Maybe you guys know something I don't on this guy, but this guy strikes me as someone that can be a very good defensive defenseman in this league...played in the 20's and 30's, got some all-star voting...couldn't find a good picture...
Maybe you guys know something I don't on this guy, but this guy strikes me as someone that can be a very good defensive defenseman in this league...played in the 20's and 30's, got some all-star voting...couldn't find a good picture...
D Ted Graham
You pretty much listed everything I know about him.
Never had Graham on my radar, going all the way to the Single-A draft, 2000 picks in; never read a dang thing about the guy in any history book either. Check your indexes to see if he's even mentioned in those history books you have but haven't read.
There are several renowned and well respected undrafted defensemen.
Making a stat pick might make sense when they have multiple 1st and 2nd place finishes in some category or other. Beyond top-3 or top-5 it definitely seems like a big reach certainly not worth much more than having two respected hockey minds giving glowing quotes about a guy's career.
Never had Graham on my radar, going all the way to the Single-A draft, 2000 picks in; never read a dang thing about the guy in any history book either. Check your indexes to see if he's even mentioned in those history books you have but haven't read.
There are several renowned and well respected undrafted defensemen.
Making a stat pick might make sense when they have multiple 1st and 2nd place finishes in some category or other. Beyond top-3 or top-5 it definitely seems like a big reach certainly not worth much more than having two respected hockey minds giving glowing quotes about a guy's career.
I dont think there is anything special with Ted Graham. I agree with you there is definitly better defensemen (from what I can tell) out there. Graham seems more of a AA pick.
I dont think there is anything special with Ted Graham. I agree with you there is definitly better defensemen (from what I can tell) out there. Graham seems more of a AA pick.
Doesn't he have one of the best all star records left? I think he had 2 top 10s off the top of my head.
With our seventh pick, 101st overall, the Winston-Salem Polar Twins select:
Jocelyn Guevremont, D
Top-shelf offensive talent and deadly on the PP. Capable of playing well in his own zone. Guevremont ensures that the Polar Twins will have steady offensive flow from at least two defensive pairings, and will always have a strong quarterback on the ice during PP opportunities.
NHL All Star Game 1974
Fringe Norris and All-Star consideration in 1972, 1974 and 1976.
- Broke Bobby Orr's rookie defensemen points record in 1972.
- Consistently top-10 among defensemen in scoring during the early-to-mid 1970s.
- Recognizing his defensive deficiencies, he became a reliable two-way defenseman in the second half of his career. His +/- made a remarkable swing from -42 to +47, while his offensive numbers remained respectable.
- The only defenseman teammate who outscored him in a full season was Jerry Korab.
- First draft pick in Vancouver Canucks history.
- Career cut short by a dispute with Rangers management.
Yeah. I personally don't think he was the best available, but he was on our radar. He's definately a solid top-4 in my opinion.
I find the all star voting to be more objective evidence that a couple of LOH quotes or whatever. As long as you don't abuse it by doing something like making a big deal out of a single vote
I do think the voting needs to be supplemented by information about how the player actually played though. Rememeber how reluctant I was to draft Doug Young until I finally found evidence as to his style of play
I shouldn't have felt icky at the thought of picking Craig Janney in the 800s. He quite clearly had the best offensive resume of all post-expansion centers remaining, both regular season and playoffs. (among recently selected centers, only Apps comes close in the regular season but falls far short in the playoffs) - Go back 50 picks to Barry Pederson and you have a guy with credentials more in line with Janney. (Pederson has more of a dropoff after his six best seasons, but I doubt anyone cares that much)
I would have figured this out in time for my next pick, but of course Janney was taken anyway. So the point is, I just want to take back that comment. There shouldn't be any doubt that at pick 895 he is well worth the negatives.
I preferred App to Janney. Dreakmur preferred Janney to Apps.
Both were at or near the top of our list for our next pick if they fell through
Edit: Neither is as good as Bill Thoms though
Agree. Comparing offensive resumes of pre-expansion guys to post-expansion is not easy (In fact, I keep separate lists now), but Thoms has a sizeable edge on any available pre-expansion NHL center; more than Janney’s edge on the next tier of guys.
I've been reading about the 1933-34 Stanley Cup final recently. It appears that Teddy Graham, Doug Young, and Walter Buswell were all used heavily by Detroit in the first two games. Burr Williams was the fourth defender but played less often. Graham and Buswell were the starting pairing, going with Detroit's top line against Chicago's top line, and Young and Williams were the second pairing. But in any big situations it was two of Graham, Buswell, and Young out there. (The detailed writeup in the newspaper mentions the lineups sent out at several points in the game.)
Detroit used five forwards for their power plays, so their defenders weren't asked to contribute much to the attack. Although Doug Young scored the winning goal in Game 3 on a long shot (for some reason this is missing from the official NHL stats.)
Chicago used their innovative forechecking system and short shifts by forwards to smother Detroit's transition game and force their defence into turnovers. Detroit probably could have used some better puck moving defencemen. They moved Ebbie Goodfellow from second line centre back to right defence for the third game to replace Williams, and won that game. Goodfellow remained on defence for the fourth and final game, but Detroit lost.
Tommy Gorman wrote an article after the final in which he stated that he expected every NHL team to move to a more aggressive forechecking system to match the Hawks. I wonder if this was a cause of several forwards moving back to defence in the mid-1930s - to add more skill and puck-moving ability to beat the forecheck. It certainly seemed to work for Detroit, as they would win two Cups with Goodfellow on the blueline.
I've been reading about the 1933-34 Stanley Cup final recently. It appears that Teddy Graham, Doug Young, and Walter Buswell were all used heavily by Detroit in the first two games. Burr Williams was the fourth defender but played less often. Graham and Buswell were the starting pairing, going with Detroit's top line against Chicago's top line, and Young and Williams were the second pairing. But in any big situations it was two of Graham, Buswell, and Young out there. (The detailed writeup in the newspaper mentions the lineups sent out at several points in the game.)
Detroit used five forwards for their power plays, so their defenders weren't asked to contribute much to the attack. Although Doug Young scored the winning goal in Game 3 on a long shot (for some reason this is missing from the official NHL stats.)
Chicago used their innovative forechecking system and short shifts by forwards to smother Detroit's transition game and force their defence into turnovers. Detroit probably could have used some better puck moving defencemen. They moved Ebbie Goodfellow from second line centre back to right defence for the third game to replace Williams, and won that game. Goodfellow remained on defence for the fourth and final game, but Detroit lost.
Tommy Gorman wrote an article after the final in which he stated that he expected every NHL team to move to a more aggressive forechecking system to match the Hawks. I wonder if this was a cause of several forwards moving back to defence in the mid-1930s - to add more skill and puck-moving ability to beat the forecheck. It certainly seemed to work for Detroit, as they would win two Cups with Goodfellow on the blueline.
Great stuff. The speculation about this being a cause of the movement of former forwards to the blue line is probably worth a post in the dishing the dirt thread
I shouldn't have felt icky at the thought of picking Craig Janney in the 800s. He quite clearly had the best offensive resume of all post-expansion centers remaining, both regular season and playoffs. (among recently selected centers, only Apps comes close in the regular season but falls far short in the playoffs) - Go back 50 picks to Barry Pederson and you have a guy with credentials more in line with Janney. (Pederson has more of a dropoff after his six best seasons, but I doubt anyone cares that much)
I would have figured this out in time for my next pick, but of course Janney was taken anyway. So the point is, I just want to take back that comment. There shouldn't be any doubt that at pick 895 he is well worth the negatives.
Barry Pederson. By age 22 had 92.107,116 point seasons then - Missed majority of 1984-85 due to surgery to remove benign tumour from shoulder. The tumor operation reduced him to a defensive role for a few years than retirement
1983-84 season 3rd in AST voting behind Gretzky and Trottier,ahead of Savard, Stastny, Hawerchuk and the usual early eighties centers. Also had series support for Hart and Selke voting.Note his 1984 playoff performance, especially against Buffalo.
Note the performance level of his linemate Rick Middleton and Middleton's performance after Pederson's surgery.
Legit #1 center, much better overall game than Jannet who never had a defensive game.
Barry Pederson. By age 22 had 92.107,116 point seasons then - Missed majority of 1984-85 due to surgery to remove benign tumour from shoulder. The tumor operation reduced him to a defensive role for a few years than retirement
1983-84 season 3rd in AST voting behind Gretzky and Trottier,ahead of Savard, Stastny, Hawerchuk and the usual early eighties centers. Also had series support for Hart and Selke voting.Note his 1984 playoff performance, especially against Buffalo.
Note the performance level of his linemate Rick Middleton and Middleton's performance after Pederson's surgery.
Legit #1 center, much better overall game than Jannet who never had a defensive game.
Well, he should have been taken before Janney, and he was, so let's not make a big deal of this here. I was clear I was speaking only in terms of offense.
Even after taking era into consideration, Pederson's two 100 point seasons are better than anything Janney did. But Janney has five of the next best seven seasons between them.
I shouldn't have felt icky at the thought of picking Craig Janney in the 800s. He quite clearly had the best offensive resume of all post-expansion centers remaining, both regular season and playoffs. (among recently selected centers, only Apps comes close in the regular season but falls far short in the playoffs) - Go back 50 picks to Barry Pederson and you have a guy with credentials more in line with Janney. (Pederson has more of a dropoff after his six best seasons, but I doubt anyone cares that much)
I would have figured this out in time for my next pick, but of course Janney was taken anyway. So the point is, I just want to take back that comment. There shouldn't be any doubt that at pick 895 he is well worth the negatives.
It seems flat out weird a guy like Janney produced as well as he did in the playoffs with the reputation he had. I had a hard time downgrading him on my longlist when I saw how decent it really was.
It seems flat out weird a guy like Janney produced as well as he did in the playoffs with the reputation he had. I had a hard time downgrading him on my longlist when I saw how decent it really was.
Playoffs were the reason my co-GM preferred Janney to Syl Apps Jr, but keep in mind who Janney was passing to in the playoffs
