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.

MLD 2012 Mickey Ion Finals: Medicine Hat Tricks vs Winston-Salem Polar Twins

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-11-2012, 02:18 PM
  #51
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 32,202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
I'm sure I'm not the only one who thinks that arguing based on past fantasy draft position isn't really an argument at all.
I would agree with that in almost any other case, but I'm responding to a charge that a group of defensemen with zero ATD experience (and more AAA/undrafted experience than you might expect) are in fact an ATD-quality unit.

I think the draft record speaks for itself. Either that, or you guys have been waiting for Mike to join this game and show you all how to draft properly

tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-11-2012, 02:25 PM
  #52
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,885
vCash: 500
guys rise and fall for a reason. Typically, the current draft list is the best and most accurate one, and prior lists look silly in comparison.

In other words, it's where you guys drafted them this time that would actually matter in this nature of comparison, and if you started to compare them based on that you would of course find your teams to be perfectly even.

What does that leave us with? Evaluating based on merit. Like you guys were doing at first!

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-11-2012, 02:32 PM
  #53
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,885
vCash: 500
and by the way, if you want to call someone an ATD or AAA player based on the fact that they seem out of place in the MLD, either by being too good or not good enough, that is legit. I would just like to see it based on merit.

(i.e. "how did you get to the finals with this guy on a scoring line? look at his best adjusted points totals, they are the worst in this MLD and I see at least a couple dozen available with better credentials - this guy probably belongs in the AAA")

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-11-2012, 02:41 PM
  #54
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 32,202
vCash: 500
In that case, I can only wait for my opponent to give me a substantial argument in support of those players as being ATD-quality defenders. Otherwise I have nothing to argue against beyond the broad, unsupported statements previously quoted.

Edit: But I have to say, it stretches credulity that the ATD count from last year alone is 13 to 1, yet somehow the teams are even on merit. That would be one hell of a collective screwup, don't you think?


Last edited by tarheelhockey: 10-11-2012 at 02:47 PM.
tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-11-2012, 03:25 PM
  #55
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,885
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
In that case, I can only wait for my opponent to give me a substantial argument in support of those players as being ATD-quality defenders. Otherwise I have nothing to argue against beyond the broad, unsupported statements previously quoted.

Edit: But I have to say, it stretches credulity that the ATD count from last year alone is 13 to 1, yet somehow the teams are even on merit. That would be one hell of a collective screwup, don't you think?
That's a lot of smoke, and that could mean there's fire there. But it could just be a coincidence, and you got a bunch of guys who used to be ATDers and rightfully fell down a level.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-11-2012, 04:45 PM
  #56
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 32,202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
That's a lot of smoke, and that could mean there's fire there. But it could just be a coincidence, and you got a bunch of guys who used to be ATDers and rightfully fell down a level.
[indulging an off-topic tangent for a moment]

That's probably true of a couple, but in most cases their overall ATD selection range hasn't dropped as much as it would appear.

"ATD Forwards"
Nilsson - 468, 617, 810
Horvath - 720, 806, 833
Burns - 715, 641, 865
Dornhoefer - 545, 557, 874
Scanlan - 859, 838, 897
Kehoe - 936, 938, 938
Juneau - 1070, 1000, 970
Bernier - 1070, 895, 1130
Henning - 967, 1003, 1145

Just the defense
Maxwell - 633, 686, 842
Guevremont - 1006, 1015, 906
Kiessling - 889, 864, 929
Ellett - 944, 776, 961
Langlois - 1156, 882, 1025
Butcher - 1100, 1148, 1129
Brown - 1009, 1149, 1183
Swift - 801, 824, 1084


Most of these players were selected in the same 100-200 pick range in all three drafts. Kehoe was incredibly consistent. The biggest faller from three years ago was Nilsson, and that's going to happen with a top-line forward who doesn't quite crack the ATD top lines.


[back on-topic]

Compare to my opponent.

"ATD forwards"
Kerr - 757, 748, 836

Defense
Campbell - 911, 1036, 807
Brydge - 1261, 1111, 871
Graham - undrafted, 1258, 903
Traub - 1221, 1174, 964
Trapp - 1175, 1059, 996
Tallon - 1067, 1101, 1135
Siltanen - 961, 1090, 1189
Winters - 894, 1298, 1190
Watson - 1293, 1350, 1143

My point in listing these is to illustrate that even if my opponent wants to fight this battle in fantasy land, I can win there too. By invoking the collective opinion as to what constitutes an ATD'er, he is giving me the opportunity to show that collective opinion has held my players in higher esteem.

On a more productive note, I'd very much like to know how Medicine Hat justifies moving guys like Graham and Brydge up by over 300 spots.

Note: I had to cut and paste several spreadsheets to get these numbers, so I own any mistakes that might have been made in the final order. Shouldn't be anything substantial.


Last edited by tarheelhockey: 10-11-2012 at 04:52 PM.
tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-11-2012, 11:24 PM
  #57
Mike Farkas
Hockey's Future Staff
Moron!
 
Mike Farkas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,030
vCash: 500
Sorry if I wasn't clear (which I evidently was not). I was referring to overall team defense (I often look at things from a coach's perspective, or at least try) not the actual position of defense. Though, I will say that I thought those arbitrary numbers made my players look better at passing glance, to be honest...

With every draft, the group gets smarter (one would hope) but yet the very players that are questioned keep rising (Campbell, Brydge, Traub, Graham, Trapp etc.) as we learn more about them (including some new bios from yours truly, which I hope will aid in future drafts)...whereas, Maxwell, Ellett, Swift, and even forwards like the aforementioned Nilsson, Burns, Henning (the last two being your only really competent defensive forwards), Dornhoefer, etc. seem to be wanted less and less as we learn more and more...interesting, if nothing else.

This line of reasoning - as a rookie - was what actually scared me off of my initial plan of having Seth Martin be my starting goalie...I went with "safer" options instead...had I had known that using arbitrary numbers of a system that invites itself into biases by way of team-constructing competition would be dismissed as a trashy-journalism mothergoosery like so many grocery store gossip scoops (maybe ones that read: "Rick Kehoe: Abducted By Aliens...Yearly!"), I would have taken the chance on Martin after all.

I'll respond to the rest in the morning.

Mike Farkas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 07:44 AM
  #58
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 32,202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Farkas View Post
With every draft, the group gets smarter (one would hope) but yet the very players that are questioned keep rising (Campbell, Brydge, Traub, Graham, Trapp etc.) as we learn more about them (including some new bios from yours truly, which I hope will aid in future drafts)...whereas, Maxwell, Ellett, Swift, and even forwards like the aforementioned Nilsson, Burns, Henning (the last two being your only really competent defensive forwards), Dornhoefer, etc. seem to be wanted less and less as we learn more and more...interesting, if nothing else.
Interesting, I guess, but the plain and simple fact remains that you are making a claim of "ATD defense vs MLD offense" when the truth is closer to the opposite.

My group is composed mostly of top-1000 players who slipped when the ATD became an 800-pick draft. Yours is composed mostly of players from the 1100-1300 range who were taken unprecedentedly early by you. That does not support a claim of "ATD vs MLD" in your favor, unless you think for example that you have proven that Ted Graham actually deserves a higher ranking than Arnie Brown, or that Bill Brydge belongs in the ATD ahead of Bronco Horvath. I don't see any such argument being supported here... just the broad, unsupported (and highly exaggerated IMO) claim that you have managed to draft ATD-quality players despite none of them having ever actually been close to the ATD.

I'm not a fan of using arbitrary rankings either, but if you are going to do it you should at least make sure the numbers are on your side.

tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 09:22 AM
  #59
Mike Farkas
Hockey's Future Staff
Moron!
 
Mike Farkas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,030
vCash: 500
Again, I'm not alleging to have gotten ATD players, per se. Again, this is teetering on coachspeak. It's that many of my players (most of my bottom two lines + Bergeron) were documented and known for their ability to shutdown elite ATD players...so, their ability to handle players that are MLD level and only really getting drafted for a few years of production (like Juneau, Horvath, etc.) would be noteworthy. Whether you are willfully ignoring/dismissing that or whether I'm not explaining myself clearly enough is either a matter of philosophical difference or me becoming unhooked from phonics.

Mike Farkas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 09:54 AM
  #60
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 32,202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Farkas View Post
Again, I'm not alleging to have gotten ATD players, per se. Again, this is teetering on coachspeak. It's that many of my players (most of my bottom two lines + Bergeron) were documented and known for their ability to shutdown elite ATD players...so, their ability to handle players that are MLD level and only really getting drafted for a few years of production (like Juneau, Horvath, etc.) would be noteworthy. Whether you are willfully ignoring/dismissing that or whether I'm not explaining myself clearly enough is either a matter of philosophical difference or me becoming unhooked from phonics.
There are a few different issues here:

- You are characterizing my scoring forwards as "MLD level" when nearly all of them are consistent top-1000 draftees who would have been selected in a larger ATD. Right off the bat it's a semantic argument.
- Also, you are drawing a false distinction between the competition that the two different groups of players faced, as if they weren't all star players facing star competition in their own rights. When Horvath led the Bruins in scoring by 11 points, who would he have been facing if not the best defensive players? Do you not think he had to go through Andre Pronovost from time to time in order to score those points?
- You are ignoring the fact that you have several players -- Traub, Trapp, Graham -- who likely did NOT play against star competition on a regular basis.
- You are overstating the defensive ability of a guy like Brian Campbell who is far from a defensive star and will be playing a lot more minutes than your bottom-6 forwards.
- You seem to think my team doesn't also have defensive specialists who also matched up against their opponents' scoring stars.
- To top it off, you take a shot at "a few years of production" when you have Bodnar and Kozhevnikov on your top line.


We could go on for pages like this. Needless to say, I vigorously disagree with the entire premise of what you're arguing here.

tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 10:06 AM
  #61
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 32,202
vCash: 500
To add some specificity to the whole "your players are no competition for my players" thing.

In 1960, both Horvath (Winston-Salem) and Pronovost (Medicine Hat) were well established in their roles. Horvath was in a season in which he tied for the league lead in goals, was 2nd in the league in points, led his own team by 11 points, played in the All Star Game, made the 2nd All Star Team, and got a bunch of press -- clearly he would have been the major object of focus for any opposing defense.

Against Montreal -- and head-to-head with Pronovost by your estimation of his role as THE shutdown guy for Montreal -- Horvath scored 12 goals and 8 assists in only 14 games. Either Pronovost was matched up with someone else (which contradicts your assertion that he was assigned to the top offensive players) or he was seriously getting his ass handed to him by an "MLD player".

tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 10:10 AM
  #62
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,885
vCash: 500
Was Pronovost ever really THE shutdown guy? Or is this more of a "Orest Kindrachuk/Terry Crisp" kind of situation where he wasn't the prime defensive player of their powerhouse and only really the prime defensive player among the guys not already taken hundreds of picks ago?

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 10:15 AM
  #63
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,885
vCash: 500
Quote:
- You are overstating the defensive ability of a guy like Brian Campbell who is far from a defensive star and will be playing a lot more minutes than your bottom-6 forwards.
This is an important point too. I realize Campbell's defense has progressed to the point where his apologists will call it "acceptable" now and that's fine, but that doesn't mean it's "acceptable" for his career. Looking at his whole career, or at least his whole relevant career, his defensive play still averages out to "below average", and below average in an NHL setting is even less than that in an ATD/MLD setting where most players were typically average or better in most respects.

I don't mean for this to be a point about campbell in particular; it applies to everyone.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 10:15 AM
  #64
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 32,202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Was Pronovost ever really THE shutdown guy? Or is this more of a "Orest Kindrachuk/Terry Crisp" kind of situation where he wasn't the prime defensive player of their powerhouse and only really the prime defensive player among the guys not already taken hundreds of picks ago?
The Habs' checking line was:

RW - Claude Provost - ATD #213
C - Phil Goyette - ATD #373
LW - Andre Pronovost - MLD #223

Needless to say, Pronovost did all the heavy lifting against the Howes and Hulls of the league.

tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 10:15 AM
  #65
Mike Farkas
Hockey's Future Staff
Moron!
 
Mike Farkas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,030
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Was Pronovost ever really THE shutdown guy? Or is this more of a "Orest Kindrachuk/Terry Crisp" kind of situation where he wasn't the prime defensive player of their powerhouse and only really the prime defensive player among the guys not already taken hundreds of picks ago?
Pronovost and Crisp both are regarded for their matchups against elite players. Crisp was used in such a role under two reputable coaches: Bowman and Shero.

Mike Farkas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 10:17 AM
  #66
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,885
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
The Habs' checking line was:

RW - Claude Provost - ATD #213
C - Phil Goyette - ATD #373
LW - Andre Pronovost - MLD #223

Needless to say, Pronovost did all the heavy lifting against the Howes and Hulls of the league.
considering he's not your player, and one of those two stars didn't even play the correct corresponding wing, I assume you mean that last part sarcastically?

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 10:18 AM
  #67
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,885
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Farkas View Post
Pronovost and Crisp both are regarded for their matchups against elite players. Crisp was used in such a role under two reputable coaches: Bowman and Shero.
The only problem with that statement is, practically every Flyer center has had that claim made against them and it can't be true about all of them. I choose to believe Clark was that guy, as the evidence points the most strongly in that direction.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 10:18 AM
  #68
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 32,202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
considering he's not your player, and one of those two stars didn't even play the correct corresponding wing, I assume you mean that last part sarcastically?
Of course

tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 10:21 AM
  #69
Mike Farkas
Hockey's Future Staff
Moron!
 
Mike Farkas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,030
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
The only problem with that statement is, practically every Flyer center has had that claim made against them and it can't be true about all of them. I choose to believe Clark was that guy, as the evidence points the most strongly in that direction.
I just skimmed Orest Kindrachuk and Bobby Clarke's Legends of Hockey entries and neither mention shutting down Esposito in the '74 Finals or the French Connection in '75...but in Crisp's it explicity lists both of those things.

Mike Farkas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 10:25 AM
  #70
Mike Farkas
Hockey's Future Staff
Moron!
 
Mike Farkas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,030
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
If that were the case, players would switch wings all the time, no big deal. Yet almost all of them (including Kozhevnikov) show clear limitations as to what positions they can play.

You want to take a guy who never demonstrably played RW and put him at RW on your first line? Be my guest.
Well, in one clip, Kozhevnikov is carrying the puck up the right side of the rink into the offensive zone. So, he's allowed over there and he's not allergic to it. We obviously don't have nearly as much information about the Russians (renegade or otherwise) but to think the difference would be that great for Kozhevnikov or any other Soviet (given their teachings) would be rather misleading. It was already explained why players don't switch wings very often in North American hockey - handedness, coupled with the board play that is more common in our game. I'm so comfortable with Kozhevnikov at right wing that I actually think it's an advantage to have his lethal, off-wing shot over there (given, again, how he - personally - was developed)...but that's a matter for the courts I guess.


Quote:
This would make a good thread. Both of those eras were characterized by violent incidents. I'd argue that the 70s were more violent on a night-by-night basis, whereas the early era was prone to isolated incidents that were almost comically violent (ie, Cleghorn beating the tar out of Hooley Smith at a restaurant after the game, players getting in stick fights with fans, etc). Any way you want to look at it, both eras were a bit out of control.
Certainly. I just felt that borderline-maiming was more commonplace in the early eras and therefore, more was expected to be allowed. I read a game summary once that involved a player stomping another player's leg with his skate and received a "stern warning" from the referee to not do that anymore... They certainly both have their aspects of the wild and woolly variety.


Quote:
See his bio. He was, by far, the #1 minute muncher on a division winner and conference champion.
Saw his bio, looked at his ice time. I would feel more comfortable seeing more PK time if I was to believe his defense was the main reason he was out there for that time. He had to see some good talent if he was playing over 20 minutes per night, certainly, but I'm not sure he was renowned for his defensive ability in the process. Or else he would have been used in situations that warrant such.


Quote:
Brown paired with Howell when he won the Norris and Park when he was runner-up to Orr. And he even pulled down some Norris and AS votes (marginal totals, mind you) despite playing on the same pairing as Norris contenders. So clearly he was not only up against top competition, but looked pretty good to the writers.
Very good then, I didn't doubt that if Brown was paired with those guys that he would have seen some skill. I was just wondering how often that happened. He sounds quite valuable.

Quote:
Obviously your team is more defensively inclined, and mine is more offensively inclined. No question about that. But when the roles are reversed -- when my team is asked to play defense, and yours is asked to play offense -- my team is demonstrably deeper and more capable of playing effectively in both directions.
"deeper" seems to be used in an offensive context. I don't see it that way and maybe I'm alone, which is fine. But, I see a team with three extremely capable defensive lines and given this team's structure, it would be tough for any opposing offense to wade through this...which is by design. I don't view the game really as one-way-at-a-time, "asked to play offense" then "asked to play defense" - just a philosophical difference I suppose.

Quote:
Take your defense corps for example. Obviously Campbell and Tallon can move the puck, and Brydge is an adequate support scorer. But Traub, Trapp and Graham are offensive non-factors. Being in the 5-10 range among WCHL defensemen among a bunch of never-drafteds and A-level guys doesn't cut it at this level. Literally half your defense is going to struggle to move the puck.
This is just flat out incorrect. I welcome you to read Graham's new bio: http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...&postcount=170

Trapp regarded as one of the top d-men in hockey for a time and can do just fine with or without the puck: http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...&postcount=919

Traub was probably not an astute puck-mover, I'll grant you that much, but it's hardly noteworthy.

Quote:
So, take it on balance. My defense is much better rounded offensively, and respectable defensively. Yours is much stronger in their own end, but there are holes in their ability to get the puck up the ice. What happens when these teams collide? Possession time starts to tilt toward the group that is actually able to do something with the puck when they get it.
I don't agree that you will have more possession time for starters. Why would you? This is going to be chippy, chippy hockey. Line after line of defensive stalwarts and physical forwards backed by a mobile, physical and more-than-defensively capable backline and guys like Nilsson and Juneau are going to keep the puck? This puck will be stuck to the boards the entire game by my forwards who can manufacture offense off the cycle. This won't be an open-air series. There won't be room to breathe out there - especially for smallish offensive players, if they're out there...too much smarts, too much defensive anticipation, too much ground being covered at once by my team for it to be anything but a chippy series...won't be a lot of flow to it...which is a sizeable advantage to me.

I'm not sure how you're envisioning this defensive scheme, but this won't be a 60-minute penalty kill by any means...I hope you have guys that can score from 70 feet out on the boards because that's going to be the only space alloted really, it's going to be relentless because everyone can help basically...I just can't fathom how your offense won't be heavily disrupted and interrupted in all of this, how on earth are these guys going to keep the puck on their sticks for long enough to use their offensive skill. It'll be suffocating. As it has been during the regular season and first two rounds of the playoffs...

I just wonder how your players will respond in the transition of things. When your guys inevitably turn the puck over (which should happen rather often, I'm not sure I see a lot of "possession bulls" out there, and that doesn't seem to be your team's style really anyway, and Campbell or Graham or Tallon rev it up the other way, how willing a backchecker are some of these forwards gonna be on your side? How positionally ready will Maxwell or Guevremont be? They're gonna be eager to move forward with the play, they'll come flying in, just to see Juneau lose it at the blueline...that's a lot of skates now headed the wrong way...we might not have a ton of firepower, but you give any team enough odd-man rushes and they'll figure a way to get the puck in the net...

I don't doubt it will be close, as most defensive teams are involved in close, low-scoring tilts...but it's going to be messy, a choppy, and tactical. I don't think that's to your team's strengths. If I had one line of shutdown players and one shutdown pairing...sure, you got me on offense, you win. But it's just not like that. And the voters have recognized so far that my games are no-holds-barred grudge matches played seemingly in slush rather than on top of ice.

We'll see if they stick to their guns, and stick to the age-old adages involving defensive play and winning, in what should be a very good series.

Mike Farkas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 10:44 AM
  #71
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,885
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Farkas View Post
I just skimmed Orest Kindrachuk and Bobby Clarke's Legends of Hockey entries and neither mention shutting down Esposito in the '74 Finals or the French Connection in '75...but in Crisp's it explicity lists both of those things.
OK. I don't want you to think I'm assuming the worst for no good reason, but... LOH has been known to have errors and/or to overstate things. Considering Clarke was the center who got the most icetime and had the best defensive reputation, AND Shero said he liked playing MacLeish (the only center without a great defensive reputation!) against Perreault because he was the only one who could skate with him, I do have a hard time believing in Crisp's role as fully as you seem to.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 10:57 AM
  #72
Mike Farkas
Hockey's Future Staff
Moron!
 
Mike Farkas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,030
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
OK. I don't want you to think I'm assuming the worst for no good reason, but... LOH has been known to have errors and/or to overstate things. Considering Clarke was the center who got the most icetime and had the best defensive reputation, AND Shero said he liked playing MacLeish (the only center without a great defensive reputation!) against Perreault because he was the only one who could skate with him, I do have a hard time believing in Crisp's role as fully as you seem to.
And I don't want to assume that I'm backing my players blindly for no good reason. The reason I made so many new bios, for instance, was for my own knowledge...as I've referenced, this is my first time doing this. The fact that I'm in the spot I'm in in this thing is far beyond what I expected. But above all, this is for education not for competition. So, if I'm (or anyone) perpetuating anything that's incorrect it should be further examined, certainly.

I see LOH cited here early and often. So I'm using it for what it says, without further inference. And while I understand that LOH tends to look back on things with favorable light, I would be interested to see what other sources say happened.

Shero obviously thought enough of Crisp's smarts on the rink to introduce him as a very early assistant coach. So, surely that speaks to what he could do on the rink in some respects. Whether it's to the extent that LOH seems to be believe can be discussed if we'd like to go down that road...

In terms of just pure hockey play (and this is where I'm more at home), Clarke can't spend half the game just working on Esposito and Orr, he has to be alloted to carry the team offensively too. He has to be put out there in a favorable situation so he can score as well (which he did). So, perhaps, it's a case of meeting in the middle. Clarke checked Esposito and when Clarke couldn't/didn't/needed a rest/double-shift of Espo, then Crisp was assigned to him.

And if there's any merit to that theory, then that wouldn't diminish Crisp's legacy at all...being 1B or second-fiddle to one of the greatest two-way forwards ever in Clarke. Just like I have no issue that Andre Pronovost wasn't as good as Claude Provost...perhaps the best shadow in history...

Mike Farkas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 11:04 AM
  #73
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 32,202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Farkas View Post
Saw his bio, looked at his ice time. I would feel more comfortable seeing more PK time if I was to believe his defense was the main reason he was out there for that time. He had to see some good talent if he was playing over 20 minutes per night, certainly, but I'm not sure he was renowned for his defensive ability in the process. Or else he would have been used in situations that warrant such.
4:30 of PK time per game doesn't count as being used in defensive situations?

In any case, Maxwell is a 2nd-pairing PK guy in my lineup and paired with a defensive conscience at even strength. He is being used well within his limitations.

Quote:
Trapp regarded as one of the top d-men in hockey for a time
I assume this statement is based on a strict interpretation of WCHL All Star voting?

While he does have a solid 3-year voting peak, it would be really nice to have the entire voting record to validate the quality of players he was surpassing. From what I have seen, the WCHL was a lot like the WHA in terms of talent -- a cluster of real stars followed by a big dropoff.

Quote:
I don't agree that you will have more possession time for starters. Why would you? This is going to be chippy, chippy hockey. Line after line of defensive stalwarts and physical forwards backed by a mobile, physical and more-than-defensively capable backline and guys like Nilsson and Juneau are going to keep the puck?
Scanlan and Dornhoefer would be the top-6 corner guys, not Nilsson and Juneau.

Quote:
This puck will be stuck to the boards the entire game by my forwards who can manufacture offense off the cycle.
Getting the puck to the boards is not the same as generating offense. Your forwards lack scoring ability, pretty straightforwardly.

Quote:
This won't be an open-air series. There won't be room to breathe out there - especially for smallish offensive players, if they're out there...too much smarts, too much defensive anticipation, too much ground being covered at once by my team for it to be anything but a chippy series...won't be a lot of flow to it...which is a sizeable advantage to me.

I'm not sure how you're envisioning this defensive scheme, but this won't be a 60-minute penalty kill by any means...I hope you have guys that can score from 70 feet out on the boards because that's going to be the only space alloted really, it's going to be relentless because everyone can help basically...I just can't fathom how your offense won't be heavily disrupted and interrupted in all of this, how on earth are these guys going to keep the puck on their sticks for long enough to use their offensive skill. It'll be suffocating. As it has been during the regular season and first two rounds of the playoffs...
It's kind of hard to believe you see this out of a squad that has Campbell as the #1 defenseman and Bodnar as the #1 center.

Quote:
Campbell or Graham or Tallon rev it up the other way, how willing a backchecker are some of these forwards gonna be on your side?
Scanlan was an excellent backchecker for his era. Dornhoefer was a strong one. Juneau was good as a mature player. Riley and Boll were willing if not exceptional. Brown is more of a forechecker but does his part backchecking. Henning was a PK specialist. Burns was an excellent shutdown center.

I think that covers all the lines. Horvath is the only guy I know to have been a real floater, and he is supposed to be out for a good part of the series (the part where he's not lighting up Pronovost).

Quote:
How positionally ready will Maxwell or Guevremont be? They're gonna be eager to move forward with the play, they'll come flying in, just to see Juneau lose it at the blueline...
I'm not sure why Juneau loses it at the blue line here, seeing as he's more skilled than all but maybe 2 of your forwards, but if your players are skating in the correct direction, they are going to turn around at the same time as mine. You don't think you have a speed advantage in this series, do you?

tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 11:34 AM
  #74
Mike Farkas
Hockey's Future Staff
Moron!
 
Mike Farkas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 5,030
vCash: 500
- Maxwell averaged 4:30 PK ice time per game for his career? I must have the wrong spreadsheet or your cherry picking.

- In his bio, seventies broke it down about the d-men of the era. Trapp was reflected positively in it, plus his accolades.

- I'm sure Scanlan and Dornhoefer would be the first to the corner...I just wonder how they propose to get out of there with the puck. Not a ton of skill or playmaking from those guys as I understand it. Which means you need some good board play, which you won't get from a lot of those other top-sixers, I wouldn't imagine. And even if you did, my team has a noteworthy advantage along the boards.

- Manufacturing offense is a much different animal than organic creation of offense (the foundation of your team). Can't be viewed in "shootout terms", hands, skill, dekes, etc. You have a top-to-bottom advantage there, which is by both of our own designs. How it will be a big advantage to you in a series like this is another story...

- Balanced approach. Campbell covers enough ground against not-very-intimidating forwards, so he'll be fine. Bodnar and the top unit go out at the right times, and with the home ice advanatge in the series it won't be an issue. Bodnar won't be spending 30 minutes on the rink...he's not Esposito...

- You have some players that can backcheck throughout your lineup (as you should), but a lot more is going to be asked of them than you initially think. Let's hope they can keep their head on swivel defensively to support your offensive forays...or odd-man rushes could be a thing that dooms your squad.

- I guess I'm not illustrating what is happening quite clear enough or how my defensive tactics would work. And I'm not sure that I should continue in trying to express them because I'm not sure it's fair for one person to look at it like a coach and the other person have to defend against that, so to speak. Which isn't at all meant to question anything you have said so far or your knowledge or anything of the sort (not at all, I mean that sincerely), I just think that may be what I'm saying doesn't really belong in this context and the only reason I started to is because defending a team of defensive players is not very quantifiable...there is no defensive statistic in hockey, no number that can be adjusted, ranked, scaled, or extrapolated that gives a consistent measure of an individual's defensive abilities. So, I resorted to tactical measures for the whole team which, in turn, puts the team-building ahead of the ranking of all-time players, which I didn't think was the original goal of this exercise. So, maybe I shouldn't delve too deeply into the gameplay of the fictitious game in an effort to defend the team that I built, as oppose to the players that are on it...

Mike Farkas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-12-2012, 12:58 PM
  #75
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 32,202
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Farkas View Post
- Maxwell averaged 4:30 PK ice time per game for his career? I must have the wrong spreadsheet or your cherry picking.
I don't have your spreadsheet so I can't confirm the validity of your numbers.

What I do know is that Maxwell averaged 4:30 of PK time on a division-winning, conference champion team. That's more meaningful than a career average, as far as measuring his defensive ability is concerned. I'm not portraying him as an incredible defensive rock, nor am I using him in that kind of role, but I don't think he is a serious question mark in normal defensive conditions either.


Quote:
- In his bio, seventies broke it down about the d-men of the era. Trapp was reflected positively in it, plus his accolades.
I see that part of his bio, but there are still significant questions to be asked.

First question is, when Trapp finished 3rd in AS voting in the WCHL, who was 4th? When he made the 1st AS team, who was on the 2nd? That's just about the only way to validate the quality of the accolades.

Second question, when we say he was the 10th best defenseman in hockey, who was 11th? If it was someone we consider high-quality, great. But if it was some forgotten riff-raff, there is an issue. Again, simply trying to validate the quality of his ranking.

Third question, how did seventies calculate his rankings when he combined the NHL with the WCHL? IE, when he says "X, Y and Z were better", how does he come to that conclusion? We're fortunate that he is here and can hopefully shed light on this and possibly the other two questions.


Quote:
I'm sure Scanlan and Dornhoefer would be the first to the corner...I just wonder how they propose to get out of there with the puck. Not a ton of skill or playmaking from those guys as I understand it.
You would be wrong about Scanlan, who was quite skilled. Dornhoefer was more of a goal scorer so he was skilled enough to get results.


Quote:
Which means you need some good board play, which you won't get from a lot of those other top-sixers, I wouldn't imagine. And even if you did, my team has a noteworthy advantage along the boards.
So I need good board players to back up my good board players, but even if I had them you still have more good board players? I guess the ideal team is one composed of nothing but board players?

If you have a winger who is effective at jamming on the boards, what you really need is a center with a good stick who can pull the puck out and do something productive with it. I have Nilsson, Horvath, and Bernier; you have Bodnar, Bergeron and Crisp. To be honest, I think you may be overestimating your team's abilities in this part of the game. If you have an advantage, it's certainly not the blowout you seem to envision.


Quote:
Manufacturing offense is a much different animal than organic creation of offense (the foundation of your team). Can't be viewed in "shootout terms", hands, skill, dekes, etc. You have a top-to-bottom advantage there, which is by both of our own designs. How it will be a big advantage to you in a series like this is another story...
This goes back to team roundedness. While you certainly have a more specialized group in the Claude Julien style of play, my group isn't limited to one skill set. If you want to jam in the corners, we can do that (see above). But if a lane opens up, I have guys on every line who can take advantage. Do you?


Quote:
Balanced approach. Campbell covers enough ground against not-very-intimidating forwards, so he'll be fine.
"Fine" is a lot different than the "perfect" you were pushing earlier. If your team loses the game when it allows more than 2.5 goals, you need better than "fine" defense from your #1 minute-muncher.


Quote:
Bodnar and the top unit go out at the right times, and with the home ice advanatge in the series it won't be an issue. Bodnar won't be spending 30 minutes on the rink...he's not Esposito...
I assume Bodnar will be skating 20+ minutes a game considering he's the center of your only scoring line. (Bear in mind that we already know, based on his career, that a considerable amount of that time will be offensively unproductive) I would also assume that Campbell will be out there around 25-27 minutes, based on his #1 position and the fact that you've been pushing his ice time as a positive. So assuming Bodnar and Campbell overlap for the most part, you're looking at around a third of the game that will be spent with a weak defensive center and a suspect defenseman on the ice together. We haven't heard much about Kozhevnikov's defense yet either.

This just doesn't cohere with your image of a team that never makes defensive mistakes. That group WILL make mistakes, and given the scoring ability of my depth players you won't be able to use home-ice matchups to mask them. Sure, put Bodnar against Bernier in defensive transition and see who gets to your net faster. I'll take that matchup in a heartbeat.


Quote:
You have some players that can backcheck throughout your lineup (as you should), but a lot more is going to be asked of them than you initially think. Let's hope they can keep their head on swivel defensively to support your offensive forays...or odd-man rushes could be a thing that dooms your squad.
Again -- odd-man rushes are a function not only of turnovers, but also team speed in transition. It's pretty obvious which of these teams is faster up and down the ice.

And at the end of the day, odd-man rushes don't mean a whole lot if you can't put the puck in the net.


Quote:
I just think that may be what I'm saying doesn't really belong in this context and the only reason I started to is because defending a team of defensive players is not very quantifiable...there is no defensive statistic in hockey, no number that can be adjusted, ranked, scaled, or extrapolated that gives a consistent measure of an individual's defensive abilities.
On the other hand, our lack of defensive statistics means it's a whole lot easier to arbitrarily claim that a player will have a perfect series on defense. Imagine if I were making a similar claim about my team's offensive abilities.

tarheelhockey 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 01:02 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.