I will say it is the point aspect that sold us... can play the right side to Lidstrom or Pratt on the PP plus be a nice gritty third liner... I think that is more valuable than taking Oatman even if he might be a bit better but then needing a PP specialist also
Sorry, but Rene Robert is little more than a 4th liner in this kind of draft. He has no business being anywhere near a powerplay, on the point or otherwise.
Duncan did have that one huge year that Cook didn't have, but at a quick glance, Cook seems to have been an impact player for longer.
Strange too in that you seem to have found more praise for Cook's defensive game than Duncan's, right? The press reports seem to talk about Duncan as a major puck rusher and Cook more as a guy who picked his spots, yet their numbers are pretty close.
I wouldn't say I found more about his defense, just a larger percentage. I simply found a lot more written on Duncan. That said, I would characterize Cook as more of conservative defenseman and Duncan as the explosive puck rusher with the harder shot. Cook reminds me a lot of Numminen.
__________________
Every post comes with the Nalyd Psycho Seal of Approval.
Sorry, but Rene Robert is little more than a 4th liner in this kind of draft. He has no business being anywhere near a powerplay, on the point or otherwise.
I agree that he would be best as a 4th liner, but I think he's better than some other guys who have and will appear on scoring lines. I don't have his VS2 numbers and don't feel like running them, but I do have his top 30 scoring finishes from that comparison of glue guys I did awhile back:
7th, 16th, 17th, 22nd, 26th (watered down 70s, 3rd best member of his line)
Sorry, but Rene Robert is little more than a 4th liner in this kind of draft. He has no business being anywhere near a powerplay, on the point or otherwise.
Why? His point finishes and VS2 scores aren't out of place.
I don't see what's wrong with him as a bottom of the barrel 2nd liner who plays a complimentary role. I guess you could get aggressive with his linemate situation, but there's so many people in that boat.
Eddie Oatman is better than a lot of RWs who have gone. Can't believe VI didn't take Oatman to play with Dunderdale.
Hedberg and I thought Bobby Bauer an excellent value where we picked him, and others agreed.
If you want to argue that Oatman is clearly better than Bauer then make the argument. Maybe he is a deserving top-300 player. Otherwise, close your five hole please. The consistently critical comments directed at what I do is piling up and I'm getting fed up with it. There is no balance to all that you say: it's always negative digs. At least EB and TDMM have the odd postive thing to say. Life is too short to hang around unending negativity.
Frank played all/most of 12, 13, 14, and 17 so it looks like he was cleanly beat by Moose and Lester once. Not that it offers an answer to the question I asked, just a bit more context.
Frank played all/most of 12, 13, 14, and 17 so it looks like he was cleanly beat by Moose and Lester once. Not that it offers an answer to the question I asked, just a bit more context.
Also, I have Johnny's list
That's why some people like Frank so much - Mickey Ion (the referee-in-chief of the PCHA who picked the All-Star teams) picked him over Lester in 3 of 4 seasons they played in the same league. But still... Frank basically only played for 5-6 full seasons total (1 NHA, 4 PCHA, maybe 1 ECAHA), while Lester played for something like 20, so I dunno.
Why? His point finishes and VS2 scores aren't out of place.
I don't see what's wrong with him as a bottom of the barrel 2nd liner who plays a complimentary role. I guess you could get aggressive with his linemate situation, but there's so many people in that boat.
Even before looking at his line mate situation, his offense is very weak. He doesn't bring nearly enough intangibles to make up for that.
That's why some people like Frank so much - Mickey Ion (the referee-in-chief of the PCHA who picked the All-Star teams) picked him over Lester in 3 of 4 seasons they played in the same league. But still... Frank basically only played for 5-6 full seasons total (1 NHA, 4 PCHA, maybe 1 ECAHA), while Lester played for something like 20, so I dunno.
Yeah I never thought to compare the two to be honest, but I don't really know anything about them outside of what's in the bios. Frank played 5/8 games with the Vics in the CAHL in 1905 as well when they won the league, but they didn't challenge for the Stanley Cup sadly.
]If you want to argue that Oatman is clearly better than Bauer then make the argument. Maybe he is a deserving top-300 player.
He is clearly better. Better peak, better longevity, more well-rounded player.
Quote:
The consistently critical comments directed at what I do is piling up and I'm getting fed up with it. There is no balance to all that you say: it's always negative digs. At least EB and TDMM have the odd postive thing to say. Life is too short to hang around unending negativity.
I've been critical of one of your players. I think Bauer is terribly over-rated. Either get used to the criticism, or show me why I'm wrong.
As for me always being negative towards you.... you must have a short fricken memory.
Who was it that offered to bring you in as a secret co-GM when you were still banned from the draft? That guy must have really disliked you...
Even before looking at his line mate situation, his offense is very weak. He doesn't bring nearly enough intangibles to make up for that.
what do you mean he doesn't bring enough intangibles? Robert was the cornerman and hardest checker on one of the best lines in hockey. he certainly wasn't nearly as flashy as Martin or Perreault but, was arguably a better two-way player. (he actually had more points then Martin during the French Connection years - and this is in no way me implying he's better than Martin, because he's not)
as for his play at the point - he was praised as being one of the best point men in the NHL during the 70's. a quick (and very raw - as I can't tell exactly when he played the point between 72-79) stats check indicates he has the second highest total of power play goals among players known to play the point (though Bobby Orr was on his way out of the game at this point)
Open question now that they're all drafted, should Frank Patrick continue to go ahead of Art Duncan and Lloyd Cook?
interesting note about Frank Patrick - he played hockey for Stanstead College, the same school where recent Calgary Flames 1st rounder Mark Jankowski played
what do you mean he doesn't bring enough intangibles? Robert was the cornerman and hardest checker on one of the best lines in hockey. he certainly wasn't nearly as flashy as Martin or Perreault but, was arguably a better two-way player. (he actually had more points then Martin during the French Connection years - and this is in no way me implying he's better than Martin, because he's not)
Yeah, he's fine in the other areas. We're comparing him to the best of all time, though, and there are just so many better players still available to be drafted.
Sorry, but Rene Robert is little more than a 4th liner in this kind of draft. He has no business being anywhere near a powerplay, on the point or otherwise.
Thank you for your opinion but the numbers do not seem to back it up...
From 1970-71 to 1980-81:
PPG from RWs:
1. Lafleur
2. Bossy
3. Cournoyer
4. Undrafted
5. McDonald
6. Pronovost 7. Robert
8. Hodge
9. Gilbert
10. Gare
He was top ten in every offensive category during that decade stretch among RWs... including goals (7) assists (2) and points (2)
Finally Robert was also fifth in ESG from RW during the 70s... despite playing at least 100 less games than everyone ahead of him
Fancy numbers like V2 and whatnot are all good but the boxcars tell us he was very effective at what he did... you can say okay look at his linemates but I'm wonder if you have seen our top six and therefore top six PP forwards... Kharlamov/Hawerchuk is vastly superior to Martin/Perreault... and the KLM line is no slouch unit either. Robert will be taking passes from some combo of those forwards... tough to argue he will be in tough compared to his Sabres days linemate-wise
Thank you for your opinion but the numbers do not seem to back it up...
From 1970-71 to 1980-81:
PPG from RWs:
1. Lafleur
2. Bossy
3. Cournoyer
4. Undrafted
5. McDonald
6. Pronovost 7. Robert
8. Hodge
9. Gilbert
10. Gare
These 5 and 10 year chunks are very flattering to any player you want to flatter.
So you take his peak, then limit it to only RWs, and he's still only 7th? That's very unimpressive when you compare it to other players.
Vic Stasiuk, as an example, who isn't a very strong offensive player, is 5th among RWs during his 10 year peak, and the 4 ahead of him are Gordie Howe, Andy Bathgate, Rocket Richard, and Bernie Geoffrion.
Quote:
Fancy numbers like V2 and whatnot are all good but the boxcars tell us he was very effective at what he did... you can say okay look at his linemates but I'm wonder if you have seen our top six and therefore top six PP forwards... Kharlamov/Hawerchuk is vastly superior to Martin/Perreault... and the KLM line is no slouch unit either. Robert will be taking passes from some combo of those forwards... tough to argue he will be in tough compared to his Sabres days linemate-wise
Relatively, Kharlamov/Howerchuk is quite a bit weaker than Martin/Perrealt. Martin and Perreault, at their peaks, were among the very best in the league. Depending on who you ask, Kharlamov is among the elite, but Howerchuk absolutely is not.
These 5 and 10 year chunks are very flattering to any player you want to flatter.
So you take his peak, then limit it to only RWs, and he's still only 7th? That's very unimpressive when you compare it to other players.
1) It's not really his peak... that's his entire career... Oatman who you love played 320 top-level games...
2) It's a decade's worth of play... are we to throw out all those books and magazines that rank the 60s 70s 80s because it's "flattering to any player?" (that doesn't even make sense... there are winners and losers in such comparisons... Robert happens to be a winner)
3) So we are not allowed to compare positions to positions... interesting rule and I will remember it...
Quote:
Vic Stasiuk, as an example, who isn't a very strong offensive player, is 5th among RWs during his 10 year peak, and the 4 ahead of him are Gordie Howe, Andy Bathgate, Rocket Richard, and Bernie Geoffrion.
If you ignore, what, his first six seasons in the league? THAT is cherry-picking... this is not...
Quote:
Relatively, Kharlamov/Howerchuk is quite a bit weaker than Martin/Perrealt. Martin and Perreault, at their peaks, were among the very best in the league. Depending on who you ask, Kharlamov is among the elite, but Howerchuk absolutely is not.
Hahaha... what do you mean "depending on who you ask"... there is no question Kharlamov is among the top 100 players ever... the majority would tell you top 50... our own History of Hockey voted him 35... and he goes in that area in the ATD every time... it seems you like to build strawmans that blow over after someone breathes on them... it doesn't help your point at all to go after such hyperbole
Hawerchuk? His resume from a high level view is nearly identical to Perreault's... again I don't know where this hyperbole is coming from... "among the very best in the league" and he has two 2nd ASTs and is 3, 4, 5, 8, 9 in points to Hawerchuk's one 2nd AST and 3, 4, 7, 9...
1) It's not really his peak... that's his entire career... Oatman who you love played 320 top-level games...
Oatman had a 30 year career.... and a peak that smashes Rene Robert's.
Quote:
2) It's a decade's worth of play... are we to throw out all those books and magazines that rank the 60s 70s 80s because it's "flattering to any player?" (that doesn't even make sense... there are winners and losers in such comparisons... Robert happens to be a winner)
Rene Robert looks like a winner because he is at an advantage. Why not look at 1965-1974 and see where Robert ranks there?
Quote:
3) So we are not allowed to compare positions to positions... interesting rule and I will remember it...
It's not about what you are allowed to do, it's about understanding how impressive (or not) something is.
Quote:
If you ignore, what, his first six seasons in the league? THAT is cherry-picking... this is not...
You may not have deliberately cherry-picked, but the result is the same. Robert is at an advantage.
Quote:
Hahaha... what do you mean "depending on who you ask"... there is no question Kharlamov is among the top 100 players ever... the majority would tell you top 50... our own History of Hockey voted him 35... and he goes in that area in the ATD every time... it seems you like to build strawmans that blow over after someone breathes on them... it doesn't help your point at all to go after such hyperbole
Rick Martin was one of the top few LWs in the game. Is Kharlamov one of the top few LWs in this draft? As I said, it depends who you ask.
Personally, I wouldn't say a guy who could only lead a second-rate league in scoring once is one of the best LWs of all time.
Quote:
Hawerchuk? His resume from a high level view is nearly identical to Perreault's... again I don't know where this hyperbole is coming from... "among the very best in the league" and he has two 2nd ASTs and is 3, 4, 5, 8, 9 in points to Hawerchuk's one 2nd AST and 3, 4, 7, 9...
We're not talking about how Hawerchuk compares to Perreault in a head-to-head comparison. We're comparing them relatively.
Gilbert Pearreault was one of the best few centers in the league. Is Hawerchuk one of the best few centers in this league?
You can argue that Perreault wasn't one of the very best, but he was definitely a top-end 1st line center. Hawerchuk isn't close to that here.
