HFBoards

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

Bob Cole Divisional Semifinals: Kazan vs. Rögle

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-19-2012, 12:52 AM
  #26
nik jr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Congo-Kinshasa
Posts: 10,526
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
Here are the defensive groupings that I see on these two teams.

Lidstrom
Cleghorn, Chara, Pulford
Ramsey, Desjardins, Numminen, Portland
Johansson, Svoboda, Murphy
Hatcher

Your group is maybe a litte better defensively, but it's not really significant.
your opinion of lidstrom has obviously changed very much in the last few years.

you are underrating murphy. (b/c of his time with TML?) i would put him between desjardins and numminen. murphy is also playing with lidstrom, which will make his work easier.


why should numminen or portland be ranked with ramsey? can you give any evidence that they were considered among the best defensive d-men of their time?

2 examples of general opinion of ramsey's D: 1990 poll of players, 1984 coaches' poll

Quote:
I think the speed of Forsberg and Foyston are going to give Chara a lot of problems in open ice.
occasionally, yes, but not often. the current era emphasizes speed and skill more than any other in history, and chara is still elite.

by contrast, your bio of pulford says he was not terribly mobile or skilled, and he played in an era with a much lower pace.

which of these players is more likely to be victimized by speed and skill?

judging from your bio of portland, he has similar problems.

Quote:
That is going to be a mismatch down low.
i think ramsey is well suited to defending stewart, as he was strong defensively, big and physical, but stewart was one of the best ever near the net and will be able to score.

i think the key to playing against stewart is to keep his unit from setting up plays for him. make him play in the defensive zone, attack the puck carrier in the neutral zone and at the blueline. stewart was slow, so he takes longer to get in position


Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
I think guys like Kevin Hatcher, Phaneuf, Jovanovski, and McCabe usually get overrated by the media for a few years for their big hits and offense, then they get tired of their constant mistakes and actually become underrated. So guys like that often have an all-star "peak" they probably don't deserve but then spend the later part of their careers being overly criticized.

I think it's most true about Phaneuf, but it probably affects the others too
i think that is generally true, but i don't think it is true of hatcher, mostly b/c of his back injuries.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hobnobs View Post
am I the only one who is not impressed with Nik's offense (except for Jagr)? I think it will be pretty "easy" for our forward corps to shut them down.

Edit: Palffy will get injured in the first game.
and forsberg will get injured in the 2nd. which is a bigger loss?


Last edited by nik jr: 04-19-2012 at 05:26 PM.
nik jr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2012, 01:30 AM
  #27
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,810
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nik jr View Post
your opinion of lidstrom has obviously changed very much in the last few years.
It has.

It's only been in the last few years that I started watching teams other than the Leafs. I've started following the Kings and Sharks, and that has allowed me to get a much better handle on players who rarely face the Leafs.

Quote:
you are underrating murphy. (b/c of his time with TML?) i would put him between desjardins and numminen. murphy is also playing with lidstrom, which will make his work easier.
I was actually tempted to put him in that tier.

Quote:
why should numminen or portland be ranked with ramsey? can you give any evidence that they were considered among the best defensive d-men of their time?

2 examples of general opinion of ramsey's D: 1990 poll of players, 1984 coaches' poll
Looks like I've under-rated Ramsey. I've never owned him, and I can't say I've ever really researched him. I have always pictured him as a steady, reliable guy, but nothing special. Looks like he might be something special defensively.

I'd put him ahead of that group, but not in the above group. He gets his own

Quote:
occasionally, yes, but not often. the current era emphasizes speed and skill more than any other in history, and chara is still elite.
Chara gets exposed in open ice. That's probably his only weakness, but it's something I'll be looking to exploit.

Quote:
by contrast, your bio of pulford says he was not terribly mobile or skilled, and he played in an era with a much lower pace.

which of these players is more likely to be victimized by speed and skill?
In his early career, Pulford was a poor skater, but he got a lot better over the years. Pulford was basically Chara without the slapshot.

Both guys are likely to be exposed by speed. Only one of them is going to be matched up against the top units.

Quote:
judging from your bio of portland, he has similar problems.
Like Pulford, Portland was a much better skater in the second half of his career.

Also like Pulfrod, Portland isn't a top pairing defenseman.

Quote:
i think ramsey is well suited to defending stewart, as he was strong defensively, big and physical, but stewart was one of the best ever near the net and will be able to score.

i think the key to playing against stewart is to keep his unit from setting up plays for him. make him play in the defensive zone, attack the puck carrier in the neutral zone and at the blueline. stewart was slow, so he takes longer to get in position
As I said in the last series, that Stewart line is a chip/dump and chase line. They won't be carrying through the neutral zone. If we win the race, we set up the cycle. If we lose the race, kill the guy with the puck, and then set up the cycle. That line is going to keep the puck down low until they score or draw a penalty, especially against weaker defense pairs.

With Lidstrom and Murphy on the ice, it will be pretty tough to keep us in our own end.

Dreakmur is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-19-2012, 01:43 AM
  #28
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,810
vCash: 500
Jaromir Jagr is obviously the key to slowing down Kazan's attack. Luckily for us, it looks like the Kazan 1st line is flawed. Jagr is a great player, but he is best when playing a style that requires good linemates of the right style.

First of all, there is a serious lack of muscle. That line will have a lot of problems along the boards, in the corners, and in the dirty areas. Hockey always comes down to 1-on-1 battles, and this line isn't going to be able to win a lot of them. All the skill in the world goes to waste if the other team constantly ends up with the puck on their sticks.

Second, all three players on that line are biased towards passing instead of shooting. Jagr's biggest strength as a player is his ability to protect the puck, wait for linemates to get open and find them. If he's doing what he's best at, he's setting up two pretty mediocre scorers. If Jagr is going to be the scorer on the line, he's not nearly as effective as he could be.

Lastly, Mats Naslund is basically an anchor. He's got no business being a top-6 forward in this size of draft, let alone a 1st liner.

Dreakmur is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2012, 09:37 AM
  #29
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,810
vCash: 500
Why Rogle should win the series…

Goaltending – Once again, Rogle will have an advantage in net. Brodeur is definitely better than Bower, and it’s a bigger edge than we had over Benedict last series.

Top-6 Forwards – Once you get past Jaroir Jagr, Kazan’s top-6 forwards are pretty mediocre. When you factor in the flaws in the Jagr line, this is going to me a significant problem. Kazan will have trouble scoring in this series.

Rogle, on the other hand, has good depth in terms of offensive talent. With Forsberg, Stewart, Foyston, and Kovalchuk, all spread through the line-up, we’ll be able score much more easily than Kazan.

Strength Up the Middle – We are going to have a significant advantage at center ice for this series. With Forsberg and Stewart going up against Ratelle and Modano, it’s pretty close to a mismatch, especially in terms of physical play.

Physical Play – Once again, I see this series going at least 6 games, so the physical punishment that the Rogle forwards can dish out is going to wear down Kazan, and maybe even intimidate them.

Dreakmur is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2012, 11:22 AM
  #30
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 38,060
vCash: 500
Rogle has more offensive depth, but Jagr is the best offensive player in the series. What's the plan for dealing with him?

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2012, 05:16 PM
  #31
nik jr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Congo-Kinshasa
Posts: 10,526
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
As I said in the last series, that Stewart line is a chip/dump and chase line. They won't be carrying through the neutral zone. If we win the race, we set up the cycle. If we lose the race, kill the guy with the puck, and then set up the cycle. That line is going to keep the puck down low until they score or draw a penalty, especially against weaker defense pairs.

With Lidstrom and Murphy on the ice, it will be pretty tough to keep us in our own end.
will stewart's line be playing primarily with lidstrom and murphy?



i don't think stewart's line will be very successful with a dump and chase.

harris and smith are well suited to it, but a successful forecheck needs more than 2 players. one F will forecheck the puck carrier, the other F will take away the pass along the boards. who will take away passes to the middle?

stewart is slower than all my skaters with the possible exception of andreychuk, and is much slower than about 1/2 of my roster.

another risk is that if harris and smith are not successful and get caught behind the puck, stewart would be the last F back.

my d-men also have more speed than yours, so are better able to escape forecheckers.


how effective would nels stewart be on the cycle? stewart was very big, but was constantly called sluggish and lazy. cycling requires hard work on the boards.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
Jaromir Jagr is obviously the key to slowing down Kazan's attack. Luckily for us, it looks like the Kazan 1st line is flawed. Jagr is a great player, but he is best when playing a style that requires good linemates of the right style.

First of all, there is a serious lack of muscle. That line will have a lot of problems along the boards, in the corners, and in the dirty areas. Hockey always comes down to 1-on-1 battles, and this line isn't going to be able to win a lot of them. All the skill in the world goes to waste if the other team constantly ends up with the puck on their sticks.
both our teams play on big ice, so there will not be as much grinding on the boards as in a smaller rink. the combined speed and passing ability of all 3 players is very valuable on big ice, especially against some of your relatively slower d-men.

3 of your top 4 d-men are unphysical. against lidstrom, murphy and numminen, getting to the puck first and fighting for it is more important than power. although naslund was very small, he was very fiesty and not soft, which is one of the main reasons he was/is so popular in montreal. jagr is also one of the strongest players in history.


i thought i said this in my 1st round series, but i did not. i mentioned that my approach to matchups is based more on zones than on matching lines. andreychuk will get many shifts with ratelle and jagr in the offensive zone.

you mentioned a similar idea in your 1st round series with stewart and forsberg. andreychuk was basically a poor man's nels stewart and loses most of his value above the hash marks. andreychuk is primarily there for his ability around the net, but also gives the line more strength on the boards, and another faceoff man.

6'4 andreychuk will also tend to draw the bigger and more physical of your d-men to him at the net.


when andreychuk takes naslund's place, naslund will play with the 4th line. naslund and bobby smith were linemates for most of naslund's NHL career.


Quote:
Second, all three players on that line are biased towards passing instead of shooting. Jagr's biggest strength as a player is his ability to protect the puck, wait for linemates to get open and find them. If he's doing what he's best at, he's setting up two pretty mediocre scorers. If Jagr is going to be the scorer on the line, he's not nearly as effective as he could be.
totally disagree with this

first, lines rarely have too much playmaking. extra passes break down defensive structure. sedins operate this way. gretzky did it much better than anyone. more playmaking makes a line less predictable.



second, jagr was not biased toward passing or shooting. he was biased towards the offensive zone, which i will discuss later. his biggest strength is that he was one of the 5 best offensive players in the history of hockey.

since shots have been recorded ('68), jagr is 8th in shots, and was regularly among the leaders in shots.


third, jagr was an all time great goalscorer, and may be the best goalscorer in this series.

8 times in top 10 in goals in a deep era, 9 times in the top 10 in ES goals, 7 times in top 5 in goals per game. if not for the lockouts, jagr would almost certainly be a 700g scorer despite playing mostly in a low scoring era, and if he had also not left the NHL after '08, he would have a chance to pass howe for 2nd all time.


fourth, ratelle was also a good goalscorer.
ratelle's finishes in top 20 in goals from '68-'77: 7th, 13, 11, --, 5, 6, --, 16, 17, 15

only esposito and cournoyer scored more goals during that span.

ratelle also had the bad luck to get his ankle broken when he was challenging esposito for the '72 art ross. 1.73p per game vs 1.75 for esposito. ratelle was 2nd in goals per game (.73) and won the pearson/lindsay.

Quote:
Lastly, Mats Naslund is basically an anchor. He's got no business being a top-6 forward in this size of draft, let alone a 1st liner.
naslund is obviously a weak 1st liner, and will not play the minutes of a 1st liner, but in his prime was a better offensive player than owen nolan.

naslund was the primary offensive player on one of the better teams in the NHL, and was not in a position to leech off better players. this is one of the main problems i have with simply comparing players' numbers.

second, the habs were one of the most defensive teams in the NHL. players like skrudland, carbonneau and mcphee sometimes played as much or more than naslund. lemaire and burns (2 of naslund's coaches) did similar sometimes with NJD.

a good description of naslund by a longtime buffalo fan:
Quote:
Originally Posted by reckoning View Post
I would move Mats Naslund up to #3. During the 80s he was the engine than ran Montreals offence. The general rule among the other teams was if they could stop Naslund, they could beat Montreal. An outstanding skater and stickhandler who was deadly in the offensive zone, but most impressive was how he wasn't afraid to play gritty. For a small player (5' 7", 160 ) he took an incredible amount of physical punishment, but never complained or backed away. Even Don Cherry (no lover of Swedes) used to admiringly call Naslund "a tough little bugger".
you are right that naslund is a weak linemate, but i think his speed, skill and playmaking work well with ratelle and jagr. but as i said above, naslund will not play typical minutes for a 1st liner, and andreychuk will also take some of naslund's shifts in the offensive zone.






puck possession/territorial play
i think kazan will have possession at ES more often than rogle.

1. trotz vs blake
2. my blueline is better defensively.
3. my F's are better at keeping possession.



barry trotz has coached a defensive, grinding team for over a decade. his style of play has resulted in less time of possession and in being outshot in almost every season, regardless of win/loss record, making/missing playoffs or offense.

nashville has not been outshot b/c they were weak offensively. there seems to be no correlation between their shot differential and goals. the worst numbers since nashville became a playoff team (-3.6, -3.2) correspond to higher scoring (5th, 8th in GF), even though negative shot differential generally means less time in the offensive zone.

this trend has continued in playoffs.


trotz's team's generally have relied on their goaltenders to keep them in games while the skaters play relatively passively. but getting outshot is generally bad, and brodeur was used to fewer shots. only in '06 were NJD outshot, and it was by a tiny margin (-.1).



i had noted some things in jean beliveau's book about toe blake that i wanted to post about, but i can no longer read them in google books. it is too hard to find good detailed information on old coaches. almost all i read about blake is vague praise.




both 1st lines are good puck possession lines built around a dominant possession player. jagr tended to drive the play into the offensive zone, and as a result was one of the very best ES scorers in history. from '94-'01, jagr was either 1st or 2nd in ES points except in '97 (due to injury). both jagr and forsberg tended to dominate possession regardless of linemates, and increase their linemates scoring, but jagr was better at it, and more importantly, was not injured for 30% of his career.

ratelle was also a very good possession player, based on his speed, passing and 2 way play. like jagr, ratelle was also a very good ES scorer, and as evidenced by his +/-, routinely outscored his opponents.

NHL.com only has a couple of naslund's seasons, but based on those, he was quite a good ES scorer (13th in '89, 14th in '88). andreychuk was a weak ES scorer and was biased towards PP, but i think the tradeoff for net presence is worth making.

i think my 1st line will control the puck more and outscore any of rogle's lines.




i think the key player of rogle's 2nd line, nels stewart, is a problem for territorial play. as i said above, i don't think he will be an effective forechecker. b/c of his sluggish play away from the net, his teammates have to carry the puck and set up offense, and can be fairly easily pressured.

this is not just speculation. players similar to stewart (esposito without orr, kerr, ciccarelli, andreychuk), were poor territorial players who were often outshot and outscored.


the key player on rogle's 4th line, ilya kovalchuk, who will play 2nd line minutes, is also a problem territorially. kovalchuk generally does not control play, has not played well in a structured system, is a weak defensive player, generally does not make his teammates better and is routinely outscored, even during his last 2 seasons on a team that ranked 8th best in GA. in 9 of kovalchuk's 10 seasons, he has had among the worst +/- ratings on his team, despite an offensive rather than defensive role.

nik jr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2012, 09:16 PM
  #32
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,810
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Rogle has more offensive depth, but Jagr is the best offensive player in the series. What's the plan for dealing with him?
He gets to play mostly against Lidstrom and Pulford. He'll also get a very healthy dose of Tony Leswick.

Also, as I said before, his line is seriously flawed, will be less effective that the sum of it's parts, and will be a lot easier to target and shut down one specific player.

Dreakmur is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2012, 09:48 PM
  #33
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,810
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nik jr View Post
will stewart's line be playing primarily with lidstrom and murphy?



i don't think stewart's line will be very successful with a dump and chase.

harris and smith are well suited to it, but a successful forecheck needs more than 2 players. one F will forecheck the puck carrier, the other F will take away the pass along the boards. who will take away passes to the middle?

stewart is slower than all my skaters with the possible exception of andreychuk, and is much slower than about 1/2 of my roster.

another risk is that if harris and smith are not successful and get caught behind the puck, stewart would be the last F back.

my d-men also have more speed than yours, so are better able to escape forecheckers.


how effective would nels stewart be on the cycle? stewart was very big, but was constantly called sluggish and lazy. cycling requires hard work on the boards.
Dump and chase only requires two forwards to be done effectively. Smith and Harris are both players who excell in all the aspects need to play that game.

Agreed that cycling does work better with three forwards. Stewart has the ability to absolutely dominate the cycle game - he's huge, he's powerful, and he's got a great set of hands. He was always lazy, but Barry Trotz has always been able to get his players to buy hard work and discipline, so Stewart should be more effective that with other coaches.

Quote:
both our teams play on big ice, so there will not be as much grinding on the boards as in a smaller rink. the combined speed and passing ability of all 3 players is very valuable on big ice, especially against some of your relatively slower d-men.
Both our teams play on regulation NHL ice.

Quote:
3 of your top 4 d-men are unphysical. against lidstrom, murphy and numminen, getting to the puck first and fighting for it is more important than power. although naslund was very small, he was very fiesty and not soft, which is one of the main reasons he was/is so popular in montreal. jagr is also one of the strongest players in history.
That's right, getting to the puck first is important. There are two problems there...

First of all, your team is not a dump and chase team. You have said it yourself that your team is a puck-control team, so it doesn't matter. They will rarely force my defensemen to go back to retrieve pucks.

Second of all, my defense will almost never have to retireve them, even if you do dump it in. Martin Brodeur handles all those dump-ins.

Quote:
puck possession/territorial play
i think kazan will have possession at ES more often than rogle.

1. trotz vs blake
2. my blueline is better defensively.
3. my F's are better at keeping possession.

barry trotz has coached a defensive, grinding team for over a decade. his style of play has resulted in less time of possession and in being outshot in almost every season, regardless of win/loss record, making/missing playoffs or offense.

nashville has not been outshot b/c they were weak offensively. there seems to be no correlation between their shot differential and goals. the worst numbers since nashville became a playoff team (-3.6, -3.2) correspond to higher scoring (5th, 8th in GF), even though negative shot differential generally means less time in the offensive zone.

this trend has continued in playoffs.

trotz's team's generally have relied on their goaltenders to keep them in games while the skaters play relatively passively. but getting outshot is generally bad, and brodeur was used to fewer shots. only in '06 were NJD outshot, and it was by a tiny margin (-.1).
Well, since you obviously never watch Nashville play....

Nashville has been a super-aggressive, physical, forechecking team for years. Defensively, they do play passively. They take away the best scoring areas and let the other team fire away from the low percentage areas.

That defensive system is very similar to New Jersey's. That's why Brodeur actually did face a lot of shots, though they weren't often good quality chances.

Quote:
both 1st lines are good puck possession lines built around a dominant possession player. jagr tended to drive the play into the offensive zone, and as a result was one of the very best ES scorers in history. from '94-'01, jagr was either 1st or 2nd in ES points except in '97 (due to injury). both jagr and forsberg tended to dominate possession regardless of linemates, and increase their linemates scoring, but jagr was better at it, and more importantly, was not injured for 30% of his career.

ratelle was also a very good possession player, based on his speed, passing and 2 way play. like jagr, ratelle was also a very good ES scorer, and as evidenced by his +/-, routinely outscored his opponents.

NHL.com only has a couple of naslund's seasons, but based on those, he was quite a good ES scorer (13th in '89, 14th in '88). andreychuk was a weak ES scorer and was biased towards PP, but i think the tradeoff for net presence is worth making.

i think my 1st line will control the puck more and outscore any of rogle's lines.
Your first line probably does outscore any of my lines, but this isn't a competition between top lines. This is a game played with 20 guys, and after your top-1 forward, Rogle has a substantial advantage.

Quote:
i think the key player of rogle's 2nd line, nels stewart, is a problem for territorial play. as i said above, i don't think he will be an effective forechecker. b/c of his sluggish play away from the net, his teammates have to carry the puck and set up offense, and can be fairly easily pressured.

this is not just speculation. players similar to stewart (esposito without orr, kerr, ciccarelli, andreychuk), were poor territorial players who were often outshot and outscored.

the key player on rogle's 4th line, ilya kovalchuk, who will play 2nd line minutes, is also a problem territorially. kovalchuk generally does not control play, has not played well in a structured system, is a weak defensive player, generally does not make his teammates better and is routinely outscored, even during his last 2 seasons on a team that ranked 8th best in GA. in 9 of kovalchuk's 10 seasons, he has had among the worst +/- ratings on his team, despite an offensive rather than defensive role.
As I've said before, I'll take the defensive problems of Stewart and Kovalchuk any day, especially when they are surrounded with the forwards I have around them.

You can't win if you don't score, and you can't score if you don't take chances.

Dreakmur is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2012, 09:52 PM
  #34
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 38,060
vCash: 500
Quote:
That defensive system is very similar to New Jersey's. That's why Brodeur actually did face a lot of shots, though they weren't often good quality chances.
Brodeur didn't face a lot of shots

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2012, 10:44 PM
  #35
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,620
vCash: 500
Yeah, you don't get to say you play on big ice just because of where you chose to locate your team.

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-20-2012, 11:50 PM
  #36
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,810
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Brodeur didn't face a lot of shots
He was almost always top-10 in shots against.

Also, you claimed that their official shot counter missed a lot of shots against. That would further increase his shots against, and his save percentage too.


Edit:

Of course, it doesn't really matter anyway, since nik's claim was not entirely factual. Nashville doesn't give up that many shots. They are most often in the middle of the pack.

Dreakmur is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-21-2012, 12:50 PM
  #37
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 TheDevilMadeMe View Post
I think guys like Kevin Hatcher, Phaneuf, Jovanovski, and McCabe usually get overrated by the media for a few years for their big hits and offense, then they get tired of their constant mistakes and actually become underrated. So guys like that often have an all-star "peak" they probably don't deserve but then spend the later part of their careers being overly criticized.

I think it's most true about Phaneuf, but it probably affects the others too
Yes, I think this is very much true, and not just for Phaneuf.

Sturminator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-21-2012, 02:10 PM
  #38
Jafar
Keep it logical
 
Jafar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,995
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Yeah, you don't get to say you play on big ice just because of where you chose to locate your team.
Yeah I was wondering about that part

Jafar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-23-2012, 06:49 AM
  #39
nik jr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Congo-Kinshasa
Posts: 10,526
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
Dump and chase only requires two forwards to be done effectively. Smith and Harris are both players who excell in all the aspects need to play that game.
that is right when my d-men have not recovered, but that is not the usual situation.

if harris and smith are forechecking deep in the offensive zone, stewart or someone else must take away a pass to the other d-man or a F.

how often will a slow, one dimensional player like nels stewart beat my 2 way C's into my defensive zone?

Quote:
Agreed that cycling does work better with three forwards. Stewart has the ability to absolutely dominate the cycle game - he's huge, he's powerful, and he's got a great set of hands. He was always lazy, but Barry Trotz has always been able to get his players to buy hard work and discipline, so Stewart should be more effective that with other coaches.
basically all coaches have been able to get their players to work hard and play with discipline. a coach who could not would be fired.

trotz has never had a player like nels stewart. nashville has generally been a mixture of grinders and skilled players.

Quote:
That's right, getting to the puck first is important. There are two problems there...

First of all, your team is not a dump and chase team. You have said it yourself that your team is a puck-control team, so it doesn't matter. They will rarely force my defensemen to go back to retrieve pucks.

Second of all, my defense will almost never have to retireve them, even if you do dump it in. Martin Brodeur handles all those dump-ins.
board work does not happen primarily in dump and chase situations. hockey is a chaotic game, so the puck is loose very often regardless of style of play.

lidstrom, murphy and numminen did not punish or overpower anyone on the boards. pulford, portland and hatcher were obviously much more physical, but all of them were also fairly slow-footed, so i don't think your team will dominate the boards, especially since your team will most likely have possession less often.


Quote:
Well, since you obviously never watch Nashville play....

Nashville has been a super-aggressive, physical, forechecking team for years. Defensively, they do play passively. They take away the best scoring areas and let the other team fire away from the low percentage areas.
i can almost guarantee that i have seen more games of nashville than you. you said above that you have only started watching other teams in the last few years.

super-aggressive forechecking and passive D cannot be done at the same time. d-men have to pressure from the back in the offensive zone for aggressive forechecking to be successful. similarly, F's have to provide support to d-men for passive D to be successful.

nashville often plays an aggressive forecheck (not super-aggressive, though), but also often retreats into passive D. that passive style results in less time of possession and getting outshot. i don't think your team is built for that.

forsberg, lidstrom, murphy, numminen and possibly others, used puck possession as a form of D. they rarely played passive D. passive D requires control the middle of the defensive zone, blocking shots and locking down the front of the net. i cannot say about pulford or portland, but lidstrom, murphy and numminen were not at their best in those circumstances. kevin hatcher's strength was much more on offense than D.

playing passively removes one of the main strengths of your blueline, puts your d-men in an uncomfortable situation, and reduces your time on offense.


i don't want to play a passive defensive game, but i will note that my d-men should be better than yours in controlling the middle of the defensive zone, in blocking shots and in clearing the crease.



will forsberg's line also play a forechecking style?

Quote:
That defensive system is very similar to New Jersey's. That's why Brodeur actually did face a lot of shots, though they weren't often good quality chances.
NJD and nashville have both used different systems over the years, but their results are not at all similar. nashville's forechecking generally was more aggressive and their passive D less effective than NJD's. NJD covered the neutral zone better and was better in shot suppression.

brodeur almost always faced a low number of shots. for most of his career, it was under 25 per game. that does not mean brodeur will not be able to handle more shots, though.

NJD were almost never outshot. nashville were almost always outshot, even in '07 playoffs when they had a great record and had peter forsberg.


[QUOTE]Your first line probably does outscore any of my lines, but this isn't a competition between top lines. This is a game played with 20 guys, and after your top-1 forward, Rogle has a substantial advantage.[QUOTE]
your offense plays against a better D, and i think my team is better in possession for reasons i mentioned earlier.


ratelle is superior to foyston. their relative numbers seem fairly similar, but ratelle played in a full league in a deeper era. foyston was also usually not his team's leading scorer.

i think naslund and andreychuk were better offensively than owen nolan.

your 2nd and 4th lines have more offensive potential than mine, but i think time of possession is an issue for both. i won't claim that my 2nd or 4th lines will be dominate in possession, though.

i think my 3rd line is better b/c of tkaczuk. yours lacks some playmaking ability, and i think mine will be better able to cycle.


Quote:
As I've said before, I'll take the defensive problems of Stewart and Kovalchuk any day, especially when they are surrounded with the forwards I have around them.

You can't win if you don't score, and you can't score if you don't take chances.
the issues of stewart and kovalchuk are not really mostly about their own defensive play. it is that their styles of play lead to less time of possession, and thus more time on defense and less on offense, particularly if not playing with lidstrom and murphy. then, their defensive play becomes a problem.


stewart's game requires a lot of time to set up, b/c of poor transitional play and the time required to establish possession in the offensive zone and get into scoring position.

kovalchuk has basically the opposite problem. he plays too fast, without proper structure and support of teammates, and relies on his own speed and skill.

a simpler way to say it is that stewart relies too much on support from his teammates, and kovalchuk too little.


lower time of possession is not confined to poor defensive players. in my 1st post in this thread, i said:
Quote:
a player can be better defensively but less effective defensively if he spends too much time in the defensive zone, but i don't think that is a problem for me.
conversely, a bad defensive player like jagr can be effective defensively by maintaining possession for most of his shifts.

i also mentioned this as a possibility in a comparison of craig ramsay and bob gainey.

nik jr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2012, 09:27 AM
  #40
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,620
vCash: 500
In a 7-game series that couldn't have been any closer, or any more difficult to vote on, Ak Bars Kazan prevails in overtime.

Great job by all parties on a well-debated series.

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2012, 10:01 AM
  #41
Hobnobs
Pinko
 
Hobnobs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,980
vCash: 500
Good series nik, good luck with your next one!

Hobnobs is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-25-2012, 04:14 PM
  #42
nik jr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Congo-Kinshasa
Posts: 10,526
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hobnobs View Post
Good series nik, good luck with your next one!
thanks, and same to you

you and dreakmur built a very strong team and i was expecting you to win. i think rogle was good enough to win it all.

nik jr 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 12:42 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.