HFBoards

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

Bob Cole Divisional Finals: Kazan vs. Philadelphia

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-27-2012, 02:26 PM
  #26
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 38,602
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
his first season, 1952 (33 pts in 33 games) is not included. The rest is.

He has 4 more years in 13th-20th in ESP.
Right. Seems like a big part of the Montreal PP but used more defensively at ES. Toe Blake did use the Moore-Richard-Richard line against the opponents's top lines quite often, and it wasn't so much because of Maurice.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2012, 03:48 PM
  #27
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,687
vCash: 8400
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Did Billy actually call Primeau "possibly the best defensive player of his era?"
Pelletier said he was as good a penalty killer and defensive player as there was in his day. Best in his era might be a stretch, but he's still a very good defensive player.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Jagr has the puck way too often to be a liability. Even if his defensive willingness/ability are low, his puck possession means his defensive impact would be more profound than a guy like, say, Nieuwendyk.

I mean, it's not like Ratelle's huge edge on Nieuwendyk makes up the gaps on the wings here; you should have the superior first line but you seem reluctant to give any credit whatsoever.
Since when does being a guy that likes to hold the puck make him a more valuable defensive player than a guy that actually has a reputation for playing defense? I don't agree with that at all. By that logic, Kariya should be a good defensive player as well because he loved to hold the puck in the offensive zone. I'd like to know what others think about this.

If I seemed reluctant to give credit, I didn't mean to be. The fact that there was no bio on Ratelle in the Master Bio thread in addition to the fact that the only mention of him in LOH OR Pelletier of his defensive abilities was that he did it in the Summit Series made me think that his defensive play was not that good. Usually, one of those three sources will say something more than a passing mention in an international tournament about something that a guy was, according to you, very good at.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2012, 03:58 PM
  #28
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,687
vCash: 8400
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
I'm surprised at how strong Modano's Selke record is. 4, 6, 6, 12, 16, and 18 is impressive. I did not think it would be nearly that good. I can't help but think the fact that he was always playing next to Lehtinen that people may have perceived him to be better defensively than he may have been, but I'll give Modano the edge defensively after looking at these finishes.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2012, 04:17 PM
  #29
Hawkman
Moderator
 
Hawkman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 4,165
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyShoe1721 View Post
... Since when does being a guy that likes to hold the puck make him a more valuable defensive player than a guy that actually has a reputation for playing defense? I don't agree with that at all. By that logic, Kariya should be a good defensive player as well because he loved to hold the puck in the offensive zone. I'd like to know what others think about this. ...
I'm not saying Jagr is more valuable defensively than Bob Gainey. What I'm saying is that Jagr is a truly elite puck handler whose size also makes it difficult to knock him off the puck. This combined with strong Dmen like Cleghorne and Chara reduces turnovers. This is the advantage of the puck possession game. Kariya is not in the same league as Jagr and is irrelevant to the discussion. That's what I think about this.

Hawkman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2012, 04:26 PM
  #30
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 38,602
vCash: 500
Kariya and Selanne weren't really big time pick possession players like Jagr - they were more quick strike guys

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2012, 05:21 PM
  #31
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,687
vCash: 8400
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
3rd Lines

Graves and Davidson are fairly similar players. Both are good defensively and physical. The difference between them is in offense, where Graves was a bigger contributor. Graves was on the PP a good amount in NY, but I still think he's got a good sized advantage. He has 7 seasons of adjusted points that are better than Davidson's one best without adjusting games for either. Defensively, Davidson has a better reputation as a pure shadow and checker, whereas I think Graves' defensive value was more of a physical two-way player. I think Graves is the better overall player, but I can see why Kazan would prefer Davidson's shutdown ability to Graves' overall skillset.

Stanfield and Tkaczuk played at basically the same time frame. Tkczuk's career adjusted PPG is .66 over 945 games, and Stanfield's is .647 over 914 games, with neither adjusted for games played. Their numbers appear equal, but Tkaczuk is the better offensive player considering Stanfield played with better linemates in a more offensive role, whereas Tkaczuk was used in a more defensive role. In terms of defense, Tkaczuk gets the advantage as he was an elite defensive player compared to just a good two-way player in Stanfield. Tkaczuk also takes physicality as well. Tkaczuk is the better player because he basically does the same stuff Stanfield does, just at a higher level.

That takes us to Hyland and Nesterenko. I don't think it's a stretch to say Hyland is the much better offensive player, and Nesterenko is the much better defensive player. It comes down to how you want to build your 3rd line when choosing who you think is "better".

Philadelphia's 3rd line is better offensively, and Kazan's 3rd line is better defensively. Deciding which line is better is based on what you prefer from your 3rd line. If you want a more pure checking unit, then Kazan's is the way to go. If you want more of a more balanced line leaning toward offense, then go with Philadelphia's.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2012, 11:20 AM
  #32
nik jr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Congo-Kinshasa
Posts: 10,526
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyShoe1721 View Post
First Lines

I don't think a comparison of Andreychuk and Kariya requires much in-depth work, Kariya is definitely the stronger offensive player here.

Much like Andreychuk and Kariya doesn't require much comparison, Nieuwendyk and Ratelle doesn't either. Ratelle is the much stronger player here.

Usually when you draft Jaromir Jagr, you're going to have the advantage in terms of offense at RW, considering he's the 3rd best offensive RW of all time. But next to Howe, it's a no go. Howe is the better player, both offensively, defensively, and in terms of physicality.
i would compare them differently.

nieuwendyk's role and style of play are more similar to andreychuk's than ratelle's, and kariya's more similar to ratelle's than andreychuk's.

jagr and howe have similar roles.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyShoe1721
The first lines are an advantage to Philadelphia. I think Philadelphia's line is better both offensively and defensively.
i think my 1st line will outscore yours, b/c your line will have to beat better defensive players. yours will have to beat cleghorn and chara and often tkaczuk, davidson and nesterenko.


which of your players will play against my 1st line?

Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyShoe1721
Jagr and Andreychuk are both below average defensively in the ATD, and I'm not big on Ratelle's defensive abilities either. After looking at LOH and Pelletier, the basis of Ratelle's reputation as a good defensive player appears to be based on his work in the Summit Series. It doesn't look there has ever been a comprehensive bio done on hims either. I think this could be a serious problem for my opponent if they get pinned in their own zone against my top 6. This line is going to struggle defensively.
ratelle was recognized as a good defensive player through at least most of his career (not sure about the early part).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Record-Journal: 3-29-1981
In his 20 year career, Ratelle blended his own graceful style with an uncanny ability at both ends of the arena as a scorer and tough defensive checker.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Montreal Gazette: 2-22-1972
Many observers see a resemblance between Ratelle and Jean Beliveau. Ratelle is big and he's a smooth skater, accomplished playmaker, accurate shot and he has defensive abilities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Phoenix: 11-28-1973
Ratelle is difficult to check when he has the puck, and he does as much checking himself as any centre, McCreary (Canucks' coach) notes. A big plus on Ratelle's side is the way he plays on faceoffs. "He must win 80% of his faceoffs," McCreary says. "There wasn't anything I could do to stop him."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Sinden
Jean Ratelle got almost 100 points in both his first two years with us. You know, I've often used his name as players have come along since and pointed out what a great defensive player he was without being an aggressive type of forward. He was a terrific checker. A lot of players who don't have an aggressive nature think you're talking body-checking, but Ratelle is a great example of how you can check so well without necessarily being a body-checker. He brought a lot to this team. He was an excellent faceoff man and more of a creative playmaker than a shooter. He'd get 35 goals while Espo would get around 60, but Jean was able to put a lot of points up there with his playmaking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boston Globe: 3-7-1979
Jean Ratelle is out there. He's out there because of his defensive value. Most fans think of him as a great player on offense and he is. What they miss is his outstanding defensive play.
from the book "The Greatest Players and Moments of the Boston Bruins"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gregg Sheppard
Some people noticed Ratelle's effectiveness with the puck, but they didn't see what a great positional player he was. I very rarely saw an opposing center score a goal from the slot with Jean on the ice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Sinden
I knew he was a good player, but i had no idea how good he was until he joined our team. I always recognized his offensive ability but I hadn't realized he was such an excellent defensive player, too.
in 1976, marcel dionne described ratelle as "a very complete player."



but ratelle's defensive play was not mentioned very often. he was a good defensive player, but not someone who would challenge for a selke. it also seems very likely that ratelle was better defensively in boston. i think boston played a more defensive style than NYR after the big trade, and ratelle was used more as a 2 way C.




ratelle and especially jagr were very good possession players, which i think very much mitigates the defensive weakness of andreychuk and especially jagr, and the weak possession ability of andreychuk.

andreychuk will sometimes be replaced by naslund, who was a much better puck possession player than andreychuk.


Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyShoe1721
They also don't bring much of a physical presence at all. Ratelle wouldn't hurt a fly, Andreychuk was big, but he didn't really use his size much, and Jagr has size as well and uses it, but not at all in a physical way. Jagr is very good at working in the corner and protecting the puck, but this line just doesn't bring any grit on the forecheck or cycle at all.
andreychuk is fine on the boards. he wasn't tonelli, but he was not weak.

ratelle was unphysical and could be intimidated, but was effective on the boards unless he was bullied. that is a problem of ratelle, but i have several players who protected teammates: cleghorn, chara, davidson, nesterenko, ramsey, foligno.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyShoe1721
I think against a physical group like my defensemen, it could limit their effectiveness. Since Jagr is obviously the focal point of this line, you don't necessarily need a guy that will forecheck balls to the wall considering Jagr's abilities in protecting the puck and carrying it into the zone, but if we take away that option for Jagr by pressuring him in the neutral zone, and force Kazan to play more of a dump and chase game, I honestly don't think this personnel could do it.
i think your team is probably a bit too offensive minded to shut down jagr and ratelle in the neutral zone. mats naslund was much much faster and much much more elusive than andreychuk, which should help progress through the neutral zone.


Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyShoe1721 View Post
Second Lines

Stasiuk and Moore play a pretty similar style. They played around the same time frame as well. But, Moore basically does everything Stasiuk does, but at a much higher level. Moore is definitely the better player offensively, defensively, and in terms of physicality as well. Stasiuk has just two years of 70% or more production versus 2nd place(70 and 85). And he didn't really have anything relevant in terms of offensive ability until he was put on the Uke Line with Bucyk and Horvath.

Primeau and Modano is our first actually close comparison. Offensively, Modano gets the edge in terms of longevity, and Primeau gets the edge in terms of peak value. Primeau has two finishes of 100%, whereas Modano's highest is 86. Era definitely needs to be taken into consideration though, as this comparison favors Primeau. Modano's career adjusted PPG is .939 over 1,499 games, and Primeau's(when adjusted for games) is 1.125 over 544 games. Despite Primeau's advantage in peak offense, Modano is likely the better overall offensive player. Defensively, both are very strong players. I think Primeau might have a small advantage in this area because he was known as possibly the best defensive player of his era, whereas Modano was just a strong two-way player. Overall, these guys are both close as players. I'll give a small edge to Modano because I think the difference in offensive is a bit larger than the difference in defense.

I think Palffy is a guy that gets underrated in the ATD because of some of his injury issues, and that he played for teams that were consistently in the dumpster of the NHL. I think he deserve to move up from where he's usually taken. But, he's no Babe Dye. 6x top 2 in Goals pre-consolidation(one 2nd place was post-consolidaton) is not something Palffy can compare to. Both of these guys are basically pure offense. And at offense, Dye does it better.

Philadelphia has the advantage in 2nd lines. The difference in offense on the wings compared to Kazan's advantage offensively at center is what gives Philadelphia the advantage. Philadelphia also probably enjoys a small advantage defensively as well, with the wings basically equaling out and Primeau having an advantage at center.
i agree your 2nd line is better.

i think mine is better defensively, b/c dye was weak and modano is the best of the 6 players. palffy played a 2 way game with LAK, regularly PKed and sometimes played against top lines, but was not outstanding.

i think modano is well above primeau. although primeau's playmaking ability was very important to the kid line, primeau was usually the 3rd best member, meaning he got many easy assists, and he had a very short career. primeau also does not appear in hart voting.


modano was almost always the best player on his line and had a long career. in his prime, modano usually outscored his teammates by a good margin. of course, modano probably would not have outscored his teammates reguarly if he played with conacher and jackson. but he also would have better career numbers if he played with comparable players like selanne and kariya.



as i said earlier, i am hoping my 2 way C's can focus on primeau to reduce the line's production.

Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
Don Cherry was very complementary of Ratelle's two-way play in his book.

He wrote that Buffalo pulled Perreault's line off the ice whenever he sent Ratelle on.
in the book "The Rangers, The Bruins, And The End of an Era," gregg sheppard said in an interview that his line with marcotte and o'reilly always played against top lines, but that he played against GAG line more at home, b/c GAG line often played against boston's top line. he also said ratelle was "very good" on faceoffs.

other C's sheppard said were good on draws: perreault, tkaczuk clarke, mikita


fred stanfield mentioned mikita and sittler as strong on faceoffs. interviewer asked a leading question about clarke cheating on faceoffs. stanfield agreed, said the officials let him do it, and said he does not count clarke as one of the best for that reason.

stanfield (who was apparently also very good on faceoffs) also mentioned esposito, sanderson, rousseau.

interviewer suggested that NYR put out ratelle for most important faceoffs. stanfield said ratelle was physically strong and locked opponents on faceoffs to prevent a quick win.


pete stemkowski mentioned mikita for faceoffs, and said he struggled against clement. he also said clarke cheated regularly.


in 1970, vic stasiuk, then coach of the philadelphia flyers, said clarke was the best faceoff man he has seen since ted kennedy. link

Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyShoe1721 View Post
I'm surprised at how strong Modano's Selke record is. 4, 6, 6, 12, 16, and 18 is impressive. I did not think it would be nearly that good. I can't help but think the fact that he was always playing next to Lehtinen that people may have perceived him to be better defensively than he may have been, but I'll give Modano the edge defensively after looking at these finishes.
i think it is the opposite. splitting votes with lehtinen was one of the main reasons modano did not place higher, especially after carbonneau retired in 2000.

i have said before that modano's selke record underrates him, especially in relation to other star C's like sakic, forsberg, fyodorov and yzerman.

in '01, for example, modano was dallas' primary checking C and PKing F. sakic split that role with yelle, and i think yelle's defensive role was bigger. but sakic was 2nd in selke voting and had the most 1st place votes. imo, sakic's NHL leading +/- was a big reason. modano was 3rd in selke voting.

in '03, forsberg was rarely used on PK (only 12 seconds per game) and was used less in a defensive role than usual in his career. but he led the NHL in +/- and points and finished 4th in selke voting. modano was 6th despite being the top defensive C of one of the best defensive teams.

selke has often had a bias towards +/-.


overpass' bio of modano has some statistical analysis of modano as well as quotes by coaches. http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...9&postcount=58


Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyShoe1721 View Post
3rd Lines

Graves and Davidson are fairly similar players. Both are good defensively and physical. The difference between them is in offense, where Graves was a bigger contributor. Graves was on the PP a good amount in NY, but I still think he's got a good sized advantage. He has 7 seasons of adjusted points that are better than Davidson's one best without adjusting games for either. Defensively, Davidson has a better reputation as a pure shadow and checker, whereas I think Graves' defensive value was more of a physical two-way player. I think Graves is the better overall player, but I can see why Kazan would prefer Davidson's shutdown ability to Graves' overall skillset.

Stanfield and Tkaczuk played at basically the same time frame. Tkczuk's career adjusted PPG is .66 over 945 games, and Stanfield's is .647 over 914 games, with neither adjusted for games played. Their numbers appear equal, but Tkaczuk is the better offensive player considering Stanfield played with better linemates in a more offensive role, whereas Tkaczuk was used in a more defensive role. In terms of defense, Tkaczuk gets the advantage as he was an elite defensive player compared to just a good two-way player in Stanfield. Tkaczuk also takes physicality as well. Tkaczuk is the better player because he basically does the same stuff Stanfield does, just at a higher level.

Philadelphia's 3rd line is better offensively, and Kazan's 3rd line is better defensively. Deciding which line is better is based on what you prefer from your 3rd line. If you want a more pure checking unit, then Kazan's is the way to go. If you want more of a more balanced line leaning toward offense, then go with Philadelphia's.
i think the stats of graves and stanfield are inflated somewhat by their PP scoring. stanfield played the point besides orr on arguably the best PP in history. graves played on a great PP with leetch, zubov and messier. graves will not play on your PP, while stanfield is on the 2nd unit.

i know tkaczuk and sometimes nesterenko played on PP, but i don't have their PP stats.

seventieslord earlier posted stanfield's ES/PP numbers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
at ES he had 142 and 239 (0.59 goals per assist). on the PP he had 57 and 154 (0.37 goals per assist)
those are slightly lower than his career numbers, so they may not include all his time with chicago.

numbers for graves from NHL.com: 408 at ES, 177 on PP, 31 SH. based on numbers, graves' was used most often on PP from '94-'00.

numbers for linden: 554 at ES, 282 on PP, 29 SH. in his best seasons from '91-'96, linden scored a lot on PP.


your 3rd line still has more offensive potential, but i think the difference at ES/SH is smaller than their overall numbers show.

nik jr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2012, 05:37 PM
  #33
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
 
Nalyd Psycho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: No Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,718
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Right. Seems like a big part of the Montreal PP but used more defensively at ES. Toe Blake did use the Moore-Richard-Richard line against the opponents's top lines quite often, and it wasn't so much because of Maurice.
Is that pot shot really needed? Maurice Richard played very good defensive hockey when his coach asked it of him. Most of his career he was asked to focus on scoring. Why is it so hard to believe that Richard can be a contributor on the defensive end?

__________________
Every post comes with the Nalyd Psycho Seal of Approval.
Nalyd Psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2012, 06:29 PM
  #34
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 38,602
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalyd Psycho View Post
Is that pot shot really needed? Maurice Richard played very good defensive hockey when his coach asked it of him. Most of his career he was asked to focus on scoring. Why is it so hard to believe that Richard can be a contributor on the defensive end?
His coach didn't ask him to play D, yet he was matched against the top lines of opponents on purpose? I think that's pretty good circumstantial evidence that his linemates were responsible defensively.

I agree with you that Maurice doesn't seem any worse defensively than than your typical scoring winger, and I know that he was praised as a responsible checker in the last couple of seasons of his career, as his scoring declined

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-29-2012, 07:29 PM
  #35
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
 
Nalyd Psycho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: No Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,718
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
His coach didn't ask him to play D, yet he was matched against the top lines of opponents on purpose? I think that's pretty good circumstantial evidence that his linemates were responsible defensively.

I agree with you that Maurice doesn't seem any worse defensively than than your typical scoring winger, and I know that he was praised as a responsible checker in the last couple of seasons of his career, as his scoring declined
And the Moore-Richard-Richard years were those years where he was praised as a checker. That line was the final 4-5 seasons of his career. He was asked by his coach to play defence and everyone at the time agreed he did an admirable job.

Nalyd Psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2012, 04:43 PM
  #36
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,687
vCash: 8400
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
4th Lines

In a vacuum, Naslund is a far superior player to Fleming. He's a much better scorer, by far. But, Fleming wasn't drafted to be BPA. He was drafted to be a physical pest that can shadow and be good defensively.

Smith and Linden are pretty even, with Smith being better offensively(.779 career adjusted PPG over 1,077 games) than Linden(.632 over 1,382 games) and Linden being better defensively and more physical. I like Linden in a 4th line role more personally, but it depends upon how you want to build your lines.

Wharram is better offensively, Foligno is better defensively and in terms of physicality. Wharram also has the better all star record. In a vacuum, Wharram is the better player. In a 4th line role, Foligno's skill set makes more sense.

Kazan has the advantage in 4th lines in terms of overall talent. Kazan's line basically acts as another scoring line with some defensive ability. Philadelphia's line is more of a checking, physical, defensive line that can chip in some offense when needed. Just like the 3rd lines, it comes down to preference and how the rest of the team is structured when you decide whose you like better.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2012, 04:46 PM
  #37
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,687
vCash: 8400
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
1st Pairing

Cleghorn is a better #1 than Salming, and Chara is much better than Leo Boivin. I don't think I'm making any earth-shattering assumptions there.

Kazan has the advantage in first pairings. Their personnel is simply better. Both pairings will be quite physical, and effective in all areas of the game. But, Kazan's is just better.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2012, 05:25 PM
  #38
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,687
vCash: 8400
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
2nd Pairing

This one will require closer examination. Kazan has chosen to stack their first pairing with their two best defensemen, and I've chosen to split up my two best defensemen. First, let's look at Goodfellow and Desjardins, the two best defensemen on each pairing.

AS Voting

Goodfellow: 2, 2, 3, 5, 5, 7
Desjardins: 4, 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 13*

*One first place vote, 5 voting points

Hart Voting

Goodfellow: 1, 3
Desjardins: None

I like Desjardins a lot as a Flyers fan, and I think he's a very solid anchor to a 2nd pairing here. But, he's no Ebbie Goodfellow. Goodfellow gets the advantage here.

That takes us to Ramsey and Reise. Two big, strong, stay at home defensemen. Here are their AS records:

Reise: 3, 4, 11
Ramsey: 6, 8, 14, 16

14th place came with 4 voting points, four 3rd place votes
16th place came with 6 voting points

Reise's finishes look better, but Ramsey did play in an era where it was quite difficult for defensive defensemen to get AS votes, and Reise was playing in a less deep era. Another thing to consider looking at AS records is that during two of Reise's best years, he made the all-star game based on merit, and we have no voting record beyond the top 4 for those years. From a previous thread:

Quote:
Reise made the all star game on merit in 1951, 1952, and 1953. We don't have the complete voting record for any of these seasons. But, Reise was 4th in AS voting in 51. In 52 and 53, we have nothing beyond the top 4. So, I think it's reasonable to suspect that Reise has 2 pretty good finishes in those 2 seasons as well.
Neither brings very much in terms of offense. One thing to note is that Reise was seen as one of the best defensemen on two cup winning teams, whereas Ramsey only made it past the second round in the twilight of his career in Detroit. Ramsey's all star record may appear more impressive because of era, but when you consider that Reise is missing two good seasons of finishes, and that his teams were more successful, I think Reise may have a slight advantage here, despite the 41 pick gap that separated them.

Overall, 2nd pairings are an advantage to Philadelphia. Goodfellow is better than Desjardins, and Reise and Ramsey are about equal, with a possible slight advantage to Reise.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2012, 06:51 PM
  #39
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,687
vCash: 8400
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
3rd Pairings

Larson and Johansson are both here to be puck-moving defensemen. For once, Reed Larson has a better voting record than the guy he's competing against! Johansson has just two AS votes to his credit in his entire career, a 2nd and 3rd place vote in 92 and 96 respectively. Larson doesn't have a great AS record, but it's better than that. Larson has relevant finishes of 10th, 12th, and 14th. Larson's adjusted PPG is .613 over 904 games, and Johansson's is .48 over 1,109 games. In seventies' study, Larson received a "score" of 25.29 compared to Johansson's 24.52. Larson gets the advantage here.

That takes us to Svoboda and Smith. Here are their relevant AS records:

Svoboda: 9, 13
Smith: 6, 6, 9, 17, 18*, 19, 23

*One Point

I think that's good enough to say Smith is definitely the better defenseman here. Neither one was anything special offensively, with both being able to chip in a bit, and a small advantage to Svoboda in that area. Even when you factor in league size for the AS voting records, I still think Smith definitely has the superior record.

3rd Pairings are an advantage to Philadelphia. Larson has a better AS record and is better offensively than Johansson, and Smith has a better voting record than Svoboda.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2012, 06:58 PM
  #40
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,687
vCash: 8400
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Goaltending

Comparing Bower and Holecek isn't going to be easy. Bower was the 11th goalie selected, and Holecek the 18th. Bower is above average, and Holecek is probably slightly below average. I'll definitely concede an advantage in goaltending to Kazan in this matchup. People have varying opinions on Holecek as a player, ranging from better than Tretiak to I don't know what. I'll just re-post what I've posted the last couple rounds:

Quote:
The biggest thing is that Holecek was voted the best goalie at the World Championships, and was elected to the World Championships all star team more often than Tretiak. He was elected the best goalie in the World Championships five times, whereas Tretiak only won the honor 3 times. Seth Martin won it four times, but in a highly questionable era in terms of competition. The only other player(of any position) to be named the best at the World Championships five times is Fetisov at defense. He was also named to the World Championships All-Star team 5 times to Tretiak's 3. His 5 elections is the most all-time among goalies. And Bobby Hull said he was the best goalie in the world, better than Tretiak and Dryden if that means anything.
I don't expect either backup to play a significant role in this series.

Kazan has the advantage in goaltending. Bower is likely a better goalie than Holecek. We don't have much of a way to compare them directly, so we'll just assume canon is right.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2012, 07:22 PM
  #41
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,687
vCash: 8400
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Coaching

Toe Blake is one of the best coaches ever. Lindy Ruff is one of the worst coaches in the ATD. No argument here. But, Blake is definitely going to have to be working a lot harder in terms of trying to get the matchups he wants out on the ice. I believe my opponent wants to get Davidson/Tkaczuk out against Howe as much as possible, and then probably Stasiuk/Modano if Davidson isn't an option. Then, whichever one doesn't get Howe, the other will get Dye. And he wants to get Chara/Cleghorn out against Gordie as much as possible, which should make for some awesome battles.

One problem this could create for Kazan is that it's going to limit Kazan's first line's ice time. That line has their two best offensive players on it, and because it is not that strong defensively, I don't think Kazan plans on playing it much against my top 6. For Jagr, this could limit his effectiveness. Jagr's game is based on his ability to use his massive butt to protect the puck, and force defenders to be constantly exerting energy trying to get it from him. By the end of the game, they're tired and they can't keep up with his strength, and he uses his ability to protect the puck and get past guys to score. It's what he does best. When Jagr was in his prime, he played huge ES minutes. From 97-98 to 07-08, the highest Jagr ranked among all forwards at ES in ice time was 8th. Will his game be as effective when the defenders may not be as worn down by him not playing as many minutes? This is the biggest advantage that Jagr has over defensemen, his ability to protect the puck. And looking at Kazan's top 6 forwards, they're not very physical, and I don't think they're going to wear down my defense much. The 3rd line could do some damage on the forecheck, but considering they're going to be out against Gordie Howe as much as possible, I don't see them forechecking my defensemen hard that often. And when Jagr is out there, Philadelphia's defensemen are going to punish him down low. Larson had some physicality, and the other 5 were known for being quite physical in their own zone.

What I'm trying to say is, either Kazan is going to be forced to play their 3rd line often, and use their 2nd line in a more defensive role and limit the first line's playing time(which is the heart and soul of their offense) or risk playing the first line against mine and hope that they can hold their own defensively.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2012, 07:46 PM
  #42
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,687
vCash: 8400
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
PP

The forward groups for both PP1 units are the same as the first lines, so there's no need to run a comparison again. Philadelphia's group is the superior group. If Nieuwendyk can be criticized for being a PP production based player, then Andreychuk is certainly deserving of that criticism as well. 42.8% of Andreychuk's goals came on the PP to Nieuwendyk's 38.1%. I just realized that. Andreychuk is already a big weak link on an ATD first line, but on an ATD first line at ES he's even worse. Either way, forwards are an advantage to Philly.

Salming and Cleghorn is a difficult comparison. Cleghorn dominated an era with few offensive defensemen, and Salming was one of the best(but not the best) in one of the strongest eras for offensive defensemen. Percentages wouldn't do a very good job of deciding who was better offensively because Cleghorn had very little competition for scoring supremacy. Their adjusted PPGs are .566 for Cleghorn over 730 games(when adjusted for games played) and .577 for Salming over 1,148 games. Cleghorn does have good years in the NHA that I'm not sure how to factor in. So, Salming produced slightly better for much longer. But, I'm still not sure this is a good comparison because the style of play for defensemen when Cleghorn played was so different that he very well could have scored many more points if he played in another era. Adjusted PPG is the most fair metric I can think of, and it says Salming is better offensively. Desjardins seems out of place on a first unit PP in the ATD. He was a good offensive defenseman, but not deserving of being on a first unit if you ask me. Larson is better offensively. Larson's career adjusted PPG is .613 over 904 games to Desjardins' .525 over 1,143 games.

First PP units are an advantage to Philadelphia. Philadelphia has the better forward corps, and Larson is better than Desjardins. Cleghorn and Salming is up for debate.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2012, 08:00 PM
  #43
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,687
vCash: 8400
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Moore is better offensively than Naslund. Primeau and Smith I believe is an advantage to Primeau as well. Primeau's adjusted PPG is 1.125 over 544 games(when adjusted for games) to Smith's .779 over 1,077 games. Dye and Palffy has already been discussed, and Dye is better.

On the points, I'll give Chara an edge over Goodfellow because of consistent production over the past 8 years of 40+ points. Modano and Stanfield are both forward playing the point. I really don't feel like calculating the numbers, so I'll give Modano an advantage because Philadelphia's unit will be better anyway.

Philadelphia has the advantage on 2nd PP units as well. It comes down to Philadelphia having the superior forwards.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2012, 08:33 PM
  #44
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,687
vCash: 8400
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
PK

Nesterenko and Tkaczuk are both very strong PK forwards, and are better than their Philadelphia counterparts as a whole. Salming is a better defenseman than Chara, but Chara is the definition of what you want as a crease clearer in the ATD. They're about even. Smith and Ramsey were both known for heavy PK usage, both logging 49% over their careers. Ramsey did it for 180 more games, but Smith did it for the dynasty Bruins squad. They're about even.

Kazan has the advantage in first PK units because of their advantage at forward.

Davidson was known as one of the best defensive forwards in the NHL, but we don't have anything on his penalty killing. He should be solid for a 2nd unit, even though I don't see any quotes about him on the PK in his bio. Graves killed 26.6% of his team's penalties over 1,152 games. Linden killed 33% of his team's penalties over 1,382 games. Modano killed 25.6% of his team's penalties over 1,499 games.

Cleghorn and Desjardins are both better than Goodfellow and Reise, respectively in a vacuum. Cleghorn will be better on the PK than Goodfellow, and Desjardins more effective than Reise, but the advantage is definitely smaller than the gap between them in overall play. Reise was known for being a crease clearer and a strong physical presence down low. Rico was more of a smart, cerebral defender. Kazan has the better defensemen.

2nd PK units are a slight advantage to Kazan. Their advantage in defensemen gives them the superior PK unit.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2012, 08:44 PM
  #45
vecens24
Registered User
 
vecens24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 5,002
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyShoe1721 View Post
Coaching

Toe Blake is one of the best coaches ever. Lindy Ruff is one of the worst coaches in the ATD. No argument here.
This is where your argument should have ended instead of trying to cloud it. Yeah, this is probably the biggest mismatch of the series here. Blake + home ice is a massive advantage here over Ruff.

vecens24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-30-2012, 09:03 PM
  #46
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,687
vCash: 8400
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Quote:
Originally Posted by vecens24 View Post
This is where your argument should have ended instead of trying to cloud it. Yeah, this is probably the biggest mismatch of the series here. Blake + home ice is a massive advantage here over Ruff.
Blake will get the matchups he desires more often than Ruff will for sure. Everything else I said is still legitimate. nik jr already said Chara-Cleghorn and the 3rd line will be out against Howe as much as possible, and I assumed that they were going to use their 2nd line in a more defensive role considering they are the only line I would personally trust to go up against Howe or my 2nd line. The point about Jagr and Ratelle getting less ice time and the 2nd line being forced to play defensively is still a legitimate point. It's not like two forward lines can be on the ice at the same time. Either Kazan plays defensively by trying to match their 2nd and 3rd line against my top 6(limiting Jagr and Ratelle's ice time), or they play sort of defensively by matching the 3rd line against one of my lines and letting the other be, hoping their lines can handle it(making Jagr an open target). By forcing Kazan to play the matchup game, I'm already dictating how the game is going to be played. I'm forcing them to deviate from what they want to do. That's why I didn't care about getting a good coach for my team, because I don't need one. Ruff won't be doing much line matching at all. We'll try to keep Howe away from the 3rd line and Chara-Cleghorn when possible, but it's not a huge deal if they have to play against them. That's what our secondary scoring is for.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2012, 12:43 AM
  #47
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,687
vCash: 8400
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Reasons to vote for Philadelphia

-Better 1st line
-Better 2nd line
-Better offensive 3rd line
-Better 2nd pairing
-Better 3rd pairing
-Matchup problem for Kazan that either will limit the ice time of Jagr and Ratelle, or will put them out in a situation where they will have to play some defense, exposing Jagr and Andreychuk
-Better PP units, first and second
-Physical defensemen may wear down Jagr over a long series
-The only other line Kazan could use as a checking line(besides its third line) would be its second line, taking away some of the offense they could provide and putting almost all the responsibility on the first line to score goals

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2012, 10:52 AM
  #48
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 38,602
vCash: 500
I want to hear more about the plans on how to deal with Gordie Howe and Jaromir Jagr.

Kazan's planning on giving Howe large helpings of Chara-Cleghorn, which is wise. The plan is to get Davidson out there against Howe. I would like to know more about Davidson's speed and strength to know if he's up for the task. Also, you said you aren't hard matching, so what's the secondary plan.

Kazan's plan seems to be to play Jagr in as many favorable situations as possible. I realize Kazan has much better coaching, but I would like to hear more about how Philly wants to deal with Jagr, who is clearly the second best player in the series.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2012, 11:49 AM
  #49
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,839
vCash: 500
Andreychuk and Nieuwendyk are both extremely underwhelming all-time options for a first line at ES, this is true. But simply looking at the percentage of goals they scored in their careers on the PP is not a "big picture" comparison, plus there is another important factor being overlooked.

I think that looking at their points, and looking specifically at their primes, would make more sense. I also think that instead of looking at percentages we would probably want to see what those raw figures are.

Andreychuk had 871 points in 834 games between 1984 and 1994. 370 were on the PP and 497 were at ES. (4 SH) (.60 + .44 +.00 = 1.04)

Nieuwendyk had 762 points in 759 games from 1988 to 1998. 295 were on the PP and 454 were at ES. (10 SH) (.60 + .39 + .01 = 1.00)

I could adjust these figures using overpass' numbers or HR's numbers but we are talking about a predominantly 80s player and a predominantly 90s player; I have reason to distrust comparisons made between these two groups of players using standard adjusted numbers. However, these two periods overlap six years, with Andreychuk playing 4 years before the overlapping period and Nieuwendyk playing 4 after. There should be an adjustment but it is minor. In fact, it is probably right in the 4% range.

I'll test that theory. According to this, http://www.quanthockey.com/TS/TS_GoalsPerGame.php - The difference in average league scoring over these overlapping periods actually turns out to be 10% (7.35/6.66) and we know that about half of the changes in league scoring manifest themselves in the top half of top line players. So the adjustment should be about 5%. You could say Nieuwendyk's figures adjust to (.63 + .41 + .01 = 1.05)

So, in their primes, adjusted for era, these guys are extremely similar producers in all situations. Nieuwendyk was a little more prolific at ES, and Andreychuk was a little more productive on the PP.

But, with all that said.... Andreychuk's production in his prime is not that far off from most 2nd line LWs and he wouldn't really look out of place there. Nieuwendyk's prime production is actually quite far off from most 2nd line centers and I'd personally be quite disappointed to end up with him in that role. In this case, Nieuwendyk is a 1st line center, and too far out of his depth. It's not really a fair comparison just putting the numbers of a center up against those of a LW, is it?

On the PP, they are fine. Without looking at the numbers of a bunch of other players, I can pretty confidently say they are two of the better PP scorers of the PP stats era (they are 21st and 45th all time in adjusted PP points on overpass' sheet). But at ES, one is not that far below average and one is an anchor, in relation to expectations of a 1st line.

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2012, 12:01 PM
  #50
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,574
vCash: 500
There are a number of teams with extremely underwhelming 1st and 2nd liners that have advanced this year..

BraveCanadian 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 03:30 PM.

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.