HFBoards

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

MLD2011 Sir Montagu Allan Rnd 1: Philadelphia Quakers (2) vs Pittsburgh Hornets (7)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-15-2011, 07:10 PM
  #26
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
Didn't Shorty play quite a bit of defense?

Either way, it doesn't really matter. The whole "he's better than Shorty" argument doesn't mean a whole lot when one's a first liner and the other is a fourth. WhaȚ really matters is how he stacks up against other first liners.

As for Shorty being in the Hall, I've already said it has more to do with his medical condition and career ending injury.
I am not sure about the last part, I think it has to do with the Hamilton revolt.

I agree that there's really not much need to compare them, I was only responding to a point that Red was the 2nd-best player on his line when with Burch and Shorty. He wasn't necessarily.

also, what the hell character is that at the end of the word "what" and how did you manage to accidentally type it instead of a "t"?

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2011, 07:16 PM
  #27
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,503
vCash: 844
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
I'm going to plead the 5th about Shepelev. I don't know enough about him to say anything conclusively.
Fair enough, he is a fairly enigmatic player to analyze. But would you say they are pretty close, all things considered?

Quote:
Maybe, maybe not. have you seen my Himes bio from MLD11? He was a pretty gutsy little player himself. Maybe at Ftorek's level, maybe not, or maybe the era and the fact that the NY Times was my only source of research two summers ago is what prevented it from being better-substantiated than Ftorek.
I hadn't, but I just looked it up. It looks like mostly circumstantial stuff, suggesting some of those things but nothing really concrete whereas Ftorek's strengths in those areas are much more supported and substantiated. It adds a little bit to his intangibles resume, but definitely not to the level that Ftorek has if you ask me.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2011, 07:44 PM
  #28
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,503
vCash: 844
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
4th Lines

Rick Dudley-Stephane Yelle-Mark Johnson

vs.

Dallas Drake-Mike Sillinger-Tom Fitzgerald

The LW matchup is between Dallas Drake and Rick Dudley. Both are solid, prototypical bottom 6 forwards. Both are physical guys that like to forecheck and battle in the corners. In terms of toughness and physicality, I'd probably give an advantage to Dudley. But in terms of two-way play, an advantage goes to Drake. Both were good skaters. I think they're about even considering all of those previous things until you come to offense. Their career adjusted PPGs in the NHL are about .03 away in favor of Drake, but that is also taking away Dudley's best years where he played in the WHA. Using seventies formula of .65xWHA points=NHL point totals, those years come out as 53, 57, 46, and 24 points. And statistically, assuming those were in the same amount of games, would be his 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 6th best seasons in the NHL. Considering that, I think it's safe to say that would make Dudley's career adjusted, adjusted PPG higher than Drake's. Overall, I'd give an extremely slight advantage to Dudley, but it's not very big. It's mostly due to slightly better offense.

Sillinger defined journeyman, being a good faceoff guy and chipping in points and decent two-way play. Yelle is a purely defensive specialist to play on my PK. Sillinger is much better offensively, but Yelle is also a superior defensive player and PKer. When looking at them being all around players, Sillinger is a better player, but I didn't pick the best player when I picked Yelle, and I knew that. I picked him to play a specialized role, and he is elite at that role. I'd call Sillinger a better overall player, but Yelle fits my team better for what their roles are compared to Sillinger. But, I'd argue Yelle is the more valuable player overall because he is elite at a few things, whereas Sillinger was decent at a lot of them. Considering the small roles that these players are playing, the fact that Yelle can fill an elite role on my team makes him more valuable in my eyes.

That takes us to Mark Johnson and Tom Fitzgerald. Johnson is no doubt the better offensive player, having almost double the career adjusted PPG of Fitzgerald. Johnson was noted for having great hands, very good speed, and being a good two-way player. Fitzgerald was more of your run of the mill 4th liner, contributing good defensive play and being a hard working grinder. Fitzgerald might be a little bit better defensively, but it isn't even close to the gap between them offensively, which is what tips the scales in the favor of Mark Johnson.

Overall, the 4th lines are a slight advantage to Philadelphia. Philadelphia's group is a little better offensively due to Dudley's slight advantage over Drake and Johnson's sizable advantage over Fitzgerald. Defensively, the Hornets' group is probably a little bit better, with all 3 players being good two-way players, whereas Philadelphia boasts a guy that's average defensively, a good two-way player, and a guy that's the best defensively on either 4th line in Yelle.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2011, 08:05 PM
  #29
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiLLY_ShOE1721 View Post
[The LW matchup is between Dallas Drake and Rick Dudley. Both are solid, prototypical bottom 6 forwards. Both are physical guys that like to forecheck and battle in the corners. In terms of toughness and physicality, I'd probably give an advantage to Dudley. But in terms of two-way play, an advantage goes to Drake. Both were good skaters.
Are you sure about that? Drake was often one of the most physical forwards in the league. Was Dudley ever at that level?

Quote:
I think they're about even considering all of those previous things until you come to offense. Their career adjusted PPGs in the NHL are about .03 away in favor of Drake,
...and Drake managed to do that despite playing until age 39 and over 3X as many games...

Quote:
but that is also taking away Dudley's best years where he played in the WHA. Using seventies formula of .65xWHA points=NHL point totals, those years come out as 53, 57, 46, and 24 points. And statistically, assuming those were in the same amount of games, would be his 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 6th best seasons in the NHL. Considering that, I think it's safe to say that would make Dudley's career adjusted, adjusted PPG higher than Drake's. Overall, I'd give an extremely slight advantage to Dudley, but it's not very big. It's mostly due to slightly better offense.
That would be three seasons in the 40-50% range as far as percentages go. So he'd have a 59%, and then those three, and then a 30%. Drake didn't have that 59% peak season, but his percentages are 48, 44, 43, 40, 37, 36, 36, 34, 31. Basically, compare Dudley's five most impressive seasons to Drake's, they're about even... and then Drake has six more on top of that as a serviceable 29-36-point grinder.

Quote:
That takes us to Mark Johnson and Tom Fitzgerald. Johnson is no doubt the better offensive player, having almost double the career adjusted PPG of Fitzgerald. Johnson was noted for having great hands, very good speed, and being a good two-way player. Fitzgerald was more of your run of the mill 4th liner, contributing good defensive play and being a hard working grinder. Fitzgerald might be a little bit better defensively, but it isn't even close to the gap between them offensively, which is what tips the scales in the favor of Mark Johnson.
this is where that whole thing about 4th lines not being that far off at even strength comes in. Johnson got a ton of his points on the PP and averaged 34 adjusted per 80 games in his short career. Fitzgerald averaged 25 in his career that was nearly twice as long. From 1999-2004 Fitzgerald averaged 27 and that is still in a lot more games than Johnson ever played. The difference in ES offensive abilities of both players is really not much more than 20%. If one will generate 25 points from the 4th line, the other would generate 30, which doesn't really constitute a huge gap. Fitzgerald was a very good defensive forward; a few tiers ahead of Johnson. In fourth line roles it is definitely arguable that he's more valuable.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2011, 08:10 PM
  #30
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,503
vCash: 844
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
1st Pairings

Earlier I did a comparison between Alex Smith and Jim Morrison because someone had pointed out that Morrison was definitely a better offensive player than Smith. Here's what I found:

Quote:
Jim Morrison vs. Alex Smith

Earlier seventies said that Smith wasn't as good as Morrison offensively. I wasn't so sure about that. Here is a comparison in both finishes and Vs2. Finishes were cut off at top 15.

Goals

Morrison-3, 3, 9, 12, 13, 15
Smith-4, 4, 6, 8, 10

Assists

Morrison-5, 5, 5, 8, 10, 16
Smith-1, 8, 9, 10, 11, 11, 12

Points

Morrison-7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 11
Smith-6, 6, 7, 7, 8, 11, 14

Vs2 Goals

Morrison-80, 75, 45, 43, 33, 23
Smith-90, 86, 60, 42, 36

Vs2 Assists

Morrison-79, 66, 57, 46, 44, 38
Smith-100, 80, 57, 46, 43, 42, 32

Vs2 Points

Morrison-79, 59, 49, 49, 38, 38
Smith-81, 74, 54, 44, 43, 40, 39
Basically, the conclusion was that they are about equal offensively. But, Morrison was known more as an offensive defenseman, whereas I was able to unearth some quotes about Smith's defensive play and physicality. I believe that is what tips this matchup in Philadelphia's favor.

A legitimate comparison of Rick Smith and Phat Wilson is impossible, to be honest. But, I think it's safe to conclude that Wilson leading scoring among defensemen in his league 9 times and being top 10 in points overall 9 times makes him a significantly better player offensively, no matter what league we're talking about. Smith was more of a stay at home defenseman who was at his best when you didn't notice him. Smith was likely better defensively, although there is no real way to decide. I'm basing that on him being a good NHL defenseman against proven competition rather than being the Bobby Orr of amateur hockey like Wilson. Overall, I'm not convinced that the gap defensively is large enough to make up for the Grand Canyon sized gap offensively. Overall, I think Wilson is the more effective and valuable defenseman. While he was known as a good puck rushing defenseman, he didn't have a reputation of being bad in his own zone. He was just that good offensively.

Overall, I'd say 1st pairings are a definite edge to Philadelphia. Smith was a better player than Morrison, and I think Wilson's offensive abilities outweigh Smith's possible advantage in defensive ability. Philadelphia's side will definitely provide more offense.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2011, 08:21 PM
  #31
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,503
vCash: 844
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Are you sure about that? Drake was often one of the most physical forwards in the league. Was Dudley ever at that level?
I think so. Looking at PIM totals, Drake never cracked 100PIM whereas Dudley cracked it 5 times between the WHA and NHL(4 in WHA, 1 in NHL). I'll be the first to admit that that had a decent bit to do with era, but Dudley definitely was a higher PIM guy. Some words that were used to describe him "well known for his pugnacious style of play", "with his vigorous skating and energetic checking, it was easy to like the hard working Rick. He added a level of abrasiveness which gave the Sabres a bit of an edge...He played with great passion and it rubbed off infectiously on his teammates", "People called our third line the Kamikaze kids - Lorentz, Rick Dudley, and Brian Spencer - not scoring a lot but creating mayhem with their forechecking.", "a genuine wild man".
Quote:
...and Drake managed to do that despite playing until age 39 and over 3X as many games...
True. It depends upon the interpretation of having a better PPG or having longevity at a lower PPG.

Quote:
this is where that whole thing about 4th lines not being that far off at even strength comes in. Johnson got a ton of his points on the PP and averaged 34 adjusted per 80 games in his short career. Fitzgerald averaged 25 in his career that was nearly twice as long. From 1999-2004 Fitzgerald averaged 27 and that is still in a lot more games than Johnson ever played. The difference in ES offensive abilities of both players is really not much more than 20%. If one will generate 25 points from the 4th line, the other would generate 30, which doesn't really constitute a huge gap. Fitzgerald was a very good defensive forward; a few tiers ahead of Johnson. In fourth line roles it is definitely arguable that he's more valuable.
I'm not convinced that Fitzgerald is that much better than Johnson defensively. You're also not considering the fact that Johnson is playing on the PP. I still think Johnson is the more effective player all things considered.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2011, 08:38 PM
  #32
vecens24
Registered User
 
vecens24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 5,002
vCash: 500
Yeah, you're going to have an extraordinarily difficult time convincing me that Dudley was as physical/tougher as/than Drake, let alone more. Drake was known as one of the best and toughest hitters in the league during his time. Dudley as far as I know was simply known as a high energy, "pugnacious" (as Pelletier calls him) winger who could score. The ONLY advantage Dudley has on him is peak offense in my opinion.

vecens24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2011, 08:52 PM
  #33
vecens24
Registered User
 
vecens24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 5,002
vCash: 500
As far as Fitzgerald vs. Johnson defensively, Fitzgerald was considered a "key defensive player" when the Isles upset the 1993 Penguins in the semi-final of the playoffs (LOH). He was also considered a tough defensive player in the formative years of the Predators. Just a quick Google News search of Fitzgerald and you find things about his defensive skill.

Pelletier's profile of Johnson (and Pelletier is normally quite a bit more generous with praise than the normal person is) doesn't mention anything about his two-way play or defense. Neither does his LOH profile (although it does mention that he was used on the PK). Now just from researching him into looking into whether he was a decent pick I know he was far from bad defensively, but I can't see him as anything more than average, or maybe slightly above. Fitzgerald is a defensive player first and foremost. I'm not sure how you can say that Johnson is close to Fitzgerald defensively.

vecens24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2011, 09:20 PM
  #34
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,503
vCash: 844
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Dallas Drake was a bit before my time, so I really never saw him play in his best years. Johnson's not an elite two-way player, but he twice led his team in PK TOI/G, and was 3rd, 4th, and 5th another time. I didn't know who Tom Fitzgerald was before this playoff matchup. My opponent's incorrectly linked bios aren't making it very easy to do comparisons. Is Fitzgerald that much better? I don't know, I don't have anything to base it on other than a quick Google search that revealed a couple quotes about being a good defensive player and a hard worker that didn't blow me away.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2011, 09:24 PM
  #35
Iain Fyffe
Hockey fact-checker
 
Iain Fyffe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Fredericton, NB
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,172
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
also, what the hell character is that at the end of the word "what" and how did you manage to accidentally type it instead of a "t"?
That's a thorn. Apparently dreakmur is a traveller from mediaeval times.

Iain Fyffe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2011, 12:01 AM
  #36
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiLLY_ShOE1721 View Post
I think so. Looking at PIM totals, Drake never cracked 100PIM whereas Dudley cracked it 5 times between the WHA and NHL(4 in WHA, 1 in NHL). I'll be the first to admit that that had a decent bit to do with era, but Dudley definitely was a higher PIM guy. Some words that were used to describe him "well known for his pugnacious style of play", "with his vigorous skating and energetic checking, it was easy to like the hard working Rick. He added a level of abrasiveness which gave the Sabres a bit of an edge...He played with great passion and it rubbed off infectiously on his teammates", "People called our third line the Kamikaze kids - Lorentz, Rick Dudley, and Brian Spencer - not scoring a lot but creating mayhem with their forechecking.", "a genuine wild man".
Using PIMs for this purpose isn't really useful. It just tells us how many penalties they took, not how effective they were physically. Mike Grier was as physical as these two guys, but took a minor penalty every six games, for example.

Quote:
True. It depends upon the interpretation of having a better PPG or having longevity at a lower PPG.
Not really. this can be quantified. For example, if we can agree on what Dudley's offensive worth is after converting over his WHA years, then we can see how Drake's best comparable period of time looks.

If it's better, then Drake is obviously a better scorer because his longevity years are just gravy.
If it's about the same, Drake still wins.
If it's behind, then it becomes more open to interpretation, with Dudley's owner no doubt saying his peak is more important, and Drake's GM countering the opposite.

I kinda went over this already in the paragraph that you didn't quote, and it's pretty clear that their best 5-6 seasons are about even in total value, and Drake has a good six more as a good scoring grinder.

Quote:
I'm not convinced that Fitzgerald is that much better than Johnson defensively. You're also not considering the fact that Johnson is playing on the PP. I still think Johnson is the more effective player all things considered.
No, I'm not forgetting that Johnson is on the PP. But you're comparing 4th lines here, right? Not PP units.

If you want to claim Johnson is more valuable by being on your PP, you have to accept that Sands is less valuable y not being on your PK!

You compared Sands to Davidson already using his raw numbers, which no doubt included some goals scored on the PP. But he's not on your PP unit.

You can't separate out Sands' numbers though, so it's only fair to compare raw-to-raw with Sands/Davidson and ES-to-ES with Johnson/Fitzgerald. When you compare PP units then you can talk about Johnson being on the PP.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BiLLY_ShOE1721 View Post
Dallas Drake was a bit before my time, so I really never saw him play in his best years. Johnson's not an elite two-way player, but he twice led his team in PK TOI/G, and was 3rd, 4th, and 5th another time. I didn't know who Tom Fitzgerald was before this playoff matchup. My opponent's incorrectly linked bios aren't making it very easy to do comparisons. Is Fitzgerald that much better? I don't know, I don't have anything to base it on other than a quick Google search that revealed a couple quotes about being a good defensive player and a hard worker that didn't blow me away.
You'll have to take our word for it, then, if you didn't see them. Fitzgerald was a defensive forward. That was his job - it always was. Johnson may have been an OK defensive player for a scorer, but it's ridiculous to suggest he's as good as a guy who was really only in the NHL for his defensive ability.

Rather than compartmentalize his SH time like that, let me clarify: Johnson killed 27% of penalties for his teams in his career. That's pretty good, but not special. What's really unimpressive about that is that his teams were 17% worse than average on the PK.

533 players played at least 500 games post-expansion and killed at least 25% of penalties for their teams. Johnson's results as a PKer are 10th-worst among them.

My point is, don't oversell him as a defensive player.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iain Fyffe View Post
That's a thorn. Apparently dreakmur is a traveller from mediaeval times.
wow, you learn something new in the ATD each day!

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2011, 12:12 AM
  #37
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,322
vCash: 500
Billy, you must be pretty annoyed at me by now. But c'mon! You are 14-for-14 now, in declaring your player better than his Pittsburgh counterpart. No team is that much better than any other team in this draft! You have to be making some pretty optimistic logical leaps to really think you had the better player in all of the last 14 comparisons. I feel like your opponent, by virtue of not being present for this debate, has given you an inch and you're trying to take miles and miles because you can. I realize we are here to sell your teams, and I leave most of what you say alone, but the things that make me roll my eyes, I can't help saying something to.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2011, 04:47 PM
  #38
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,503
vCash: 844
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Billy, you must be pretty annoyed at me by now. But c'mon! You are 14-for-14 now, in declaring your player better than his Pittsburgh counterpart. No team is that much better than any other team in this draft! You have to be making some pretty optimistic logical leaps to really think you had the better player in all of the last 14 comparisons. I feel like your opponent, by virtue of not being present for this debate, has given you an inch and you're trying to take miles and miles because you can. I realize we are here to sell your teams, and I leave most of what you say alone, but the things that make me roll my eyes, I can't help saying something to.
I appreciate the challenge. I'd rather have someone check what I'm saying. I honestly saw a legitimate comparison between Green and Shepelev(nobody has put forth any argument as to why Shepelev is better), and originally saw one between Ftorek and Himes before I realized how others value the WHA, which is much less than I do. McDougall is better than Babych, Tanti better than Lukowich, and Backstrom is better than Young. Sands and Davidson is up to interpretation as far as I'm concerned. No arguments have been offered about my 3rd line comparison so I'll assume it's sound. I said Sillinger was a better overall player than Yelle, which he is. I said Yelle is more valuable to my team because of the role he's playing. I'm not seeing how Drake is more physical than Dudley, Drake's LOH profile calls him gritty and that's it, and his Pelletier bio paints him to be similar to Dudley, not well above. I calculated Dudley's percentages for those seasons, they're 44.5, 46.7, 37.4, and 29.2(to make a useful percentage extrapolated his PPG to 75 games). So that would give Dudley the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, and 9th best seasons among them. Johnson is significantly better than Fitzgerald offensively. That comment about the PP was more directed at the "more valuable" thing, I was saying that because it sounded like you were saying Johnson's PP stats were worthless because he wasn't going to be on the PP, and he is. I don't think Fitzgerald is that much better defensively to make up for Johnson having double the career adjusted PPG. Nobody offered any comments on my 1st pairings comparison, so I'll assume that is sound as well. I honestly don't think I've said anything that would make anyone roll their eyes. If I did, exactly what was it? And was it something I later recanted or explained myself on?

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2011, 05:36 PM
  #39
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,503
vCash: 844
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
2nd Pairings

Bill Juzda-Kim Johnsson

vs.

Bob Trapp-Hugh Bolton

Trapp provides more offense than Juzda, but less physicality, which Juzda brings a lot of, maybe being the hardest hitting defenseman in the draft. We have recently uncovered records about some of Juzda's NHL career, but not all of it. He wasn't on any of the all star teams up to '47, but that still leaves the 2nd half of his career, and likely his better half. At any rate, we have nothing definitive that says he was somewhere in the 5-10 range in terms of defensemen in the world at that time like Trapp does. Trapp ends up as being the better overall player considering his all star finishes.

Bolton's offense is smoke and mirrors if you ask me, his two top 10s have percentages of 47 and 40. Johnsson two best are 73 and 78. Add on the longevity that Johnsson brings compared to Bolton never being able to stay healthy, I think it's safe to say Johnsson is better offensively. seventies, I'm surprised that you'd do this without making a note of it, but I just went back and looked at Bolton's Norris finishes. You touted them as being his crown jewel, but didn't note that he received 9 points and 3 points for his two notable Norris finishes. Neither of those makes the cut of the universally accepted 10 point threshold for a finish being relevant. I'll call the 9 point one relevant because it's close, but the 3 point one, I'm not convinced that is relevant. Johnsson has an 11th and 16th all star voting record, but received 7 and 4 points in the voting. I really wish we could see Hugh Bolton's TOI compared to his teammates, because it would go a long way in determining his value. Considering he played only 3 full seasons, it's safe to say your spares Power/Mariucci will play a good bit. So, Bolton could only have ever been a #1 defenseman 3 times(possibly), whereas we know Johnsson was a #1 defenseman 6 times, a #2 twice, and a #4 another time. This one is perplexing to call. Johnsson is better offensively and has the longevity to his advantage. I'm not sure if I'm the only one, but I can't help but think being a #1 defenseman for twice as long(at the worst), and being a #2 twice and being better offensively trumps over two Norris finishes that don't meet the threshold of being historically relevant(although I'll call the 9 point one mostly relevant). Bolton had 3 points and his teammate Morrison had 2 points, and in the other finish Tim Horton was right behind him but we don't know how many points Horton had. I'll take Johnsson over Bolton.

Overall, I'd call the 2nd lines a slight advantage to Pittsburgh. This is due to the all star record that Trapp has. I think Johnsson is better than Bolton, but Trapp has the most significant all star record of anyone. I think Johnsson is the best offensively of the group, and Juzda the most physical, but Pittsburgh still holds the slight edge.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2011, 05:44 PM
  #40
vecens24
Registered User
 
vecens24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 5,002
vCash: 500
Jesus Christ Billy, even a declining Dallas Drake was considered a physical beast in his 16th season. Ken Holland on Drake:

""The physical pounding that Dallas laid on the other teams' defences is something we didn't have in the last couple of years."

Holland also went on to say Drake was "a big part of us winning the Stanley Cup this year." He also described him as: "a perfect third-line, fourth-line player"

This was a 16th season player playing his final season in the NHL after such a long career of physical beating. Even if you say that he and Dudley were equally as physical (which they weren't), the 7 years longer that Drake's career lasted at a high physicality level makes it more valuable here.

vecens24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2011, 05:50 PM
  #41
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,503
vCash: 844
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Quote:
Originally Posted by vecens24 View Post
Jesus Christ Billy, even a declining Dallas Drake was considered a physical beast in his 16th season. Ken Holland on Drake:

""The physical pounding that Dallas laid on the other teams' defences is something we didn't have in the last couple of years."

Holland also went on to say Drake was "a big part of us winning the Stanley Cup this year." He also described him as: "a perfect third-line, fourth-line player"

This was a 16th season player playing his final season in the NHL after such a long career of physical beating. Even if you say that he and Dudley were equally as physical (which they weren't), the 7 years longer that Drake's career lasted at a high physicality level makes it more valuable here.
I was basing my remarks on what I read, which was LOH and greatesthockeylegends. I didn't go searching around to find quotes about him. Fair enough, Drake is more physical and is a better scorer because of greater longevity despite the fact that Dudley has the best 2 seasons because the rest are more or less a jumbled mess. Overall, Drake is a more effective player. That fair?

While I'm at it, Shirley Davidson has an edge over Charlie Sands offensively. I'm sticking to my guns that Johnson is a better player than Fitzgerald. Himes has a definitive edge over Ftorek offensively that is partially(NOT FULLY) made up by Ftorek's two-way play, leadership, and grit. Is there anything else mildly controversial that I've said that I need to clear up?


Last edited by BillyShoe1721: 08-16-2011 at 05:55 PM.
BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2011, 06:11 PM
  #42
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiLLY_ShOE1721 View Post
I appreciate the challenge. I'd rather have someone check what I'm saying. I honestly saw a legitimate comparison between Green and Shepelev(nobody has put forth any argument as to why Shepelev is better), and originally saw one between Ftorek and Himes before I realized how others value the WHA, which is much less than I do. McDougall is better than Babych, Tanti better than Lukowich, and Backstrom is better than Young. Sands and Davidson is up to interpretation as far as I'm concerned. No arguments have been offered about my 3rd line comparison so I'll assume it's sound. I said Sillinger was a better overall player than Yelle, which he is. I said Yelle is more valuable to my team because of the role he's playing. I'm not seeing how Drake is more physical than Dudley, Drake's LOH profile calls him gritty and that's it, and his Pelletier bio paints him to be similar to Dudley, not well above. I calculated Dudley's percentages for those seasons, they're 44.5, 46.7, 37.4, and 29.2(to make a useful percentage extrapolated his PPG to 75 games). So that would give Dudley the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, and 9th best seasons among them. Johnson is significantly better than Fitzgerald offensively. That comment about the PP was more directed at the "more valuable" thing, I was saying that because it sounded like you were saying Johnson's PP stats were worthless because he wasn't going to be on the PP, and he is. I don't think Fitzgerald is that much better defensively to make up for Johnson having double the career adjusted PPG. Nobody offered any comments on my 1st pairings comparison, so I'll assume that is sound as well. I honestly don't think I've said anything that would make anyone roll their eyes. If I did, exactly what was it? And was it something I later recanted or explained myself on?
There's too much to address here, I probably won't have the time before leaving for the UK, and certainly not after that.

I will say this - you shouldn't need people to keep you in check, you should just be fair from the start.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BiLLY_ShOE1721 View Post
2nd Pairings

Bill Juzda-Kim Johnsson

vs.

Bob Trapp-Hugh Bolton

Trapp provides more offense than Juzda, but less physicality, which Juzda brings a lot of, maybe being the hardest hitting defenseman in the draft. We have recently uncovered records about some of Juzda's NHL career, but not all of it. He wasn't on any of the all star teams up to '47, but that still leaves the 2nd half of his career, and likely his better half. At any rate, we have nothing definitive that says he was somewhere in the 5-10 range in terms of defensemen in the world at that time like Trapp does. Trapp ends up as being the better overall player considering his all star finishes.
we have beyond 1947 now. 1948 we have up to the top-10, 1949 we have top-6. 1950, top-8. In 1951-1953, there is nothing known beyond top-4 (nor does it look like there ever will be), but there were at least some defensemen making the ASG on merit, and Juzda was not among them either. You can put him in the "never earned recognition" category. but with that said, he is like Jason Smith or Bob Plager to me - an elite niche player. You want a big bodychecker? Juzda's your man. He's not without value. Trapp is absolutely better though. (assuming he was really an all-star on D and not an all-star spare!)

Quote:
Bolton's offense is smoke and mirrors if you ask me, his two top 10s have percentages of 47 and 40. Johnsson two best are 73 and 78. Add on the longevity that Johnsson brings compared to Bolton never being able to stay healthy, I think it's safe to say Johnsson is better offensively.
No doubt Johnsson is better offensively and possibly overall too. He's never been anywhere near the top defensemen in the league but he's a solid #1.

Quote:
seventies, I'm surprised that you'd do this without making a note of it, but I just went back and looked at Bolton's Norris finishes. You touted them as being his crown jewel, but didn't note that he received 9 points and 3 points for his two notable Norris finishes. Neither of those makes the cut of the universally accepted 10 point threshold for a finish being relevant. I'll call the 9 point one relevant because it's close, but the 3 point one, I'm not convinced that is relevant.
- 3 points is significant when it's 9th in the league. 9 is especially significant when it's 5th, and Bob Goldham had 16 in 4th.

- since when is there a "universally accepted" threshold of 10 points? Considering voting has been done in a number of considerably different ways, I find the idea that there could ever be a universally applicable threshold, funny. With these newly discovered old results I've been using two points as a threshold, just to make sure it wasn't a token homer vote or a mistake vote.

Quote:
Johnsson has an 11th and 16th all star voting record, but received 7 and 4 points in the voting. I really wish we could see Hugh Bolton's TOI compared to his teammates, because it would go a long way in determining his value.
Considering he led Leaf defensemen in all-star votes both seasons, I'd say he was their best and most-used defenseman. Would that make sense?

Quote:
Considering he played only 3 full seasons, it's safe to say your spares Power/Mariucci will play a good bit. So, Bolton could only have ever been a #1 defenseman 3 times(possibly), whereas we know Johnsson was a #1 defenseman 6 times, a #2 twice, and a #4 another time.
being a #1 back then was like being top-6. Being a #1 now means you're top-30 (to put it simply). The talent pool is bigger, but I doubt it's five times bigger. So the two are not comparable like apples to apples.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2011, 06:13 PM
  #43
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,188
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vecens24 View Post
Oh no I am okay with Ftorek being a lower end first line center. I totally agree with that. I was more downgrading him compared to Himes, who is one of the top centers if not the top center in the draft.
Err.... I would take several centers over Himes in this draft. His best season by a solid margin was 1929-30 with its weird rules. He gets way too much credit for "being the best forward on an awful team" in a way that a modern guy would not.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2011, 06:20 PM
  #44
vecens24
Registered User
 
vecens24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 5,002
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Err.... I would take several centers over Himes in this draft. His best season by a solid margin was 1929-30 with its weird rules. He gets way too much credit for "being the best forward on an awful team" in a way that a modern guy would not.
I know of one I would take personally and he happens to be on our team. There are a couple more I would take, but I mean Himes was picked as the top center according to the "All Star Teams". So I guess consensus was that he was. So I'm not totally basing it off of my opinion here.

vecens24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2011, 06:28 PM
  #45
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,322
vCash: 500
I thought he was more of a 2nd line guy heading in, but I ultimately gave him a 6th-place vote in my T6F list. No one in this draft carried the offensive load for their team like he did. His percentages look mediocre compared to modern players in this draft, but they look great vs. other pre-expansion guys, maybe the very best (pre-expansion players of this caliber clearly need to be viewed against eachother and not against post-expansion guys) and the huge offensive edge he sometimes held on his own team makes it more impressive.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2011, 06:35 PM
  #46
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,188
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vecens24 View Post
I know of one I would take personally and he happens to be on our team. There are a couple more I would take, but I mean Himes was picked as the top center according to the "All Star Teams". So I guess consensus was that he was. So I'm not totally basing it off of my opinion here.
Oh right... there are "All Star Teams"

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2011, 07:33 PM
  #47
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,503
vCash: 844
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
we have beyond 1947 now. 1948 we have up to the top-10, 1949 we have top-6. 1950, top-8. In 1951-1953, there is nothing known beyond top-4 (nor does it look like there ever will be), but there were at least some defensemen making the ASG on merit, and Juzda was not among them either. You can put him in the "never earned recognition" category. but with that said, he is like Jason Smith or Bob Plager to me - an elite niche player. You want a big bodychecker? Juzda's your man. He's not without value. Trapp is absolutely better though. (assuming he was really an all-star on D and not an all-star spare!)
Trapp is definitely better. You're right, I didn't look far enough down the page.

Quote:
- 3 points is significant when it's 9th in the league. 9 is especially significant when it's 5th, and Bob Goldham had 16 in 4th.

- since when is there a "universally accepted" threshold of 10 points? Considering voting has been done in a number of considerably different ways, I find the idea that there could ever be a universally applicable threshold, funny. With these newly discovered old results I've been using two points as a threshold, just to make sure it wasn't a token homer vote or a mistake vote.
I always got the impression that 10 was the cutoff for it being relevant. I thought I saw that way back somewhere. I remember that seemingly never-ending Ted Green debate between Dreak and Sturm last ATD and I believe the number they insisted on using was 10. Maybe that's where I'm getting the number, but that's always the number I used.

Quote:
Considering he led Leaf defensemen in all-star votes both seasons, I'd say he was their best and most-used defenseman. Would that make sense?
Agreed.

Quote:
being a #1 back then was like being top-6. Being a #1 now means you're top-30 (to put it simply). The talent pool is bigger, but I doubt it's five times bigger. So the two are not comparable like apples to apples.
True.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2011, 08:46 PM
  #48
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,503
vCash: 844
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Moving along...

Drew Doughty-Jim Dorey

vs.

Stewart Evans-Colin White

I don't know much about Evans, but he seems like a guy with some offensive ability that wasn't bad in his own zone. I don't really see a good way to compare him to Drew Doughty. Doughty's adjusted career PPG is better even before considering the number of games that Evans played. Evans got 1 point in the 35-36 all star voting, 1 point in 36-37, and 2 points in 38-39. Doughty was 12th in 10-11 with 7 points, was 17th in 08-09 with 3 points, and a 2nd team all-star in 09-10, and was 3rd in the Norris voting that year. Deciding this one is up to how you value Doughty being a #1 defenseman and peak vs. longevity.

Dorey and White are both physical. I'm not sure one is more physical than the other, but Dorey seems to have more of a tendency to fight(looking at pre-eye injury White). Dorey is definitely better offensively, with a career adjusted PPG of .414 to .175. In Dorey's time in the NHL, he was 2, 3, 3, and 5 in ice time on his team. White's were: 5, 4, 4, 4, 3, 3, 4, 5, 4, 3

He was behind Paul Martin, Scott Stevens, Brian Rafalski, Scott Niedermayer, Sean O'Donnell, Mike Mottau, Bryce Salvador, Niclas Havelid, Johnny Oduya, and Andy Greene. The only historically relevant players he was in front were Ken Daneyko at the very tail end of his career, Anton Volchenkov this past year, Oleg Tverdovsky for 1 year, Paul Martin his rookie year, and Richard Matvichuk in his last real year in the NHL. That's pretty unimpressive. I know he was periodically stuck behind a trio of ATD staples, but the fact that post-lockout he was never even a #2 behind Paul Martin(a spare this draft), says to me he isn't that good. I know he had that eye injury, but we can't say that that is the real Colin White, because that's a huge what if.

Dorey was behind Horton 2 years, Baun 2 years, Ley 2 years, McKenny 2 years, and 1 undrafted for 1 year. He was ahead of Pilote in the last year of his career, Ley 2 years, McKenny 1 year, and Marcel Pronovost in the last full year of his career. Then there's his WHA years, where he was always 1st in points on his team among defensemen(or PPG when he was traded mid-year). Considering their TOI finishes and offensive abilities, I'm pretty confident in saying that Dorey is a better player.

The 3rd pairings are an advantage to _________________? You fill in the blank. I think Dorey is definitely a better player than White. You're open to interpret who is better between Evans and Doughty. Opinions will likely vary from my camp(myself and seventies) and what I consider the other school of thought on Doughty(Dreak). I've clearly ruffled some feathers(I admit I was stretching a good bit), so I'm going to leave this up for the masses to decide.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2011, 08:52 PM
  #49
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,322
vCash: 500
Evans also had 5 voting points in 1938, good for 9th... "Tex" is Stew.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2011, 08:59 PM
  #50
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,503
vCash: 844
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Evans also had 5 voting points in 1938, good for 9th... "Tex" is Stew.
I saw that, but I was trying to figure out what this meant.

Quote:
ALTERNATE TEAM: RIGHT D: Art Coulter, NYR 8; Walt Buswell, Mtl 4; Eddie Shore, Bos 4; Earl Seibert, Chi 3; Babe Siebert, Mtl 3; Jimmy Fowler, Tor 3; Red Horner, Tor 2; Flash Hollett, Bos 1; Dit Clapper, Bos 1; Joe Jerwa, NYA 1; Doug Young, Det 1
LEFT D: Stewart Evans, Mtl M 5; Allan Murray, NYA 4; Earl Seibert, Chi 3; Eddie Shore, Bos 3; Red Horner, Tor 3; Jack Portland, Bos 3; Art Coulter, NYR 3; Jimmy Fowler, Tor 1; Ott Heller, NYR 1; Hap Day, Tor 1; Babe Pratt, NYR 1; Doug Young, Det 1; Marty Burke, Chi-Mtl 1; Babe Siebert, Mtl 1
What is the alternate team? Just the next best guys or best spares?

BillyShoe1721 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 09:38 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.