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 - Draft Thread VII

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-07-2012, 07:55 PM
  #401
nik jr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Congo-Kinshasa
Posts: 10,526
vCash: 500
my calculations from HSP for '61 TML


shots for per game: 31.54
home: 31.71
road: 31.37

shots against per game: 32.01
home: 29.22
road: 34.8


bower's sv%: .922 (hockeydb says .923)

bower's undrafted backups had .919 and .928. (hockeydb says .918 and .928)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkey Town 18 View Post
I would say the ATD is somewhere inbetween this and NHL TOI averages. IMO the 4th liners on Team Canada are much closer to Team Canada 2nd liners than an ATD 4th liner is to an ATD 2nd liner. Also, the bigger roster and one or two blowout games throw things off a bit.
agree

nik jr is offline  
Old
03-07-2012, 08:19 PM
  #402
Hawkman
Moderator
Deacon Blues
 
Hawkman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 4,106
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalyd Psycho View Post
No. It's your fourth line. I can't see any sensible reason for a coach to give more icetime to the Kurtenbach line. Honestly, none of those three players deserve 3rd line icetime.
In hockey, the third line is the checking line. The fourth line is the momentum line.

Hawkman is online now  
Old
03-07-2012, 08:36 PM
  #403
vecens24
Registered User
 
vecens24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 5,002
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by God Made Me View Post
In hockey, the third line is the checking line. The fourth line is the momentum line.
I see no reason why this is set in stone. Shouldn't your third best line be your third line, therefore be the line with the third most minutes? For instance last year arrbez and I's team rolled four lines pretty solidly (that is, a lot more equally than the numbers of what I jus posted as ideal would indicate), and the 4th line was the "checking" line with Reg Fleming-John Madden-Xxxxxx.

I see no reason why the "checking" line has to be the 3rd. If its the line that is going to play the 3rd most out of your lines, then that is your third line.

vecens24 is offline  
Old
03-07-2012, 08:36 PM
  #404
nik jr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Congo-Kinshasa
Posts: 10,526
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by God Made Me View Post
In hockey, the third line is the checking line. The fourth line is the momentum line.
not necessarily

many teams have used their 1st or 2nd line as the main checking line.

nik jr is offline  
Old
03-07-2012, 08:53 PM
  #405
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
Again, when?

He can't, it is statistical smoke.
So why are you still asking and disputing when this was already answered?

Quote:
No one is disputing he is a good defensive player.

But you can't score or check when you aren't playing, what, 30% of the time?
Sure you can. In the 70% of the time that you are playing.

Quote:
Yeah, just a small detail. Then add in that he never played 80 games... He made it to 70 or more twice, though!
Explain to me how this affects his actual offensive ability. Seems to me this has more to do with his ability to stay in the lineup.

Quote:
If you are using them as a shutdown line against a 1st or 2nd line, you do. And if they aren't capable of generating any offensive of their own.. what else do you do with them?
No, even shutdown 3rd lines don't play that often. I can only think of one instance in history where a 3rd line was played that much.


Quote:
Originally Posted by jarek View Post
Here's an idea.. if you're going to remove Hasek and Roy from the equation for voting finishes when comparing Joseph and Barrasso, why not then do a percentage against number 1 comparison of their total voting points, if they are available?
Because voting points are crap. They are on a 5-3-1 system, which implies that it's 5 times as impressive to be voted 1st as it is to be voted 3rd, or 3 times as impressive to be voted 2nd. If the voting system actually reflected how good the best, 2nd-best and 3rd-best are relative to eachother, the points system would look more like 10-8-7, not 5-3-1.

Quote:
Originally Posted by markrander87 View Post
I lol'd in real life.
I'm sure you did. Tell me again, how did you do in that draft? Which team eliminated you? Which player ran away with the bottom 6 winger all-star voting? which LW that you insisted was better didn't get a single vote in said voting?

You are laughing last, but I laughed first - and best.

You got your snipe in, and I got mine. Now please, let's not turn this thread into a gong show.

seventieslord is offline  
Old
03-07-2012, 08:59 PM
  #406
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,796
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by God Made Me View Post
In hockey, the third line is the checking line. The fourth line is the momentum line.
Traditionally, but not always. IMO, the "4th line as energy line" is a relic of the 70s and 80s when there was not enough talent to fill out the rosters, so teams loaded up the 4th lines with goons, in part to sell tickets. Though having a 4th line energy line is definitely still a viable tactic (hedberg and VCL created a great one on their team).

Anyway, didn't you kind of break the traditional mold yourself when you drafted Pierre Turgeon to center the fourth line?

TheDevilMadeMe is offline  
Old
03-07-2012, 09:04 PM
  #407
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,796
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post


Explain to me how this affects his actual offensive ability. Seems to me this has more to do with his ability to stay in the lineup.
Not everyone here evaluates players on a "per game" basis. Some of us do it on a per-season basis. Some of us use a mix of the two. You seem to evaluate scoring line players on a per-season basis with the vs. 2 method, but then evaluate the offense of checkers on a per-game basis. Which is fine. But not everyone does it that way.

(I used to exclusively use "per season" numbers" but have come around somewhat).

Quote:
No, even shutdown 3rd lines don't play that often. I can only think of one instance in history where a 3rd line was played that much.
Was it the NJ Devils? The 2003 Cup winner's "3rd line" got more ice time than either scoring line. Also, the late 90s Devils were notorious for giving their 3rd line center the most ice time of anyone on the team.

2006 Anaheim is the most recent example of a hardcore checking line being used as such. What was their ice time?

Edit: I think both posters who mentioned high ice times for checking lines were assuming playoff matchups, not normal regular season games.

GMM never said he was hard matching his checking line, so I don't think it even necessarily applies to him.


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 03-07-2012 at 09:16 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is offline  
Old
03-07-2012, 09:16 PM
  #408
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
 
Nalyd Psycho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: No Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,717
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by God Made Me View Post
In hockey, the third line is the checking line. The fourth line is the momentum line.
Nah. The third line is the line that gets the third most icetime. It often breaks down to scoring1, scoring2, checking, energy. But there is nothing written in stone about that. Many teams use second lines as checking line. It depends entirely on the skill level of the lines. And if you're saying the Turgeon line is used as an energy line, eek...

__________________
Every post comes with the Nalyd Psycho Seal of Approval.
Nalyd Psycho is offline  
Old
03-07-2012, 09:20 PM
  #409
nik jr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Congo-Kinshasa
Posts: 10,526
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nik jr View Post
my calculations from HSP for '61 TML


shots for per game: 31.54
home: 31.71
road: 31.37

shots against per game: 32.01
home: 29.22
road: 34.8


bower's sv%: .922 (hockeydb says .923)

bower's undrafted backups had .919 and .928. (hockeydb says .918 and .928)
as expected from these shot numbers, '61 TML were much better at home.

home: 21-6-8
road: 18-13-4


'60 TML
home: 20-9-6
road: 15-17-3

'59 TML
home: 17-13-5
road: 10-19-6

nik jr is offline  
Old
03-07-2012, 09:47 PM
  #410
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,318
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
So why are you still asking and disputing when this was already answered?
Because you're avoiding answering the specific question to get out of admitting that the "adjustment" is not valid.

And if the claim is that it is valid, well then I guess the owners of Cam Neely and Eric Lindros etc. will be quite happy.

BraveCanadian is offline  
Old
03-07-2012, 09:50 PM
  #411
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,796
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
Because you're avoiding answering the specific question to get out of admitting that the "adjustment" is not valid.

And if the claim is that it is valid, well then I guess the owners of Cam Neely and Eric Lindros etc. will be quite happy.
I think it's just as valid to assume Neely and Lindros perform at their per game rates but will miss 1/4 of the games as it is to average out their per season rates and not worry about injuries

TheDevilMadeMe is offline  
Old
03-07-2012, 09:52 PM
  #412
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
Because you're avoiding answering the specific question to get out of admitting that the "adjustment" is not valid.

And if the claim is that it is valid, well then I guess the owners of Cam Neely and Eric Lindros etc. will be quite happy.
The owners of Cam Neely and Eric Lindros got what they paid for (well maybe not Neely's owner - he never gets quite what he pays for).... but Lindros is easily, on a per-game basis, better than all the players taken around him. The catch is that he won't play every game.

Is there a contradiction in what I'm saying? You seem to have this "gotcha" attitude about you here, and I'm not feeling it, bro. I'm not weaseling, I am being consistent.

I said in my last post "Explain to me how this affects his actual offensive ability.". Who's avoiding answering things?

seventieslord is offline  
Old
03-07-2012, 09:56 PM
  #413
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,318
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
I think it's just as valid to assume Neely and Lindros perform at their per game rates but will miss 1/4 of the games as it is to average out their per season rates and not worry about injuries
When you're talking about players that literally could not put together one full season in their entire careers, prorating their per game rates to full seasons doesn't make any sense to me.

That is my big issue with the Erixon scored 27 adjusted ES points per season thing.. it is absolutely untrue.

I would say the same thing about someone telling me Neely scored 43 goals per season.

BraveCanadian is offline  
Old
03-07-2012, 09:57 PM
  #414
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,538
vCash: 500
as for not "letting sleeping dogs lie":

I did not bring up Erixon's offense. Other people did.

As for me apparently thinking (according to Condescending Willy Wonka) that Erixon's offense is underrated:

Erixon's offense was discussed in a way that suggested it was so poor, that the other 191 bottom 6 forwards in the draft would get somewhere between 20 and 45 points in an ATD season, and Erixon would lag behind with 10. When in reality, there are actually forwards in this draft with production levels very similar to his at even strength. There's no doubt he would be very close to the bottom when all is said and done but he wouldn't be the worst, and he would still be reasonably close to many of the players he was behind*

*(on a per-game level, that is. Because he will probably miss 30% of the games)

seventieslord is offline  
Old
03-07-2012, 09:58 PM
  #415
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
When you're talking about players that literally could not put together one full season in their entire careers, prorating their per game rates to full seasons doesn't make any sense to me.
nobody is doing that.

Quote:
That is my big issue with the Erixon scored 27 adjusted ES points per season thing.. it is absolutely untrue.

I would say the same thing about someone telling me Neely scored 43 goals per season.
Is the reason I ruined your day and evening really that I said the word "season" instead of "80 games"? Really?

I clarified it practically right away, so what's your problem?

seventieslord is offline  
Old
03-07-2012, 10:11 PM
  #416
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Not everyone here evaluates players on a "per game" basis. Some of us do it on a per-season basis. Some of us use a mix of the two. You seem to evaluate scoring line players on a per-season basis with the vs. 2 method, but then evaluate the offense of checkers on a per-game basis. Which is fine. But not everyone does it that way.

(I used to exclusively use "per season" numbers" but have come around somewhat).
I use a mix now, more and more lately. Too often the true level of a player's performance is obscured by games they missed.

Quote:
Was it the NJ Devils? The 2003 Cup winner's "3rd line" got more ice time than either scoring line. Also, the late 90s Devils were notorious for giving their 3rd line center the most ice time of anyone on the team.
It wasn't always though, was it? You're right that I was thinking of the 2003 Devils.

Quote:
2006 Anaheim is the most recent example of a hardcore checking line being used as such. What was their ice time?
19.4, 18.6, 17.3. (in games that averaged 63.5 minutes in length)

which would be 18.3, 17.6, 16.3.

seventieslord is offline  
Old
03-07-2012, 10:13 PM
  #417
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,318
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
nobody is doing that.
That is funny because you did.

That is what 27 ES points per season means.

You are claiming that Jan Erixon scored 27 ES points per season.

27 ES points per season.

Or 27 ES per 80 games as you now say, which at least makes it apparent what you have done to arrive at that number.

Then comes the issue of reality.

Quote:
Is the reason I ruined your day and evening really that I said the word "season" instead of "80 games"? Really?

I clarified it practically right away, so what's your problem?
Don't flatter yourself.

I'm not going to argue this all over again like we already did in the other draft.

If you don't see how making claims about how a player compares to others based on per season or per 80 games (or whatever the hell you want to call it) when that player is incapable of playing 80 games.. I don't know what to say.

Is 27 adjusted ES points per 80 games possibly his actual offensive ability.. maybe. Or maybe he would have slowed down playing more games or maybe he would have sped up by getting into the groove.

But it doesn't matter because he simply couldn't do it.

BraveCanadian is offline  
Old
03-07-2012, 10:23 PM
  #418
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
That is funny because you did.

That is what 27 ES points per season means.

You are claiming that Jan Erixon scored 27 ES points per season.

27 ES points per season.

Or 27 ES per 80 games as you now say, which at least makes it apparent what you have done to arrive at that number.

Then comes the issue of reality.
go on.......

Don't flatter yourself.

Quote:
I'm not going to argue this all over again like we already did in the other draft.

If you don't see how making claims about how a player compares to others based on per season or per 80 games (or whatever the hell you want to call it) when that player is incapable of playing 80 games.. I don't know what to say.
If you think that a player who is injured is replaced by a gaping hole and not the next-best player in the lineup.........

seventieslord is offline  
Old
03-07-2012, 10:31 PM
  #419
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,318
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
If you think that a player who is injured is replaced by a gaping hole and not the next-best player in the lineup.........
Nice unrelated tangent. Not biting.

We're trying to compare the players we have selected.

BraveCanadian is offline  
Old
03-07-2012, 10:38 PM
  #420
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BraveCanadian View Post
Nice unrelated tangent. Not biting.

We're trying to compare the players we have selected.
It's absolutely not a tangent. An Eric Lindros-type who scored 70 points in 50 games does make his team better than a Craig Janney-type who scores 70 in 80. You can't just say 70=70. The residual effects throughout the lineup when the Lindros is injured, means that the team isn't actually losing the 42 goals he would participate in, in the 30 games he missed. the actual number is much lower. There was a good study done on this a few years back but of course I forget where I read it.

seventieslord is offline  
Old
03-07-2012, 11:56 PM
  #421
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,796
vCash: 500
Did more research on Gaye Stewart. The vast majority of references to him were simply about him scoring goals and being a star, nothing his stats couldn't tell us. One prominent reference about him being a "speed merchant."

The only references to real physical play that I saw were specific game instances. One when Gaye Stewart and Tom Johnson (a very dirty player) went into the corner together and tussled, both getting roughing penalties. Gaye Stewart was apparently the guy a rookie Gordie Howe fought in his first game, so he didn't shy away from the rough stuff (ago we of course had no reputation at the time though he was large). But the fact that I really had to search to find evidence of Stewart's physical game suggests that it wasn't a big part of his game. Pelletoer's quote about Stewart's "aggression" seems to be based largely on the famous stick swinging incident when Stewart was a rookie, hardly something he should be praised for.

I think Stewart can be thought of a large, very fast goal scorer who doesn't shy away from the physical game but isn't a big part of it, either. He's would be fine as a member of a "puck winning by committee line.". But should not be the designated puck winner of a line.

I added the quotes to the bottom of this post: http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...41&postcount=2

TheDevilMadeMe is offline  
Old
03-08-2012, 12:04 AM
  #422
monster_bertuzzi
registered user
 
monster_bertuzzi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,349
vCash: 500
Gretzky should go before Orr all week if we're holding Lindros's injury troubles against him.

monster_bertuzzi is offline  
Old
03-08-2012, 12:07 AM
  #423
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by monster_bertuzzi View Post
Gretzky should go before Orr all week if we're holding Lindros's injury troubles against him.
Orr didn't have a bunch of injury-shortened seasons. He was having a great career, and then it was pretty much over. So it's not really the same thing. Orr vs. Gretzky is peak vs. longevity. And if you're someone who says "8 seasons is enough to see how good Orr was" and judge his best 8 seasons against Gretzky's best 8 (I am not one of them, simply because I don't believe in pretending the other 12 years of his career didn't happen) then Orr is a slam dunk better player.

seventieslord is offline  
Old
03-08-2012, 01:02 AM
  #424
DoMakc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 938
vCash: 500
Thrashers select Bill "Red" Hay, C.

DoMakc is offline  
Old
03-08-2012, 01:05 AM
  #425
nik jr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Congo-Kinshasa
Posts: 10,526
vCash: 500
Kazan picks G Roberto Luongo.

nik jr is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:25 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.