HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Fantasy Hockey Talk > All Time Draft
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
All Time Draft Fantasy league where players of the past and present meet.

ATD 2012 Line-up Assassination Thread

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-19-2012, 03:58 PM
  #51
vecens24
Registered User
 
vecens24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 5,002
vCash: 500
Thanks Billy for the review. The only thing I have a quibble with (outside of Doan PKing) is the third line's chemistry. Roenick is a very complete offensive player. He is fully capable of adapting to who he has on a line. Amonte is also a capable passer (no argument with Tkachuk). Too often we fall into the "mucker, playmaker, sniper!" idea of line building, and the more complete offensive players are hurt as a result. This group will function fine together, and Roenick and Amonte will work to get the puck on the net so that Tkachuk can take advantage of one of his strongest skills - working in front of the net.

vecens24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 04:05 PM
  #52
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,690
vCash: 8400
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
I would definitely make Blake the captain. For the assistants, Westfall, Wilson, Taylor, and Parise were all captains at one point. I would give one to Westfall, and the other to Taylor or Wilson, depending upon if you think it's necessary for one of your defensemen to have a letter.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 04:08 PM
  #53
Velociraptor
Nucks future 1C??
 
Velociraptor's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Maritimes
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,665
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by markrander87 View Post
The Cincinnati Fireworks

Head Coach: Pete Green


Syd Howe - Stan Mikita - Lanny McDonald (A)
Dean Prentice - Rick MacLeish - Andy Bathgate
Bob Pulford - Dave Poulin (C) - Mario Tremblay
Red Hamill - Art Chapman - Rick Vaive


Al MacInnis (A)
- Jacques Laperriere
Carol Vadnais - Herb Gardiner
Barclay Plager (A) - Ed Jovanovski

George Hainsworth
Mike Vernon



Extras: Clint Smith LW/C, Ron Greschner D, Joe Lamb F/D, Tomas Jonsson D




Powerplay:

Syd Howe - Stan Mikita - Lanny McDonald
Al Macinnis - Andy Bathgate

Rick MacLeish - Art Chapman - Rick Vaive
Carol Vadnais - Ed Jovanovski



Penalty Kill:

Bob Pulford - Dave Poulin
Jacques Laperierre - Herb Gardiner

Stan Mikita - Rick MacLeish
Al MacInnis - Barclay Plager

Dean Prentice - Syd Howe
Jacques Laperierre - Herb Gardiner
I'm going to begin by doing my entire divison.

I'll start with mark's team.

First Line: You've got a two complete players in Mikita and McDonald. I like Howe more in the middle as it was his primary position, but he's not entirely out of place on the wing. I think the line is capable of playing 200-foot hockey and being a serious offensive threat.

Second Line: Similar premise on the second line, but I like the defensive composure more. With three reputable two-way forwards, including Rick MacLeish who I thought about taking at 311 before you scooped him. I also believe this is a lethal scoring line that will also be tough to contain defensively.

Third Line: Tough third line, Pulford is another guy I like at centre opposed to the wing, but not completely out of place. Poulin is a solid third line centre and Tremblay is a good bottom-six winger. I'd imagine this is the line you're going to have out against oppositions scoring lines, they'll have their way with most that's for sure.

Fourth Line: Not a bad fourth line, Chapman as we now know was a decent two-way player who was looked at as a playmaker. Rick Vaive on the right side was a good sniper, and is a puck winner. Hamill adds additional toughness. Definitely a fourth line with an arsenal of intangibles.

Overall strong forward corps, four lines of offensive and defensive ability, great depth.

First Pairing: Very strong first pairing, it killed me to pass on Jacques Laperriere at 116, but with a perennial #1 defenseman I felt it was more necessary to get offensive depth. Him and MacInnis are a solid contrasting pair, MacInnis is a strong two-way threat and Laperriere is a defensive specialist.

Second Pairing: I'm not totally informed on Gardiner, but I do know he was a defensive rock and was fairly consistent. Vadnais is a good offensive defenseman, so they complement each other pretty nicely.

Third Pairing: A pretty physical third pairing, Plager was a tenacious hitter and JovoCop was a strong hitter as well. I passed on Jovanovski because I didn't think he was the strongest ES performer as he has a fairly underwhelming +/-, not a terrible bottom pairing.

Goaltending: I'm not overly sold on George Hainsworth, although I believe you got him in the range where he should go. He's probably near the top of the bottom tier of goaltending, he'll keep your team in games and occasionally steal one, but he's not among the stronger starting goaltenders.

Coaching: Pete Green is a pretty reputable coach with a solid résumé.

Spares: Clint Smith is a good versatile offensive spare, nothing special defensively. I like Greschner as a seventh defenseman, brings a decent two-way game. I like Joe Lamb's two-way game and Tomas Jonsson is a solid offensive spare but doesn't provide much else.

Special Teams: PP - First line, which is a plus offensively, with Andy Bathgate and MacInnis on the point. Top tier first unit. I think MacLeish would be better than Chapman on the second PP, no? Wingers and defense are also good.

PK - Great PK forwards and defensemen.

Summary: Good two-way team, can win close games or they are capable of outscoring their opponent by a fair margin. Goaltending seems to be the biggest weakness, but overall a tough squad that I would not necessarily look forward to meeting in the playoffs. Great entry, mark.


Last edited by Velociraptor: 03-19-2012 at 05:27 PM.
Velociraptor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 04:08 PM
  #54
Dwight
The French Tickler
 
Dwight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: West Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,783
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyShoe1721 View Post
I would definitely make Blake the captain. For the assistants, Westfall, Wilson, Taylor, and Parise were all captains at one point. I would give one to Westfall, and the other to Taylor or Wilson, depending upon if you think it's necessary for one of your defensemen to have a letter.
Went with Westfall and Wilson. Definitely want at least one of my letters to be on D.

Dwight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 04:09 PM
  #55
EagleBelfour
Registered User
 
EagleBelfour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,234
vCash: 873
L'équipe nationale de France

(1928-2012)

Head Coach: Jacques Lemaire

Frank Mahovlich (A) - Sidney Crosby (A) - Didier Pitre
Paul Thompson - Milan Novy (A) - Odie Cleghorn
Nick Metz - Ralph Backstrom - Floyd Curry
Jaroslav Jirik - Billy Burch - Alf Skinner
Buddy O'Connor (C)
Harry Oliver (RW, C)
John Ferguson (LW, RW)

Valeri Vasiliev (C) - Jan Suchy
Moose Vasko - Frank Patrick
Taffy Abel - Jiri Bubla
Behn Wilson

Dominik Hasek
Chuck Rayner


Powerplay:
Frank Mahovlich - Sidney Crosby - Didier Pitre
Jan Suchy - Jiri Bubla

Paul Thompson - Odie Cleghorn - Milan Novy
Valery Vasiliev - Frank Patrick

Penalty Kill:
Floyd Curry - Nick Metz
Moose Vasko - Valery Vasiliev
Dominik Hasek

Paul Thompson - Ralph Backstrom
Taffy Abel - Jan Suchy
Dominik Hasek

Frank Mahovlich - Sidney Crosby
Elmer Vasko - Valery Vasiliev
Dominik Hasek

EagleBelfour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 04:12 PM
  #56
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,858
vCash: 500


Coach: Barry Trotz
Assistant coach: Larry Robinson

Frank Foyston - Peter Forsberg - Owen Nolan
Smokey Harris - Nels Stewart - Alf Smith
Tony Leswick - Mike Peca - Johnny Peirson
Ilya Kovalchuk - Red Sullivan - Bill Goldworthy
Garry Unger - Andre Boudrias

Nicklas Lidström - Larry Murphy
Harvey Pulford - Teppo Numminen
Kevin Hatcher - Jack Portland
Wade Redden

Martin Brodeur
Roger Crozier

PP1:
Nels Stewart - Peter Forsberg - Alf Smith
Ilya Kovalchuk - Nicklas Lidstrom

PP2:
Smokey Harris - Frank Foyston - Owen Nolan
Kevin Hatcher - Larry Murphy

Pk1:
Michael Peca - Tony Leswick
Harvey Pulford - Nicklas Lidstrom

PK2:
Red Sullivan - Johnny Peirson
Jack Portland - Teppo Numminen

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 04:21 PM
  #57
monster_bertuzzi
registered user
 
monster_bertuzzi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkrx View Post
Winnipeg Falcons

Coach: Rudy Pilous

Robitaille - Delvecchio - Alfredsson
Shanahan - Datsyuk - Oatman
Sharp - Lepine - Graham
Sid Smith - Steen - Paiement
Tardif - Sheppard

Stevens - McCrimmon
Steve Smith - Lennart Svedberg
Magnuson - Svehla
Kjell Samuelsson - Chiasson

Terry Sawchuk
Kiprusoff

PP1:
Robitaille - Delvecchio - Alfredsson
Datsyuk - Svedberg

PP2:
Shanahan - Lepine - Oatman
Stevens - Svehla

PK1:
Lepine - Graham
Syevens - McCrimmon

PK2:
Steen - Alfredsson
Smith - Svehla

PK3:
Datsyuk - Delvecchio
McCrimmon - Svedberg
Divisional rival, here we go:

Lets start of with Pilous as head coach and choosing not to go with an assistant (and there were some beauty's available like Laviolette, Tortorella, Quenneville, Tippet etc.). Jesus, I don't know how this team is going to function. You have possibly the worst coaching in the league, and can run into trouble against some fo these task master coaches you will be up against.

Top 6 is solid. I like Datsyuk making a big jump this year, he deserves it. Teams aren't going to be able to just try and shut down line 1 with Shanny-Datsyuk-Oatman next over the boards.

I don't think Sharp has done enough to earn a spot on a 3rd line, especially at left wing (). Lepine-Graham is pretty good tenacity and checking. I like Steen and Paiement's ability to put the puck in the net, but not sure what you're going with here. I prefer checkers and grit on 4th lines.

Scott Stevens is a stud anchor on defence I will always maintain that. I see McCrimmon more as a #3, anchor for the second pair. After that it gets murky. You've got Keith Magnuson playing his off-side at left D next to Svehla who isn't good enough on his own to make up for Maggie playing the foreign side. Steve Smith-Svedberg is a non spectacular second pair.

Sawchuk was amazing obviously, but you will need him to stand on his head at times when Stevens is gassed and not on the ice, to be honest.

Overall I see a team built from the net out obviously. A nice group of elements in the top 6 forward group but a shallow defence after Scott Stevens and a weak bottom 6 is a problem.

monster_bertuzzi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 04:23 PM
  #58
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,543
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
I got the impression of Lapointe that he may have been the most talented of the Big 3 in Montreal but the least driven and that he would sleepwalk through some regular season games.

I agree that you have tons of lesser leaders, so I think you could find someone better than Lapointe to wear the A.

On the other hand, you dont really have a lot of flakes who need to be pushed.
Morrow over Lapointe? Smyth is actually gonna get relevant icetime, even on 4th line and 2nd PP, so I think he's fine.

Quote:
I think you overrate your bottom pairing guys a bit - I see them both as more like #5s than #4s, but you still have a well above average bottom pair. But then the bottom pair is the least important. I think your top 4 is very average, which is fine considering the strength of your offense
Maybe.

Food for thought - there were 23 D-men (not counting Taylor as one) picked before Lapointe. Unless you think there's 9 D-men picked behind him who are better #1s (I don't see it, with guys like Howe, Langway and Chara leading the pack), he is actually a #1, even if in the bottom 25%. Or, we have to accept that there's just <24 'true #1s'. Or I was completely off my rocker when I picked him, but I don't think that's the case.

Pronovost went 39th (among the top #2s), Stapleton 66th (elite #3), Corbeau 99th (too soon, would make him elite #4), Harris 118th (ok #4), Ramage 124th (low end #4). I don't think I picked them all that too soon, really, so I'd say that's still damn well above average.

In 30-team ATD 2010, Lapointe was 26th (low end #1), Pronovost 35th (top #2), Stapleton 63rd (elite #3), Corbeau 103rd (average #4), Harris 124th (top #5) and Ramage 128th (top #5)

Unless ATD canon and general pick order is awfully wrong, Lapointe is a #1 (if clearly bottom-tier), and my defense overall is well above average.


I'm gonna review a team or two tomorrow, lest I get accused of arguing only about my own team.

MadArcand is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 04:30 PM
  #59
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,690
vCash: 8400
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
I think Doan's fine in the PK. He doesn't kill all that many penalties in Phoenix because they need his offense at even strength (he's led them in scoring something like 9 times), but when Team Canada selects players to kill penalties, they select guys like Doan, not the 3rd liners who do it in the NHL.

If Vecens has a problem in his second PK, it's the fact that I'm not sure if Doan or Middleton can take faceoffs
I can't speak to Doan killing penalties or not for Team Canada, I don't really recall one way or another. He seems like a decent candidate for it, but he's been in one Olympics, and 6 World Championships. 55 total games. I'm skeptical to think that 55 games of being a PKer makes him credible for being on a 2nd unit in a 32 team ATD. I'm not going to give him credit for something he might be capable of, but never actually did.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 04:31 PM
  #60
arrbez
bad chi
 
arrbez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,611
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to arrbez
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
Food for thought - there were 23 D-men (not counting Taylor as one) picked before Lapointe. Unless you think there's 9 D-men picked behind him who are better #1s (I don't see it, with guys like Howe, Langway and Chara leading the pack), he is actually a #1, even if in the bottom 25%. Or, we have to accept that there's just <24 'true #1s'.
I think it's important to distinguish whether a #1 is a true stud defenseman, or whether a #1 is just the best guy a team has.

In the real NHL, there aren't 30 elite blueline-anchording defensemen, but there are obviously 30 guys who lead their team in icetime, if only by default.

I'm not arguing Lapointe either way, but I'm just saying that there doesn't have to be exactly 32 #1 defensemen in this draft, if we're using the first definition of the term.

arrbez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 04:41 PM
  #61
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 38,688
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyShoe1721 View Post
I can't speak to Doan killing penalties or not for Team Canada, I don't really recall one way or another. He seems like a decent candidate for it, but he's been in one Olympics, and 6 World Championships. 55 total games. I'm skeptical to think that 55 games of being a PKer makes him credible for being on a 2nd unit in a 32 team ATD. I'm not going to give him credit for something he might be capable of, but never actually did.
Well, he was certainly capable of it in the World Championships.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 04:42 PM
  #62
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 38,688
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arrbez View Post
I think it's important to distinguish whether a #1 is a true stud defenseman, or whether a #1 is just the best guy a team has.

In the real NHL, there aren't 30 elite blueline-anchording defensemen, but there are obviously 30 guys who lead their team in icetime, if only by default.

I'm not arguing Lapointe either way, but I'm just saying that there doesn't have to be exactly 32 #1 defensemen in this draft, if we're using the first definition of the term.
Maybe my head is still stuck in the "HOH top 60 defensemen of all time" project, but I see Lapointe and Pronovost as very close to each other in quality.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 04:45 PM
  #63
arrbez
bad chi
 
arrbez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,611
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to arrbez
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Maybe my head is still stuck in the "HOH top 60 defensemen of all time" project, but I see Lapointe and Pronovost as very close to each other in quality.
Me too, I don't see anything wrong with Lapointe as a #1 (albeit a lower-end one). It was more about the difference between a "true #1" and a "default #1", if that makes sense.

arrbez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 04:45 PM
  #64
jkrx
Registered User
 
jkrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,203
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by monster_bertuzzi View Post
Divisional rival, here we go:

Lets start of with Pilous as head coach and choosing not to go with an assistant (and there were some beauty's available like Laviolette, Tortorella, Quenneville, Tippet etc.). Jesus, I don't know how this team is going to function. You have possibly the worst coaching in the league, and can run into trouble against some fo these task master coaches you will be up against.

Top 6 is solid. I like Datsyuk making a big jump this year, he deserves it. Teams aren't going to be able to just try and shut down line 1 with Shanny-Datsyuk-Oatman next over the boards.

I don't think Sharp has done enough to earn a spot on a 3rd line, especially at left wing (). Lepine-Graham is pretty good tenacity and checking. I like Steen and Paiement's ability to put the puck in the net, but not sure what you're going with here. I prefer checkers and grit on 4th lines.

Scott Stevens is a stud anchor on defence I will always maintain that. I see McCrimmon more as a #3, anchor for the second pair. After that it gets murky. You've got Keith Magnuson playing his off-side at left D next to Svehla who isn't good enough on his own to make up for Maggie playing the foreign side. Steve Smith-Svedberg is a non spectacular second pair.

Sawchuk was amazing obviously, but you will need him to stand on his head at times when Stevens is gassed and not on the ice, to be honest.

Overall I see a team built from the net out obviously. A nice group of elements in the top 6 forward group but a shallow defence after Scott Stevens and a weak bottom 6 is a problem.
What exactly is wrong with a coach who has won on every level his coached (including a cup)?

jkrx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 04:46 PM
  #65
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,543
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arrbez View Post
I think it's important to distinguish whether a #1 is a true stud defenseman, or whether a #1 is just the best guy a team has.

In the real NHL, there aren't 30 elite blueline-anchording defensemen, but there are obviously 30 guys who lead their team in icetime, if only by default.

I'm not arguing Lapointe either way, but I'm just saying that there doesn't have to be exactly 32 #1 defensemen in this draft, if we're using the first definition of the term.
But then we are basically equating #1 with 'superstar defenseman' or something.

And I'd argue there have to be 32 #1s by definition. What's very much true is that not every team has to have a #1, though, just as in NHL.

MadArcand is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 04:50 PM
  #66
monster_bertuzzi
registered user
 
monster_bertuzzi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkrx View Post
What exactly is wrong with a coach who has won on every level his coached (including a cup)?
There's nothing 'wrong' with Pilous, but his NHL resume isn't good enough to run with just him and no assistant coach. Yeah he won the Cup in 61 on a stacked Chicago team, but there was also some disapointments during his time there.

He's the Tom Renney of this ATD league.

monster_bertuzzi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 04:55 PM
  #67
arrbez
bad chi
 
arrbez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,611
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to arrbez
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
But then we are basically equating #1 with 'superstar defenseman' or something.

And I'd argue there have to be 32 #1s by definition. What's very much true is that not every team has to have a #1, though, just as in NHL.
Hmmm...maybe you've got a point. I guess it's all kinda semantics anyhow

arrbez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 04:57 PM
  #68
jkrx
Registered User
 
jkrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,203
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by monster_bertuzzi View Post
There's nothing 'wrong' with Pilous, but his NHL resume isn't good enough to run with just him and no assistant coach. Yeah he won the Cup in 61 on a stacked Chicago team, but there was also some disapointments during his time there.

He's the Tom Renney of this ATD league.
USHL Championship (1948)
PCHL Championship (1949)
Memorial Cup Championships (1954 & 1960)
Stanley Cup Championship (1961)
WHL regular season Championship (1964)
Avco Cup (WHA) (1976, 1978, & 1979)
Inducted into the Hockey Hall of Fame in 1985

I find that better than what Laviolette, Tortorella, Quenneville and Tippet has done. Do anyone even remember how Quenneville ran the Blues, talk about winning with a stacked Hawks team. Tortorella has accomplished nothing since Lightnings cinderella run. Tippet is good but unproven I like his style of coaching but no way is he superiour to Pilous. Laviolette has that one season with carolina aswell as missing playoffs with them three times around that season. Im unimpressed.

jkrx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 04:58 PM
  #69
EagleBelfour
Registered User
 
EagleBelfour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,234
vCash: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by arrbez View Post
Hmmm...maybe you've got a point. I guess it's all kinda semantics anyhow
I think what TDMM means is that:

High end #1 - #2
4 - 5
6 - 6

Is better than

Low end #1 - #2
3 - 4
4 - 5

... or something like that. The first pairing is very much more important to a team than the second pairing, who's again much more important than the third pairing.

EagleBelfour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 04:59 PM
  #70
monster_bertuzzi
registered user
 
monster_bertuzzi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkrx View Post
USHL Championship (1948)
PCHL Championship (1949)
Memorial Cup Championships (1954 & 1960)
Stanley Cup Championship (1961)
WHL regular season Championship (1964)
Avco Cup (WHA) (1976, 1978, & 1979)
Inducted into the Hockey Hall of Fame in 1985

I find that better than what Laviolette, Tortorella, Quenneville and Tippet has done. Do anyone even remember how Quenneville ran the Blues, talk about winning with a stacked Hawks team. Tortorella has accomplished nothing since Lightnings cinderella run. Tippet is good but unproven I like his style of coaching but no way is he superiour to Pilous. Laviolette has that one season with carolina aswell as missing playoffs with them three times around that season. Im unimpressed.
I didn't say any of them were better, but they all would have made fine assistants along side him - thats all.

Instead you've got a bottom half coach on his own. Like I said I don't really care what anyone does in the minor leagues either.

monster_bertuzzi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 05:02 PM
  #71
jkrx
Registered User
 
jkrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,203
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by monster_bertuzzi View Post
I didn't say any of them were better, but they all would have made fine assistants along side him - thats all.

Instead you've got a bottom half coach on his own. Like I said I don't really care what anyone does in the minor leagues either.
Coaching is still coaching even in the minor leagues. Not sure if I'd call WHA a minor league either. Obviously winning in the NHL counts for more but coaching teams to victory from juniors and up is points in his favor. He was a winner wherever he went.

jkrx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 05:05 PM
  #72
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,543
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EagleBelfour View Post
I think what TDMM means is that:

High end #1 - #2
4 - 5
6 - 6

Is better than

Low end #1 - #2
3 - 4
4 - 5

... or something like that. The first pairing is very much more important to a team than the second pairing, who's again much more important than the third pairing.
But my #2 & #3 are among the best, #4 is OK and #5 & #6 are elite. Does so much depend on #1 that having a below average #1 automatically means your defense is average at best, even if the rest of your defense is stacked through the roof?

MadArcand is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 05:05 PM
  #73
Modo
Global Moderator
Mo'Benn
 
Modo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Etobicoke
Country: Canada
Posts: 40,499
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveG View Post
Top 6:
Trottier and Broadbent complement eachother very well in this. Firsov's also an outstanding goal scorer, but from what I've gathered his speed was his biggest asset in that regard. Will be interesting to see how he meshes with these two. Definitely a balanced and frankly potentially explosive first unit.

The second unit again meshes some solid elements together. Tikkanen providing the sandpaper and defense for Malkin and Bure to do their thing. This one I see as a bit better of a blend then the first unit, though both should be very dangerous offensively.

Bottom 6:
Kilrea - Goring - Verbeek is a decent 3rd unit in this. Decent enough offensively, pretty good defensively, and with some good all around grit on both wings. Kilrea's 29-30 season is an outlier for him but he's still a good checking winger for this. The 4th line I'm not entirely sold on though, but they won't be getting a ton of ice time.

Defense:
Pronger offers you a bit of everything, he's a solid guy to build your defense around. Zubov is a bit soft for my liking as a #2 but Pronger definitely holds more then his own physically. Plus Zubov is a strong PMD here which should help transition the puck to your explosive first two lines rather nicely.

Kuzkin and Davydov I need to do a bit more research on. But from initial reads Kuzkin looks like a solid offensive dman and a good leader and being teamed with his real life partner from the soviet teams in Davydov is a plus. Again, more research is needed but it sounds like Davydov was the defensive conscience of that pairing to me.

Holtet and Monroe are both solid, and utilizing Holtet here on the 3rd pairing looks like it could be a very smart move. Offensively he's one of the best PMD's in this, regardless of pairing.

Goalies:
Connell is a solid #1 in this, and you don't lose too much going to the backup Chabot either. Solid tandem.

Special teams:
I can't quite figure out how this is going to work. You have two players who are listed as extras right now (Phalson and Kasparaitis) on the kill.

Your powerplay should be pretty solid, though I don't know just how much Bure played the point. You have 4 dmen that are capable on the powerplay in this though in Pronger, Zubov, Kuzkin, and obviously Holtet.

Johnson's a good coach for a very offensive minded team like this, I'll just be curious to see how you finish the lines considering that you are utilizing some of your currently listed spares on special teams.
Thanks for the critique!

Was unsure whether Bure would be more lethal on PP or PK....he scored his share of PK floater goals, but I figured that won't fly when every roster's ATD-calibre.

And the reason why I used Pahlsson and Kasparaitis in special teams is, well....if I'm not using them on special teams, when would they ever get used? Both made a name for himself through different means, and both were well known league-wide for what they brought to the table. Since I can't see a way to get them on the main roster, why not utilize them off the bench in special situations? I didn't use Yushkevich at all; I guess I can't use everyone, but I just thought this would be a way to get the extras more involved, without subtracting from overall efficiency.

__________________
If you're telekinetic and you know it, clap my hands!
Modo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 05:11 PM
  #74
Sturminator
I voted for Kodos
 
Sturminator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: West Egg, New York
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 7,386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
Thanks for the review.

There's only two things I'd disagree on:

- Leadership. You see it as a little weak, I'd say the team is actually quite loaded with leaders. Perhaps you meant the choice of letters? Because a team with Lemieux, Lapointe, Smyth, Dineen, O'Reilly, Risebrough, Morrow, Thornton, Ramage and Stapleton is not lacking leadership on any line or pairing.

- Overall defense impression. I would actually say I have a pretty damn good top-6, almost certainly in the top third of the field. I do lack a strong #1, but beyond that I think all my defensemen are actually clearly above par for their role. Especially the bottom pairing, which is basically two decent #4s.
I personally think that Mario, although at times a flake and a smoker and a guy who sometimes needed his teammates to lace up his skates for him, was a tremendous leader on the ice. I doubt that Mario gave a lot of pep talks in between periods or taught a lot of rookies good practice habits, but on the ice he had a will to win and a belief in his own ability which is very rare in any athlete, and his teams bought into that. He was simply a magnetic personality. I think your leadership is good.

Your first pairing is average to slightly below-average at even strength, IMO. Lapointe is a strong special teams player, but at even strength, he is a bottom-end #1, but that is counterbalanced by a very strong #2 in Pronovost. I agree with Devil that Lapointe - Pronovost are less than ideally matched, but it is not that big of a problem. I think the 2nd pairing is above average. Stapleton is a strong #3, IMO (I credit his first couple of seasons in the WHA because he had already established a high level of play in the NHL and was clearly still at his peak), and Harris is an average to above-average #4. Overall, a nice second pairing.

I think Ramage is a good #5, but I would not want him on a 2nd pairing. Ditto Bert Corbeau.

Sturminator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-19-2012, 05:17 PM
  #75
EagleBelfour
Registered User
 
EagleBelfour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,234
vCash: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
But my #2 & #3 are among the best, #4 is OK and #5 & #6 are elite. Does so much depend on #1 that having a below average #1 automatically means your defense is average at best, even if the rest of your defense is stacked through the roof?
Especially for defenceman #5 and #6, the opinion differ very much from one person to another. However, I agree with the placement you give your players. We would need to compare the other 31 teams to see where you stand. It's hard to have a better defence than someone who has Bobby Orr or Doug Harvery, even though he picked his defenceman later than you do.

EagleBelfour 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 04:15 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.