Coach: Toe Blake
Captain: Sprague Cleghorn
Alternate Captains: Zdeno Chara, Eric Desjardins, Mike Modano
#25 Dave Andreychuk - #10 Jean Ratelle - #68 Jaromir Jagr
#7 Vic Stasiuk - #9 Mike Modano (A) - #33 Zigmund Palffy
#4 Bob Davidson - #18 Walt Tkaczuk - #16 Eric Nesterenko
#26 Mats Naslund - #15 Bobby Smith - #17 Mike Foligno
#8 Johnny Wilson
#14 Barney Stanley
#12 Tom Lysiak
#3 Zdeno Chara (A) - #2 Sprague Cleghorn (C)
#5 Mike Ramsey - #37 Eric Desjardins (A)
#6 Calle Johansson - #23 Petr Svoboda
#44 Alexei Zhitnik
other PKers: Johansson, Svoboda, Ratelle, Palffy, Smith, Davidson, Stanley, Lysiak
VS
Cecil Hart
Harry Watson - Wayne Gretzky (C) - Jari Kurri
Baldy Northcott - Pat Lafontaine - Alexander Mogilny
Ross Lonsberry - Rod Brind'Amour (A) - Ron Ellis
Murray Murdoch - Mike Richards - Bernie Nicholls
Brian Leetch - Moose Johnson (A)
George Boucher (A) - Jimmy Watson
Lloyd Cook - Kimmo Timonen
Tiny Thompson
Rogie Vachon
Spare: Pavol Demitra (LW/RW/C), Bill Ezinicki (RW), Robyn Regehr (D), Pavel Kubina (D)
On the other hand, both teams have two of the best pure offensive players of all time to help elevate the play of those weak LW's.
In a draft this size, it's a matter of what you can get away with sometimes. Obviously I'd have gotten a more dynamic offensive LWer than Watson if I didn't have Gretzky-Kurri on the top line, for instance.
In fairness, teams have won the Cup with some pretty weak LWers leading the way (Lucic, Fedotenko...Kreider?)
Historically, it's definitely the weakest position, so it's probably not that surprising that teams can succeed in the ATD without major scoring threats at LW.
In fairness, teams have won the Cup with some pretty weak LWers leading the way (Lucic, Fedotenko...Kreider?)
Historically, it's definitely the weakest position, so it's probably not that surprising that teams can succeed in the ATD without major scoring threats at LW.
When we get to pick the absolute best of them from all time, it kind of is surprising..
Every team has flaws but to have these LW on the top lines of the ATD... well.. the people who voted for them the whole way can explain it.
Explanation is simple, every team has flaws. And every team has strengths. The weak lws worked well with Kazan and Inglewood's strengths, so they beat teams with weaknesses elsewhere. It is merely happenstance that both have the same weakness.
Every team has flaws but to have these LW on the top lines of the ATD... well.. the people who voted for them the whole way can explain it.
Speaking for my team, I don't think Watson is an issue on the top line because of who he's playing with. It's all about context. If I had an average top line centre I would have obviously looked for more offense from that position.
And that's the danger of using strict position-v-position ratings like I've seen in a few series. The team with the stronger players at any one position doesn't necessarily have the stronger lines overall.
I could have taken a Goulet or Schriner with my 5th pick, but I thought it was diminishing returns to take another shooter there compared to the value of having Georges Boucher as my #3 defenseman (particularly for the style I wanted to play).
In fairness, teams have won the Cup with some pretty weak LWers leading the way (Lucic, Fedotenko...Kreider?)
Historically, it's definitely the weakest position, so it's probably not that surprising that teams can succeed in the ATD without major scoring threats at LW.
I think Modin was Tampa Bay's best LW when they won, not that it matters.
Teams have won Cups with pretty weak top RWs and Cs too, as long as they made up for them in other areas.
I think Modin was Tampa Bay's best LW when they won, not that it matters.
Teams have won Cups with pretty weak top RWs and Cs too, as long as they made up for them in other areas.
I was thinking Fedotenko for Pittsburgh, actually. Although he did come up huge in game 7 with Tampa. But yeah, Modin is another guy to add the to list of legendary cup-winning LWers.
I was thinking Fedotenko for Pittsburgh, actually. Although he did come up huge in game 7 with Tampa.
Oh right. Pittsburgh in 2009 was pretty unique though. Crosby and Malkin in the NHL in 2009 would be almost like an ATD team having Gretzky and Lemieux down the middle.
I think Modin was Tampa Bay's best LW when they won, not that it matters. Teams have won Cups with pretty weak top RWs and Cs too, as long as they made up for them in other areas.
I was thinking Fedotenko for Pittsburgh, actually. Although he did come up huge in game 7 with Tampa. But yeah, Modin is another guy to add the to list of legendary cup-winning LWers.
He was still behind Kunitz thankfully, although he couldn't score to save his life during those playoffs.
Explanation is simple, every team has flaws. And every team has strengths. The weak lws worked well with Kazan and Inglewood's strengths, so they beat teams with weaknesses elsewhere. It is merely happenstance that both have the same weakness.
Both of these teams represent what seems to be the new fashion in ATD team-building.
1) Draft 2/3rds of an excellent first line.
2) Draft a bunch of defensemen early.
3) ???
4) Profit.
Personally, I find it a bit banal that three out of the four semifinalists this year were teams built around this concept, but sometimes the wind just blows that way in the ATD. I think overpass deserves a lot of the credit (or blame) for the above being such a popular scheme this year.
Both of these teams represent what seems to be the new fashion in ATD team-building.
1) Draft 2/3rds of an excellent first line.
2) Draft a bunch of defensemen early.
3) ???
4) Profit.
Personally, I find it a bit banal that three out of the four semifinalists this year were teams built around this concept, but sometimes the wind just blows that way in the ATD. I think overpass deserves a lot of the credit (or blame) for the above being such a popular scheme this year.
I think this can be simplified to saying that "depth wins". Teams that have stacked their top line with talent and subsequently lacked the depth among the rest of their roster have not had a ton of success of late.
I think this can be simplified to saying that "depth wins". Teams that have stacked their top line with talent and subsequently lacked the depth among the rest of their roster have not had a ton of success of late.
Isn't this the exact opposite of what Sturm just said..?
I think this can be simplified to saying that "depth wins". Teams that have stacked their top line with talent and subsequently lacked the depth among the rest of their roster have not had a ton of success of late.
Actually, I think it's more of a referendum on the state of the offense/defense balance in the ATD. Essentially, this model offers voters a bare minimum of "guaranteed" offense (guys like Jagr, Gretzky and Richard who we know will score) slapped onto a team that is otherwise highly defensive. Among the semifinalists, the team with the best second line was the team that lost in five games. I'm not sure this indicates that the voters favor depth. It seems to me that the voters at this point seem to favor defense quite heavily, and don't give much of a **** about offensive depth.
This was not always the case. This is a new team-building paradigm, and a shocking new level of homogeneity among the teams that have advanced furthest. Earlier, in an ironic response to my criticism of voting patterns, GMM suggested that I post my votes as a template for others to follow. Sadly, the real irony seems to be that the voters are, in fact, following some template, just not mine.
