I can't come up with a detailed report because, honestly, Tretiak and Fetisov are the only advantages I see for Kimberley. Aside from that, I believe Minnesota is superior in every way.
__________________
Every post comes with the Nalyd Psycho Seal of Approval.
I can't come up with a detailed report because, honestly, Tretiak and Fetisov are the only advantages I see for Kimberley. Aside from that, I believe Minnesota is superior in every way.
Pretty much, even though Bugg's top 6 is very skilled and will make Lehman look like a sieve a couple of the games in the series.
Pretty much, even though Bugg's top 6 is very skilled and will make Lehman look like a sieve a couple of the games in the series.
I highly doubt it. Lehman was aces when he could see the action. I have done a lot to mitigate that and Bugg's team is not designed to challenge for the crease. Their best crease crasher (Mikhailov) is smaller than my smallest d-man (Tikal) and he'll mostly match up against Hatcher or Clapper. His hardest shooters are on the blueline, where they'll be out of position five on five if they try to snipe. If that is my one weakness, and I don't believe it is a weakness, Kimberley can't capitalize on it at all.
I can't come up with a detailed report because, honestly, Tretiak and Fetisov are the only advantages I see for Kimberley. Aside from that, I believe Minnesota is superior in every way.
You forgot a few.
Cowley is obviously better than Lemaire. Ragulin easily tops Duncan. Maltsev belongs ahead of Zetterberg, at least for now. And his whole 4th line is arguably better than yours throughout. I hope I don't sound like I'm picking apart your lineup because I'm not. But it's pretty tough to be superior to your opponent in 23 of 25 roster spots. Even Leaf Lander's team has more than 2 head to head advantages.
Cowley is obviously better than Lemaire. Ragulin easily tops Duncan. Maltsev belongs ahead of Zetterberg, at least for now. And his whole 4th line is arguably better than yours throughout. I hope I don't sound like I'm picking apart your lineup because I'm not. But it's pretty tough to be superior to your opponent in 23 of 25 roster spots. Even Leaf Lander's team has more than 2 head to head advantages.
Maltsev isn't even an LW, he's a C/RW playing his off wing. Cowley as an individual may be better, but as a whole the Twin City Express is the stronger line. I'll take Holik over Almetov, Holik is quite underrated. His peak value actually exceeds his more famous brother.
But I can't dispute that Ragulin is the better #3...
I could. Heck. I could argue that my #6 is better seeing as some people at the time may have had that opinion. (No one says Tikal is better than Ragulin, but they do say Tikal is the best European d-man of the 60's.) The problem is that the main argument is to argue against early 60's European hockey and I'm not a huge fan of that. Duncan does have the higher peak value. But, that can be said of some #1 defencemen...
Maltsev isn't even an LW, he's a C/RW playing his off wing. Cowley as an individual may be better, but as a whole the Twin City Express is the stronger line. I'll take Holik over Almetov, Holik is quite underrated. His peak value actually exceeds his more famous brother.
But I can't dispute that Ragulin is the better #3...
yeah, I should have noticed this about Maltsev... Cowley's still better if we're just pointing out individual players, which was what you did. I knew you would come back and say Holik is better than Almetov, that is definitely possible.
.
