Count me in in the ''keep this thread alive'' clan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cognition
I think we should keep it. Draft threads are piling up so much, keeping as much as possible out of them can only help. This thread has the duel benefit of a) keeping the draft thread under control, and b) letting people who want to discuss this not have their posts drowned.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Modo
I also want this thread to stay as-is. Draft threads are cluttered enough even the picks themselves are getting drowned by ongoing debates.
Agreed, think of it as a precursor to the assassination thread, I like the idea.
I think about my own blueline, where I have only 2 defensemen and think I'm behind, but then I realize how many other teams still only have 2 D. I think there are some teams that only have 1 even. It's kinda funny how 40 teams affects things. I think you're fine on the blueline for now, but another one with your next pick may not be a terrible idea, just so you don't fall too far behind.
BPA unless it's RW or goal. No need to rush any position yet.
Are you saying that exclusively in reference to his team, or as a general comment on team-building philosophy in this draft? I've been keeping a curious eye on your team and they way you're building it, so the comment piqued my interest.
Are you saying that exclusively in reference to his team, or as a general comment on team-building philosophy in this draft? I've been keeping a curious eye on your team and they way you're building it, so the comment piqued my interest.
Specifically to this circumstance. That said, it is also my general philosophy. I always intend with my 4 picks in the late 2nd/early 3rd to come away with two defencemen, but because of how other people picked, the gap between the best forwards and the best defencemen was just too great, so I went with four forwards. But then with my 4th and 5th rounders, I clearly needed defencemen, so I bit the bullet and went that route, irregardless of who there was. Johnson was good value, but Zubov was not as good, but I felt that if I didn't take him, the only way to get a true PPQB was to go with a specialist. So, I guess my strategy is to try to get the best player, but, I have biases to needs and overall goals.
Specifically to this circumstance. That said, it is also my general philosophy. I always intend with my 4 picks in the late 2nd/early 3rd to come away with two defencemen, but because of how other people picked, the gap between the best forwards and the best defencemen was just too great, so I went with four forwards. But then with my 4th and 5th rounders, I clearly needed defencemen, so I bit the bullet and went that route, irregardless of who there was. Johnson was good value, but Zubov was not as good, but I felt that if I didn't take him, the only way to get a true PPQB was to go with a specialist. So, I guess my strategy is to try to get the best player, but, I have biases to needs and overall goals.
Interesting... that's almost exactly how I figured your response was going to be though, haha.
Keep it up, you build good teams with lots of unique character.
Think I'm set on RW for a while, time to build the rest of my team. I'm thinking 2nd line C should be next, unless a gem at LW is spotted.
Or should I focus more on padding my blueline, which is more or less average at the moment?
I think I agree with Nalyd on the BPA position now. You've got five forwards and two defensemen; theoretically it's good to keep around a 2:1 ratio of them if you want to stay balanced. I'd take whatever position you like on the board most, then go the other direction with your next pick after. All IMO of course. (and not really necessary in your shoes)
----------------------------------------------
Side comment- I think it would be a good idea for people asking their advice to start off with the following bolded word just to sort things out easier; I'm oddly organized today. Without further ado:
QUESTION
How good is the functionality of a Nels Stewart-Ron Francis-Martin St.Louis line? Would I be getting particularly docked for the mesh here, particularly for puck winning? I'm wondering if the line can function in a puck-winning by committee kind of thing. (I know Nels isn't known for it, quite the opposite, but he's definitely go the right kind of body type for it, and he's got the nasty. Maybe with the right coach...)
I don't like St. Louis on the line, his speed actually works against him, especially as he is best when using his linemates on the rush. He could easily be often off-side with slower linemates. You'd be better off getting a center who can score and anchor the second line to St. Louis.
I really don't like the look of the line to be honest... and it's not necessarily because you don't have a designated "puck-winner" or anything stupid like that (although all the guys I'm thinking of that would make the line look good are puck winners lol, so maybe that's a subconscious hint). Depending on who's available with your next set of picks, you should construct the lines differently, maybe:
Stewart - Francis - (a guy like Northcott)
XXXXX - XXXXXX - St. Louis
So far I have Robinson and Stanley on my blueline. If I was to draft a dman, what route do ppl think I should go? Defensive or offensive or balanced 3rd to pair with Robinson? or to start off my 2nd pairing?
I don't like St. Louis on the line, his speed actually works against him, especially as he is best when using his linemates on the rush. He could easily be often off-side with slower linemates. You'd be better off getting a center who can score and anchor the second line to St. Louis.
Not to mention Stewart was at his best with two fast bruisers (Babe Seibert and Hooley Smith) to dominate the corners and backcheck for him. Francis and St. Louis will both backcheck, but the pair of Lady Byng winners aren't exactly going to scare anyone.
Agree that St. Louis is probably best as the centerpiece of a second line.
Actually, St. Louis is notorious for making his centers better, so you could even move Stewart back to center and put him with St. Louis, with Francis centering the second line (I think Francis is a much better 2nd line center than a 1st liner).
So far I have Robinson and Stanley on my blueline. If I was to draft a dman, what route do ppl think I should go? Defensive or offensive or balanced 3rd to pair with Robinson? or to start off my 2nd pairing?
I would keep Robinson and Stanley together.
And then draft the best European prospect ever, a man compared to the great Bobby Orr.*
Agreed. You don't want to put a lesser defenseman out there getting the kind of minutes Robinson will be getting. Stick Stanley on that pairing and you have a very strong 2-way first unit. Start your second pairing with the best defenseman available, regardless of style. We're too thin on talent at 40 teams to get too picky.
Anybody else think drafting coaches is pointless since we do all the line and units and built our team for our strategy all by ourselves?
I want my coach to make the line and units for my team, and adjust them in games if necessary. Any lines I post are what I think my coach might do and are for the benefit of other GMs to make it easier to evaluate my team.
If your lines and units don't match your coach's usual tactics, I might assume he's going to change them on you when I evaluate your team.
If you draft Scotty Bowman, part of the reason is because of his ability to juggle lines and put players in position to succeed. Your team definitely isn't going to stick 100% to the lines posted in the roster thread if Scotty Bowman is your coach.
Maltsev is the better offensive player. Go with him.
What do you guys think of this?
Denneny - Keats - Watson at ES.
Denneny - Keats - Martinec on the PP.
I'd let Martinec run his own PP, he was an excellent playmaker and had tremendous hockey sense and vision. I'd put a net crasher with Denneny and Keats, and moved Martinec down to 2nd PP unit to run his own show.
I can't decide whether or not Bailey is a good fit on my top line or if I'd be better off starting a second line with him.
Blake-Howe-Bailey
Thoughts?
Put Bailey on the top line. Neither Blake nor Howe is a guy who can be a high-end digger for you, so Bailey adds something to the unit, and you're not going to find a better overall winger than him at this point, anyway. He's more of a glue guy than a guy you build a line around, so use him as such.
