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 Chat Room VII

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-28-2012, 08:34 PM
  #151
Iain Fyffe
Hockey fact-checker
 
Iain Fyffe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Fredericton, NB
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,795
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
The fact is, the superior player will always get more special teams time, and extra ES shifts with other partners (last minute, for example). Dallas Smith, as another example, was not near Orr's ice time despite being his partner.
This is generally true. You might speak in terms of a certain rotation, but that's not really what happens in-game. PP and SH ice time is divided much differently than ES, and coaches always find ways to get their best players extra shifts.

Iain Fyffe is offline  
Old
08-28-2012, 08:55 PM
  #152
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Take the modern game to mean the short shift game which changed the way the game was played/coached and included extra players on the roster.

Your analogies do not touch the O6 nor the post 1967 expansion. Boston was not an expansion team.

The players in the MLD that are effected are from the two eras above as specified.
but then I don't refer to players as #1 or 2 defensemen in the O6 era in the absence of TOI estimates (unless it's obvious), do I?

seventieslord is offline  
Old
08-28-2012, 09:04 PM
  #153
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,506
vCash: 500
O6 Era

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
but then I don't refer to players as #1 or 2 defensemen in the O6 era in the absence of TOI estimates (unless it's obvious), do I?
Never said you did but there are misreads of the second half of the O6 era when it comes to defensemen like Al Langlois, Bob Turner, Lou Fontinato

Canadiens1958 is offline  
Old
08-28-2012, 09:16 PM
  #154
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,506
vCash: 500
Toe Blake

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iain Fyffe View Post
So in trying to get the #2 man the most minutes behind the #1 man, your hypothetical coach instead gives the #4 the most minutes behind the #1? That sounds like bad coaching.

Can you provide an actual example of this happening, instead of just making up numbers?


Is there a useful definition of a #1 defenceman other than one that the coach plays the most? If he's not the #1, why does he play the most? That is, if a coach designs a rotation such that his purported #1 does not play the most, he should reject that rotation and design a new one.
Let's try Toe Blake - pretty good coach. 1959-60 season team had five defensemen.

#1 Doug Harvey, #2 Tom Johnson, #3 Jean-Guy Talbot, #4 Al Langlois, #5 Bob Turner.

Pairings,RD/LD, Harvey/Langlois, Johnson/Talbot. swingman Bob Turner whose prime role was as a forward on the PK with Don Marshall. PP was Moore/Beliveau/M.Richard with Geoffrion and Harvey on the points, Harvey playing the LD point.

The only viable definition is what gives the coach and team the best opportunity to win. Managing the TOI of older players instead of burning them in the first half of the season is part of the definition as is developing the eventual replacements.

Canadiens1958 is offline  
Old
08-28-2012, 09:22 PM
  #155
Iain Fyffe
Hockey fact-checker
 
Iain Fyffe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Fredericton, NB
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,795
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Let's try Toe Blake - pretty good coach. 1959-60 season team had five defensemen.

#1 Doug Harvey, #2 Tom Johnson, #3 Jean-Guy Talbot, #4 Al Langlois, #5 Bob Turner.

Pairings,RD/LD, Harvey/Langlois, Johnson/Talbot. swingman Bob Turner whose prime role was as a forward on the PK with Don Marshall. PP was Moore/Beliveau/M.Richard with Geoffrion and Harvey on the points, Harvey playing the LD point.
Okay, now what was the ice time for each of these players?

Iain Fyffe is offline  
Old
08-28-2012, 09:33 PM
  #156
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Never said you did but there are misreads of the second half of the O6 era when it comes to defensemen like Al Langlois, Bob Turner, Lou Fontinato
you could be right about Langlois and Turner. It's not easy to judge a player who lasted a long time in the O6 on a strong team, yet never earned any recognition as a strong player themselves. One one hand you could say "Turner was the Habs #5, but on a weaker team he might have been a #2", but on the other hand it's quite possible he was as mediocre as any other team's #5 and carried by the Habs' stronger players.

The thing about Turner and Langlois, though, is that when they played, just 30 defensemen could play in the NHL. So even if they were the worst defensemen in the NHL, it's arguable they were roughly 30th best in the world. multiply by three or whatever you want to multiply by to translate to modern terms, (i choose 3) and it's like saying Turner or Langlois compares to a modern day #3 defenseman. not great at the MLD level, but extremely safe.

With Fontinato it is much different. He earned all-star/norris recognition in two separate seasons (1959, 1963), plus in two other seasons there are strong indicators. In 1957 Blueline magazine said that by the end of the season he was regarded as one of the best defensemen in the league, and Bernie Geoffrion said in his book that he'd have given him a vote in the 1962 season for how he performed following the trade. (this was of course substantiated by the fact that he actually earned votes the next year)

and if none of that matters to you, the "fallback" that applies to Turner and Langlois, still applies to him. In fact, I don't think you would apply a multiple; you often talk like the 30th best in 1960 is similar to the 30th best in 2012 and the talent pool hasn't actually gotten larger. if that's the case, Fontinato, Langlois and Turner, at worst, equate to 30th today, or #1/1a/2 defensemen. I don't believe that, but that does fit in with things you've said in the past.

seventieslord is offline  
Old
08-28-2012, 10:42 PM
  #157
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,506
vCash: 500
Rosters

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
you could be right about Langlois and Turner. It's not easy to judge a player who lasted a long time in the O6 on a strong team, yet never earned any recognition as a strong player themselves. One one hand you could say "Turner was the Habs #5, but on a weaker team he might have been a #2", but on the other hand it's quite possible he was as mediocre as any other team's #5 and carried by the Habs' stronger players.

The thing about Turner and Langlois, though, is that when they played, just 30 defensemen could play in the NHL. So even if they were the worst defensemen in the NHL, it's arguable they were roughly 30th best in the world. multiply by three or whatever you want to multiply by to translate to modern terms, (i choose 3) and it's like saying Turner or Langlois compares to a modern day #3 defenseman. not great at the MLD level, but extremely safe.

With Fontinato it is much different. He earned all-star/norris recognition in two separate seasons (1959, 1963), plus in two other seasons there are strong indicators. In 1957 Blueline magazine said that by the end of the season he was regarded as one of the best defensemen in the league, and Bernie Geoffrion said in his book that he'd have given him a vote in the 1962 season for how he performed following the trade. (this was of course substantiated by the fact that he actually earned votes the next year)

and if none of that matters to you, the "fallback" that applies to Turner and Langlois, still applies to him. In fact, I don't think you would apply a multiple; you often talk like the 30th best in 1960 is similar to the 30th best in 2012 and the talent pool hasn't actually gotten larger. if that's the case, Fontinato, Langlois and Turner, at worst, equate to 30th today, or #1/1a/2 defensemen. I don't believe that, but that does fit in with things you've said in the past.
First bolded that would be wrong. Not in any order:

Toronto: Horton, Stanley, Brewer, Baun,
Chicago: Pilote, Vasko, St. Laurent, Evans,Arbour,
Detroit: M.Pronovost, Kelley, Godfrey, Jim Morrison,
Boston: Flaman, Armstrong, Boivin,
New York: Gadsby, Howell,Fontinato,

Not even close to #2 elsewhere.

In the Canadiens farm system, J.C. Tremblay and Jean Gauthier were better dmen but they were prospects who had to play plus they could not play forward on the PK.

Second bolded - see Pete Goegan.

Third bolded. Never said that about Fontinato, Turner and/or Langlois which is what matters here. Specifically assume a 1960 expansion, none of the three gets a #1 role even though Langlois and Turner would be exposed. Plenty of defensemen in the minors could transition, run a PP or PK on defense. These are #1 or 2 requisites. Point is that they could not fill #3,4 or 5 roles in the O6 NHL.


Last edited by Canadiens1958: 08-28-2012 at 10:53 PM. Reason: completeness.
Canadiens1958 is offline  
Old
08-28-2012, 11:34 PM
  #158
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
First bolded that would be wrong. Not in any order:

Toronto: Horton, Stanley, Brewer, Baun,
Chicago: Pilote, Vasko, St. Laurent, Evans,Arbour,
Detroit: M.Pronovost, Kelley, Godfrey, Jim Morrison,
Boston: Flaman, Armstrong, Boivin,
New York: Gadsby, Howell,Fontinato,

Not even close to #2 elsewhere.
no, not when stated like this, but every team didn't have all these exact players healthy every season that Turner played. Do I believe he was #2-caliber? Of course not, I'm simply stating it's a position one could take based solely on how good the Habs were.

Quote:
In the Canadiens farm system, J.C. Tremblay and Jean Gauthier were better dmen but they were prospects who had to play plus they could not play forward on the PK.
Jean Gauthier, who played two full NHL seasons including one as a #5 with a poor expansion team, and couldn't catch on after that despite being just 30 when the league doubled in size?

Quote:
Second bolded - see Pete Goegan.
Pete Goegan played 383 NHL games, just three seasons over 50 games exclusively in the NHL, none of them consecutive, and earned all-star consideration in one season.

Fontinato played 535 NHL games, seven consecutive seasons over 50 games exclusively in the NHL (and had the ability to play longer if not for an injury), and earned all-star consideration in two seasons, and other forms of recognition in two others.

Trust you don't need to put on glasses to see the difference between those two portfolios.

Quote:
Third bolded. Never said that about Fontinato, Turner and/or Langlois which is what matters here. Specifically assume a 1960 expansion, none of the three gets a #1 role even though Langlois and Turner would be exposed.
So in a roundabout way you are saying they weren't top-12 defensemen. It's quite possible that you and I are both right, considering I'm only saying they were 30th at worst.

seventieslord is offline  
Old
08-29-2012, 04:25 AM
  #159
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,506
vCash: 500
Fontinato / Goegan

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post

With Fontinato it is much different. He earned all-star/norris recognition in two separate seasons (1959, 1963), plus in two other seasons there are strong indicators. In 1957 Blueline magazine said that by the end of the season he was regarded as one of the best defensemen in the league, and Bernie Geoffrion said in his book that he'd have given him a vote in the 1962 season for how he performed following the trade. (this was of course substantiated by the fact that he actually earned votes the next year)
Fontinato / Goegan.

Link to voting for AT and Norris from their era:

http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...=145895&page=5

The seasons had half/half voting but this is not reflected in the voting totals shown for both players. Goegan's AST total is higher for his single season than Fontinato's combined so Goegan had support from a much greater voter base.As do Langlois' 1960-61 votes. Likewise for the Norris, Goegan's one season total reflects a greater voter base.

The half/half voting format inflates the actual total but has the virtue of reflecting consistency over the season.

Jean Gauthier. The Canadiens moved Turner after the 1960-61 season th create room for upcoming defensemen including Jean Gauthier. Also my 1959-60 comments did not include the promising juniors.


Last edited by Canadiens1958: 08-29-2012 at 04:29 AM. Reason: addition
Canadiens1958 is offline  
Old
08-29-2012, 10:51 AM
  #160
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Fontinato / Goegan.

Link to voting for AT and Norris from their era:

http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...=145895&page=5

The seasons had half/half voting but this is not reflected in the voting totals shown for both players. Goegan's AST total is higher for his single season than Fontinato's combined so Goegan had support from a much greater voter base.As do Langlois' 1960-61 votes. Likewise for the Norris, Goegan's one season total reflects a greater voter base.

The half/half voting format inflates the actual total but has the virtue of reflecting consistency over the season.p
and if you take the seasonal totals you still get a good idea of who generally performed well over the season.

Goegan's one season of recognition was based on an unexpected and unsustainable offensive explosion.

Quote:
Jean Gauthier. The Canadiens moved Turner after the 1960-61 season th create room for upcoming defensemen including Jean Gauthier. Also my 1959-60 comments did not include the promising juniors.
that wasn't a very smart move then, was it?

seventieslord is offline  
Old
08-29-2012, 11:08 AM
  #161
jkrx
Registered User
 
jkrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,283
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
no, not when stated like this, but every team didn't have all these exact players healthy every season that Turner played. Do I believe he was #2-caliber? Of course not, I'm simply stating it's a position one could take based solely on how good the Habs were.



Jean Gauthier, who played two full NHL seasons including one as a #5 with a poor expansion team, and couldn't catch on after that despite being just 30 when the league doubled in size?



Pete Goegan played 383 NHL games, just three seasons over 50 games exclusively in the NHL, none of them consecutive, and earned all-star consideration in one season.

Fontinato played 535 NHL games, seven consecutive seasons over 50 games exclusively in the NHL (and had the ability to play longer if not for an injury), and earned all-star consideration in two seasons, and other forms of recognition in two others.

Trust you don't need to put on glasses to see the difference between those two portfolios.



So in a roundabout way you are saying they weren't top-12 defensemen. It's quite possible that you and I are both right, considering I'm only saying they were 30th at worst.
Goegan had a much better season than Fontinatos two. Mind you that Goegan had injury problems too specially after being whacked in the head by Lindsay after a heated struggle in the corner.

I don't think either Fontinato nor Goegan belongs in the MLD both of them were top-3 defensemen for lousy defensive teams.

jkrx is offline  
Old
08-29-2012, 12:46 PM
  #162
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkrx View Post
Goegan had a much better season than Fontinatos two. Mind you that Goegan had injury problems too specially after being whacked in the head by Lindsay after a heated struggle in the corner.

I don't think either Fontinato nor Goegan belongs in the MLD both of them were top-3 defensemen for lousy defensive teams.
For two seasons Fontinato was top-3 for an awesome defensive team.

There's a place for Goegan, but not the MLD, I agree. Fontinato, on the other hand, has some all-star recognition that is impossible to ignore. At worst, he's an elite "niche player" in the MLD. A better, defense-only version of Marty McSorley, who I think is an excellent spare.

seventieslord is offline  
Old
08-29-2012, 02:14 PM
  #163
jkrx
Registered User
 
jkrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,283
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
For two seasons Fontinato was top-3 for an awesome defensive team.

There's a place for Goegan, but not the MLD, I agree. Fontinato, on the other hand, has some all-star recognition that is impossible to ignore. At worst, he's an elite "niche player" in the MLD. A better, defense-only version of Marty McSorley, who I think is an excellent spare.
I would be news to me if he played more than Johnson the first season in Montreal and Gauthier during the last. You raise an intresting question about McSorley, is he really MLD material? While I don't have any research infront of me, I get the feeling that McSorley is Jimmy Orlando but a bit better offensively and worse defensively (and with longevity as Orlando had WW2 interupting his career).

jkrx is offline  
Old
08-29-2012, 02:28 PM
  #164
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,506
vCash: 500
Bob Turner / Al Arbour

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
and if you take the seasonal totals you still get a good idea of who generally performed well over the season.

Goegan's one season of recognition was based on an unexpected and unsustainable offensive explosion.



that wasn't a very smart move then, was it
?
Bob Turner:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...turnebo01.html

Played two seasons for Chicago at the expense of Al Arbour:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...arboual01.html

who played more than 350 NHL games post Chicago, contributing to two Toronto SCs and three Blues SC finals. Bob Turner played app 150 NHL games.

Jean Gauthier played app 175 NHL games, contributing to one Montreal SC.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...gauthje01.html

Canadiens came out ahead on the Turner for Gauthier flip, Chicago lost big time, disrupting a SC team for no benefit. Toronto, St. Louis and Al Arbour did the best.

Canadiens1958 is offline  
Old
08-29-2012, 02:38 PM
  #165
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,506
vCash: 500
1961-62 Canadiens

Quote:
Originally Posted by jkrx View Post
I would be news to me if he played more than Johnson the first season in Montreal and Gauthier during the last. You raise an intresting question about McSorley, is he really MLD material? While I don't have any research infront of me, I get the feeling that McSorley is Jimmy Orlando but a bit better offensively and worse defensively (and with longevity as Orlando had WW2 interupting his career).
Jean-Guy Talbot played the full 1961-62 season, replacing Doug Harvey on the left point on the PP. Talbot had a career year. johnson and J.C, Tremblay were next in line, Then Fontinato and MacNeil rotated thru the 4th and 5th spot. Gauthier played 12 games. Fontinato was injured for 16 games.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/teams/MTL/1962.html

McSorley started out as a forward.Orlando was always a defenseman. Even without WWII Orlando was not getting back into the USA.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Orlando


Last edited by Canadiens1958: 08-29-2012 at 02:46 PM. Reason: link
Canadiens1958 is offline  
Old
08-29-2012, 03:11 PM
  #166
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkrx View Post
I would be news to me if he played more than Johnson the first season in Montreal and Gauthier during the last. You raise an intresting question about McSorley, is he really MLD material? While I don't have any research infront of me, I get the feeling that McSorley is Jimmy Orlando but a bit better offensively and worse defensively (and with longevity as Orlando had WW2 interupting his career).
Doubtful. There are a lot of reasons to take McSorley well ahead of Orlando.

- McSorley is a legitimate 4th line goon option as opposed to exclusively a defenseman.
- There is lots of doubt surrounding Orlando’s status as a fighter/tough guy. He collected penalty minutes, but we aren’t really sure of the context. McSorley was a legitimate heavyweight who fought and beat most other heavyweights.
- Even if you give some leeway for the WW2 years, McSorley had a career in the big leagues that was over twice as long.
- McSorley was a leader – was Orlando?
- McSorley was an agitator – was Orlando?
- Was Orlando the type of player you’d ever expect to lead the NHL in +/- if it existed in the 40s?
- No one ever tossed a few all-star votes Orlando’s way; they did to McSorley.
- McSorley signing a contract that temporarily made him hockey’s 16th-highest paid player is good evidence of how he was valued in his role. Would Orlando get paid like that?
- The offensive gap between them can’t be written off as “a bit”. McSorley had a half dozen seasons more impressive than Orlando’s best, and that 11 point season didn’t exactly prove to be sustainable.
- What do we know about Orlando’s defensive game, anyway?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Bob Turner:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...turnebo01.html

Played two seasons for Chicago at the expense of Al Arbour:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...arboual01.html

who played more than 350 NHL games post Chicago, contributing to two Toronto SCs and three Blues SC finals. Bob Turner played app 150 NHL games.

Jean Gauthier played app 175 NHL games, contributing to one Montreal SC.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...gauthje01.html

Canadiens came out ahead on the Turner for Gauthier flip, Chicago lost big time, disrupting a SC team for no benefit. Toronto, St. Louis and Al Arbour did the best.
I think it’s obvious that in the long run Al Arbour proved he was better than Bob Turner. Bad decision by Chicago. No argument there. Gauthier? That would take a lot of convincing. I wonder if he’d even be selected by pick #4000.

seventieslord is offline  
Old
08-29-2012, 05:18 PM
  #167
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,979
vCash: 500
just had a two-team ATD... anyone care to comment?

Blake

Mahovlich - Beliveau - Howe
Lindsay - Mikita - Bossy
Messier - Clarke - Kurri
Denneny - Morenz - Cook

Orr - Fetisov
Harvey - Kelly
Shore - Lidstrom

Roy
Sawchuk

spares: Robinson, Taylor, Trottier, Lehtinen

VS:

Bowman

Hull - Gretzky - Richard
Ovechkin - Lemieux - Jagr
Gainey - Sakic - Lafleur
Shanahan - Yzerman - Neely

Bourque - Potvin
Chelios - Stevens
Coffey - MacInnis

Hasek
Plante

spares: Niedermayer, Sakic, Carbonneau, Robitaille

seventieslord is offline  
Old
08-29-2012, 05:57 PM
  #168
Hawkey Town 18
Moderator
 
Hawkey Town 18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,493
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
just had a two-team ATD... anyone care to comment?

Blake

Mahovlich - Beliveau - Howe
Lindsay - Mikita - Bossy
Messier - Clarke - Kurri
Denneny - Morenz - Cook

Orr - Fetisov
Harvey - Kelly
Shore - Lidstrom

Roy
Sawchuk

spares: Robinson, Taylor, Trottier, Lehtinen

VS:

Bowman

Hull - Gretzky - Richard
Ovechkin - Lemieux - Jagr
Gainey - Sakic - Lafleur
Shanahan - Yzerman - Neely

Bourque - Potvin
Chelios - Stevens
Coffey - MacInnis

Hasek
Plante

spares: Niedermayer, Sakic, Carbonneau, Robitaille
Blake's team all day...can't believe Howe and Orr ended up being on the same team in that format. I'm generally in agreement with Bowman being the best coach of all time, but I don't think he fits that team very well...I would've gone with Lester Patrick.

I was just thinking the other day that it would be fun to do a 4-team ATD...each team gets one of the Big 4 that way.


EDIT: I would've gone with Joliat next to Morenz over Denneny, especially with Cook on the right side. Just noticed Robinson is a spare on Blake's team...you know your D is good when that happens.

EDIT 2: No Dickie Moore on either squad?


Last edited by Hawkey Town 18: 08-29-2012 at 06:09 PM.
Hawkey Town 18 is offline  
Old
08-29-2012, 06:36 PM
  #169
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkey Town 18 View Post
Blake's team all day...can't believe Howe and Orr ended up being on the same team in that format. I'm generally in agreement with Bowman being the best coach of all time, but I don't think he fits that team very well...I would've gone with Lester Patrick.
how did it happen? it was a snake draft so the first guy picking gets 1, 4, 5, 8, 9... and so on. it went like this:

Orr
Gretzky/Lemieux
Howe/Harvey

Quote:
EDIT: I would've gone with Joliat next to Morenz over Denneny, especially with Cook on the right side. Just noticed Robinson is a spare on Blake's team...you know your D is good when that happens.
yeah, now that you mention it, I agree. Chemistry over Denneny's toughness edge, even if it's a 4th line.

as for D, yeah, it's # 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9 on the hfboards list versus 3, 6, 10... Robinson would be a #3 d-man on the second team.

Quote:
EDIT 2: No Dickie Moore on either squad?
team Blake ran out of room. team Bowman could have used him.

But obviously this is an ATD vet against a potential ATD noob in training.

seventieslord is offline  
Old
08-29-2012, 06:50 PM
  #170
Hawkey Town 18
Moderator
 
Hawkey Town 18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,493
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
how did it happen? it was a snake draft so the first guy picking gets 1, 4, 5, 8, 9... and so on. it went like this:

Orr
Gretzky/Lemieux
Howe/Harvey
I was asking how it happened from a strategy standpoint. With all the talent at center I think Howe should've been taken with one of those 2/3 picks. Also would've been ok if he put Wayne and Mario on the same line a la 1987 CC (I always forget, did Mario play the left or right side next to Wayne).

Hawkey Town 18 is offline  
Old
08-29-2012, 06:53 PM
  #171
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkey Town 18 View Post
I was asking how it happened from a strategy standpoint. With all the talent at center I think Howe should've been taken with one of those 2/3 picks. Also would've been ok if he put Wayne and Mario on the same line a la 1987 CC (I always forget, did Mario play the left or right side next to Wayne).
I think it was the right side.

from a strategy standpoint, the way it went was the person picking Bowman's team ranks Mario and Wayne 1/2 of all-time.

you're right that rarity of wingers should have dictated earlier selections for a few of them, Howe included.

seventieslord is offline  
Old
08-30-2012, 06:44 AM
  #172
jkrx
Registered User
 
jkrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,283
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Doubtful. There are a lot of reasons to take McSorley well ahead of Orlando.

- McSorley is a legitimate 4th line goon option as opposed to exclusively a defenseman.
- There is lots of doubt surrounding Orlando’s status as a fighter/tough guy. He collected penalty minutes, but we aren’t really sure of the context. McSorley was a legitimate heavyweight who fought and beat most other heavyweights.
- Even if you give some leeway for the WW2 years, McSorley had a career in the big leagues that was over twice as long.
- McSorley was a leader – was Orlando?
- McSorley was an agitator – was Orlando?
- Was Orlando the type of player you’d ever expect to lead the NHL in +/- if it existed in the 40s?
- No one ever tossed a few all-star votes Orlando’s way; they did to McSorley.
- McSorley signing a contract that temporarily made him hockey’s 16th-highest paid player is good evidence of how he was valued in his role. Would Orlando get paid like that?
- The offensive gap between them can’t be written off as “a bit”. McSorley had a half dozen seasons more impressive than Orlando’s best, and that 11 point season didn’t exactly prove to be sustainable.
- What do we know about Orlando’s defensive game, anyway?
- I don't put much value in being a goon, I value them when they grow out of it and become enforcers.

- Thats because the enforcer/goon status wasn't as defined back then as it is today. Orlando had his fare share of heavyweight fights against guys like Reardon, Stewart, Egan and so on.

- Yes, thats why I said McSorley has longevity. Allthough QHSL wasn't a bad league at the time. Lots of players chose to play there instead of the NHL even Beliveau

- If you mean he led with experience then yes.

- See the Gaye Stewart incident. Yes, Orlando was an agitator.

- +/-? Really? McSorley went from leading the NHL in that regard to being -13. That stat isn't that relevant on an individual level.

- Orlando was thrown a couple of votes in '43.

- It just shows you how inconsistent contracts became when player salaries increased. It was also boosted by the Blues insanity of that time. Pretty weak argument by your standards.

- I would say Marty were about 10% better offensively.

- That he rarely was in a goal against. He usually was out there with Jack Stewart to build a physical wall when protecting leads. Just like Motter and Goodfellow were combined when trying to catch up to a lead.

jkrx is offline  
Old
08-30-2012, 10:18 AM
  #173
Hawkman
Moderator
RIP Jean Beliveau
 
Hawkman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 4,841
vCash: 500
Quote:
(Team 1)
Orr - Fetisov
Harvey - Kelly
Shore - Lidstrom

Roy
Sawchuk

spares: Robinson, Taylor, Trottier, Lehtinen

VS: (Team 2)

Bowman

Hull - Gretzky - Richard
Ovechkin - Lemieux - Jagr
Gainey - Sakic - Lafleur
Shanahan - Yzerman - Neely
Team 2 does have good forwards and Team 1 has so much offensive firepower at the blue line that I would take Robinson's defense over Fetisov.

Hawkman is offline  
Old
08-30-2012, 10:58 AM
  #174
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkrx View Post
- I don't put much value in being a goon, I value them when they grow out of it and become enforcers.

- Thats because the enforcer/goon status wasn't as defined back then as it is today. Orlando had his fare share of heavyweight fights against guys like Reardon, Stewart, Egan and so on.

- Yes, thats why I said McSorley has longevity. Allthough QHSL wasn't a bad league at the time. Lots of players chose to play there instead of the NHL even Beliveau

- If you mean he led with experience then yes.

- See the Gaye Stewart incident. Yes, Orlando was an agitator.

- +/-? Really? McSorley went from leading the NHL in that regard to being -13. That stat isn't that relevant on an individual level.

- Orlando was thrown a couple of votes in '43.

- It just shows you how inconsistent contracts became when player salaries increased. It was also boosted by the Blues insanity of that time. Pretty weak argument by your standards.

- I would say Marty were about 10% better offensively.

- That he rarely was in a goal against. He usually was out there with Jack Stewart to build a physical wall when protecting leads. Just like Motter and Goodfellow were combined when trying to catch up to a lead.
I don't value "goons" either, we're just using different terms in different ways. If you're defining an enforcer as a useful player who also fights, and goon as a useless player who fights, McSorley was an enforcer, not a goon.

But how good was Orlando at fighting? Was he the best? 2nd best? one of the best? We know exactly how good McSorley was.

This isn't just a small longevity edge though. We're talking about a career 2-3X as long even if you give him WW2 credit (which, considering the circumstances, you really shouldn't)

Just looking at the 1949 QSHL, here are the ATD/MLD/AAA/AA caliber players: Herb Carnegie, Larry Zeidel, Leo Lamoreux. that is all. No, it's not a good league.

How is a "stick swinging incident" agitation?

You don't lead the NHL in +/- with smoke and mirrors.

I guess 2 votes then is as good as 3 votes in 1991.

the salary argument is not weak... teams talk with the amount of money they shell out. It also shows that was the amount of money needed to ensure he didn't choose a different team, so there was obviously great interest. Go through the salary lists year by year, it's not like you will find a lot of crappy players in the top-30 in salary. Making him the 16th-highest paid player in the NHL said A LOT.

The 10% figure was pulled out of thin air and has no basis. When one guy has at least six seasons better than the best the other guy had, then the difference is a lot more than 10%.

How do you know Orlando was rarely scored on?

Regardless of whatever skills he had, the guy demonstrated them for just four seasons.

------------------------

Going back to whether McSorley belongs in the MLD:

- Have most "goons who can play" been drafted by now? Yes they have.
- Have most defensemen with his reasonable offensive production been drafted by now? Yes they have.
- Was he just stapled to the bench and sent out to fight? No. Does his "ice time record" of 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 3rd, 3rd, 4th, 4th, 5th (and an average of 21.36 minutes) stand out as particularly bad among MLD draftees? No, it doesn't.

Here are the "best 8" for a few other players:

Mike Milbury - 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4 (22.29)
John Van Boxmeer - 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 (22.25)
Dave Maloney - 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5 (21.93)
Bryan Watson - 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5 (21.74)
Garth Butcher - 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4 (21.64)
Don Sweeney - 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4 (21.58)
Brad Marsh - 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4 (21.48)
Marek Zidlicky - 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5 (21.23)
Bob Rouse - 1, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5, 5 (21.11)
Brendan Witt - 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4 (21.19)
Risto Siltanen - 1, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 5, 6 (21.09)
Dave Lewis - 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4 (20.98)
Sylvain Lefebvre - 1, 2, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4 (20.81)
Jason Smith - 2, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4 (20.64)
Tom Bladon - 1, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 6 (20.53)
Joe Reekie - 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6 (20.36)
Marc Bergevin - 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 4, 4 (20.32)
Hal Gill - 2, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 5 (20.18)
Lee Fogolin - 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5 (19.71)
Sheldon Souray - 1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 4, 7, 7 (19.00) (over 40 game seasons)


Last edited by seventieslord: 08-30-2012 at 02:04 PM.
seventieslord is offline  
Old
08-30-2012, 11:59 AM
  #175
jkrx
Registered User
 
jkrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,283
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
But how good was Orlando at fighting? Was he the best? 2nd best? one of the best? We know exactly how good McSorley was.
I never saw him myself but he was talked about as one of the best. He also could be kind of cheap like in the goating of Stewart when he knocked him out cold.

Quote:
Just looking at the 1949 QSHL, here are the ATD/MLD/AAA/AA caliber players: Herb Carnegie, Larry Zeidel, Leo Lamoreux. that is all. No, it's not a good league.
Thats because most players who stayed in QHL are impossible for ATD GMs to value since they didnt play in the NHL.

Quote:
How is a "stick swinging incident" agitation?
He agitated Stewart that entire game.

Quote:
You don't lead the NHL in +/- with smoke and mirrors.
Maybe not but he wasnt a consistent +/- leader either. Would be like using Jaqcues Richards 50 goal season and against Gradin.

Quote:
the salary argument is not weak... teams talk with the amount of money they shell out. It also shows that was the amount of money needed to ensure he didn't choose a different team, so there was obviously great interest. Go through the salary lists year by year, it's not like you will find a lot of crappy players in the top-30 in salary. Making him the 16th-highest paid player in the NHL said A LOT.
I didnt say he was crappy I said it was a weak argument. Yashins wage were 4th in the league at one point and while I do like him as a player he was a headcase of the ice and not valueable to a team at all.

It's dunny because Blues signed him to an offersheet because of his Kings play but they made a huge overpayment but Kings matched it and HAD to trade him away because he was too expensive.

Remember Im not commenting on that crappy players get good contracts but that some players gets overpayed and McSorley is definitly one of these players. His contract doesnt reflect his skill as a player.

Quote:
The 10% figure was pulled out of thin air and has no basis. When one guy has at least six seasons better than the best the other guy had, then the difference is a lot more than 10%.
The fact is Marty isnt pulling away from Orlando and Jimmy were a stay-at-home defenseman. When Marty scored 40 points guys like Brad Shaw, Bob Beers, Weinrich and Michel Petit did it and I wouldnt exactly brag about their offensive skills, would you?

Quote:
How do you know Orlando was rarely scored on?
Word of mouth from people involved with hockey back then.

Quote:
Regardless of whatever skills he had, the guy demonstrated them for just four seasons.
I will remember that when people claim Orr over Lidström

jkrx is offline  
Closed Thread

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 11:30 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.