HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Fantasy Hockey Talk > All Time Draft
All Time Draft Fantasy league where players of the past and present meet.

ATD 2012 Lineup Assassination Thread - Sam Pollock Division

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-24-2013, 02:34 AM
  #51
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
That is one mean team. You're going to beat the **** out of a lot of people with that lineup.

Biggest issue I can see right away would be the PK. The defence is just OK, and the forwards are pretty weak. Considering the amount of time you'll be short-handed, that could cause some issues.
Yeah, unless I'm missing something, Alf Smith has no business being on an ATD penalty kill, let alone the first unit. And Bridgman - Smyl seems below average for a second unit. Messier is a horse, but he's really being heavily relied on here.

On D, Jack Stewart is an awesome penalty killer, but Leo Boivin... meh. You guys really need Babe Siebert on the penalty kill.

I think you're wasting Gordie Drillion by not having him on the first PP - getting garbage goals in front of the net is by far his best skill. Otherwise, the PP forwards are good; lack of a natural PP QB up top hurts though - Pitre and Stanfield are more shooters than QBs.

EB and Dave really made an extreme team. Waves of tough scorers who are going to relentlessly pound the defense at even strength without a rest. Much better at even strength than on special teams, though. I also think lack of a real shut down unit could make it tough to hold a lead - provided the opponent hasn't already given up from the constant physical abuse.


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 03-24-2013 at 02:44 AM.
TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-24-2013, 09:55 AM
  #52
BubbaBoot
Registered User
 
BubbaBoot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Mission Hill
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 10,982
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Yeah, unless I'm missing something, Alf Smith has no business being on an ATD penalty kill, let alone the first unit. And Bridgman - Smyl seems below average for a second unit. Messier is a horse, but he's really being heavily relied on here.

On D, Jack Stewart is an awesome penalty killer, but Leo Boivin... meh. You guys really need Babe Siebert on the penalty kill.

I think you're wasting Gordie Drillion by not having him on the first PP - getting garbage goals in front of the net is by far his best skill. Otherwise, the PP forwards are good; lack of a natural PP QB up top hurts though - Pitre and Stanfield are more shooters than QBs.

EB and Dave really made an extreme team. Waves of tough scorers who are going to relentlessly pound the defense at even strength without a rest. Much better at even strength than on special teams, though. I also think lack of a real shut down unit could make it tough to hold a lead - provided the opponent hasn't already given up from the constant physical abuse.
I had this same feeling but since I don't know some of these earlier players as well you do it's good to know that I wasn't far off. (Although Drillon is someone who's caught my eye and I'll research more about him).

You're right about Stanfield, he was more of a shooter than a playemaker on the PP point but that was pretty much what the Bruins PP was at the time. Orr and Stanfield shooting with Espo, Bucyk and Hodge getting the rebounds or tips.

BubbaBoot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-24-2013, 03:49 PM
  #53
Sturminator
I voted for Kodos
 
Sturminator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: West Egg, New York
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 7,386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EagleBelfour View Post
Les Nordiques de Québec

(1972-1995)

General Manager: DaveG & EagleBelfour
Head Coach: Peter Laviolette
Assistant Coach: Father David Bauer

Richard Martin - Mark Messier - Bill Cook
Sid Smith - Eric Lindros - Didier Pitre
Alf Smith - Fred Stanfield - Gordie Drillon
Mel Bridgman - Orland Kurtenbach - Stan Smyl
Art Chapman
XXX

Jack Stewart - Babe Siebert
Frantisek Pospisil - Leo Boivin
František Tikal - Ron Greschner
Gilles Marotte

Tom Barrasso
Eddie Giacomin


Powerplay:
Mark Messier - Sid Smith - Bill Cook
Babe Siebert - Didier Pitre

Richard Martin - Eric Lindros - Gordie Drillon
Fred Stanfield - Frantisek Pospisil

Penalty Kill:
Alf Smith - Mark Messier
Jack Stewart - Leo Boivin

Stan Smyl - Mel Bridgman
Frantisek Pospisil - Frantisek Tikal

Bill Cook - Orland Kurtenbach
Ron Greschner - Babe Siebert
I'll take a crack at this one. This is a very interesting team that will certainly cause its opponents some serious problems. The defense is absolutely ferocious, and the forward lines all have at least one player on them with a quite violent reputation. This is the last opponent that a soft and/or injury-prone team will want to meet in the playoffs, especially if the weakness is at forward.

Defense:

A remarkably aggressive group. Stewart are Siebert are going to be extremely physical, but are below-average as a top-pairing, overall. Stewart is a viable #1 defenseman, but he is definitely on the lower end, while I consider Siebert a bit above the average for a #2. This top pairing will be strong defensively, but won't be that great at moving the puck, I think.

The Pospisil - Boivin second pairing is among the best in the draft. Pospisil is an elite #3 defenseman who has pretty much everything but great mobility. Boivin is a player I have a hard time rating...funny for a guy who is so well established in the ATD, but there still seem to be a lot of unknowns here. On the one hand, Boivin's actual AST voting placements are very suspect, and suggest that he shouldn't be a 2nd pairing defenseman, at all. But on the other hand, we have incomplete voting records for a chunk of his prime years, and he was for most of his career the classic "defensive defenseman on a bad team", and those guys never get the credit they deserve. He's also in the hall of fame, though I don't really know how much that tells us. Anyway, weighing all of the variables, I think Boivin is likely a good to very good #4, though not an elite one. Overall, an excellent second pairing that is very physical and has no clear weaknesses.

Tikal and Greschner seem to be a good match on the bottom pairing. I think you overrated Gresch's defense a bit after making the pick, but he's still a good bottom-pairing guy in this, and matches well with the rough, defensive-minded Tikal. I wish I knew more about Tikal, but we know something about the competition he faced, and he was at least good enough to beat out Ragulin a couple of times, and is generally well-respected for having a long and good career. I think he's a good bottom-pairing guy, as well.

The unit as a whole probably comes out to about average, with the relative weakness and strength of the 1st and 2nd pairings, respectively, counterbalancing one another.

Forwards:

Frightening top line. Jeez...Messier - Cook are going to roll a lot of defensemen, even at this level. Martin is a player who I think has been historically pretty overrated in the ATD, mainly on account of his all-star credentials (which he won in a very weak era for LWs) and his prominence on a famous line. The VsX numbers are not kind to Rick Martin, and I think the reason for that is because he was a limited player with very little playmaking ability. Anyway, unbalanced goalscorers are a bit underrated by points-based VsX numbers, so he's somewhat better relatively than the numbers indicate, and he should get excellent playmaking service from Messier and Cook. Very strong top line at any rate, even if I think Martin is somewhat less a player than his ATD reputation would indicate.

The forward lines aren't as dominant past the top unit, and it's a shame that Pitre didn't use his size and strength to play a rougher style of hockey, because it would have been useful given your team concept. But Lindros will do a lot of hitting for the line, and is generally a quite strong second line pivot. Smith is another pure goalscorer like Martin, and is ok as a second liner. Pitre, I'm not sure about. Ok, he led the NHA in scoring twice, and led the IHL once, though beyond that peak, he's got one more pretty good season where he was 3rd in NHA scoring, and then a bunch of years that don't look all that impressive. I just don't know about Pitre. He's certainly fine as a second liner, but I wonder if he's not still a bit overrated compared to a few of the RWs taken a bit later. Anyway, it's a strong second line.

I have some concerns about the 3rd line. Specifically, I don't know if this is a good way to get the best out of Gordie Drillon at even strength. Drillon was known for cleaning up Apps' trash, and I don't see a whole lot of offensive creativity on this unit, so I don't know how much trash he'll have to clean up at even-strength. In fact, I would strongly consider switching Drillon and Pitre, because I think Drillon next to Lindros could work out very well. Anyway, Drillon is certainly an elite offensive talent for this unit if you choose to leave him there. Stanfield is a kind of meh 3rd liner at even strength, I think, though I think Smith is pretty good in a kind of poor man's Cashman role.

The bottom line is very hardworking, tough and aggressive, although not particularly skilled. You'll probably want to match it against other bottom units when possible, although the way a lot of teams have built depth scoring this year, that may not always work out, either. This line is kind of a battering ram more than anything - a classic energy line - and it will do that job well, but not much else, in my opinion.

Other:

Barrasso is a good goalie for this team. He's been fairly underrated in the ATD for some time and I like where you took him relative to a couple other goalies who went a good bit earlier. With a fairly average defense and not a whole lot of high-end checking from the forwards, he will probably get a fair amount of work, but he was at his best when facing a heavy volume of shots, so it's a good fit. His puckmoving abilities are also pretty underrated by a lot of people who don't remember him clearly, I think, and will help the defense a lot to get the puck moving quickly in the other direction on dump-ins and such. This will be especially helpful behind the first pairing who are not the greatest puckmovers for this level.

I like Peter Laviolette, and think he's definitely an ATD-calibre coach at this point. He runs hard-nosed, disciplined teams who are often something more than the sum of their parts. I'd like to see a little more checking from the forwards on a Laviolette team because I think he kind of likes that, but it's a small nit to pick. He's not a high-end ATD coach, but he's also not out of place, and I think it generally a good fit for the team you're icing.

The PK is an issue, as others have mentioned. Not sure I can offer better advice than has already been given. Siebert next to Stewart on that first unit would probably be a good idea. Beyond that, I think you've got the personnel about right.

You're leaning on Babe Siebert an awful lot having him on 1st units straight across, but I think it is the most sensible choice from a talent perspective. How he'll hold up is maybe a good question, but he was a very tough guy who played a long career without any real physical problems, so he can probably take a lot of icetime. This is still probably more than I'd give him in a perfect world, but it's not as bad as it would be for some #2 defensemen to play that kind of minutes. Come to think of it, maybe Pospisil on the 1st unit PK (dropping Boivin to the 2nd) would be a better idea than Siebert.

Overall, a good entry. This team may well eat opponents who cannot keep up with the physical game, though it may run into problems with those that can survive the onslaught, and exploit the so-so penalty kill.

Sturminator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-24-2013, 04:09 PM
  #54
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,813
vCash: 500
My biggest issue with the Gordie Drillon is that his complete lack of defensive play often creates a 4-on-5 situation for your team at even strength when they don't have the puck, so you absolutely need a strong defensive presence from a linemate, and I'm not sure that they have a forward with that kind of defensive ability. In real life, Hap Day put Bob Davidson, who had very little offensive talent, with Apps and Drillon to do the backchecking for the line. Messier is probably their best defensive center, and its tough to break up the devastating Messier-Cook duo.

I think Alf Smith is good defensively, not great, and Stanfield is okay, but I'm not sure if that's enough.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-24-2013, 06:33 PM
  #55
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,813
vCash: 500
Okay, I don't buy Alf Smith as much of a penalty killer and I think he's a good but not great defensive player, but Sturm, why do you think he was "a poor man's Wayne Cashman?" I actually like Smith better than Cashman. I see him as very close to Cashman along the boards, but Smith is faster and more known for his leadership. I think he's also probably better defensively than Cashman and probably a better playmaker. At worst, I see Alf Smith basically being Cashman's equal, but I think he might have more upside.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 03:00 AM
  #56
Sturminator
I voted for Kodos
 
Sturminator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: West Egg, New York
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 7,386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Okay, I don't buy Alf Smith as much of a penalty killer and I think he's a good but not great defensive player, but Sturm, why do you think he was "a poor man's Wayne Cashman?" I actually like Smith better than Cashman. I see him as very close to Cashman along the boards, but Smith is faster and more known for his leadership. I think he's also probably better defensively than Cashman and probably a better playmaker. At worst, I see Alf Smith basically being Cashman's equal, but I think he might have more upside.
I don't think there's any reason to think Smith is on Cashman's level in terms of working the boards, crashing in on the forecheck, prying the puck free, and passing it to the net for a play...which will be very much needed on a line with Drillon. In those terms, I think Cashman is likely Smith's absolute upside, but there are far too many unknowns here to value him that highly, among them the fact that Smith likely never forechecked a day in his life as this doesn't seem to have been done until Tommy Gorman's system brought it into hockey in 1935.

I'm also not the biggest fan of reconstructed assists, as you know, though I agree with you that Smith was likely somewhat better than Cashman defensively. Bottom line is that Cashman is a known commodity, while Smith is very much not. You're probably going to get a bit more checking from Smith, but you have to take a real blue sky view of the guy to think he's on Cashman's level in terms of his other skills.

Sturminator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 03:19 AM
  #57
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,773
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sturminator View Post
Smith likely never forechecked a day in his life as this doesn't seem to have been done until Tommy Gorman's system brought it into hockey in 1935.
Sorry, but that is an absolutely brutal argument, and it goes completely against the whole spirit of the draft.

If we're going to punish all the guys who didn't play under the current rules and systems, we may as well just rename this the "All-Time 1970s-present day Draft".

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 03:22 AM
  #58
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,773
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Okay, I don't buy Alf Smith as much of a penalty killer and I think he's a good but not great defensive player, but Sturm, why do you think he was "a poor man's Wayne Cashman?" I actually like Smith better than Cashman. I see him as very close to Cashman along the boards, but Smith is faster and more known for his leadership. I think he's also probably better defensively than Cashman and probably a better playmaker. At worst, I see Alf Smith basically being Cashman's equal, but I think he might have more upside.
Agreed. Cashman is probably a better board-man, but Smith is better at everything else.

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 03:38 AM
  #59
Sturminator
I voted for Kodos
 
Sturminator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: West Egg, New York
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 7,386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
Sorry, but that is an absolutely brutal argument, and it goes completely against the whole spirit of the draft.

If we're going to punish all the guys who didn't play under the current rules and systems, we may as well just rename this the "All-Time 1970s-present day Draft".
Nonsense. All I'm saying is that in this role, Cashman is a known commodity, and Smith is a projection. Smith has all the tools to be a good forechecker, and I think he would probably be good in that role, but we know that Cashman was great at specifically this job. It is nothing more than placing more value in the certain than the uncertain. Surely this does not go against the spirit of the draft.

Sturminator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 05:46 AM
  #60
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
Agreed. Cashman is probably a better board-man, but Smith is better at everything else.
Eh, I wouldn't say everything else. It's hard to compare exactly, but I don't see a reason to think Smith is better than Cashman at goal scoring. I remember seeing a seventieslord post awhile ago that showed that Alf Smith was as far behind Frank McGee percentage-wise as John Tonelli was behind Mike Bossy - and I don't think anyone thinks McGee is as good as Bossy.

Now that was just goal scoring, not overall offense (I don't think the reconstructed assist project had happened yet), but that does not paint Alf Smith as much of a goal scorer. And that makes sense - he played in an era where players were highly specialized, and Smith's primary job was to battle for the puck by any means necessary (including hitting opponents with his stick, which was for some reason tolerated back then), and then get it to Frank McGee, and later Marty Walsh.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sturminator View Post
Nonsense. All I'm saying is that in this role, Cashman is a known commodity, and Smith is a projection. Smith has all the tools to be a good forechecker, and I think he would probably be good in that role, but we know that Cashman was great at specifically this job. It is nothing more than placing more value in the certain than the uncertain. Surely this does not go against the spirit of the draft.
I'm not entirely sure how I feel about the forechecking thing, so I'll leave it aside for now, and talk about Cashman's best attribute - doing anything possible, including nasty and dirty play, to get the puck out from the boards to his more talented teammates. That's pretty much Alf Smith's thing too, right?

It's possible I'm missing someone obviously, but Alf Smith is pretty much the best board man to play before the 1926 consolidation, right?

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 06:22 AM
  #61
Sturminator
I voted for Kodos
 
Sturminator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: West Egg, New York
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 7,386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
I'm not entirely sure how I feel about the forechecking thing, so I'll leave it aside for now, and talk about Cashman's best attribute - doing anything possible, including nasty and dirty play, to get the puck out from the boards to his more talented teammates. That's pretty much Alf Smith's thing too, right?

It's possible I'm missing someone obviously, but Alf Smith is pretty much the best board man to play before the 1926 consolidation, right?
We have no specific knowledge of how Alf Smith worked the boards. Was he better than Broadbent, Denneny, Oatman, Harris? Who knows? He is described as a physical and quite dirty player, and we think that he was a good playmaker, although I strongly suspect that Ottawa players are overrepresented in SIHR's reconstructed assists project simply because it was a great team that got a lot of exposure, and the best newspaper coverage at the time was coming out of that city, which was the birthplace of hockey. I've said it before, but it bears repeating here: the reconstructed assists project is a methodological trainwreck. The conclusions they reach are akin to aiming your camera at the night sky, taking a single picture, and saying "This is the cosmos."

Going from the quite foggy knowledge we have of Smith to saying specifically that he was a great boardman involves a lot of assumptions. For all we know, Smith's style of play was to rush the puck in open ice, pass it off and then give somebody a two-hander with his stick. Does this sound ridiculous? It probably is, but based on the facts that we actually know, it is no less likely than describing him as a Cashman-style player.

When dealing with players about whom our knowledge is quite general and unrefined, we have to be careful not to project onto them what we want them to be. Smith was fast and physical, and he had some playmaking ability, though how much is anyone's guess. What we know about his checking ability is actually close to nothing. From his bio last year, there is a single game quote:

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Montreal Gazette – March 25, 1907
Alf Smith was the life of the Kenora team, and without him they would have been in poor shape indeed. He rushed and checked like a fiend, bumping Hod Stuart or anyone else who blocked his path with an abandon that pleased the lusty-lunged rooters mightily. He had plenty of speed and did not spare himself.
...and a quote from UH calling him an "all-around" player, which is more-or-less worthless. And that's it. seventies calls him a good two-way player, but the evidence for it is almost nonexistent. He is much more consistently cited for simply being a rough player than for doing a lot of checking.

So what is Smith, really? Can we say he was a better two-way player than a guy like Cashman? The case is extremely thin. Can we say that he was a great boardman, or anything of the sort? Ehhhh...kinda? It's really hard to say. Compared to our specific, detailed knowledge of Cashman's career, Smith is still an amorphous blob.

Sturminator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 07:26 AM
  #62
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sturminator View Post
We have no specific knowledge of how Alf Smith worked the boards. Was he better than Broadbent, Denneny, Oatman, Harris?
Eh, all the quotes about Alf Smith talk about him being a physical menance, and there are a lot of them. I realize there is no specific evidence that he fought for the puck in corners, but he does appear to have battled relentlessly all over the ice. I think it's enough to put him decisively over Oatman and Harris, both of whom have much more vague quotes about their battling.

Denneny and Broadbent I thinnk have much more established physical play and might be up there, though Denneny's so much better as an offensive player than the rest of these guys, I don't think he's really comparable.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 07:48 AM
  #63
Sturminator
I voted for Kodos
 
Sturminator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: West Egg, New York
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 7,386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Eh, all the quotes about Alf Smith talk about him being a physical menance, and there are a lot of them. I realize there is no specific evidence that he fought for the puck in corners, but he does appear to have battled relentlessly all over the ice. I think it's enough to put him decisively over Oatman and Harris, both of whom have much more vague quotes about their battling.
I agree with you, but we also have to take into account that "physicality" in the sense that it was meant in Smith's day is not entirely similar to what we would think of in a modern sense, and specifically involved a lot more fighting and stickwork than is present (or legal) in the game today. I think we should probably give players like Smith the benefit of the doubt in this setting, but it is easy to go too far, and make them into something that they quite possibly were not - another example, perhaps, of the "decadence" of some forms of ATD historiography.

Sturminator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 07:59 AM
  #64
EagleBelfour
Registered User
 
EagleBelfour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,218
vCash: 873
Thank you to everyone that have been commenting Dave & I team. I have a busy schedule, and I will be in Russia in 60 hours, but I will try my best to answer everyone. Part one:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
That is one mean team. You're going to beat the **** out of a lot of people with that lineup.

Biggest issue I can see right away would be the PK. The defence is just OK, and the forwards are pretty weak. Considering the amount of time you'll be short-handed, that could cause some issues.
That was the initial plan

I will agree that the PK do have some issues. We still have a 25th selection to make, but at this point, would a lineup like this be better:

Babe Siebert - Mark Messier
Jack Stewart - Frantisek Pospisil

Stan Smyl - Mel Bridgman
Leo Boivin - Frantisek Tikal

Which would make Babe Siebert and Mark Messier play 1stES, 1stPP & 1stPK. Mark Messier is probably the only, or at least one of the VERY few forwards that can play 1st line minute in every situation and be fine. He have elite longevity, rarely injured. As for Babe Siebert, I wouldn't want him to play 1st line minute in every role. I would move him down on the 2ndPP, which is still using him a lot, but he was a resilient player for a long stretch, again a player rarely injured.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Yeah, unless I'm missing something, Alf Smith has no business being on an ATD penalty kill, let alone the first unit. And Bridgman - Smyl seems below average for a second unit. Messier is a horse, but he's really being heavily relied on here.

On D, Jack Stewart is an awesome penalty killer, but Leo Boivin... meh. You guys really need Babe Siebert on the penalty kill.

I think you're wasting Gordie Drillion by not having him on the first PP - getting garbage goals in front of the net is by far his best skill. Otherwise, the PP forwards are good; lack of a natural PP QB up top hurts though - Pitre and Stanfield are more shooters than QBs.

EB and Dave really made an extreme team. Waves of tough scorers who are going to relentlessly pound the defense at even strength without a rest. Much better at even strength than on special teams, though. I also think lack of a real shut down unit could make it tough to hold a lead - provided the opponent hasn't already given up from the constant physical abuse.

I believe I overestimated the PK abilities of Alf Smith. I wouldn't mind having on my 2ndPK, but 1st PK is a stretch, and something that needs to be fix.

As I wrote earlier, I believe Messier is the only player in the draft that have the abilities and elite longevity/resiliency to play 1stES, 1stPP & 1stPK at this level. Do you disagree? If so, why?

Change made. I will have 'three' defence man patrol the 1stPK unit (ah the beauty of versatility!)

I think we will switch Gordie Drillon and Sid Smith. However, I don't think the lack of PPQB will hurt our unit. These PP unit were built to put the most shot possible on net, as we have two of the best all-time garbage goalscorer/tip-in players. Moreover, we have imposing forwards like Messier, Cook, Lindros that can put rebounds into the net and are physically extremely imposing. With that in mind, what we were focusing to have on the point was players that can put pucks to the net and players with imposing shots, that goaltenders would allow rebounds on. Didier Pitre do own one of the most fierce and precise shot of all-time. Stanfield was renown to be great at putting puck on the net etc ... We are actually extremely satisfy of those PP unit.

A true shutdown unit is always the best option to save a lead. However, this team is not built for 2-1 games. Yes, we may lose leads more often than the usual ATD team, but we will come from behind far often than the usual ATD team. It equals itself in a way, and having three lines that can hurt you offensively is a luxury that few teams have, and a lot of team will have difficulty defending us. If anything, we will be a fun team to watch.





Quote:
Originally Posted by Sturminator View Post
I'll take a crack at this one. This is a very interesting team that will certainly cause its opponents some serious problems. The defense is absolutely ferocious, and the forward lines all have at least one player on them with a quite violent reputation. This is the last opponent that a soft and/or injury-prone team will want to meet in the playoffs, especially if the weakness is at forward.

Defense:

A remarkably aggressive group. Stewart are Siebert are going to be extremely physical, but are below-average as a top-pairing, overall. Stewart is a viable #1 defenseman, but he is definitely on the lower end, while I consider Siebert a bit above the average for a #2. This top pairing will be strong defensively, but won't be that great at moving the puck, I think.

The Pospisil - Boivin second pairing is among the best in the draft. Pospisil is an elite #3 defenseman who has pretty much everything but great mobility. Boivin is a player I have a hard time rating...funny for a guy who is so well established in the ATD, but there still seem to be a lot of unknowns here. On the one hand, Boivin's actual AST voting placements are very suspect, and suggest that he shouldn't be a 2nd pairing defenseman, at all. But on the other hand, we have incomplete voting records for a chunk of his prime years, and he was for most of his career the classic "defensive defenseman on a bad team", and those guys never get the credit they deserve. He's also in the hall of fame, though I don't really know how much that tells us. Anyway, weighing all of the variables, I think Boivin is likely a good to very good #4, though not an elite one. Overall, an excellent second pairing that is very physical and has no clear weaknesses.

Tikal and Greschner seem to be a good match on the bottom pairing. I think you overrated Gresch's defense a bit after making the pick, but he's still a good bottom-pairing guy in this, and matches well with the rough, defensive-minded Tikal. I wish I knew more about Tikal, but we know something about the competition he faced, and he was at least good enough to beat out Ragulin a couple of times, and is generally well-respected for having a long and good career. I think he's a good bottom-pairing guy, as well.

The unit as a whole probably comes out to about average, with the relative weakness and strength of the 1st and 2nd pairings, respectively, counterbalancing one another.

Forwards:

Frightening top line. Jeez...Messier - Cook are going to roll a lot of defensemen, even at this level. Martin is a player who I think has been historically pretty overrated in the ATD, mainly on account of his all-star credentials (which he won in a very weak era for LWs) and his prominence on a famous line. The VsX numbers are not kind to Rick Martin, and I think the reason for that is because he was a limited player with very little playmaking ability. Anyway, unbalanced goalscorers are a bit underrated by points-based VsX numbers, so he's somewhat better relatively than the numbers indicate, and he should get excellent playmaking service from Messier and Cook. Very strong top line at any rate, even if I think Martin is somewhat less a player than his ATD reputation would indicate.

The forward lines aren't as dominant past the top unit, and it's a shame that Pitre didn't use his size and strength to play a rougher style of hockey, because it would have been useful given your team concept. But Lindros will do a lot of hitting for the line, and is generally a quite strong second line pivot. Smith is another pure goalscorer like Martin, and is ok as a second liner. Pitre, I'm not sure about. Ok, he led the NHA in scoring twice, and led the IHL once, though beyond that peak, he's got one more pretty good season where he was 3rd in NHA scoring, and then a bunch of years that don't look all that impressive. I just don't know about Pitre. He's certainly fine as a second liner, but I wonder if he's not still a bit overrated compared to a few of the RWs taken a bit later. Anyway, it's a strong second line.

I have some concerns about the 3rd line. Specifically, I don't know if this is a good way to get the best out of Gordie Drillon at even strength. Drillon was known for cleaning up Apps' trash, and I don't see a whole lot of offensive creativity on this unit, so I don't know how much trash he'll have to clean up at even-strength. In fact, I would strongly consider switching Drillon and Pitre, because I think Drillon next to Lindros could work out very well. Anyway, Drillon is certainly an elite offensive talent for this unit if you choose to leave him there. Stanfield is a kind of meh 3rd liner at even strength, I think, though I think Smith is pretty good in a kind of poor man's Cashman role.

The bottom line is very hardworking, tough and aggressive, although not particularly skilled. You'll probably want to match it against other bottom units when possible, although the way a lot of teams have built depth scoring this year, that may not always work out, either. This line is kind of a battering ram more than anything - a classic energy line - and it will do that job well, but not much else, in my opinion.

Other:

Barrasso is a good goalie for this team. He's been fairly underrated in the ATD for some time and I like where you took him relative to a couple other goalies who went a good bit earlier. With a fairly average defense and not a whole lot of high-end checking from the forwards, he will probably get a fair amount of work, but he was at his best when facing a heavy volume of shots, so it's a good fit. His puckmoving abilities are also pretty underrated by a lot of people who don't remember him clearly, I think, and will help the defense a lot to get the puck moving quickly in the other direction on dump-ins and such. This will be especially helpful behind the first pairing who are not the greatest puckmovers for this level.

I like Peter Laviolette, and think he's definitely an ATD-calibre coach at this point. He runs hard-nosed, disciplined teams who are often something more than the sum of their parts. I'd like to see a little more checking from the forwards on a Laviolette team because I think he kind of likes that, but it's a small nit to pick. He's not a high-end ATD coach, but he's also not out of place, and I think it generally a good fit for the team you're icing.

The PK is an issue, as others have mentioned. Not sure I can offer better advice than has already been given. Siebert next to Stewart on that first unit would probably be a good idea. Beyond that, I think you've got the personnel about right.

You're leaning on Babe Siebert an awful lot having him on 1st units straight across, but I think it is the most sensible choice from a talent perspective. How he'll hold up is maybe a good question, but he was a very tough guy who played a long career without any real physical problems, so he can probably take a lot of icetime. This is still probably more than I'd give him in a perfect world, but it's not as bad as it would be for some #2 defensemen to play that kind of minutes. Come to think of it, maybe Pospisil on the 1st unit PK (dropping Boivin to the 2nd) would be a better idea than Siebert.

Overall, a good entry. This team may well eat opponents who cannot keep up with the physical game, though it may run into problems with those that can survive the onslaught, and exploit the so-so penalty kill.

Thank You for the review. Very much appreciate.

- We see eye-to-eye for the defence man. I have nothing to add whatsoever this is a spot on analysis. I still like Greschner for the role we're using him though

- Nothing to say against any of this. Richard Martin is a lower-end 1st line LW with and elite shot. We picked him around 23X, which might have been a round early for him, but nothing disgraceful. He still brings the skills we were looking for to finish that first line.

- You're underrating Didier Pitre if you only look at his scoring placement. Didier Pitre was a very versatile player who played D & RW. It's hard (if impossible) to find game-to-game position, but I founded on various occasion that Pitre would just switch to defence in the middle of the game, or for a shift. I'm absolutely certain that the years that he played RW, he would still take turns at defence once in a while. Didier Pitre do poccess two elite skills (speed, shot), something that most 2nd liner doesn't have. I believe Didier Pitre is one of the very best 2ndline RW in this draft (the real 2nd liner obviously, not someone like Charlie Conacher). I believe our second line is one of the very best in this draft.

- It's true that Drillon was known for clearing Syl Apps shots, but Drillon isn't a one-trick pony offensively. Drillon had one of the very best shot of his era, something that he will have to rely on a little bit more than he used to in the NHL. Stanfield is an ok 3rd liner in the ATD at ES that holds great value on the PP. However, Alf Smith is an elite 3rd liner in this draft, one of the very best 3rd liner in this draft. I've read the lengthily discussion comparing Cashman & Smith, and I definitely agree that the only thing that Cashman do poccess on Alf Smith is as a cornerman. However, although we have no evidence that Smith could be a cornerman, he poccess all the qualities to be a great one. We don't plan to switch Pitre and Drillon, as Didier Pitre is just too good and a much better overall player than Drillon.

- That 4th line is an ok 4th line that doesn't bring much more than energy. As we built a very strong top-9, they won't be relied on very much and shouldn't see much ice time.

- The others section is pretty much spot on. Don't forget that with Peter Laviolette, we have, IMO, an elite assistant coach in David Bauer, who I think would work perfectly well with Laviolette and with Tom Barrasso we have Edie Giacomin, the best backup goaltender in the draft that should help Barrasso very well in the regular season.

- as for the special team unit, which I agree are an issue, how would this workout?


Mark Messier - Gordie Drillon - Bill Cook
Fred Stanfield - Didier Pitre

Richard Martin - Sid Smith - Eric Lindros
Ron Greschner - Frantisek Pospisil

Penalty Kill:
Babe Siebert - Mark Messier
Jack Stewart - Frantisek Pospisil

Stan Smyl - Mel Bridgman
Leo Boivin- Frantisek Tikal


Take Babe Siebert out of the PP to rely on him more heavily at ES and PK. Mark Messier 1stES, 1stPP & 1stPK, but I believe is the only forward in the draft that has the abilities and the career to do so.

EagleBelfour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 08:35 AM
  #65
BubbaBoot
Registered User
 
BubbaBoot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Mission Hill
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 10,982
vCash: 500
This Alf Smith vs Wayne Cashman argument is one of the first things I bought up when I was asking how we should determine our players.

Do we take them and assume they are playing via today's standard? Do we take in their own era's standard? How do the different eras mesh together?

That forechecking schemes weren't formally introduced and implemented until c.1935 is one of the scenario pitfalls I was wondering about.

I've seen all sorts of arguments now....Players small back then will be much bigger now / different equipment / training methods / assumptions / presumptions / hypotheticals / possibilites / probabilities / speculatives / theoreticals / woulda / shoulda / couldas......

Forechecking could've been used by players individually before then and possibly been interpreted as a player being "tenacious" but we'll never know for sure. Hence the reason for conjecture and requisite arguments to follow.

BubbaBoot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 08:50 AM
  #66
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EagleBelfour View Post

- as for the special team unit, which I agree are an issue, how would this workout?


Mark Messier - Gordie Drillon - Bill Cook
Fred Stanfield - Didier Pitre

Richard Martin - Sid Smith - Eric Lindros
Ron Greschner - Frantisek Pospisil

Penalty Kill:
Babe Siebert - Mark Messier
Jack Stewart - Frantisek Pospisil

Stan Smyl - Mel Bridgman
Leo Boivin- Frantisek Tikal
I think that ideally, you would have invested more heavily in your penalty killers. Having an elite penalty kill would allow your team to throw their weight around with reckless abandon - the Broad Street Bullies could play the way they did because of their elite PK. That said, I like this set up a lot better and's the best you can do with your personnel. Seems pretty average overall.

I don't like Pitre and Stanfield together on the PP at all - Both are big time shooters, but who is going to set them up and QB the thing?

Sid Smith and Rick Martin both seem to be best close to the net, so whoever doesn't have that role (it seems like Martin) will have a hit to his production, but I don't think it's that big a deal.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 08:57 AM
  #67
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,341
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
I think that ideally, you would have invested more heavily in your penalty killers. Having an elite penalty kill would allow your team to throw their weight around with reckless abandon - the Broad Street Bullies could play the way they did because of their elite PK. That said, I like this set up a lot better and's the best you can do with your personnel. Seems pretty average overall.

I don't like Pitre and Stanfield together on the PP at all - Both are big time shooters, but who is going to set them up and QB the thing?

Sid Smith and Rick Martin both seem to be best close to the net, so whoever doesn't have that role (it seems like Martin) will have a hit to his production, but I don't think it's that big a deal.
Having all that muscle and intimidation is going to backfire if they keep getting hit back where it counts - on the scoreboard - trying to kill off the inevitable penalties.

BraveCanadian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 09:45 AM
  #68
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,773
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Eh, I wouldn't say everything else. It's hard to compare exactly, but I don't see a reason to think Smith is better than Cashman at goal scoring. I remember seeing a seventieslord post awhile ago that showed that Alf Smith was as far behind Frank McGee percentage-wise as John Tonelli was behind Mike Bossy - and I don't think anyone thinks McGee is as good as Bossy.
Most of Smith's career was spent as a secondary scorer, so I would agree that he is similar to Cashman in that regard, however, Smith did have his one big season that he lead his league in scoring. Sure it was a small and weak league, but that's still better than anything Cashman ever did.

Moreover, Smith has the big x-factor in my eyes. What happened right after his bis season in which he led his league in scoring? He was banned from Canadian amateur hockey for accepting a cash bonus for winning a Lacrosse championship. So, he just establishes his offensive peak, and he gets banished for the remainder of his prime. From age 24 to 31, he gets to waste away without getting to build upon that goal-scoring title.

How exactly do we handle a situation like that? Like the War? As many have said here before - it's exactly how I was sold on the wartime players - unless a World War breaks out during out ATD season, those players won't be leaving to fight in it. Well, same goes for Smith here - it's not like he'll get suspended for accepting a gift.

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 09:57 AM
  #69
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,773
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sturminator View Post
I agree with you, but we also have to take into account that "physicality" in the sense that it was meant in Smith's day is not entirely similar to what we would think of in a modern sense, and specifically involved a lot more fighting and stickwork than is present (or legal) in the game today. I think we should probably give players like Smith the benefit of the doubt in this setting, but it is easy to go too far, and make them into something that they quite possibly were not - another example, perhaps, of the "decadence" of some forms of ATD historiography.
I agree that we can't project a guy like Alf Smith into a better boardman than Wayne Cashman. In my opinion, Alf Smith was one of the best puck-winners types of his era. That doesn't put him among the very elite of the ATD. Guys like Wayne Cashman or Bert Olmstead are going to be the best of the best, but that doesn't mean Alf Smith is no good.

Something as abstract as puck-winning is something I'm not sure we can rank players exactly. This is something I personally break into tiers. The Cashmans and Olmsteads of the world go in the top tier, and I would call them all comparable. In my opinion, Smith is not in that top tier. Depending on how you want to break down the tiers, I think he would be in the 2nd or 3rd tier of puck-winners.

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 11:05 AM
  #70
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,621
vCash: 8476
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Quote:
Originally Posted by EagleBelfour View Post
I will agree that the PK do have some issues. We still have a 25th selection to make, but at this point, would a lineup like this be better:

Babe Siebert - Mark Messier
Jack Stewart - Frantisek Pospisil

Stan Smyl - Mel Bridgman
Leo Boivin - Frantisek Tikal
Stan Smyl is still going to be a pretty big weak spot on an ATD penalty kill. He did some penalty killing in his career so he's probably the best option you've got, but he's still weak. PK TOI/G finishes of 1, 2, 3, 4, 4 probably isn't the worst in the draft, but it's not good.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 11:33 AM
  #71
DoMakc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 938
vCash: 500
Gentlemen, your 2013 HC Donbass...


Head Coach: Lemaire
Assistant Coach: Robinson
Captain: Goodfellow
Alternates: Mikita, Zetterberg, Graves

Mohns - Mikita - Kurri
B.Stuart - Zetterberg - Martinec
Graves - McKenney- J.Pronovost
Pandolfo - Skov - Keane
Hamill
U. Nilsson

S.Savard - Goodfellow
Neilson - Reise
Keith - Ohlund
Rochefort

Gardiner
Resch


Powerplay:
Graves - Mikita - Kurri
Goodfellow - Mohns

Pronovost - Zetterberg - Martinec
Keith - Savard

Penalty Kill:
Skov - Pandolfo
Savard - Ohlund

McKenney - Keane
Neilson - Reise

Zetterberg-Graves
Savard - Goodfellow

ForwardsESPPPKtotal
Mohns155020
Mikita 154120
Kurri154019
B. Stuart150015
Zetterberg133117
Martinec133016
Graves114116
McKenney110213
J.Pronovost113115
Pandolfo5038
Skov70310
Keane7029
Total12826*14178*

DefensemenESPPPKTotal
S. Savard182424
Goodfellow185124
Neilson170320
Reise170320
Keith112013
Ohlund110314
Total929*14115*


Last edited by DoMakc: 03-25-2013 at 04:24 PM.
DoMakc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 11:54 AM
  #72
Hawkey Town 18
Moderator
 
Hawkey Town 18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,141
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoMakc View Post
ForwardsESPPPKtotal
Mohns155020
Mikita 154120
Kurri154019
B. Stuart150015
Zetterberg133117
Martinec133016
Graves114116
McKenney110213
J.Pronovost113115
Pandolfo5038
Skov70310
Keane7029
Total12826*14178*

DefensemenESPPPKTotal
S. Savard182424
Goodfellow185124
Neilson170320
Reise170320
Keith112013
Ohlund110314
Total929*14115*
[/CENTER]
A good looking team that I'd like to give a full review later, but for now just a couple things on the minutes chart...

Serge Savard has PP minutes, but is not listed on any of your PP units, looks like those should go to Ohlund

You have to give Pandolfo 2 more ES minutes, otherwise you'll be short. Also, the total is off for ES forwards, should be 138 minutes after the Pandolfo adjustment.

Hawkey Town 18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 04:28 PM
  #73
DoMakc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 938
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkey Town 18 View Post
A good looking team that I'd like to give a full review later, but for now just a couple things on the minutes chart...

Serge Savard has PP minutes, but is not listed on any of your PP units, looks like those should go to Ohlund

You have to give Pandolfo 2 more ES minutes, otherwise you'll be short. Also, the total is off for ES forwards, should be 138 minutes after the Pandolfo adjustment.
Thanks. I couldn't decide on the last PP defenceman, in the end Savard won last spot, i just forgot to correct the lineup.

The forward minutes add up to 138 (128 was just a typo on my part). B.Stuart will be doubleshifted a bit with 4th line (basicly he takes that 2 minutes from Pandolfo), since he's not playing on either special team unit and is sowhat underutilised.

DoMakc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 07:23 PM
  #74
Hawkey Town 18
Moderator
 
Hawkey Town 18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,141
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoMakc View Post
Gentlemen, your 2013 HC Donbass...


Head Coach: Lemaire
Assistant Coach: Robinson
Captain: Goodfellow
Alternates: Mikita, Zetterberg, Graves

Mohns - Mikita - Kurri
B.Stuart - Zetterberg - Martinec
Graves - McKenney- J.Pronovost
Pandolfo - Skov - Keane
Hamill
U. Nilsson

S.Savard - Goodfellow
Neilson - Reise
Keith - Ohlund
Rochefort

Gardiner
Resch


Powerplay:
Graves - Mikita - Kurri
Goodfellow - Mohns

Pronovost - Zetterberg - Martinec
Keith - Savard

Penalty Kill:
Skov - Pandolfo
Savard - Ohlund

McKenney - Keane
Neilson - Reise

Zetterberg-Graves
Savard - Goodfellow

ForwardsESPPPKtotal
Mohns155020
Mikita 154120
Kurri154019
B. Stuart150015
Zetterberg133117
Martinec133016
Graves114116
McKenney110213
J.Pronovost113115
Pandolfo5038
Skov70310
Keane7029
Total12826*14178*

DefensemenESPPPKTotal
S. Savard182424
Goodfellow185124
Neilson170320
Reise170320
Keith112013
Ohlund110314
Total929*14115*
Coaching
Above average coaching. Lemaire-Robinson is a proven duo that should work well with the team you have.

Forwards
1st Line: I really like this two-way line that will make you pay. Mikita and Kurri are both great defensively, Mohns brings some muscle and gets the chemistry bonus with Mikita. Kurri usually gets re-united with Gretzky in the ATD, but this is a great use of him as well. These guys should be tough for anyone to play against.

2nd Line: Another well put together line...Martinec is the offense, Zetterberg the two-way/defensive conscience, and Stuart the muscle who can forecheck and dig the puck out for you.

3rd line: One of the better 3rd lines. The first line will be getting the toughest defensive matchups and these guys are definitely capable of handling whoever comes after that. I think McKenney is a very good 3rd line center that will be able to set-up both of his linemates.

4th Line: The weakest of all your lines in terms of where they will rank against other teams' 4th lines, but not a big deal. These guys are pretty much no threat at all offensively, but seem fairly solid defensively.

Overall: A good group of forwards that is the strength of your team and fit well with the team concept.

Defense
1st Pairing: Serge Savard is a low-end #1, but Goodfellow is an above average #2, and they compliment each other well. Certainly not a strength of your team, but they will do just fine.

2nd Pairing: I don't know a lot about Jim Neilson, he seems like a below average #3 to me, but I could be wrong. Even if he is, I think Reise is an above average #4, so it is a fine pairing. They bring some good size as well, which you will definitely need against Quebec.

3rd Pairing: Not sure what to think of this pairing. They are definitely both fine #5 and #6 Dmen, I just don't know how well they work together. While Ohlund is big, I don't really think he's that physical, which is something I'd like to see alongside the smaller Keith. Would like to hear the opinion of others on this one.

Overall: Your defense isn't the strength of your team, but not a weakness either, I'd call it average. Having Robinson as the assistant will be helpful too.

Goaltending
I'm a big fan of Charlie Gardiner. He's not an elite goalie, but definitely above average (boarder-line top 10), which I think is necessary for a defensive minded team. You got good value on him, with IMO a few goalies taken before him that shouldn't have been.

Special Teams

Powerplay: Graves is out of place on a 1st Unit. You probably put him there because you want a big body in front, but I don't like it. Not sure what the best way to go here is, maybe just put Martinec on that unit and just kill them with skill. McKenney should be playing more minutes than Graves, and he is a much better offensive player, so he could fill in on the 2nd unit and replace some of the playmaking that was taken away by moving Martinec up. Zetterberg is another guy who could move up, again with McKenney taking his spot. I don't know if I'd have Graves on the PP at all here. This is probably something to ask about in the lineup advice thread.

The first unit D are good. I think you want Ohlund's shot on the second unit. Not sure between Savard and Keith for the last spot.

Penalty Kill: Forwards seem fine. No one elite, but the fact that you have 3 full pairs that you can roll should help. Unless I'm missing something, Ohlund seems really out of place on a 1st unit PK. Savard is obviously great, but I think one of the guys from the 2nd unit needs to move up. And then, I'm not even sure if Ohlund should be on the 2nd unit? I know he has size on Keith, but I think I like Keith as a better option, who will have a large partner to clear the front of the net.

Summary
The special teams need some tweaking, but I think if that is done this team will be one of the better entries in the draft. A good team concept with the right players to make it work.

Hawkey Town 18 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-25-2013, 07:25 PM
  #75
EagleBelfour
Registered User
 
EagleBelfour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,218
vCash: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
I think that ideally, you would have invested more heavily in your penalty killers. Having an elite penalty kill would allow your team to throw their weight around with reckless abandon - the Broad Street Bullies could play the way they did because of their elite PK. That said, I like this set up a lot better and's the best you can do with your personnel. Seems pretty average overall.

I don't like Pitre and Stanfield together on the PP at all - Both are big time shooters, but who is going to set them up and QB the thing?

Sid Smith and Rick Martin both seem to be best close to the net, so whoever doesn't have that role (it seems like Martin) will have a hit to his production, but I don't think it's that big a deal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyShoe1721 View Post
Stan Smyl is still going to be a pretty big weak spot on an ATD penalty kill. He did some penalty killing in his career so he's probably the best option you've got, but he's still weak. PK TOI/G finishes of 1, 2, 3, 4, 4 probably isn't the worst in the draft, but it's not good.
Thank You for the helpful words. We will try to correct our situation the best we could with our last selection!

EagleBelfour 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 10:06 AM.

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.