I know I had questions about his speed and defense (and we went through a couple of painful exercises privately where I tried to demonstrate that, despite the quotes you found, there weren't many forwards with less substantiation of those skills drafted by pick #130 or whatever)
the most talking about Denneny I've done recently was in October 2010 when LF and I were in the finals in the LCATD3, and I was critical of the methods used to conclude that he was far superior to Selanne offensively due to the league sizes involved. Looking back, I've now come around, and I think we all have, to the fact that Selanne was being massively underrated and these two are probably within 10 spots on an all-time list. As far as him being overrated, no, I think he's pretty much rated appropriately.
Yeah, Denneny and Selanne are ultimately very close offensively. Denneny's physicality comes at a premium as it is for every powerforward and he obviously has a better postseason record so I can't see taking Selanne ahead of him in an ATD, but in absolute terms on a "greatest players" list, they would be close.
Sturm definitely showed that Balderis is not on the level of a player drafted in the 330s, and is probably about 100 spots better than that in my view at least, some may actually believe higher of him considering his offense is remarkably similar to Maltsev's.
So you would feel comfortable with Balderis as the primary puck carrier on your first line?
I certainly wouldn't.
All of a sudden he goes from questionable 2nd liner to viable option for primary puck carrier on a ATD top line?
So you would feel comfortable with Balderis as the primary puck carrier on your first line?
I certainly wouldn't.
All of a sudden he goes from questionable 2nd liner to viable option for primary puck carrier on a ATD top line?
Give me a break.
Are you really surprised that it took us a while to learn about a Russian player who played for neither CSKA or Dynamo until later in his career? Then when he did was every bit as effective?
People like him slip through the cracks, it happens mark.
Are you really surprised that it took us a while to learn about a Russian player who played for neither CSKA or Dynamo until later in his career? Then when he did was every bit as effective?
People like him slip through the cracks, it happens mark.
You still didn't answer my question though?
Would you feel comfortable with him as your primary puck carrier on a ATD 1st line? I got slack last year because mine was Darryl Sittler (In a 40 team draft) It's pretty funny how that sounds now isn't it?
Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 04-05-2012 at 03:15 PM.
Reason: QDP
I don't understand, actually, what makes Balderis the primary puck carrier of that line? There is plenty of evidence to support Denneny as a puck carrier.. especially when you consider his playmaking record.
Ah yes, another marvelous one liner from the heroic Sturm, Bra Straps, lonely at the top what could possibly be next?
You still didn't answer my question though?
Would you feel comfortable with him as your primary puck carrier on a ATD 1st line? I got slack last year because mine was Darryl Sittler (In a 40 team draft) It's pretty funny how that sounds now isn't it?
It doesn't really matter if I'd be comfortable with it, but if I had Denneny and Nighbor as the other pieces on the line I'd be fine with it. I think that having a super primary "puck carrying" player on each line gets pretty overrated here. Especially whenever he has Red Kelly/Dan Boyle to make outlet passes to his top offensive line.
It doesn't really matter if I'd be comfortable with it, but if I had Denneny and Nighbor as the other pieces on the line I'd be fine with it. I think that having a super primary "puck carrying" player on each line gets pretty overrated here. Especially whenever he has Red Kelly/Dan Boyle to make outlet passes to his top offensive line.
That's another thing. Not every team needs to rely on a forward to carry the play across the blue line. Sometimes, as long as the forwards are able to transition well, a smart pass up ice by a defenseman can spring an entry into the zone.
That's another thing. Not every team needs to rely on a forward to carry the play across the blue line. Sometimes, as long as the forwards are able to transition well, a smart pass up ice by a defenseman can spring an entry into the zone.
lack of offensive superstar
he has a big void in puck winning and physical play on his 2nd line
a below average 2nd defensive pairing
a below average 3rd defensive pairing
and well below average goaltending
When did I comment on any of that? I called you on a couple silly statements, and you avoided answering them, probably because you knew you were wrong the entire time. Don't act like I've made claims on any of the topics you've listed there.
This is more or less what just happened:
MarkRander87: Frank Nighbor is a below-average goal scorer, and he and Denneny are way too predictable to succeed.
arrbez: Nighbor placed 1,3,3,5,7 in goal scoring, and he and Denneny clearly weren't too predictable to succeed in real life.
MarkRander87: Are you suggesting that this team doesn't have a below average defense corps? And what about the grit on his second line?! Didn't I prove that his goaltending is weak?!
arrbez: wait, what?
If you want to know my thoughts on Reen's offense, D, grit, and anything else, just take a look at the assassination I did .
I just remembered that I had Curt Fraser in my line-up as a spare , but entirely forgot about him.I had that crazy flu when I picked him so I guess he just got out of my mind once I got better and never added him in my line-up.
I just remembered that I had Curt Fraser in my line-up as a spare , but entirely forgot about him.I had that crazy flu when I picked him so I guess he just got out of my mind once I got better and never added him in my line-up.
See, this is the type of thing that causes resentment in the dressing room
When did I comment on any of that? I called you on a couple silly statements, and you avoided answering them, probably because you knew you were wrong the entire time. Don't act like I've made claims on any of the topics you've listed there.
This is more or less what just happened:
MarkRander87: Frank Nighbor is a below-average goal scorer, and he and Denneny are way too predictable to succeed.
arrbez: Nighbor placed 1,3,3,5,7 in goal scoring, and he and Denneny clearly weren't too predictable to succeed in real life.
MarkRander87: Are you suggesting that this team doesn't have a below average defense corps? And what about the grit on his second line?! Didn't I prove that his goaltending is weak?!
arrbez: wait, what?
If you want to know my thoughts on Reen's offense, D, grit, and anything else, just take a look at the assassination I did .
For the best offensive player on a team, Frank Nighbor is still below average for a goal scorer? You still haven't grasped this?
For the best offensive player on a team, Frank Nighbor is still below average for a goal scorer? You still haven't grasped this?
Mark, that's not what we were talking about.
This was not a discussion of Nighbor's goal scoring as a "best offensive player on his team". Nor was it a discussion about who the best offensive player on BB's team is.
You claimed that line would be too predictable, largely because Nighbor was a poor goal scorer. Here's your comment:
Quote:
Originally Posted by markrander87
Nighbors goal scoring is well below average, who will be the main shooter on the line again? Oh yes Denneny, the same guy that Nighbor will be passing to. If you're to oblivious to the fact that this line will be more then preictable then I don't know what to tell you
You really need to stop putting words in people's mouths. This is what you said, and this is what I responded to. It's also what I would appreciate you responding to, instead of trying to divert the conversation in a different direction to avoid answering.
I'm still curious, what makes you think Nighbor-Denneny would be too predictable to succeed?
It's OK, guys. Jean Beliveau could be the best offensive player on BB's team, and he'd probably nitpick on him that his regular season resume isn't very special.
It's OK, guys. Jean Beliveau could be the best offensive player on BB's team, and he'd probably nitpick on him that his regular season resume isn't very special.
I wouldn't want Nighbor to be the best offensive player on my team either, but he isn't the best offensive player on BB's team
Quote:
Originally Posted by arrbez
Mark, that's not what we were talking about.
This was not a discussion of Nighbor's goal scoring as a "best offensive player on his team". Nor was it a discussion about who the best offensive player on BB's team is.
You claimed that line would be too predictable, largely because Nighbor was a poor goal scorer. Here's your comment:
You really need to stop putting words in people's mouths. This is what you said, and this is what I responded to. It's also what I would appreciate you responding to, instead of trying to divert the conversation in a different direction to avoid answering.
I'm still curious, what makes you think Nighbor-Denneny would be too predictable to succeed?
What makers the line so precitable? How about the fact that it is obvious that Balderis is the primary puck handler and that teams can pressure him into turning the puckover.
What about the fact that yes Nighbors goal sscoring is below average, if team focus in on shutting down Denneny (Who also has to be the puck winner and physical presence on the line) then this line will not score that many goals.
So Denneny is the primary goal scorer, puck winner and physical presence on this line?
Am I not mistaken here? Just so we are all on the same page, correct me if im wrong but i've seen nothing regarding physical play and puck winning for either Nighbor or Balderis
What makers the line so precitable? How about the fact that it is obvious that Balderis is the primary puck handler and that teams can pressure him into turning the puckover.
What about the fact that yes Nighbors goal sscoring is below average, if team focus in on shutting down Denneny (Who also has to be the puck winner and physical presence on the line) then this line will not score that many goals.
So Denneny is the primary goal scorer, puck winner and physical presence on this line?
Am I not mistaken here? Just so we are all on the same page, correct me if im wrong but i've seen nothing regarding physical play and puck winning for either Nighbor or Balderis
(MOD edit)
Denneny is definitely a more than competent puck carrier for an ATD top line.
Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 04-06-2012 at 09:10 PM.
Reason: QDP
What makers the line so precitable? How about the fact that it is obvious that Balderis is the primary puck handler and that teams can pressure him into turning the puckover.
What about the fact that yes Nighbors goal sscoring is below average, if team focus in on shutting down Denneny (Who also has to be the puck winner and physical presence on the line) then this line will not score that many goals.
So Denneny is the primary goal scorer, puck winner and physical presence on this line?
Am I not mistaken here? Just so we are all on the same page, correct me if im wrong but i've seen nothing regarding physical play and puck winning for either Nighbor or Balderis
Mark, this line worked IN REAL LIFE with basically the same setup. That's why nothing you're saying makes any sense to me (and surely others as well).
It's not like they had Gordie Howe working the corners for them on the right side. From what I know, Jack Darragh was a speedy winger with good handles who wasn't notable physically or as a "puck winner". That doesn't sound too different from Balderis to me.
Despite all your chemistry concerns, that line somehow managed to be extremely successful.
Again, I have to ask:
If this line worked in real life, why won't it work in the ATD? How is something that actually worked for over a decade in the real world too predictable to work in fantasyland?
If this line worked in real life, why won't it work in the ATD? How is something that actually worked for over a decade in the real world too predictable to work in fantasyland?
Uhh, the other teams in the ATD are a billion times stronger than the teams they played against in real life? First clue. Denneny-Nighbor-Balderis is in the bottom half of the league in terms of offensive potential from the 1st line, but that won't hurt Reen too much as his second line is very strong in support.
Uhh, the other teams in the ATD are a billion times stronger than the teams they played against in real life? First clue. Denneny-Nighbor-Balderis is in the bottom half of the league in terms of offensive potential from the 1st line, but that won't hurt Reen too much as his second line is very strong in support.
Right, every player is going to be less effective in this than in real life. And it's not one of the top 1st lines offensively.
But from a line-building and chemistry standpoint? I don't see how anyone can take issue with it. And as far as I can tell, that's what Mark was doing by questioning who the designated puck-winner, physical player, puck-carrier, etc would be (as if those distinctions aren't silly enough anyways).
Right, every player is going to be less effective in this than in real life. And it's not one of the top 1st lines offensively.
But from a line-building and chemistry standpoint? I don't see how anyone can take issue with it. And as far as I can tell, that's what Mark was doing.
Ahh, we're in agreement then. Is that really what Mark was saying? He knows Denneny and Nighbor played together.
I never fully bought the statistical case for Ramsay.
I'm curious what's so hard to "buy" about the case, as it's pretty simple.
- Both were LWs who were always matched against the opposition's best players for similar amounts of icetime
- One played in a vastly superior team situation that should have resulted in much fewer GA per game
- Instead, the other one had 0.53 adjusted ESGA per game in his prime (1974-1982) while the one with the advantage allowed 0.56 per game in his prime (1977-1986).
Ramsay's Sabres allowed 2.96 goals per game in his prime - 15.5% better than the league average. Gainey's habs allowed 2.93 - 20% better than the league average.
So it looks like Ramsay was allowing 5% fewer goals while in a team situation 4.5% more conducive to allowing goals. Sounds like about a 10% edge defensively. Difficult to surmount.
Why would the superior defensive forward on a superior defensive team, allow more goals?
The rebuttal to that, of course, is that his arena helped him. The smaller Buffalo Auditorium was better for defense. Angles and all that stuff. Gilbert Perreault scored the same at home as on the road, instead of 10% more at home, like most superstar forwards, so there must be something to that. Apparently 4 feet makes that big a difference. You never hear excuses made for Boston players (191X83), Chicago players (188X85) or Red Wings (200X83). Just for the best defensive player on the team with the fourth smallest rink in the league (196X85).
During Ramsay's prime, Buffalo outscored the opposition 1531-969 at home, 4.26 to 2.76 per game. On the road, where the regulation sized rinks would surely provide more offensive freedom to both the Sabres and their opposition, they outscored the opposition 1225-1183, or 3.49 to 3.37 per game. As you'd find with an 'average' team, they got better both offensively and defensively at home, by similar margins: 22% and 19%. The total goals in their home games was 2500. On the road, 2408. Considering what happened to Perreault's offense at home and the old Ramsay excuse, you'd think there was a ton less scoring at the Aud, but when you look at the big picture, that was not the case.
It would be really hard to make the case that Ramsay got better defensively at home at a rate disproportionate to his Buffalo teammates. The best assumption we can make, is that he was 19% better defensively at home like the rest of his team. the question is, is this abnormal?
the best data I can find is here: http://www.hockeycentral.co.uk/nhlst...omeroaddiv.php - the closest seasons to those in question are 1985-1990. Over that period, teams were 13.1% better at goal prevention at home then on the road. This is a trend that seems to be lessening over time; it has been just 9.8% over the last 4 seasons. It was likely more than just 13.1% in the 1974-1986 period I want to analyze, but let's just go with 13.1.
If Ramsay got 19% better defensively at home, but it was normal to be 13.1% better, than 5.9% of it could be explained by the arena. But only half his games were at the Aud, so the adjustment to defensive numbers should be in the 3% range.
Going back to the 10% gap we were looking at before, that would now appear to be in a 7% range. What explains that 7%?
There's not really a good answer to that. And make no mistake, 7% over that length of time is a lot.
But then the rebuttal to that is, "but look at the Selke voting". Gainey won 4 times, yes, but for whatever reasons the voters fell out of love with him rather quickly. Ramsay was consistently earning significant votes every season from 1978-1985 - his entire career span in which the selke was awarded. He actually earned more voting points per season eligible.
But the rebuttal to that, is, "but Gainey won it four times; peak > consistency!" There are three answers to this. One, Ramsay was statistically better during those 4 seasons, allowing 0.56 Adjusted ESGA per game as opposed to 0.63 for Gainey. Two, Gainey missed 14 and 16 games in two of those seasons; is it really feasible that he delivered more defensive value when Ramsay's defensive numbers were better and maintained over 80 games? Three, that they were even close in voting when one was the beneficiary of Montreal hype and dozens of nationally televised playoff games leading to cups, and the other was toiling in relative anonymity in Buffalo, how awesome does that look for the one player who was able to get recognition anywhere close to what Gainey received? Use your head here, if you had to pick, which one probably got underrated and which one probably got overrated? If you mentally adjust what the voting records say and then look at the statistical case it's not hard to come to the conclusion that Ramsay was better defensively.
Three, that they were even close in voting when one was the beneficiary of Montreal hype and dozens of nationally televised playoff games leading to cups, and the other was toiling in relative anonymity in Buffalo, how awesome does that look for the one player who was able to get recognition anywhere close to what Gainey received? Use your head here, if you had to pick, which one probably got underrated and which one probably got overrated?
In general, the effect of team situation/success, and national exposure/hype in voting totals needs to be considered in much more detail than we have thus far done in the ATD. This is not an exact science, but at the margins (and the defensive difference between Gainey and Ramsay is definitely marginal, whichever way one thinks it goes) it can make a rather large difference in how players are viewed by the voters.
As most ATD debate occurs "at the margins" (because the rough values for most players are pretty well known), this factor becomes quite significant.
.
