, 3, 3 (only played 4 years)

Clearly Taylor is second to none in this category.
Taylor was a great goalscorer when given the opportunity, and amongst these three he is second to none in goalscoring as well, but yes, playmaking was more his forte.

Quote:
Best Five Finishes in Points PCHA

Cyclone Taylor - 1, 1, 1, 1, 1
Tommy Dunderdale - 1, 1, 3, 3, 5
Frank Frederickson - 1, 2, 2, 3

Taylor 5 scoring titles, Dunderdale 2 scoring titles, Frederickson 1 scoring title.
Three more scoring titles, or top-2's, vs extra 2 top-6 and top-10 overall finishes..seems pretty wide to me. Your earlier post would have people believe these guys equal. This just illustrates the flaw of only examining top-5's when looking at a player's offense.; especially in the split-league days.

Quote:
Head to Head, Taylor vs. Dunderdale, PCHA

1912-1913 - Dunderdale 23 points Taylor 18 points
1913-1914 - Taylor 39 points Dunderdale 28 points
1914-1915 - Taylor 45 points Dunderdale 27 points
1915-1916 - Taylor 35 points Dunderdale 17 points
1916-1917 - Taylor 29 points Dunderdale 26 points
1917-1918 - Taylor 43 points Dunderdale 20 points
1918-1919 - Taylor 36 points Dunderdale 9 points
1919-1920 - Dunderdale 33 points Taylor 19 points

*Although Taylor played in the PCHA in 1921 and 1922 they were not full schedules so I left them out.
To summarize each season:

-Dunderdale beat Taylor by slim 5. points.
-Taylor beats Dunderdale by 11.
- Taylor beats Dunderdale by 18.
- Taylor beats Dundedale by 18; in this year, Taylor more than doubled Dunderdale's production.
- Taylor beats Dunderdale by slim 3 points.
- Taylor beats Dunderdale by 23 points; Taylor more than doubled Dunderdale's production.
- Taylor beats Dunderdale by 27 points; in this year, Taylor quadrupuled Dunderdale's production.
- Dunderdale beats Taylor by 14 points.

Dunderdale could never beat Taylor in Taylor's prime. The margins between the two are pretty large by this (as they should be- Taylor is the all-time PHA points leader with almost half the games played as the #2 scorer, if I am not mistaken.) Again, just goes to show the flaw at the way you were only looking at top 5's earlier.

Quote:
If we're talking late 60's/early 70's I would peg the talent distribution as ...

NHL 75%, Russia 20%, rest of the world 5%
Don't think Russia has quite that kind of talent yet.

Quote:
Anatoli Firsov

-Soviet MVP: 1968, 1969, and 1971
-Soviet scoring champion: 1966
-Soviet goal-scoring leader: 1966
-IIHF World Championships scoring leader: 1967, 1968, 1969, 1971
-IIHF World Championships goal-scoring leader: 1967, 1968, 1969, 1971
-IIHF World Championships best forward: 1967, 1968, 1971



There's no doubt that missing Firsov was a big blow to the Russians. On the level of a missing Orr, of course not, but closer to the Canadians missing Bobby Hull.
I'm not questioning Firsov's ability (I've had him before) nor how much the Russians missed him- I am questioning whether his value is really worth that of Orr and/or Hull to the Canadians. I think not; we are talking about the best defenceman of all-time and perhaps the best goalscorer of all-time here.


Last edited by Leafs Forever: 11-27-2009 at 03:44 PM.
Leafs Forever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2009, 03:33 PM
  #79
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,831
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafs Forever View Post
The reason Taylor didn't have more of a goaltending record was his time as a defenceman most likely.
Wow, he just did everything, didn't he?

as far as this comparison goes, his time as a defensemen didn't affect it because he was always a rover or center in the PCHA. It was, however, probably why he didn't earn more recognition in my studies of the 1910-1912 NHA.

Quote:
Don't think Russia has quite that kind of talent yet.
Sure they did. i'd say in 1970 they had two of the top-10 players, four of the top-20, and if we went that far, 20 of the top-100.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2009, 03:50 PM
  #80
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
I would say yes.

Anyway, yes, the assist rates apply to every player from their respective era. And this is why it is important to use assists separately and not points, which are distorted based on the assist rate.

Canadiens Fan: Did you use my Morris bio for those "best 5 finishes"? Nice digging!
Aaa, I think I get it now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Wow, he just did everything, didn't he?

as far as this comparison goes, his time as a defensemen didn't affect it because he was always a rover or center in the PCHA. It was, however, probably why he didn't earn more recognition in my studies of the 1910-1912 NHA.



Sure they did. i'd say in 1970 they had two of the top-10 players, four of the top-20, and if we went that far, 20 of the top-100.
You know it!

Perhaps I suppose. But- the percentage would be lower in those late 50's, and early-mid 60's where Hall wasn't at the tail end of his career though, like in that time period. And the gap is still quite wide.

Leafs Forever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2009, 03:50 PM
  #81
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,831
vCash: 500
Not related to the series, but: Canadiens Fan, I see you were able to make it to the SIHR annual meeting (I got my newsletter today). I want to make it to one of those eventually. Was Bill Fitzell there? I'd love to meet that guy. I think he just might be THE pre-eminent hockey historian alive, by virtue of longevity. Also, Brian McFarlane (who made a career out of rewriting his books over and over again but has become a much more serious researcher lately, from the looks of it)

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2009, 03:51 PM
  #82
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,831
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafs Forever View Post
Perhaps I suppose. But- the percentage would be lower in those late 50's, and early-mid 60's where Hall wasn't at the tail end of his career though, like in that time period. And the gap is still quite wide.
Yes, I'd say the percentage would be much lower in 1960 and probably zero in 1950.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2009, 03:57 PM
  #83
Canadiens Fan
Registered User
 
Canadiens Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 735
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafs Forever View Post

As for Fredrickson's record; as I noted in the matchup earlier, I question his ability to score goals on the line he is playing, flanking two pretty much pure goalscorers.
From 1974 - 1976 Steve Shutt's primary center was Pete Mahovlich.

Pete Mahovlich Goals
1973-74 - 36
1974-75 - 35
1975-76 - 34

From 1976 - 1979 Steve Shutt's primary center was Jacques Lemaire.

Jacques Lemaire Goals
1976-77 - 34
1977-78 - 36
1978-79 - 37

From 1979 - 1981 Steve Shutt's primary center was Pierre Larouche.

Pierre Larouche Goals
1979-80 - 50
1980-81 - 25

Each of the center's that played for Steve Shutt seemed to have no decline in their own goals scored.

Needless to say Mike Gartner seemed to score goals with a multitude of different centers.

But two examples.

1980-81 Gartner scores 48 goals. His center Denis Maruk scored 50 goals.

1984-85 Gartner scores 50 goals. His center Bobby Carpenter scored 53 goals.

Centering Shutt and Gartner, Frederickson a man who finished no lower than third in his PCHA scoring career should be able to more than hold his own.

Canadiens Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2009, 04:05 PM
  #84
Canadiens Fan
Registered User
 
Canadiens Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 735
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Not related to the series, but: Canadiens Fan, I see you were able to make it to the SIHR annual meeting (I got my newsletter today). I want to make it to one of those eventually. Was Bill Fitzell there? I'd love to meet that guy. I think he just might be THE pre-eminent hockey historian alive, by virtue of longevity. Also, Brian McFarlane (who made a career out of rewriting his books over and over again but has become a much more serious researcher lately, from the looks of it)
Yes, I was fortunate to be able to make a presentation at the annual SIHR meeting about the Plante book. To be able to do that in front of a large group prominent hockey historians was a real litmus test for the book.

One of those was indeed the incomparable Bill Fitsell who has forgotten more about hockey history than most people ever know. To have Mr. Fitsell not only purchase my book but ask me to sign it was a real honour.

If you don't mind me asking seventies from which part of the country are you from? It sure would be a benefit for all involved for you or any of the other members of this board to attend a SIHR meeting.

Also, thanks for posting the PCHA scoring table, it was worth the dig to find it.


Last edited by Canadiens Fan: 11-27-2009 at 04:11 PM.
Canadiens Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2009, 04:09 PM
  #85
Canadiens Fan
Registered User
 
Canadiens Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 735
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jareklajkosz View Post
1976 Summit Series, or 1974 I guess. Whichever year it was. Either way, Tretiak played behind some very very good teams internationally, so saying that he had to play against some highly stacked teams without context is very misleading. I think Hall's achievements against those stacked Habs teams is more impressive than what Tretiak did to be honest.
I would say that most international teams are very, very good at the very least.

But in context and by way of comparision, in the 1976 Canada Cup, Team Canada fielded 17 Hall of Famers, including 10 players in the ATD top 100 (2008).

As for the Russian squad in that same tournament they had 1 Hall of Famer, and 1 player in the ATD top 100 (2008).

Tretiak.

Canadiens Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2009, 04:49 PM
  #86
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,831
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens Fan View Post
Yes, I was fortunate to be able to make a presentation at the annual SIHR meeting about the Plante book. To be able to do that in front of a large group prominent hockey historians was a real litmus test for the book.

One of those was indeed the incomparable Bill Fitsell who has forgotten more about hockey history than most people ever know. To have Mr. Fitsell not only purchase my book but ask me to sign it was a real honour.

If you don't mind me asking seventies from which part of the country are you from? It sure would be a benefit for all involved for you or any of the other members of this board to attend a SIHR meeting.

Also, thanks for posting the PCHA scoring table, it was worth the dig to find it.
I'm in Regina.

I thought I heard that there was going to be some sort of SIHR thing in Winnipeg and I'd gladly make the trip there. But I don't know where I got that from, because the 2009 meeting wasn't there, and the 2010 meeting is apparently in Toronto.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2009, 05:12 PM
  #87
pappyline
Registered User
 
pappyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mass/formerly Ont
Country: United States
Posts: 4,152
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Yes, I'd say the percentage would be much lower in 1960 and probably zero in 1950.
I really think the percentage was much lower than your estimate for 1970. A badly coached, ill prepared & badly put together mish mash of players came from behind to beat them in 72. A Wha team in 74 had them on the run until some bad lineup decisions & the usual russian hijinks on home ice turned it around. the russians were not that good in 1970.

pappyline is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2009, 05:27 PM
  #88
Canadiens Fan
Registered User
 
Canadiens Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 735
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
I'm in Regina.

I thought I heard that there was going to be some sort of SIHR thing in Winnipeg and I'd gladly make the trip there. But I don't know where I got that from, because the 2009 meeting wasn't there, and the 2010 meeting is apparently in Toronto.
To coincide with the Memorial Cup the SIHR annual general meeting is being held in Brandon, Manitoba on the weekend of May 15th, 2010.

If you would like me to send you more information, just let me know.

The annual fall meeting is being held at the new Hall of Fame resource center in the fall of 2010.

Canadiens Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2009, 06:41 PM
  #89
Leafs Forever
Registered User
 
Leafs Forever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,781
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens Fan View Post
From 1974 - 1976 Steve Shutt's primary center was Pete Mahovlich.

Pete Mahovlich Goals
1973-74 - 36
1974-75 - 35
1975-76 - 34

From 1976 - 1979 Steve Shutt's primary center was Jacques Lemaire.

Jacques Lemaire Goals
1976-77 - 34
1977-78 - 36
1978-79 - 37

From 1979 - 1981 Steve Shutt's primary center was Pierre Larouche.

Pierre Larouche Goals
1979-80 - 50
1980-81 - 25

Each of the center's that played for Steve Shutt seemed to have no decline in their own goals scored.

Needless to say Mike Gartner seemed to score goals with a multitude of different centers.

But two examples.

1980-81 Gartner scores 48 goals. His center Denis Maruk scored 50 goals.

1984-85 Gartner scores 50 goals. His center Bobby Carpenter scored 53 goals.

Centering Shutt and Gartner, Frederickson a man who finished no lower than third in his PCHA scoring career should be able to more than hold his own.
First off- Lemaire scored 24 goals in the 78-79 according to hockeyreference.com

Secondly, who was playing RW with Shutt? Guy Lafeur, who pass as well as he could score (by his top-10's, at least). With Mahovlich and Lemaire, who were described as the set-up men in those lines, it gave the line at least two guys could pass. My problem is your line has one, and he scores goals quite well too, which he won't nearly as well if he's busy being the only one feeding passes.

I am therefore going to ask who was the LW of these lines these two years?

But as you noted, gartner played with a multitude of centres;

In 83-84, his centre was likely Bobby Carpenter- who scored 28 goals, good for about 66th, and 40 assists, good for 69th in the league.

In 87-88 his centre was likely Dale Hunter, who played 74th in assists vs 93rd in goals.

Of course one of the critiscms of Gartner was his never really reaching elite level- which was likely partially caused by being overshadowed on good teams and on the Washington teams where he was the go-to guy, not having a guy to really feed him the puck well.

Leafs Forever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2009, 07:04 PM
  #90
Leafs Forever
Registered User
 
Leafs Forever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,781
vCash: 500
I'll touch up one fourth lines a bit later..but for now

Ebbie Goodfellow-Doug Wilson vs. Zdeno Chara-Cling Johnson

I didn't think I'd get to say this, but I will take great pleasure in doing so: I have the best #1 in this series. And by quite a margin too, I think.

As far as Chara and Goodfellow comparison; Chara's Hart record (Goodfellow's 1,3,4 is likely better than anything Chara's got) is likely not near as good. Goodfellow came in an easier era to win the Hart, but still. Goodfellow didn't win that many AST's, but that likely comes from spending the start of his career as a highscoring centre.

And I'm going to challenge Chara's playoff record, and ask you if it compete with Goodfellow's playoff numbers:

Playoff Goals- 2nd (1934), 8th (1937)
Playoff Assists- 4th (1934)
Playoff Points- 3rd (1934), 10th (1937)

Playoff Defenceman Goals- 6th (1936), 2nd (1937)
Playoff Defenceman Assists- 2nd (1937), 2nd (1940), 9th (1941)
Playoff Defenceman Points- 9th (1936), 1st (1937), 5th (1940)

Not to mention Goodfellow's 3 cups.

Goodfellow was a hard-nosed guy who was also know as a "big defensive star". I think he can go up against Chara in intangibles as well; and particularly with playoff records, Goodfellow as an edge. In addition, Goodfellow is a lot more suited to take on your team, as he doesn't have mobility issues and your team isn't as fast, as to Chara with mine, who has shown he has trouble with speedy teams before.

Johnson vs Wilson

Johnson doesn't compare to Wilson offensively- Johnson was winning his AST's by his intangible work, as evident by never finishing top-5 in defenceman scoring, sometime well-out in defenceman scoring, his AST years. Wilson has a 2nd, 3rd, and two 6th's in defenceman points (In the playoffs he has a 2nd, three 3rd's, and a 6th in defenceman playoff points), and numerous other top 10's besides.

I will give the edge in to Johnson in the intangible department. Speed and suitability to play opposing offences goes to Wilson; Johnson being described as "slow footed" likely doesn't have the speed to lkeep up with my top line and play the game he wants.

Considering ther other First team AST in Johnson's years was Shore, he likely would not have ever won a norris. Now, Wilson didn't face anyone quite as good as Shore, but he did beat out Bourque in his Norris year.


Overall these pairings- Considering your guys don't have near the offense mine do, my top-pairing transition game is likely the better of the two, and my lines are going to get more offense from the blueline to back them up. As your top pairing is dealing with their weakness- great team speed- I don't think they are going to be as effective as mine will on the other side of the puck easier, giving my top pairing a fair edge.

Harvey Pulford-Gus Mortson vs Lloyd Cook-Kevin Hatcher

This one, much like the the nature of my second pairing, is destruction.

Not the easiest comparison considering Pulford is the opposite of both of your defenemen, but I suppose I'll just go for modern vs modern and non NHLer vs non NHLer.

Mortson destroys Hatcher as far as toughness and defensive play is concerned. Again, I present the Hatcher critiscm from Joe Pelletier:

Quote:
Regardless, he was never reputed to be as good in his own zone as he was in the other team's. He seemed susceptible to making boneheaded, risky plays, overhandling the puck and hurting his team defensively. He did not always maximize his size, taking nights off. Outside of the 1992-93 season he just never really could put it all together and be one of the game's truly dominant defenders.
Quote:
Physically he could dominate. He was imposing at 6'4" and 225lbs, and he enjoyed banging bodies, sometimes with a mean streak. Other times, especially as his career advanced, he seemed quite disinterested in the physical game, which for someone of his size is extremely frustrating for coaches and fans alike. He lost a few fights early in his career and seemed to back down over time. Perhaps this was simply because his coaches wanted him on the ice, not by the ice box.
Quote:
He could be guilty of getting out of position to make a big hit. Since he didn't have the lateral mobility to recover he could get burned by such bad reads. He was usually a safe defender when it came to clearing the puck, usually breaking a man with a good pass. He could be guilty of overhandling the puck, and when he did cough up the puck in his own zone, he usually did so royally.
Quote:
Despite these impressive scoring stats, he was never truly among the game's elite defensemen in the 1990s, but rather firmly just a notch below.
I showed the Mortson quotes earlier- all available in his bio.

Mortson didn't have trouble being amongst the game's elite defenceman, making the first AST. I'm also going to question if Hatcher had a better offensive record than the 5, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 10 in scoring amongst defenceman Mortson had.

As far as Pulford vs Cook, well, Pulford pretty much destroys Cook in terms of phsicality, toughness, and defensive ability (Cook is a ? in those aspects), while Cook destroys Pulford in offence. I believe Ultimate hockey both rewarded them with 3 retro norrises, for what they are worth. I can say with confidence Pulford is the 2nd best defenceman of the day; Cook I believe, is less than that, although he played in a somewhat more competitive time in that regard. In terms of them in a matchup alone, it really depends on whom you find more dominant in their aspect of the game given all the facts (All pulford info can be found in his bio, linked in the first page).

A big difference though, is chemistry and suitability. I paired Pulford with another very tough defenceman to make a fearsome pairing, who seemed to be pretty good defensively and can also handle the offensive load of the pairing. You paired Cook up, a questionmark defensively, with a guy who is jsut plain bad defensively, and seemed to be inconsistent in the toughness area. My pairing will be able to go up against any of the lines with it's tremendous defensive ability, and will rough them up with their great toughness. With Mortson there, the pairing is not going to be problematic in the transition, and offense from the blueline portion either.

Your pairing, on the other hand, is a big liability defensively. I aludded to this earlier; with home-ice, if I get the chance to play my top line against this pairing, I likely take this. And this pairing is going to likely get burned against my top line. It's a rather one-dimensional pairign that is going to be a liability. With the signifigant edge in Mortson vs Hatcher, as well as chemistry and suitability to play against opposing teams forward corps, I think my second pairing has a big edge.

Bottom pairings also to come.


Last edited by Leafs Forever: 11-27-2009 at 08:26 PM.
Leafs Forever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2009, 07:39 PM
  #91
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,846
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens Fan View Post
And in 1972 the Russian's were missing Firsov and who was the best forward in the Soviet Union throughout the sixties.
I wasn't making excuses for anybody; just stating that in the Summit Series, Tretiak didn't play against the top 2 players in the world.

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2009, 07:52 PM
  #92
Canadiens Fan
Registered User
 
Canadiens Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 735
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
I wasn't making excuses for anybody; just stating that in the Summit Series, Tretiak didn't play against the top 2 players in the world.
Fair enough. I would agree that Orr was the best player in the world at the time, but let's say that Hull had begun to fall back a bit from number two.

Personally, I would put Phil Esposito ahead of Hull in the fall of 1972. After all, he'd won the last three scoring titles up to that point and was about to win the next two.

Canadiens Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2009, 07:57 PM
  #93
pappyline
Registered User
 
pappyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mass/formerly Ont
Country: United States
Posts: 4,152
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens Fan View Post
Fair enough. I would agree that Orr was the best player in the world at the time, but let's say that Hull had begun to fall back a bit from number two.

Personally, I would put Phil Esposito ahead of Hull in the fall of 1972. After all, he'd won the last three scoring titles up to that point and was about to win the next two.
Espo was never close to Hull in ability.Scoring titles does not always = best player.

pappyline is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2009, 10:41 PM
  #94
Canadiens Fan
Registered User
 
Canadiens Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 735
vCash: 500
Came across this little nuggest about Howe and Mortson.

Globe and Mail, October 29th, 1951

Quote:
The crowd of 13,611 saw the great winger, Howe, at his dazzling best on the second goal early in the second period. Coming out on the run from the bench, he picked up the puck inside the blue-line, rounded Gus Mortson and stick handled the puck around Rollins and into the cage.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafs Forever View Post

Ebbie Goodfellow-Doug Wilson vs. Zdeno Chara-Cling Johnson

I didn't think I'd get to say this, but I will take great pleasure in doing so: I have the best #1 in this series. And by quite a margin too, I think.

As far as Chara and Goodfellow comparison; Chara's Hart record (Goodfellow's 1,3,4 is likely better than anything Chara's got) is likely not near as good. Goodfellow came in an easier era to win the Hart, but still. Goodfellow didn't win that many AST's, but that likely comes from spending the start of his career as a highscoring centre.
You're defensive comparision almost entirely relies on offensive statistics. Of course, that is merely one aspect of being a blueliner. Let's look at the first pairings in totality, and not just one aspect.

All-Star selections

Zdeno Chara - First Team 2 times, Second Team 2 times
Ching Johnson - First Team 2 times, Second Team 2 times
Ebbie Goodfellow - First Team 2 times, Second Team 1 time
Doug Wilson - First Team 1 time, Second Team 2 times

Chara-Johnson = 8 all-star nominations
Goodfellow-Wilson = 6 all-star nominations

Hart Trophy Voting

Chara - 2004 (25th place), 2006 (19th place), 2008 (14th place), 2009 (8th place)
Johnson - 1928 (5th place), 1932 (2nd place)
Goodfellow - 1937 (3rd place), 1940 (1st place)
Wilson - 1982 (9th place)

Chara-Johnson = 6 Hart Trophy placements
Goodfellow-Wilson - 3 Hart Trophy placements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafs Forever View Post
Goodfellow was a hard-nosed guy who was also know as a "big defensive star".
Can you please prove this ?? I just went through the entire Globe and Mail archive as well as my books and you're write up and was unable to find much on Goodfellow's defensive attributes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafs Forever View Post
I think he can go up against Chara in intangibles as well; and particularly with playoff records, Goodfellow as an edge.
From a scoring perspective, a small edge, not as much as you claim.

Goodfellow regular season points per game average = .58
Goodfellow playoff points per game average = .36

Chara regular season points per game average = .42
Chara playoff points per game average = .32

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafs Forever View Post
I will give the edge in to Johnson in the intangible department. Speed and suitability to play opposing offences goes to Wilson; Johnson being described as "slow footed" likely doesn't have the speed to keep up with my top line and play the game he wants.
I would argue that suitablity to play opposing offenses is in the favour of Ching Johnson, not Wilson.

Quote:
Globe and Mail, April 5th, 1937

Complete value for their 4 to 0 win. Rangers beat Maroons from net to net all the way. Their speed was dazzling, their craft devastating, and the jolts, hooks, and "holds" handed out by their Ching Johnson-led defense utterly demoralizing to the frantic Maroon front lines.
Quote:
Globe and Mail, April 9th, 1937

A moment later Ching Johnson stopped Bruneteau's drive ... Ching Johnson carried the puck the length of the ice ... Ching Johnson got in to stop Mackie's drive from right wing on a rush with Wally Kilrea.

All teams ... get away with as much interference as possible and, naturally, some of them are more proficent than others. Occasionally erring players are penalized and games are lost during their absence but even under these conditions it has been profitable to adhere to the nuisance. We think that the Ranger defensemen have always been past masters in this art, with good natured Ching Johnson as the ace performer.

Most of this interference occurs near the boards, preferably at the end of the ice surface, and is overlooked ninety percent of the time - at least by the officials. Defensemen will hold or shove attackers into the boards, knowing that as a general rule, the worst they can get out of it is a face-off in their own zone. We remember one night in Madison Square Garden when Johnson held the late Howie Morenz helpless against the side of the rink. The whistle roared to signify a penalty but in that fraction of a second Morenz hit his big tormentor on the top of his nearly bald head. Ching was chased as well as hurt, but he thought that was all right when Morenz received a major. We mention this incident as only one of the many numerous ones in the career of Ching Johnson.
In this example, Johnson seem's to have little trouble holding the great Howie Morenz, in addition to frustrating him out of his game. He figures to do the same in this series.

Quote:
Globe and Mail, April 14th, 1937

Ching Johnson got the puck off Barry's stick after the Detroit centre had stickhandled his way in front of the net.
A clear example of Johnson's defensive skill beyond his physical attributes.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafs Forever View Post
Considering ther other First team AST in Johnson's years was Shore, he likely would not have ever won a norris.
That would be an incorrect assumption.

Quote:
All-Star Team Voting for 1931-32

Source: Wednesday, March 2, 1932; Globe & Mail, page 12


The newspaper listed the all-stars of each writer over the course of several weeks. I'm not going to go through and add all of that up myself. They do provide some aggregated data, though. There were 32 writers in total.

No players earned a unanimous spot on the all-star team. Ching Johnson (1st team Defense) earned the most votes; he was chosen by "all but two" writers and "22 times on the first team" (therefore he must have received 22 first-place votes and 8 second-place votes). Eddie Shore (1st team D) and Bill Cook (1st team RW) were selected by 29 writers; Charlie Conacher (2nd team RW) was listed on 27 ballots, Chuck Gardiner (1st team G) on 26 and Busher Jackson (1st team LW) on 18.
If they had the Norris Trophy in 1932 Ching Johnson would have been the winner.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I also found this little tidbit about Ching Johnson and Eddie Shore.

Quote:
Globe and Mail, November 13th, 1929

There is much joy around Madison Square Garden today. Ching Johnson, the great Ranger defenseman, has signed a contract and will chase the puck again while his supporters cheer and his enemies jeer ... There is not a better natured hockeyist in existence than the amaible Ching but he has an unusual way of checking which confounds his critics and upsets his opponents. "Elbows" Harry Broadbent never had anything on Johnson the latter being most playful in the art of using his arms to ward off attackers. But "it's all fun" as far as Johnson is concerned and even opposing players are among his most loyal admirers. Johnson can take the bumps as well as deliver them, and he stepped into many terrific jolts, most of them engineered by the Bruins at Boston, where they would willingly play $10,000 to keep Johnson out of hockey. The latter invariably has selected Eddie Shore as his body-checking victim, and the moans and groans of disapproval in the Hub have been something out of the ordinary. Shore is a great player. He is colorful. In Boston he is an idol and he knows how to play to the gallery. His specialty is falling to the ice, as if in tremendous pain. So Johnson, an obliging sort of player, has helped along the hero act by upsetting Shore at every opportunity. May the good work continue.
If Ching Johnson was this much of a pain to the great Eddie Shore I can only imagine the effect he will have on the opposition alongside Zdeno Chara.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

More about Ching Johnson.

Quote:
Globe and Mail, February 24th, 1932

During the regular periods the Bruins outplayed their rivals by an impressive margin but Ching Johnson's spectacular defense work kept the Bostonians in check. Johnson also bore the brunt of the Rangers attack up to the overtime.
Quote:
Globe and Mail, March 23rd, 1935

Canadiens, the mystery team of the playoff series, and Rangers, in and outers present an intriguing problem. Nobody knows what either would do, but the fact is admitted that hard-bitten veterans like the Cook brothers, Frank Boucher, and Ching Johnson go places when the money looms enticingly just ahead.
Quote:
Globe and Mail, March 16th, 1937

Johnson, colorful defenseman who lured thousands of hockey patrons into Madison Square Garden to see him bowel over the enemy.


Last edited by Canadiens Fan: 11-27-2009 at 10:47 PM.
Canadiens Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2009, 10:51 PM
  #95
Hockey Outsider
Registered User
 
Hockey Outsider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,353
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens Fan View Post
You're defensive comparision almost entirely relies on offensive statistics. Of course, that is merely one aspect of being a blueliner. Let's look at the first pairings in totality, and not just one aspect.

All-Star selections

Zdeno Chara - First Team 2 times, Second Team 2 times
Ching Johnson - First Team 2 times, Second Team 2 times
Ebbie Goodfellow - First Team 2 times, Second Team 1 time
Doug Wilson - First Team 1 time, Second Team 2 times

Chara-Johnson = 8 all-star nominations
Goodfellow-Wilson = 6 all-star nominations

Hart Trophy Voting

Chara - 2004 (25th place), 2006 (19th place), 2008 (14th place), 2009 (8th place)
Johnson - 1928 (5th place), 1932 (2nd place)
Goodfellow - 1937 (3rd place), 1940 (1st place)
Wilson - 1982 (9th place)

Chara-Johnson = 6 Hart Trophy placements
Goodfellow-Wilson - 3 Hart Trophy placements
Some of those defensemen received so few Hart trophy votes that they're hardly meaningful.

Chara
2004 - 3 votes out of a possible 1,050
2006 - 4 votes out of a possible 1,290
2008 - 4 votes out of a possible 1,340

Wilson
1982 - 6 votes out of a possible 315

In all four cases we're looking at less than 2% of the maximum available votes. This is hardly meaningful and mostly likely happened because 1-2 voters gave Chara & Wilson a last-place vote. My "revised" number would give the Chara-Johnson pair a 3-2 (rather than a 6-3) advantage in years as a Hart candidate.

====

I have a newspaper article from the Globe & Mail, on April 20th, 1933, page 12, which implies that the three best defensive defensemen in the league (in no particular order) are Johnson, Clancy and Hitchman.


Last edited by Hockey Outsider: 11-27-2009 at 11:03 PM.
Hockey Outsider is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2009, 10:52 PM
  #96
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,513
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens Fan View Post
If they had the Norris Trophy in 1932 Ching Johnson would have been the winner.
I believe voting was done for right and left defence separately at the time, so Johnson wasn't directly compared to Shore. The All-Star voting can't tell us who would have won the Norris.

overpass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2009, 10:58 PM
  #97
Canadiens Fan
Registered User
 
Canadiens Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 735
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
I believe voting was done for right and left defence separately at the time, so Johnson wasn't directly compared to Shore. The All-Star voting can't tell us who would have won the Norris.
In 1932, Johnson finished second in Hart Trophy voting to Howie Morenz, in addition to garnering the most all-star votes furthering a retroactive Norris claim.

Canadiens Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2009, 11:10 PM
  #98
Leafs Forever
Registered User
 
Leafs Forever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,781
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens Fan View Post
In 1932, Johnson finished second in Hart Trophy voting to Howie Morenz, in addition to garnering the most all-star votes furthering a retroactive Norris claim.
Those all-star votes were against questionable. And hart isn't really defined as best player, just most valuable.

Where did Shore rank in hart voting?

Ultimate hockey seems to have found Shore the better in that year.

Leafs Forever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2009, 11:21 PM
  #99
Canadiens Fan
Registered User
 
Canadiens Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 735
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafs Forever View Post
Those all-star votes were against questionable. And hart isn't really defined as best player, just most valuable.

Where did Shore rank in hart voting?

Ultimate hockey seems to have found Shore the better in that year.
It appears that only two players received votes for the Hart Trophy that season.

(from BM67's original post in History of Hockey, on page 5 of the Awards forum)
1931-32
HART:


1. Howie Morenz, Mtl C
2. Ching Johnson, NYR D

And again, the original All-Star voting article as it appeared in the Globe and Mail.

Quote:
All-Star Team Voting for 1931-32

Source: Wednesday, March 2, 1932; Globe & Mail, page 12


The newspaper listed the all-stars of each writer over the course of several weeks. I'm not going to go through and add all of that up myself. They do provide some aggregated data, though. There were 32 writers in total.

No players earned a unanimous spot on the all-star team. Ching Johnson (1st team Defense) earned the most votes; he was chosen by "all but two" writers and "22 times on the first team" (therefore he must have received 22 first-place votes and 8 second-place votes). Eddie Shore (1st team D) and Bill Cook (1st team RW) were selected by 29 writers; Charlie Conacher (2nd team RW) was listed on 27 ballots, Chuck Gardiner (1st team G) on 26 and Busher Jackson (1st team LW) on 18.

Canadiens Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2009, 11:37 PM
  #100
Leafs Forever
Registered User
 
Leafs Forever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,781
vCash: 500
Quote:
Came across this little nuggest about Howe and Mortson.

Globe and Mail, October 29th, 1951
Not that one instance necessarily means Mortson is useless against Howe. If I really dig into those archives, I can make almost any defenceman look bad by focusing on a bad moment or game. Just an example:

Quote:
On the defense, he and "Red" Stuart held the Ottawa Attackers at bay with unexpected skill, and on the attack, Randall bored right in on the net in telling fashion. Severeal times he beat the Gerard-Boucher-Clancy second line with ridiculous ease.
(To explain, Clancy would be inestered into the pairing later in the game). Randall got by Gerard and Clancy with ease, two guys better than any of your defencemen. Does thi mean if I employ Randall against Gerard and Clancy had I faced them, or against yours because your guys are worse than these two, Randall will get by, succeed against them "with ridiculous ease", and outshine them?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
You're defensive comparision almost entirely relies on offensive statistics. Of course, that is merely one aspect of being a blueliner. Let's look at the first pairings in totality, and not just one aspect.

All-Star selections

Zdeno Chara - First Team 2 times, Second Team 2 times
Ching Johnson - First Team 2 times, Second Team 2 times
Ebbie Goodfellow - First Team 2 times, Second Team 1 time
Doug Wilson - First Team 1 time, Second Team 2 times

Chara-Johnson = 8 all-star nominations
Goodfellow-Wilson = 6 all-star nominations
I was trying to note intangibles as well; the speed problems can limit them somewhat with your pairing.

The reason Goodfellow didn't have more AST's was his starting out as a highscoring centre (which he exceled at) in the beginning of his career.

As for the difference between Johnson and Wilson, well , Johnson had Shore, clancy, Mantha, Conacher, Horner, and Day to compete, as opposed to Wilson who had Bourque, coffey, Potvin, MacInnis, Chelios, Mark Howe, and Robinson to deal with over the course of the 80s.

Quote:
Hart Trophy Voting

Chara - 2004 (25th place), 2006 (19th place), 2008 (14th place), 2009 (8th place)
Johnson - 1928 (5th place), 1932 (2nd place)
Goodfellow - 1937 (3rd place), 1940 (1st place)
Wilson - 1982 (9th place)

Chara-Johnson = 6 Hart Trophy placements
Goodfellow-Wilson - 3 Hart Trophy placements
Here's a question- which is better; a 25th, a 19th, and a 14th in hart voting, or a hart win? Again, this is going back to what you were trying to do earlier with the with top 5's; just like in top 5's, hart placements aren't always created equal. Did hart voting even extend to the 25's in Goodfellow's day? I highly doubt Goodfellow was worse than say 25th in hart voting in years where he wasn't on ballot for hart voting.

As Hockey Outsider noted, those finishes aren't meaningful.

I also got Goodfellow coming 4th in Hart voting in 1931..is that wrong? He was a forward at the time and aspects of a player don't always translate between forward and defenceman, but as Goodfellow's valuability to his teams did evidently translate, I think it holds value.


Quote:
Can you please prove this ?? I just went through the entire Globe and Mail archive as well as my books and you're write up and was unable to find much on Goodfellow's defensive attributes.

Here's the quote in question:

Quote:
The Wings broke camp here before Adams had a chance to analyze the outburst of Ebbie Goodfellow, his big defensive star from Ottawa, who felt a complete change in the attitude of the team was necessary before the Wings could hit a winning stride.-Globe and Mail
As for the hard-nosed bit:

Quote:
"He was a good one," (undrafted player) said of this player. "One of the real stars of the league. He was known at that time as one of the defensemen who could shoot a heavy puck and was one of the hardest shots in the league. He was a hard-nosed player, but a real nice fellow."-Ultimate Hockey
(taken from a bio another made for him)

But an in-game account of toughness:

Quote:
Ebbie Goodfellow's aggressive tactics were wasted, as the Bruins regained their winning stride after two setbacks. Goodfellow engaged in two fist-fights during the game and divided the honors with the Boston fisticuffers. Goodfellow's first-period bout with Jack Portland, 215-pound defenceman, was short and sweet, and the Red Wing was sent sprawling by a right to the jaw. In the next frame, however, Goodfellow had all the better of the battle with Ray Getliffe, and, after he connected about five times on that Bruin's jaw, both drew major penalties.-Globe and Mail

Perhaps you were focusing only on in-game accounts?


Quote:
From a scoring perspective, a small edge, not as much as you claim.

Goodfellow regular season points per game average = .58
Goodfellow playoff points per game average = .36

Chara regular season points per game average = .42
Chara playoff points per game average = .32
Well I am going to come right out and question this as A. Goodfellow is the better regular season offensive too and B. What was the average percentage drop for defenceman in these two era's?

And I am going to challenge you to show Chara's points amongst defenceman in the playoffs. In addition to reflecting Goodfellow's superiority, they also reflect Chara's relative inexperience in the playoffs compared to Goodfellow's.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
I would argue that suitablity to play opposing offenses is in the favour of Ching Johnson, not Wilson.





In this example, Johnson seem's to have little trouble holding the great Howie Morenz, in addition to frustrating him out of his game. He figures to do the same in this series.



A clear example of Johnson's defensive skill beyond his physical attributes.
Well first off, it seems like Johnson handled Morenz along the boards- where speed doesn't play as much of a factor and Johnson can play his clutch and grab game, which seems to be his bread and butter to somewhat make up for his speed issues based on this LOH quote:

Quote:
More significantly, he perfected the technique of nullifying the opposition by clutching and grabbing them as discreetly as possible - a pragmatic defensive strategy for the wily but slow-footed rearguard.
Secondly, I wouldn't call it a "clear" example, as it doesn't exactly say how Johnson got the puck off of the opposing guy's stick; by pushing him off it or by using stickwrok, but at anyrate based on the LOH quote, Johnson's defensive ability does stem primarily from his body work. On the quote on Morenz too.

Blake is the primary puck winner for my line most likely, who can handle the rought stuff pretty well. But this doesn't defend your #1 defenceman against speed who you can't defend as well as I believe we have seen Chara struggle in the playoffs against a speedy Buffalo team. And is Johnson going to fare as well on the rush, where my speedsters could get around him due to sheer speed before Johnson can employ his clutch and grab game? I don't think he is going to fare well in that regard.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
That would be an incorrect assumption.



If they had the Norris Trophy in 1932 Ching Johnson would have been the winner.
As overpass noted, they did LD-RD at the time.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
I also found this little tidbit about Ching Johnson and Eddie Shore.



If Ching Johnson was this much of a pain to the great Eddie Shore I can only imagine the effect he will have on the opposition alongside Zdeno Chara.
That last bit confuses me- somewhat suggesting Shore as a diver. Interesting though; although I am not questioning his physicality ability. But Shore sought the rough stuff- didn't try to get or speed away from it to my knowledge.

Leafs Forever 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 05:22 PM.

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.