Luc Robitaille - Alex Delvecchio (A) - Daniel Alfredsson
Brendan Shanahan (A) - Pavel Datsyuk - Eddie Oatman
Patrick Sharp - Pit Lepine - Wilf Paiement
Sid Smith - Thomas Steen - Dirk Graham
Marc Tardif - Gregg Sheppard
Scott Stevens (C) - Brad McCrimmon
Keith Magnuson - "Lill-Strimma" Svedberg
Robert Svehla - Steve Smith
Kjell Samuelsson
Terry Sawchuk
Miikka Kiprusoff
Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 04-08-2012 at 06:19 PM.
You can never truly stop Bobby Orr, but I must say that I really like the ability of takeaway artist Datsyuk and hook checker Lepine to pressure in him in neutral ice.
Delvecchio is a good defensive center too; I'm not sure about his reputation with regards to creating turnovers.
Does Winnipeg deploy Scott Stevens against Geoffrion or are we in for some epic Stevens/Lindros battles?
Two ATDs and it's the second time I face Bobby Orr. Having Orr is a sure way to get past the first round.
Good luck BBS!
you really got the short end of the stick on that.
I had Winnipeg a bit higher than their placement. Shanahan and Datsyuk are a good duo that make a pretty good second line with Oatman imo. Stevens and Sawchuk bring the star power and should definitely frustrate my attack. This should be a good series and best of luck to you.
I think it's a lot easier to have the info on hand when making comparisons so I hope no one minds the wall of text. The percentages I'm using are 70s vs#2 numbers, I know there was debate but they're still apples to apples.
First Lines
Winnipeg's top line has a strong two-way presence in Delvecchio and Alffy compared to Pittsburgh who only has one strong two-way player in Richard. I think Richard is better overall but it's not a very big margin over Fats. Geoffrion and Robitaille seem to be the finishers of our lines. Lucky Luc scored a lot of goals and for a long period of time, but his peak just doesn't rival Boom Boom's. Both are selected in the ATD for their shooting and Geoffrion's goal placements of 1, 1, 3, 3, 5, 5, 8, 9, stand above Robitaille's 4, 4, 6, 7, 7, 9, 9, 10, 10. Clear edge to Bernie here. That leaves Alffy and Roberts and it's clear who was better. Alffy is a plus defensively as well, and while Roberts is a great hustle guy who will hit anything, I wouldn't call that anything special for an ATDer. Even clearer edge to Winnipeg here.
Overall, despite the weaker weakest link, I think Pittsburgh's top line here is superior. Alffy will outplay Roberts in a best-of-seven series but this edge for Winnipeg doesn't seem great enough to make up for the differences between the other players. Plus this comparison made no mention of the fact that my top line has arguably the best player of all time backing them up.
Second Lines
Datsyuk is a great player who TDMM wisely pointed out may have a decent case for matching with Orr, but Lindros has the better resume. Lindros's percentages are better than Datsyuk's and they both bring their own unique elements. Shanny is more fearsome than LeClair but after that it's incredibly close. LeClair had the higher peak with 5 post-season all-star awards but his back troubles prevented him racking up as many productive seasons on Shanny did. I like LeClair here with his former partner Lindros next to him, but this is very close imo. And in a recurring theme, Oatman is certainly better than Pappin. Pappin doesn't provide a lot of offense but his style is perfect for his linemates. I think my take on the LOD will be a difference maker in this series with Winnipeg's particular top four, but sleeping on Winnipeg's line wouldn't be wise. I think both lines are capable of producing effectively over the seven game series with an edge to Pittsburgh at the top again.
Last edited by Bring Back Scuderi: 04-08-2012 at 10:25 PM.
I think it's a lot easier to have the info on hand when making comparisons so I hope no one minds the wall of text. The percentages I'm using are 70s vs#2 numbers, I know there was debate but they're still apples to apples.
So 70s' "versus 2" counts Lindros' actual 6th place finish as "#2" and counts one of Robitaille's 5th place finishes as "#2"?
I get the desire to remove outliers, but when you remove that many, it really isn't VS 2 anymore, right?
So 70s' "versus 2" counts Lindros' actual 6th place finish as "#2" and counts one of Robitaille's 5th place finishes as "#2"?
I get the desire to remove outliers. It when you remove that many, it really isn't VS 2 anymore, right?
I'm more of a onlooker than participant when it comes to tweaking the percentages. I followed the conversation in that thread and have no investments to any particular system. I just use this one because it's complete already and I'd really rather not try to calculate that many percentages (I'd probably just drop that metric and add more in-depth voting records simply due to accessibility which would be pretty lame).
Your points aren't lost on me, it's just regardless of what we call it, this current system is consistent right? As long as 70s took it down to #5/6 every time those particular conditions came about, then it should make a fair comparison with the caveat you should only look at post-expansion with post-expansion, and pre with pre. I'd imagine most of those outlier seasons come post-expansion anyways.
Because it became a mathematical exercise. Defining players from a set of statistical mumbo jumbo.
Plus it's Bobby Orr, like last year, GMs wont let Bobby Orr dissapear in the first round.
I think you really built a strong team, and you've definitely got a lot of the elements necessary to give Pittsburgh a hard time in this series. I would put the Stevens pairing out there against the Lindros line for obvious reasons. The trick is going to be convincing the voters that your second pairing will stand up when it is out there, because other than that one unit, you have great strength up and down the lineup and one of the top-3 (for my money) goalies of all-time.
Don't worry too much about those Vs2 numbers. They're just a shorthand for scoring equivalency across the eras, and BBS is not trying to make any disingenuous arguments here, just showing who did what as a scorer throughout their respective careers.
I think you really built a strong team, and you've definitely got a lot of the elements necessary to give Pittsburgh a hard time in this series. I would put the Stevens pairing out there against the Lindros line for obvious reasons. The trick is going to be convincing the voters that your second pairing will stand up when it is out there, because other than that one unit, you have great strength up and down the lineup and one of the top-3 (for my money) goalies of all-time.
Don't worry too much about those Vs2 numbers. They're just a shorthand for scoring equivalency across the eras, and BBS is not trying to make any disingenuous arguments here, just showing who did what as a scorer throughout their respective careers.
I dont see why my second pairing gets so questioned.
Keith Magnuson was a popular stay-at-home defenseman and a good cover for Svedberg when the puck is being rushed up the ice. Svedberg himself is probably a slightly lesser version of Coffey. The fact that guys like Kelly and Howe tried to convince him to sign in Detroit is a good enough merit for me.
Because it became a mathematical exercise. Defining players from a set of statistical mumbo jumbo.
Plus it's Bobby Orr, like last year, GMs wont let Bobby Orr dissapear in the first round.
The mumbo jumbo math is there because I'm younger than your grandson and have absolutely zero fist hand knowledge or prior knowledge from past ATDs.
To be honest, I like going up against the elder statesmen because I know I'll be set straight if the mumbo jumbo becomes statistical voodoo. Like Sturm said, I'm certainly not trying to be unfair here and I think the most noticeable part of the comparison is Pappin and Roberts really lagging behind their counterparts.
The mumbo jumbo math is there because I'm younger than your grandson and have absolutely zero fist hand knowledge or prior knowledge from past ATDs.
To be honest, I like going up against the elder statesmen because I know I'll be set straight if the mumbo jumbo becomes statistical voodoo. Like Sturm said, I'm certainly not trying to be unfair here and I think the most noticeable part of the comparison is Pappin and Roberts really lagging behind their counterparts.
You have to forgive me if I offended you it wasn't my intent. I'm simply not a fan of math.
I dont see why my second pairing gets so questioned.
Keith Magnuson was a popular stay-at-home defenseman and a good cover for Svedberg when the puck is being rushed up the ice. Svedberg himself is probably a slightly lesser version of Coffey. The fact that guys like Kelly and Howe tried to convince him to sign in Detroit is a good enough merit for me.
Svehla and Magnuson can handle Geoffrion, in fact Svehla can handle Lindros too. So Lindros will be neutralized in these series.
I think the knock on Magnuson is the same as for Mortson and Blake. The concern is they run around too much and they're not the best fit on a contrasting pair. You do have fine two-way wingers, but that doesn't change the fact that your defensive conscience Magnuson is a weaker guy for a second pair. I think he sticks out here when comparing second pairs.
I'm just not really seeing it if the claim is about Geoffrion. I'd be totally fine with Magnuson - Svedberg or Svehla - Smith matching my top line, as it's the unit I tried to build around Orr. I can buy Datsyuk and Lepine holding their own in their attempts to fend of Orr but not neutralizing him obviously. That said I don't see how either line could favor Winnipeg, are Shanahan or Sharp that valuable defensively? I just don't see any way those bottom two pairs are going to stand up to Richard-Geoffrion-Orr and their two role players.
I think the knock on Magnuson is the same as for Mortson and Blake. The concern is they run around too much and they're not the best fit on a contrasting pair. You do have fine two-way wingers, but that doesn't change the fact that your defensive conscience Magnuson is a weaker guy for a second pair. I think he sticks out here when comparing second pairs.
I'm just not really seeing it if the claim is about Geoffrion. I'd be totally fine with Magnuson - Svedberg or Svehla - Smith matching my top line, as it's the unit I tried to build around Orr. I can buy Datsyuk and Lepine holding their own in their attempts to fend of Orr but not neutralizing him obviously. That said, I don't see how either matchup could favor Winnipeg. No way those bottom two pairs are going to stand up to Richard-Geoffrion-Orr and their two role players.
Stevens and McCrimmon can handle your top line since Svehla and Smith (with help of my forwards) neutralizes your second line.
Top 4
Mccrimmon and Stevens are a very strong defensive pair that should cause any of my lines trouble. This of course doesn't mention that they're backed by Sawchuk. I don't think much needs to be said about Orr and Hitchman. Hitchman is probably best suited as a #3 but fortunately he's with Orr and fits well with his conservative game.
I think Pittsburgh's second pair is stronger than Winnipeg's as well.
This of course leaves off Svedberg who's your stronger player. With his record of 3 WC ASTs and once finishing as the Best Defender at the WC he's definitely a solid #3, but I think Blake's record which also includes 1 WC AST and Best Defender is stronger. That leaves Mortson and Magnuson and again I like my chances. Mortson is just as abrasive and nasty but has a much better record.
Top 4
Mccrimmon and Stevens are a very strong defensive pair that should cause any of my lines trouble. This of course doesn't mention that they're backed by Sawchuk. I don't think much needs to be said about Orr and Hitchman. Hitchman is probably best suited as a #3 but fortunately he's with Orr and fits well with his conservative game.
I think Pittsburgh's second pair is stronger than Winnipeg's as well.
This of course leaves off Svedberg who's your stronger player. With his record of 3 WC ASTs and once finishing as the Best Defender at the WC he's definitely a solid #3, but I think Blake's record which also includes 1 WC AST and Best Defender is stronger. That leaves Mortson and Magnuson and again I like my chances. Mortson is just as abrasive and nasty but has a much better record.
I obviously disagree with Blake being better than Svedberg. Blake is more physical and probably had a better shot. Svedberg however is the perfect playmaking defensemen who could make outlet passes aswell as rushing the puck and make an offensive zone pass. He will benefit greatly from having Shanahan and Robitaille on the ice. When Svedberg is playing I can let most of my two-way forwards do the shadowing and defensive work IF we dont control the puck.
Another thing that spells a bit of trouble for your team (and mine) is that we both utilize four dangerous lines and not really using a clear cut shutdown line. I dont think this will rest on who has the best defense but on who has the hottest goalie.
Sid Smith might possibly be the game winner in game 7.
Edit: Mortson might be better than Magnuson but only if he plays. Mortson was disciplinary nightmare for coaches.
you really got the short end of the stick on that. 
