Not that anyone probably cares, but I've decided to devote my energy to researching a few players in this draft, as I did in the last draft. I just want to make it known up front so as to avoid being accused of collusion with any of the active GMs. I've identified three pre-war greats who intrigue me, and about whom I feel not enough is known. One is an all-time pantheon type who remains something of an enigma, one is more of a mid-round scoringline guy who was a big star in his day, and the last is a high-end bottom-6 player. I'll point them out when they come along. I will probably do a 4th player, but I haven't yet identified any persons of interest beyond the first three.
No guarantees that what I find will be all positive, or even positive on the whole relative to our current opinions about these players. I will post everything that I find of any relevance, and do my best to put the players in the context of their times and provide a good, longitudinal view of their careers. I'll probably revive the Dirt thread for this purpose, so don't anybody expect me to put together a nicely formatted ATD bio.
Not that anyone probably cares, but I've decided to devote my energy to researching a few players in this draft, as I did in the last draft. I just want to make it known up front so as to avoid being accused of collusion with any of the active GMs. I've identified three pre-war greats who intrigue me, and about whom I feel not enough is known. One is an all-time pantheon type who remains something of an enigma, one is more of a mid-round scoringline guy who was a big star in his day, and the last is a high-end bottom-6 player. I'll point them out when they come along. I will probably do a 4th player, but I haven't yet identified any persons of interest beyond the first three.
No guarantees that what I find will be all positive, or even positive on the whole relative to our current opinions about these players. I will post everything that I find of any relevance, and do my best to put the players in the context of their times and provide a good, longitudinal view of their careers. I'll probably revive the Dirt thread for this purpose, so don't anybody expect me to put together a nicely formatted ATD bio.
I'm interested. Always interested in the "comma but ..." part of pre-expansion / pre-WW2 sports history because I feel like modern readers would find the general tone of sports writing in those eras unrecognizably positive. One-dimensional, lazy, selfish scorers existed in 1933, but I don't feel like very many newspapers critically looked at anything more than the "WOW!" of his offensive abilities.
Not that anyone probably cares, but I've decided to devote my energy to researching a few players in this draft, as I did in the last draft. I just want to make it known up front so as to avoid being accused of collusion with any of the active GMs. I've identified three pre-war greats who intrigue me, and about whom I feel not enough is known. One is an all-time pantheon type who remains something of an enigma, one is more of a mid-round scoringline guy who was a big star in his day, and the last is a high-end bottom-6 player. I'll point them out when they come along. I will probably do a 4th player, but I haven't yet identified any persons of interest beyond the first three.
No guarantees that what I find will be all positive, or even positive on the whole relative to our current opinions about these players. I will post everything that I find of any relevance, and do my best to put the players in the context of their times and provide a good, longitudinal view of their careers. I'll probably revive the Dirt thread for this purpose, so don't anybody expect me to put together a nicely formatted ATD bio.
I've recently started to gather data for Swedish players (not just ATD standards though) if you or anyone else have north-american qoutes, articles, interviews it would be highly appriciated as I'm mostly working with native sources with the help of my grandson.
I have a player who may never have been under rated by the ATD, but I think he is in hockey history. Whenever he is picked I'm going to honor him not as a value pick, but as an under rated player in hockey history. I'm going to make him my first annual gmm's pick of the draft.
I've recently started to gather data for Swedish players (not just ATD standards though) if you or anyone else have north-american qoutes, articles, interviews it would be highly appriciated as I'm mostly working with native sources with the help of my grandson.
Sure thing. I can't say for sure if I have any information without knowing who the player is, but point him out to me when he is drafted (or you can simply send me a PM) and I'll give you whatever I can find.
Sure thing. I can't say for sure if I have any information without knowing who the player is, but point him out to me when he is drafted (or you can simply send me a PM) and I'll give you whatever I can find.
Thank you, I'll do that.
By the way, to anyone else currently involved in the draft, me and my grandson is looking through archives of info on swedish players so don't hestitate so send a pm to see if we have some additional info to add to your bios.
I will post my finding after the ATD as to not distrupt anything but when a player is drafted I'm happy to share whatever I've found to that GM.
By the way, to anyone else currently involved in the draft, me and my grandson is looking through archives of info on swedish players so don't hestitate so send a pm to see if we have some additional info to add to your bios.
I will post my finding after the ATD as to not distrupt anything but when a player is drafted I'm happy to share whatever I've found to that GM.
There will be some differences of opinion about this!!! BUT Kenora goes away from previous ATDS with Nicklas Lidstrom, D.
Innnntttterrrresting.
I think there's certainly an argument for why he should be here. I would have taken one other DMan over him, but I don't think it's a bad pick by any means.
Mikita was the guy I was trying to trade up for. Lots of surprises thus far.
__________________
Exhibit A as to how hockey doesn't matter on ESPN:
Last night an ESPN program was discussing how the Detroit Pistons needed a hero citing the heroes on the Detroit Tigers, Detroit Lions and no mention of the Detroit Red Wings. All this despite the Red Wings probably being the most succesful team in Detroit right now.
First time Lidstrom ever went in the top 5 dmen here and it's about freaking time....
But I wouldn't have taken him quite yet.
Excited to add Lidstrom to the Thistles roster. And, while I agree there may have been a couple better picks in an all-time sense, Lidstrom was the ideal cornerstone for the team that Schultz and I are looking to build.
In my opinion, Lidstrom is one of the easiest players to build around in the draft. He excels both offensively and defensively, is a great leader, and plays a smart, subtle game. He also brings a strong playoff resume and experience to the Thistles. And, while he certainly doesn't have the physicality of the other options but, will spend very little time in the penalty box, meaning we'll have him on the ice whenever needed.
It's also nice to shake things up a bit sometimes...
Excited to add Lidstrom to the Thistles roster. And, while I agree there may have been a couple better picks in an all-time sense, Lidstrom was the ideal cornerstone for the team that Schultz and I are looking to build.
In my opinion, Lidstrom is one of the easiest players to build around in the draft. He excels both offensively and defensively, is a great leader, and plays a smart, subtle game. He also brings a strong playoff resume and experience to the Thistles. And, while he certainly doesn't have the physicality of the other options but, will spend very little time in the penalty box, meaning we'll have him on the ice whenever needed.
It's also nice to shake things up a bit sometimes...
Lidstrom is awesome, a flawless defenceman and he can hold his own as the #7 pick. I would take one defenceman that is still out there over him though, a real rugged guy wink wink nudge nudge.
The incessant Lidstrom vs Bourque comparisons on the history board have led me to conclude the following:
Even strength offense: moderate edge Bourque
Even strength defense: slight edge Lidstrom
Even strength overall: slight edge Bourque
Powerplay: even
Penalty kill: very small advantage Bourque because he's tougher in front of the net
Overall, a small but clear edge to Bourque (mainly because of even strength offense). But the difference is small enough where picking Lidstrom first isn't that big a deal.
