HFBoards

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

ATD 2013 Lineup Assassination Thread - Ray Scapinello Division

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-26-2013, 05:24 PM
  #1
Rob Scuderi
Registered User
 
Rob Scuderi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 2,618
vCash: 500
ATD 2013 Lineup Assassination Thread - Ray Scapinello Division

Ray Scapinello Division
6. Bring Back Scuderi - Pittsburgh Athletic Club
14. jkrx & KingForsberg - Philadelphia Firebirds
22. nik jr. - University of Alaska Nanooks
30. BillyShoe1721 - Philadelphia Flyers

Rob Scuderi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2013, 05:25 PM
  #2
Rob Scuderi
Registered User
 
Rob Scuderi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 2,618
vCash: 500
Pittsburgh Athletic Club

Coach: Cecil Hart

Bert Olmstead - Jean Beliveau (C) - Andy Bathgate
Sweeney Schriner - Bernie Morris - Steve Larmer
Red Berenson (A) - Neil Colville - Jim Pappin
Ryan Walter - Thomas Steen (A) - Jimmy Ward
Barney Stanley, Murph Chamberlain

Brian Leetch - Alexei Kasatonov
Barry Beck - Pat Stapleton
Willie Mitchell - Frank Patrick
Ryan Suter, Bryan McCabe

Chuck Rayner
John Ross Roach

PP1:
Olmstead - Beliveau - Morris
Leetch - Bathgate

PP2:
Schriner - Colville - Larmer
Patrick - Stapleton

PK1:
Berenson - Larmer
Beck - Kasatonov

PK2:
Steen - Walter
Leetch - Mitchell

Rob Scuderi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2013, 05:29 PM
  #3
BraveCanadian
Registered User
 
BraveCanadian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,388
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bring Back Scuderi View Post
That is some first line. Woah baby.

BraveCanadian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-26-2013, 06:46 PM
  #4
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,634
vCash: 8400
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
This is going to be the division from hell. Thank god we're doing cross-divisional playoffs because the team that finishes 3rd in this division could be the best team in another division.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-27-2013, 12:17 AM
  #5
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,634
vCash: 8400
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bring Back Scuderi View Post
Pittsburgh Athletic Club

Coach: Cecil Hart

Bert Olmstead - Jean Beliveau (C) - Andy Bathgate
Sweeney Schriner - Bernie Morris - Steve Larmer
Red Berenson (A) - Neil Colville - Jim Pappin
Ryan Walter - Thomas Steen (A) - Jimmy Ward
Barney Stanley, Murph Chamberlain

Brian Leetch - Alexei Kasatonov
Barry Beck - Pat Stapleton
Willie Mitchell - Frank Patrick
Ryan Suter, Bryan McCabe

Chuck Rayner
John Ross Roach

PP1:
Olmstead - Beliveau - Morris
Leetch - Bathgate

PP2:
Schriner - Colville - Larmer
Patrick - Stapleton

PK1:
Berenson - Larmer
Beck - Kasatonov

PK2:
Steen - Walter
Leetch - Mitchell
This team is a real contender. Very solid entry.

Forwards

Terrifying first line. Has all the elements you need and is oozing offensive talent. Smaller defensemen and checking lines could have trouble handling Beliveau and Bathgate's size with Olmstead's grinding ability. Morris is finally getting drafted where he deserves to be as maybe the second best offensive player in PCHA history. Schriner is a very solid winger for a 2nd line. That Calgary Herald quote is a nice one, I thought maybe I'd see more about two-way play later in the bio, but then realized it was saying he was better defensively than Busher Jackson, which doesn't say too much. His lack of a Hart record is still rather confusing, considering his scoring exploits and might say something about his game aside from scoring, but we just don't know. Larmer rounds the line out well. The top 6 is a little light on two-way play, with Larmer being the only guy I'd call a good two-way player, and Beliveau a small plus defensively. But offensively, they are very potent.

I'm not sure what the purpose of the 3rd line is. Berenson is a good two-way player, but his four best and 6th best offensive seasons all came at center(going by HR). The only one at LW was in 67-68. He should still be able to chip in some points and check fairly well. Colville has some evidence to call him a decent two-way player, but I'd say he was definitely more offensively-leaning. I remember when I had Mac Colville in the AAA draft last year there was a quote saying he was the one that did all the backchecking on the line. Pappin looks like a decent scorer with a little grit and a plus, but not much, defensively. I guess a third scoring line that could be use as a secondary shutdown line at the end of game situations after your first shutdown line goes out? They'll probably score more goals than most 3rd lines, but probably aren't as good defensively as most. Jimmy Ward certainly seems like he deserved the bump, and his linemates are both pretty gritty guys that were two-way players as well. A line full of guys that were pretty good two-way guys, but not elite defensively. They're not an elite shutdown unit, but should passably get the job done.

Defense

Leetch is on the tail end of #1s in this, so you did a smart thing in grabbing an above average #2 in Kasatonov. This pairing will definitely feed into your team concept of the five man attack, and will get the puck to your forwards very effectively. Kasatonov seems to have been able to handle big forwards and use his body, but wasn't actually that much of a hitter, instead using his body very technically and strategically instead of laying people out. Leetch might have benefited from somewhere that played more of a real physical game, but it still works. Stapleton is a solid #3, and Beck a good #4. Like your top pairing, they will both be able to supplement your forwards with good outlet passes. Solid typical ying-yang bottom pairing. No real holes I see other than maybe a lack of physicality on the top pairing and the fact that Leetch is a very low end #1.

Goaltending

With such a talented group of skaters, it's no surprise that goaltending is this team's biggest weakness. Rayner is near the bottom in terms of starters, but you got good value for him where he was taken. Roach is a decent but nothing special backup.

Coaching

Your team fits Cecil Hart's style to a T, very well done in executing a roster that fits his style. Expect a true 5 man attack from this team with its defensemen that can move the puck, and strong forwards.

Special Teams

PP units both look solid, no surprise considering how explosive your team is. The PK forwards are pretty underwhelming and might be the team's biggest weakness along with goaltending. I see all of those guys are preferably second unit guys, with Berenson being passable next to a good partner. Using 40 games a cutoff point, here is how many times each guy was top 4 in PK TOI/G among forwards, and how many NHL seasons they had:

Larmer: 7 of 13 years(1, 2, 3, 1, 2, 2, 2)
Berenson: 10 of 11 years we have data(2, 3, 4, 3, 1, 3, 2, 2, 3, 1)
Walter: 8 of 13 years(3, 1, 4, 4, 3, 4, 2, 1)
Steen: 7 of 12 years(1, 3, 1, 3, 3, 1, 2)

Most of them did not kill penalties throughout their entire careers. I took out seasons they did not play at least 40 games, or else these numbers would look worse. I don't see anything elite here, and I think your PK forwards are going to be your biggest weakness.

Overall

A team with a dynamic offense, and a build that fits their coach's style. A mobile defense that can get the puck to the forwards and support them. Strong power play. Only drawbacks are weak PK forwards, goaltending, and a below average #1 defenseman.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-27-2013, 12:50 AM
  #6
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,974
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyShoe1721 View Post
A team with a dynamic offense, and a build that fits their coach's style. A mobile defense that can get the puck to the forwards and support them. Strong power play. Only drawbacks are weak PK forwards, goaltending, and a below average #1 defenseman.
I mostly agree with your review, but I think BBS has another potential weakness you aren't seeing, and it's something a lot of GMs seem to be doing this time - lack of a real shut down unit. Even if he doesn't want to linematch for some reason, it's still very useful to have a unit that can take key defensive zone draws and that can close out leads when the other team has the goalie pulled. It doesn't need to be a unit in your bottom 6, but given the personnel he has on his top lines, I really would have liked to see more shut down ability from his bottom 6. You touched on it when you reviewed his third line, but it also goes to defensemen - he seems to lack a real shut down pairing. Now I think some people underrate Brian Leetch's defense - he was better defensively than someone like Paul Coffey, but still, I don't think you really want him on an ATD shut down pairing, and I would imagine Pat Stapleton is really no better. Kasatonov and Beck are definitely the guys to stay back when Leetch/Stapleton rushes, but they seem like more all-rounders than pure shutdown guys.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-27-2013, 02:15 AM
  #7
Rob Scuderi
Registered User
 
Rob Scuderi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 2,618
vCash: 500
Thanks for the review Billy, solid as always.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyShoe1721 View Post
This team is a real contender. Very solid entry.

Forwards

Terrifying first line. Has all the elements you need and is oozing offensive talent. Smaller defensemen and checking lines could have trouble handling Beliveau and Bathgate's size with Olmstead's grinding ability. Morris is finally getting drafted where he deserves to be as maybe the second best offensive player in PCHA history. Schriner is a very solid winger for a 2nd line. That Calgary Herald quote is a nice one, I thought maybe I'd see more about two-way play later in the bio, but then realized it was saying he was better defensively than Busher Jackson, which doesn't say too much. His lack of a Hart record is still rather confusing, considering his scoring exploits and might say something about his game aside from scoring, but we just don't know. Larmer rounds the line out well. The top 6 is a little light on two-way play, with Larmer being the only guy I'd call a good two-way player, and Beliveau a small plus defensively. But offensively, they are very potent.
You hit the nail on the head about the Schriner-Jackson backchecking quote. Seems nice, but then you realize what's actually being said. There's a few other quotes in his bio that suggested he floated a bit so I think he was probably weak defensively. I'm more hesitant to consider his Hart record damning though. He finished 3rd in 1935-36 and then didn't finish in the top 5 in 1936-37. The Americans missed the playoffs that 36-37 year and none of his teammates finished in the top 5 voting we have.

I think Olmstead needs more credit for his defense though. Skating is the only thing I can knock him for.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Montreal Gazette - 4/21/1958
It is a tribute to the shrewdness of Frank Selke in obtaining Bert from the Detroit Red Wings some years ago. Since that time he has become a major cog in the big Canadien wheel. Always known as one of the top playmakers in the league, Bert's usefulness does not stop there. He is also an excellent penalty killer and one of the best back-checking wings in hockey.
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Windsor Star (Jack Dulmage) - 3/25/1961
The loss of Bert Olmstead due to a knee injury suffered in a collision with Howe, complicates Imlach's problem of checking the big Detroit right winger.

In the first game, Imlach, at the start employed the Olmstead line against Howe. Abel accepted this arrangement, countering the Frank Mahovlich line with the Ullman unit...But after a while, Imlach moved Mahovlich against Howe. This suited Abel better. "I'd sooner have it that way...But darned if no sooner he does that than he comes back with Olmstead. So right there I decided to hold the line. That's why I pulled Howe off and sent out Ullman's line.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NHL.com (Red Fisher) - 1/19/2009
The Leafs had put Bert Olmstead on Geoffrion. Olmstead, in a twist, was a former Canadien who had held Gordie Howe off the score sheet some years earlier when he had reached the 49-goal mark. And for two periods, Olmstead worked his magic, holding Geoffrion to only one shot in each period.
Quote:
I'm not sure what the purpose of the 3rd line is. Berenson is a good two-way player, but his four best and 6th best offensive seasons all came at center(going by HR). The only one at LW was in 67-68. He should still be able to chip in some points and check fairly well. Colville has some evidence to call him a decent two-way player, but I'd say he was definitely more offensively-leaning. I remember when I had Mac Colville in the AAA draft last year there was a quote saying he was the one that did all the backchecking on the line. Pappin looks like a decent scorer with a little grit and a plus, but not much, defensively. I guess a third scoring line that could be use as a secondary shutdown line at the end of game situations after your first shutdown line goes out? They'll probably score more goals than most 3rd lines, but probably aren't as good defensively as most.
The point of the third line was to put Neil Colville to use. He played on a line that worried about possessing the puck and I didn't want to build a shutdown line around him, instead I wanted to have more of a two-way line that could make use of the chances he generated. I think this concept fits him and my coach better. I agree Berenson will lose some offense playing at wing, but I see him as the best checker on this line and was willing to take that hit. Berenson would fill any role you want if it meant helping the team win. Pappin won a Stanley Cup and led the playoffs in scoring as a member of Toronto's shutdown line so I think he has defensive value too. However I'm seriously wondering if Jimmy Ward may be a better fit here, but I'm not sure.

Quote:
Jimmy Ward certainly seems like he deserved the bump, and his linemates are both pretty gritty guys that were two-way players as well. A line full of guys that were pretty good two-way guys, but not elite defensively. They're not an elite shutdown unit, but should passably get the job done.
Steen seemed to pretty valuable on the cycle so I wanted to fit him with gritty players who were also defensively capable. I agree this isn't a serious shutdown unit, but it's the best my squad has without juggling lines for sure.


Quote:
Goaltending

With such a talented group of skaters, it's no surprise that goaltending is this team's biggest weakness. Rayner is near the bottom in terms of starters, but you got good value for him where he was taken. Roach is a decent but nothing special backup.
Right, below average goaltending for sure. I was one pick off getting Luongo as the backup

The biggest thing for me was getting a goalie who fit into my team's concept and I'm pretty happy with snagging Rayner even though he's probably a bottom five starter. His puckhandling skills are exactly what my team needs to be successful.


Quote:
Special Teams

PP units both look solid, no surprise considering how explosive your team is. The PK forwards are pretty underwhelming and might be the team's biggest weakness along with goaltending. I see all of those guys are preferably second unit guys, with Berenson being passable next to a good partner. Using 40 games a cutoff point, here is how many times each guy was top 4 in PK TOI/G among forwards, and how many NHL seasons they had:

Larmer: 7 of 13 years(1, 2, 3, 1, 2, 2, 2)
Berenson: 10 of 11 years we have data(2, 3, 4, 3, 1, 3, 2, 2, 3, 1)
Walter: 8 of 13 years(3, 1, 4, 4, 3, 4, 2, 1)
Steen: 7 of 12 years(1, 3, 1, 3, 3, 1, 2)

Most of them did not kill penalties throughout their entire careers. I took out seasons they did not play at least 40 games, or else these numbers would look worse. I don't see anything elite here, and I think your PK forwards are going to be your biggest weakness.
I think Berenson's a true first unit guy (40% usage in the years we have numbers for and used as a defensive specialist explicitly praised for his PK work in MTL), but agree my pk forwards are the biggest weakness of my team. I tried to avoid drafting guys who took a lot of penalties to compensate for this.

Scouting reports spoke of Steen's PK abilities and Walter is the faceoff man he needs to thrive in that role. Larmer's usage isn't special, but his Selke voting and PK results were pretty good so I really prefer him to drafting a Pandolfo/Kelly Miller type that weren't good enough to get past the PK specialist role in the NHL.

Here's a pnep chart: Top 3 Team That Had The Best PK % Each Season...Top 2 Forwards Who Had The Most PK Ice Time With That Teams
Player#
Craig "Rammer" Ramsay 9
Don Luce 6
Ed "The Shadow" Westfall 5
Guy "Carbo" Carbonneau 5
Bob "Le Capitaine" Gainey 5
Doug "Ironman" Jarvis 5
Bobby "Clarkie" Clarke 4
Dirk "Duke" Graham 3
Mark "Mess" Messier 3
Stephane "Sandbox" Yelle 3
Mike "Keaner" Keane 3
Ron Lee "Dog" Wilson 3
Kris "Nails" Draper 3
Steve "Gramps" Larmer 3
Bill Collins 3
Brian "Rollie" Rolston 3
Steve "Stevie Wonderful" Yzerman 3
[/quote]
I cut his list off at three, but here's the full list.

Rob Scuderi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-27-2013, 02:39 AM
  #8
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,974
vCash: 500
You're right BBS, Olmstead doesn't get enough credit for how good he was defensively. I don't think he's an elite defensive player by any means, but he was a very good one. On the other hand, I don't think Andy Bathgate gets enough criticism for how poor he was defensively. Beliveau seems like something of a plus.

Anyway, your top line is absolutely awesome offensively, though I do think Beliveau was better on the PP than at even strength, that's really faint criticism as Beliveau was absolutely dominant on the PP.

And your second line is better offensively than most. You're right that the praise for Schriner being better defensively than Busher Jackson isn't saying much. Steve Larmer is a good defensive conscience, but again the line is much better offensively than defensively.

I don't know. I get the strategy to build around Neil Colville, and from your bio, he sure seems like a solid two-way puck possession center and great third liner on a team that didn't necessarily need the third line for matchups. I could see him as a second liner, as long as he didn't have to carry the offensive load for the line. But given how dominant your top two lines are offensively, and how mediocre they are in their own end as a group, I really do think getting a more specialized bottom 6 might have been a good idea.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-27-2013, 03:06 AM
  #9
Rob Scuderi
Registered User
 
Rob Scuderi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 2,618
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
You're right BBS, Olmstead doesn't get enough credit for how good he was defensively. I don't think he's an elite defensive player by any means, but he was a very good one. On the other hand, I don't think Andy Bathgate gets enough criticism for how poor he was defensively. Beliveau seems like something of a plus.

Anyway, your top line is absolutely awesome offensively, though I do think Beliveau was better on the PP than at even strength, that's really faint criticism as Beliveau was absolutely dominant on the PP.

And your second line is better offensively than most. You're right that the praise for Schriner being better defensively than Busher Jackson isn't saying much. Steve Larmer is a good defensive conscience, but again the line is much better offensively than defensively.

I don't know. I get the strategy to build around Neil Colville, and from your bio, he sure seems like a solid two-way puck possession center and great third liner on a team that didn't necessarily need the third line for matchups. I could see him as a second liner, as long as he didn't have to carry the offensive load for the line. But given how dominant your top two lines are offensively, and how mediocre they are in their own end as a group, I really do think getting a more specialized bottom 6 might have been a good idea.
Hart's teams seemed to rely on their speed to go all-out throughout the game and wear teams down. That definitely doesn't seem like a conventional ATD team, but I tried to fit it for better or worse. I definitely may have gotten too cute, but I think I did myself well getting Rayner and having one of Leetch/Stapleton/Patrick on the ice at all times.

I just don't think Hart would ever hardmatch a defensive line for as much time as the opposition plays their top line. It seems so opposite of what he was about.

I really think I have to live or die by my top line and go power on power when it's even or my team is trailing. Hart played four forwards and one defenseman when Montreal was trailing until they tied it up in the 1931 Stanley Cup against Chicago so he wasn't risk-averse by any means. Bathgate sucks hard defensively as you pointed out, but he can do good work as the guy cheating offensively against top lines who have less a defensive presence than Olmstead-Beliveau. It's not like he's a center who cheats either thankfully.

This is going to be a problem if I face the Fighting Saints for example, but slow teams with questionable defense should be feasted on by my team.

I think I can afford line juggling when my team is carrying a lead near the end of the game though. Olmstead/Berenson-Beliveau/Berenson-Larmer would probably be the best fit in that case.

Rob Scuderi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-27-2013, 03:19 AM
  #10
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,974
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bring Back Scuderi View Post
Hart's teams seemed to rely on their speed to go all-out throughout the game and wear teams down. That definitely doesn't seem like a conventional ATD team, but I tried to fit it for better or worse. I definitely may have gotten too cute, but I think I did myself well getting Rayner and having one of Leetch/Stapleton/Patrick on the ice at all times.

I just don't think Hart would ever hardmatch a defensive line for as much time as the opposition plays their top line. It seems so opposite of what he was about.

I really think I have to live or die by my top line and go power on power when it's even or my team is trailing. Hart played four forwards and one defenseman when Montreal was trailing until they tied it up in the 1931 Stanley Cup against Chicago so he wasn't risk-averse by any means. Bathgate sucks hard defensively as you pointed out, but he can do good work as the guy cheating offensively against top lines who have less a defensive presence than Olmstead-Beliveau. It's not like he's a center who cheats either thankfully.

This is going to be a problem if I face the Fighting Saints for example, but slow teams with questionable defense should be feasted on by my team.

I think I can afford line juggling when my team is carrying a lead near the end of the game though. Olmstead/Berenson-Beliveau/Berenson-Larmer would probably be the best fit in that case.
Do you know how Hart used Pit Lepine, who was in Montreal for almost all of Hart's time there?

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-27-2013, 03:23 AM
  #11
Rob Scuderi
Registered User
 
Rob Scuderi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 2,618
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Do you know how Hart used Pit Lepine, who was in Montreal for almost all of Hart's time there?
No, but I'll definitely have to look because that could shed more light.

edit: I checked the newspapers and couldn't find anything about Lepine serving as a shadow or matching up. He anchored the second line with different wingers including Mantha, Gagnon, and Joliat at times. Hart was a big fan of him though and thought he could be a star without playing behind Morenz further suggesting his offense was probably better than his record shows.


Last edited by Rob Scuderi: 03-27-2013 at 01:38 PM.
Rob Scuderi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-27-2013, 06:18 PM
  #12
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,634
vCash: 8400
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721

Philadelphia Flyers
Coach: Pete Muldoon
Captain: Danny Gare
Assistant Captains: Eddie Oatman, Scott Niedermayer

Alexander Ovechkin-Cyclone Taylor-Eddie Oatman
Kevin Stevens-Joe Thornton-Joe Mullen
Dave Trottier-Jean Ratelle-Danny Gare
Gregg Sheppard-Butch Goring-Ron Stewart
Ray Whitney, Mike Richards, John Ferguson

Brad Park-Lionel Hitchman
Scott Niedermayer-Vitaly Davydov
Kevin Hatcher-Bob Armstrong
Doug Barkley

Grant Fuhr
Andy Moog


PP1:Alexander Ovechkin-Joe Thornton-Joe Mullen
Brad Park-Cyclone Taylor

PP2: Kevin Stevens-Jean Ratelle-Eddie Oatman
Scott Niedermayer-Kevin Hatcher

PK1: Butch Goring-Ron Stewart
Brad Park-Lionel Hitchman

PK2: Dave Trottier-Gregg Sheppard
Vitaly Davydov-Kevin Hatcher

PK3: Butch Goring-Ron Stewart
Lionel Hitchman-Bob Armstrong

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-27-2013, 06:34 PM
  #13
nik jr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Congo-Kinshasa
Posts: 10,526
vCash: 500
UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA FAIRBANKS NANOOKS


Head Coach: Tommy Ivan
Assistant Coach: Dave Tippett

#22 Steve Shutt - #7 Norm Ullman - #10 Guy Lafleur
#62 Patrik Elias - #26 Peter Stastny (A) - #6 Harry Hyland
#9 Murray Murdoch - #91 Steven Stamkos - #18 Vladimir Vikulov
#21 Don Marcotte - #25 Keith Primeau - #15 Harold "Mush" March
#8 Peter McNab, #19 Jason Arnott

#44 Chris Pronger (C) - #3 Ehrhardt "Ott" Heller
#5 Mike Ramsey (A) - #2 Harry Cameron
#55 Vasili Pervukhin - #28 Kjell Samuelsson
#14 Mattias Norstrom

#20 Ed Belfour
#34 Miikka Kiprusoff


PP1:
Stamkos - Stastny - Lafleur
Pronger - Cameron

PP2:
Shutt - Ullman - Elias
Pervukhin - Heller

PK1:
Marcotte - Primeau
Ramsey - Pronger

PK2:
Murdoch - March
Samuelsson - Heller

PK3:
Ullman - Elias
Ramsey - Pronger

nik jr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-28-2013, 09:00 PM
  #14
Rob Scuderi
Registered User
 
Rob Scuderi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 2,618
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyShoe1721 View Post

Philadelphia Flyers
Coach: Pete Muldoon
Captain: Danny Gare
Assistant Captains: Eddie Oatman, Scott Niedermayer

Alexander Ovechkin-Cyclone Taylor-Eddie Oatman
Kevin Stevens-Joe Thornton-Joe Mullen
Dave Trottier-Jean Ratelle-Danny Gare
Gregg Sheppard-Butch Goring-Ron Stewart
Ray Whitney, Mike Richards, John Ferguson

Brad Park-Lionel Hitchman
Scott Niedermayer-Vitaly Davydov
Kevin Hatcher-Bob Armstrong
Doug Barkley

Grant Fuhr
Andy Moog


PP1:Alexander Ovechkin-Joe Thornton-Joe Mullen
Brad Park-Cyclone Taylor

PP2: Kevin Stevens-Jean Ratelle-Eddie Oatman
Scott Niedermayer-Kevin Hatcher

PK1: Butch Goring-Ron Stewart
Brad Park-Lionel Hitchman

PK2: Dave Trottier-Gregg Sheppard
Vitaly Davydov-Kevin Hatcher

PK3: Butch Goring-Ron Stewart
Lionel Hitchman-Bob Armstrong
1st Line
Good top unit, Taylor's a great offensive catalyst. Ovechkin's goalscoring should be a great compliment here and he has the wheels, along with Taylor, to burn slower defenders. Oatman has absurd longevity and brings the glue guy qualities to round the line out. He had a nice total of assists in the PCHA which should be a boon to his linemates talented at finishing. I'd have had a really hard time with Gare up here so I think you made out pretty well.

Second Line
Thornton's basically a top line center so started over very strong in that regard. I don't love his wingers though. I think Mullen's basically an average second line winger who worked his butt off and will be an adequate triggerman for Jumbo Joe's passing. I want to love Stevens for what he meant to the Penguins, but I have a really hard time with him in the ATD. He has 5 seasons of VsX scores above 50 which is really rough, and the Lemieux factor makes it even worse. I know he suffered a horrible injury that slowed him down, but at the same time I can only give him credit for what he ended up accomplishing. I think all in all he's a pretty weak top sixer in this thing. I think this line grades out as average to above average at best. Mullen's a solid second liner, but this line is going to be really dependant on Thornton to create chances offensively.

Third Line
Ratelle's slumming it on a third line. I think he's a very good second liner who could pass as the third member of a top line. Gare is used to playing on a checking line and his even-strength scoring should be a good fit on the third line. Trottier's a good agitating presence that will make this line very unpleasant to play against. My one criticism would be is he more of a fourth liner than third? What makes him better than teammate Jimmy Ward? I think this is a pretty good, not great, defensive line that can put home some of the chances Ratelle creates.

4th Line
In a recurring theme, I think Goring is very talented for his role and capable of being bumped up a line. Sheppard and Stewart are good role players that can bolster a PK unit. Goring's stickhandling abilities should help this line eat up time and all three are capable defensive players who can hold their own when the opposition has the puck. And not that I think you necessarily need it but how physical were Sheppard and Stewart?

Spares
Ray Whitney, Mike Richards, John Ferguson
Really like all three of these spares. Richards could start as a fourth line center easily, you did a really good job of selling Whitney despite the modern nitpicking of his intangibles that seems to plague his all-time value, and Ferguson is a good goon type.

1st Pair
Park's a very good #1 who can do it all. I'd say excellent or elite, but we should probably leave that for the top 10 guys which Park is just outside of. Hitch is really more of a good #3 than top pair guy, but that's exactly how you drafted him and simply preferred to split your top two. Both guys can skate and Hitchman will really knock guys around as Park plays the man (God I'm so clever). Hitchman knew how to stay back with a partner who ventured up ice so he'll help Park take his chances. Hitchman prevents this pair from being better so I think it's probably average despite Park's stature. Hap Day's getting called a weak #2, is Hitchman any better?

2nd Pair
Nieds would work well on a top pair so he's a great asset on the second unit, everyone knows his game. Davydov is a really interesting player, seems like a Soviet defender who took care of his own end first and foremost. Seems like he liked to block his shots and muscle guys around. Being praised for his skating will make this unit able to keep up with quick lines too. He's probably a solid #4 and I think this is a very good second pair with Niedermayer leading the way.

Third Pair
Hatcher's got a lot of things going for him and some things he was maligned for. You can say that for so many bottom pairing guys and I think it says something that he's probably your worst defensive defenseman. I don't think he's a liability as much as just soft, which would be totally fine with me. I think he's a good #5 who can move the puck and help out on the powerplay. Armstrong is a guy I had my eye on and I think he's a great compliment to Hatcher. The physical righty can lean on Hatcher's abilities in the transition game and provide the element he's missing. I think Hatcher stands out more among 5s than Armstrong and 6s, but I see this is a very solid bottom pair.

Spare
Short-career, lots of all-star votes. That's Doug Barkley and I don't have a problem with him. The only thing that could be problematic is if two guys on your blueline go down. Barkley's lack of longevity makes me wonder if he needs another guy backing him up but we're talking about a hypothetical #8 defender so...

Goalies
Fuhr's essentially a better Barrasso I think. They have their detractors, but they both showed their worth in the playoffs and Fuhr didn't falter at times like Tommy B did. Fuhr played on a "run and gun" club in his career so maybe Muldoon's more balanced approach will give him an easier time. You also have to give Fuhr his credit in the puckmoving department. Feeding your forwards or Park/Niedermayer will make life that much easier in Philly. I have Fuhr around #20 all-time so he's a below average in the grand scheme, but a proven commodity in the postseason and far from bottom 5 material. Moog I'm much less thrilled about. If there's one weakness in Fuhr it was the regular season and I'm not sure Moog brings a lot to the table. This criticism becomes moot when the playoffs roll around though.

PP
That's a scary top unit. Park and Taylor are great pointmen and Thornton and Ovechkin will be deadly up front. Ovechkin better be roving around because keeping that shot open will make it tough to stick to your pointmen. Mullen's the weakest member here but he's insulated very well.

Again really like the defenders on the second unit, but more of a drop to your forwards. Really like Ratelle, Oatman's good, Stevens doesn't do much for me. That said he's just there to screen the goalie and chase down pucks so he's who you want as the weakest member of the unit.

PK
I might like your PK units even more. Goring killed a ton of penalties, and Stewart seems like the consummate PKer. Park and Hitch should get the job down on the backend as well. Sheppard is another guy with really high PK usage and Trottier seems to have the skillset to kill penalties. I wondered about Hatcher but he killed 51% of his teams' penalties for 8% better than league average. That should work. Davydov should thrive on the PK with his skating ability and temperament.

Overall
+Basis of your team, you said you cared about getting centers and defenseman and you did a great job of it

+Balanced team that should be able to execute Muldoon's gameplan, you didn't really cheat towards offense or defense and each of your defensive pairings have a puckmover and conservative guy

+Special teams, you should be able to capitalize on opponent's mistakes and kill off your own

-Wingers, I'd prefer Mullen to be the weakest member of a top six and Stevens not to be in mine at all. I might have forgone Ratelle for a winger with how quickly they seem to dry up. I'm not sure about Trottier's place either.

-Splitting your 1/2 D hamper your pairings a bit. Davydov works for me so Niedermayer makes out ok, but I had Hitchman with Orr last year and don't know if he makes the grade next to Park.

-Regular season goaltending, Fuhr is better when the chips are down and Moog isn't special. I have Rayner though so it's almost throwing stones from a glass house to be critical of your netminder.

Rob Scuderi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-28-2013, 10:20 PM
  #15
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,634
vCash: 8400
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Quote:
Originally Posted by nik jr View Post
UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA FAIRBANKS NANOOKS


Head Coach: Tommy Ivan
Assistant Coach: Dave Tippett

#22 Steve Shutt - #7 Norm Ullman - #10 Guy Lafleur
#62 Patrik Elias - #26 Peter Stastny (A) - #6 Harry Hyland
#9 Murray Murdoch - #91 Steven Stamkos - #18 Vladimir Vikulov
#21 Don Marcotte - #25 Keith Primeau - #15 Harold "Mush" March
#8 Peter McNab, #19 Jason Arnott

#44 Chris Pronger (C) - #3 Ehrhardt "Ott" Heller
#5 Mike Ramsey (A) - #2 Harry Cameron
#55 Vasili Pervukhin - #28 Kjell Samuelsson
#14 Mattias Norstrom

#20 Ed Belfour
#34 Miikka Kiprusoff


PP1:
Stamkos - Stastny - Lafleur
Pronger - Cameron

PP2:
Shutt - Ullman - Elias
Pervukhin - Heller

PK1:
Marcotte - Primeau
Ramsey - Pronger

PK2:
Murdoch - March
Samuelsson - Heller

PK3:
Ullman - Elias
Ramsey - Pronger
Forwards

You've got the chemistry bonus of Shutt and Lafleur here, if it weren't for that I'd say Shutt belongs nowhere near a first line in the ATD. He's historically been drafted way ahead of where his offense justifies, and I'm not sure he even fell far enough considering he was playing with Lafleur and Lemaire. Ullman is similar to Lemaire, but better offensively and worse defensively, probably a bit grittier too. Considering there wasn't much puckwinning on the real line, and this line has more, it should be okay. It'll be better offensively than the real thing, but a bit worse defensively. 2/3 of an elite first line with Shutt a distant third.

Stastny is a strong 2nd line center, Elias a good defensive conscious that is still strong offensively. A previous bio indicates some grit for Stastny and two-way play, but I'm not sure I buy that. I think he may have developed that at the end of his career, but I'm not sure. He'd be much more valuable if you could prove he was like that his whole career. Two guys biased towards playmaking, and Hyland is a goalscorer that can finish off their passes. He's a bit below average as far as 2nd liners go, most likely. I don't see much grit or puckwinning on this line, unless you can substantiate Stastny's toughness, or find more on Hyland than I did last year(which was basically one quote calling him a "tough little bugger".

For Stamkos to be valuable here, you have to surround him very well, you seem to have done it reasonably well. Vikulov is the small, diminutive playmaking right wing that plays the role of Marty St. Louis, with the one key difference that he was not a guy willing to battle in the corners like Marty. Murdoch provides a defensive conscious(although not as good as I'd like, he could use a good bio to see if he really deserved that retro Selke) and is more of a playmaker, which helps Stamkos. In Stamkos' career, he's basically had four linemates. Martin St. Louis his entire career at RW, and his LWs were Ryan Malone(rookie year), Steve Downie(09-10, 10-11) and Teddy Purcell(11-12, 12-13). How does Murdoch compare to them? He's not as tough as Malone or Downie, that's for sure. But, Purcell is a cupcake and Stammer is playing great, so history tells us you don't need much grit, but in the ATD, I think you need it, especially because of that small, subtle difference between St. Louis and Vikulov(besides talent) of corner work. I think this line could really suffer because it doesn't have a guy willing to dig.

This is the closest thing you've got to a checking line. They're all pretty physical, willing to forecheck and sort of play defense by pinning the other team. I could buy Marcotte as a guy on a real shutdown line, but I don't know buy Primeau and March making up the other 2/3 of a good checking line, especially considering you don't have any other lines I'd be willing to use at the end of a game to send out against the other team's best players to shut it down. I could buy Primeau if he was with another very good defensive player, but I don't see March as that guy. I like Keith as a Flyers fan. He's got two relevant Selke finishes, 6th and 8th, which are good. A good crash and bang line with solid two-way play, but when this is the main shutdown line(and really your only option), it's lacking IMO.

Overall, I see a general lack of toughness throughout the top 9. Norm Ullman is really the only guy I see in your top 9 that I would call gritty, or has the ability to win pucks. You could give Peter Stastny a little bit of grittiness, but really not much. Overall, they could get pushed around by bigger defenses, or larger checking forwards. I also see an overarching problem of matchups. Your 4th line is the only one I would call overall "good" defensively. Ullman's two-way play cancels out Lafleur's struggles in that area, and Shutt got a little better defensively as his career went on. The second line your second best defensive line with a strong two-way player in LW, a guy that was probably a small plus at center, and then basically an offense only player at RW. That adds up to the line being a plus defensively, but not one I'd want to use as a line at the end of games IMO. Your 3rd line is the same, but I'm not sure Murdoch's defense is enough to make up for the basically all-offense Stamkos and Vikulov. That leaves your grinding 4th line, who would be a great secondary shutdown unit, but leave a bit to be desired as the main unit.

Defense

You went with 1 & 3 on the top pairing and 2 & 4 on the bottom pairing. I think Pronger gets taken a little earlier than he should, but he's definitely a legit #1. This will be a difficult pair to play against, with Heller's size adjusting to probably 6'3", and Pronger at 6'6". Heller's mobility makes up for Pronger's relative slowness, and they'll be adept in both zones. A solid pairing that brings everything you could ask for.

Cameron is an impressive rushing defenseman, and Ramsey the defensive rock that he needs to cover him. Cameron is about average for a #2, and Ramsey an above average #4. They bring all aspects you would want, and are good.

The third pairing won't contribute much offensively, but will take care of things defensively. Nondescript.

Overall, a very solid, but unspectacular defensive corps. Only question would be puckmoving from the bottom pairing. Pervukhin has one quote about having a good "initiating pass" and a quote about a power play being great that he was on, but that's almost certainly BS. Bilyatednov, his parter who was seen as a stay at home guy) scored at basically the same rate internationally, and Pervuhkin scored at .132 GPG domestically, with Bilyatednov at .107. There's little difference between he and a guy who was known as a defensive defenseman.

Goaltending

Belfour is definitely an above average goalie in here. Kipper is a satisfactory backup, so goaltending will definitely be a team strength.

Coaching

Ivan is one of the best coaches ever, so this will definitely be an advantage. Seems to have been very adaptable and put players in a position to succeed. I don't sense a real prevailing theme with your team, so I guess that works that he can adapt to whatever the situation is.

PP

A very potent first unit, with real firepower because of the three howitzers you have, and the curve-shot from Cameron. Pronger has a bomb from the point, Cameron can curve his shots, Stamkos has a devastating one-timer, and Lafleur had a great shot as well. You better hope the pucks just goes in on the original shot because you've got nothing resembling a net presence at all. As impressive as the first unit is, the second unit is lacking some punch up front, specifically from the wingers. See my above comment about Pervukhin's actual offensive abilities, which I'm starting to doubt. Heller works on a 2nd unit.

PK

Don Marcotte is good for a first unit, and Keith Primeau is brutal. He was a top two unit penalty killer just four times in his career(2, 3, 3, 4 finishes in SH TOI/G among forwards), and is definitely out of place. Pronger and Ramsay are very good PK defensemen though. Your 2nd unit forwards are pretty weak also. Basically, each one has one quote about their defensive play, and a Retro Selke. I can buy Murdoch, but I don't buy March. Unfortunately, looking at the rest of your forwards, you really don't have any other good options. If I was you, I would drop March and pick up the best defensive, penalty killing RW I could find. It would give the unit credibility as a shutdown unit, and improve your PK.


Last edited by BillyShoe1721: 03-28-2013 at 11:12 PM.
BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-28-2013, 10:20 PM
  #16
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,974
vCash: 500
I mostly agree with your review of Billy's team, BBS; but I'll touch on some areas where I think I can add something.

Nothing else to say about the forwards.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bring Back Scuderi View Post
1st Pair
Park's a very good #1 who can do it all. I'd say excellent or elite, but we should probably leave that for the top 10 guys which Park is just outside of. Hitch is really more of a good #3 than top pair guy, but that's exactly how you drafted him and simply preferred to split your top two. Both guys can skate and Hitchman will really knock guys around as Park plays the man (God I'm so clever). Hitchman knew how to stay back with a partner who ventured up ice so he'll help Park take his chances. Hitchman prevents this pair from being better so I think it's probably average despite Park's stature. Hap Day's getting called a weak #2, is Hitchman any better?
Hap Day is better than Hitchman, IMO. I see Hap Day as an above average #3 and Hitchman as an average #3. Is it crazy to say that Hitchman was something of a Brad McCrimmon of his day or is that totally off?

Quote:
2nd Pair
Nieds would work well on a top pair so he's a great asset on the second unit, everyone knows his game. Davydov is a really interesting player, seems like a Soviet defender who took care of his own end first and foremost. Seems like he liked to block his shots and muscle guys around. Being praised for his skating will make this unit able to keep up with quick lines too. He's probably a solid #4 and I think this is a very good second pair with Niedermayer leading the way.
Niedermayer was a very good defenseman both ways, but his one real weakness is that he was soft, and I really wish he had a partner who addressed that, and I'm really not sure Davydov does that. The pairing is strong both ways, but I see them getting outmuscled, especially in front of their net.

Quote:
PK
I might like your PK units even more. Goring killed a ton of penalties, and Stewart seems like the consummate PKer. Park and Hitch should get the job down on the backend as well. Sheppard is another guy with really high PK usage and Trottier seems to have the skillset to kill penalties. I wondered about Hatcher but he killed 51% of his teams' penalties for 8% better than league average. That should work. Davydov should thrive on the PK with his skating ability and temperament.
I think in the grand scheme of things, penalty killing is the weakest part of Brad Park's game. He was still very good at it, just probably not as all-time great at it as he was at even strength or on the PP. Ideally, I would like to see Park on the 2nd PK for no other reason than to cut the minutes of an injury-prone player who is currently playing first units all across, but I don't think I would want to see Davydov or Hatcher on a first PK, so he's kind of stuck with him there.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-28-2013, 10:29 PM
  #17
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,974
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyShoe1721 View Post
Murdoch provides a defensive conscious(although not as good as I'd like, he could use a good bio to see if he really deserved that Selke) and is more of a playmaker, which helps Stamkos. In Stamkos' career, he's basically had four linemates.
RETRO Selke, Murdoch was handed a Retroactive Selke by the authors of Ultimate Hockey, not a real one. I know you know that, but it's a very important distinction to make.

Quote:
This is the closest thing you've got to a checking line. They're all pretty physical, willing to forecheck and sort of play defense by pinning the other team. I could buy Marcotte as a guy on a real shutdown line, but I don't know buy Primeau and March making up the other 2/3 of a good checking line, especially considering you don't have any other lines I'd be willing to use at the end of a game to send out against the other team's best players to shut it down. I could buy Primeau if he was with another very good defensive player, but I don't see March as that guy. I like Keith as a Flyers fan. He's got two relevant Selke finishes, 6th and 8th, which are good. A good crash and bang line with solid two-way play, but when this is the main shutdown line(and really your only option), it's lacking IMO.
Well, if we're talking Retro Selkes, Mush Marsh has one too, only 2 years after Murdoch was awarded his.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-28-2013, 11:03 PM
  #18
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,634
vCash: 8400
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
I appreciate the review, I agree with most of it and it was very well thought out and accurate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bring Back Scuderi View Post
Second Line
Thornton's basically a top line center so started over very strong in that regard. I don't love his wingers though. I think Mullen's basically an average second line winger who worked his butt off and will be an adequate triggerman for Jumbo Joe's passing. I want to love Stevens for what he meant to the Penguins, but I have a really hard time with him in the ATD. He has 5 seasons of VsX scores above 50 which is really rough, and the Lemieux factor makes it even worse. I know he suffered a horrible injury that slowed him down, but at the same time I can only give him credit for what he ended up accomplishing. I think all in all he's a pretty weak top sixer in this thing. I think this line grades out as average to above average at best. Mullen's a solid second liner, but this line is going to be really dependant on Thornton to create chances offensively.
I think my second line wingers are probably the weakest part of my team. But I think the unit can work because Thornton can work absolute magic with what he's been dealt. Glen Murray's career high in goals was 29, and in the 3 seasons he played with Thornton, he put up 41, 44, and 42. We saw what he did to Jonathan Cheechoo. Patrick Marleau had never broken 30 goals in his career, and since Thornton arrived, he's broken it 6 of 7 full seasons, and would be on pace to break it this year if it were a full season. He led his team in scoring 8 of the last 9 years of his career(3 points away in 10-11) by margins of 9, 13, 32, 36, 41, 15, 6, and 12. I think Stevens and Mullen are definitely better than anything he's ever had to work with. I'm also a big believer in two-way play throughout a lineup, which is why I picked Mullen over better pure scorers like Heatley or Bondra.
Quote:
Third Line
Ratelle's slumming it on a third line. I think he's a very good second liner who could pass as the third member of a top line. Gare is used to playing on a checking line and his even-strength scoring should be a good fit on the third line. Trottier's a good agitating presence that will make this line very unpleasant to play against. My one criticism would be is he more of a fourth liner than third? What makes him better than teammate Jimmy Ward? I think this is a pretty good, not great, defensive line that can put home some of the chances Ratelle creates.
Nothing makes Trottier better than Jimmy Ward. Jimmy Ward is better, but he does play a thinner position. They're no Rod Gilbert, but I think both of them are definitely better players than Vic Hadfield.

Quote:
4th Line
In a recurring theme, I think Goring is very talented for his role and capable of being bumped up a line. Sheppard and Stewart are good role players that can bolster a PK unit. Goring's stickhandling abilities should help this line eat up time and all three are capable defensive players who can hold their own when the opposition has the puck. And not that I think you necessarily need it but how physical were Sheppard and Stewart?
They're both a little physical, but not too much. They're more just very hard workers. Sheppard "pleased the crowd with his scrappiness", "played hard at both ends of the ice", "his relentless hustle and persistent checking". Stewart was "a long time industrious hockey player", "a hard working versatile player, "a tireless skater", "a relentless checker, and he could play that way all season long", "a crafty forechecker and relentless worker who was one of Punch Imlach's prized foot soldiers", "his tireless skating and strong forechecking made him a valuable penalty killer". The entire line is a very industrious, hard working group that didn't really seem to take many penalties at all.
Quote:
Hap Day's getting called a weak #2, is Hitchman any better?
Hitchman isn't a #2 defenseman, he's my #3 and he's nothing great in that role. Solid, but not spectacular. I'm a big subscriber of splitting my best defensemen into two pairings.

Quote:
Spare
Short-career, lots of all-star votes. That's Doug Barkley and I don't have a problem with him. The only thing that could be problematic is if two guys on your blueline go down. Barkley's lack of longevity makes me wonder if he needs another guy backing him up but we're talking about a hypothetical #8 defender so...
Ron Stewart was actually so versatile that when he played defense(mostly in the beginning of his career), he was voted 5th in AS voting and 4th in Norris voting in 57-58. He can drop back to play defense if absolutely necessary. We could also put Cyclone Taylor back on defense in a pinch. He was probably the best defenseman in the world for a year or two in fact. If we did that, we would bump every center up one with Richards taking the 4th line center spot. You know you've got center depth when you can take your best player and #1 center, put him on defense, and still have each guy be at least average at their position.
Quote:
Goalies
Moog I'm much less thrilled about. If there's one weakness in Fuhr it was the regular season and I'm not sure Moog brings a lot to the table. This criticism becomes moot when the playoffs roll around though.
Moog was the guy that played in the regular season for the Oilers when he and Fuhr were together. In the years they were together, Moog played 220 regular season games, and Fuhr played 207. That includes three Stanley Cup championship seasons. In those cup seasons, Moog played 123 regular season games, and Fuhr played 135. I went with familiarity because they are both accustomed to this extremely odd relationship.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-28-2013, 11:10 PM
  #19
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,634
vCash: 8400
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Hap Day is better than Hitchman, IMO. I see Hap Day as an above average #3 and Hitchman as an average #3. Is it crazy to say that Hitchman was something of a Brad McCrimmon of his day or is that totally off?
Seems about right. Hitchman is definitely my #3.

Quote:
Niedermayer was a very good defenseman both ways, but his one real weakness is that he was soft, and I really wish he had a partner who addressed that, and I'm really not sure Davydov does that. The pairing is strong both ways, but I see them getting outmuscled, especially in front of their net.
There really isn't much out there about Davydov, but in two of the sources it calls him "pluckier than everyone else and skillfully applies body-checking technique", "always quick to defend himself physically", "the young player would not mind playing tough, often engaging opponents...". And then there's the story of him having his jaw broken in 8 places with a stick, and still going after the opposing forward on a breakaway before he passed out on the bench. He's got some physicality, but he's not big either.

Quote:
I think in the grand scheme of things, penalty killing is the weakest part of Brad Park's game. He was still very good at it, just probably not as all-time great at it as he was at even strength or on the PP. Ideally, I would like to see Park on the 2nd PK for no other reason than to cut the minutes of an injury-prone player who is currently playing first units all across, but I don't think I would want to see Davydov or Hatcher on a first PK, so he's kind of stuck with him there.
What about Bob Armstrong? He was known as a tough, stay at home guy that provided basically no offense, but was 4x top 13 in AS and Norris voting?

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
RETRO Selke, Murdoch was handed a Retroactive Selke by the authors of Ultimate Hockey, not a real one. I know you know that, but it's a very important distinction to make.

Well, if we're talking Retro Selkes, Mush Marsh has one too, only 2 years after Murdoch was awarded his.
Yes, yes of course. Typo on my part, I'll definitely fix that.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-29-2013, 03:46 AM
  #20
nik jr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Congo-Kinshasa
Posts: 10,526
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyShoe1721 View Post
Forwards

You've got the chemistry bonus of Shutt and Lafleur here, if it weren't for that I'd say Shutt belongs nowhere near a first line in the ATD. He's historically been drafted way ahead of where his offense justifies, and I'm not sure he even fell far enough considering he was playing with Lafleur and Lemaire. Ullman is similar to Lemaire, but better offensively and worse defensively, probably a bit grittier too. Considering there wasn't much puckwinning on the real line, and this line has more, it should be okay. It'll be better offensively than the real thing, but a bit worse defensively. 2/3 of an elite first line with Shutt a distant third.
thanks for the review.


i don't see why ullman should be considered worse than lemaire defensively. ullman was more often mentioned for his defensive play, and PKed more than lemaire. Dreakmur's bio of ullman mentions defensive play often, but here is some more evidence:

punch imlach, who famously stressed defensive play, particularly from C's, said ullman was the best C he ever coached. ullman was also voted best checker in a '70 poll of NHL coaches. those are from ullman's time with TML, but he was known for his defensive play earlier.

when he was traded in 1968 for mahovlich, dink carroll said ullman had been a "fine two way player for a long time."

a quote from mikita:
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Sun: 12-24-1965
"Beliveau is using his body on me a lot," he says ruefully, "but I can't hope to out-bump the big guy. Then there are Ullman over in Detroit and Keon in Toronto. Most checkers take a few whacks at me and leave me go but they keep right on me. I figure if I can solve the problem of those three headaches, I'll have it made.
http://news.google.com/newspapers?ni...rontpage&hl=en

page 63


i'll also add these, since i think they are worth mentioning:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ottawa Citizen: 5-4-1954
Ullman, 18 year old pivot, specializes in digging pucks out of corners for his wings.
that was before ullman was in NHL.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reading Eagle: 1-7-1979
As a center, I rate him (Trottier) as a cross between the best points of Jean Beliveau and Norm Ullman, Beliveau for his strong skating and Ullman for his digging.


i agree about shutt, and i expect other players would occasionally get shifts with lafleur. it's also very possible that some other C would sometimes replace ullman, as happened in reality. tommy ivan seems to have tried many different line combinations. i have read about many different players with howe and with howe and lindsay. abel, delvecchio, ullman, prystai, pavelich.

Quote:
Stastny is a strong 2nd line center, Elias a good defensive conscious that is still strong offensively. A previous bio indicates some grit for Stastny and two-way play, but I'm not sure I buy that. I think he may have developed that at the end of his career, but I'm not sure. He'd be much more valuable if you could prove he was like that his whole career. Two guys biased towards playmaking, and Hyland is a goalscorer that can finish off their passes. He's a bit below average as far as 2nd liners go, most likely. I don't see much grit or puckwinning on this line, unless you can substantiate Stastny's toughness, or find more on Hyland than I did last year(which was basically one quote calling him a "tough little bugger".
i will just point out that i think too much playmaking is very, very rarely a problem, and that stastny and elias were both good goalscorers.

from '81-'89, his NHL prime, stastny was 7th in goals. stastny was 11th in goals 3 times.

elias' offensive stats have been hurt a lot by playing for NJD, particularly on PP, but he was always a good ES scorer.

from '00-now, elias has scored .37 ES goals per game. some contemporaries for comparison:

hossa: .44
gaborik: .44
naslund: .41
alfredsson: .39
hejduk: .39


Quote:
For Stamkos to be valuable here, you have to surround him very well, you seem to have done it reasonably well. Vikulov is the small, diminutive playmaking right wing that plays the role of Marty St. Louis, with the one key difference that he was not a guy willing to battle in the corners like Marty. Murdoch provides a defensive conscious(although not as good as I'd like, he could use a good bio to see if he really deserved that Selke) and is more of a playmaker, which helps Stamkos. In Stamkos' career, he's basically had four linemates. Martin St. Louis his entire career at RW, and his LWs were Ryan Malone(rookie year), Steve Downie(09-10, 10-11) and Teddy Purcell(11-12, 12-13). How does Murdoch compare to them? He's not as tough as Malone or Downie, that's for sure. But, Purcell is a cupcake and Stammer is playing great, so history tells us you don't need much grit, but in the ATD, I think you need it, especially because of that small, subtle difference between St. Louis and Vikulov(besides talent) of corner work. I think this line could really suffer because it doesn't have a guy willing to dig.
i made a short bio of murdoch which focuses on his defensive play: http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...&postcount=143

Quote:
This is the closest thing you've got to a checking line. They're all pretty physical, willing to forecheck and sort of play defense by pinning the other team. I could buy Marcotte as a guy on a real shutdown line, but I don't know buy Primeau and March making up the other 2/3 of a good checking line, especially considering you don't have any other lines I'd be willing to use at the end of a game to send out against the other team's best players to shut it down. I could buy Primeau if he was with another very good defensive player, but I don't see March as that guy. I like Keith as a Flyers fan. He's got two relevant Selke finishes, 6th and 8th, which are good. A good crash and bang line with solid two-way play, but when this is the main shutdown line(and really your only option), it's lacking IMO.
i am not planning to use 4th line to check 1st or 2nd lines. i see them mostly taking defensive zone faceoffs and protecting leads and being PKers.

mush march was a very good defensive player. it is just harder to find citations b/c he played in chicago's small market and chicago newspapers are much less accessible. chicago generally played a defensive style during his career, and march was a regular PKer.

when march died in 2002, the toronto star's obituary described him as "an excellent defensive player and penalty killer."


newspaper reports from finals are usually a lot bigger, and i found some good information.

in '38 finals, march's line with thompson and romnes checked davidson - apps - drillon. march got injured early in game 1 and missed game 2.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saskatoon Star-Phoenix: 4-13-1938
(Game 4) Mush March wound up the scoring late in the third period in the midst of futile Leaf rallies to pierce Chicago's defensive tactics. The customary Leaf dash and speed got nowhere against the ceaseless Hawk checking.
....
Drillon and March went off together for high sticking before the game was five minutes old.
...
Drillon, Apps and Davidson were tied up in knots by the close checking of Chicago's first line (Thompson - Romnes - March).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saskatoon Star-Phoenix: 4-11-1938
(Game 3) March went off a few seconds afterwards and Hawks were two men short.
...
March checked the Leafs silly and got in two shots, one on a brilliant end-to-end rush while Thompson was off.
Fans threw bottles and vegetables onto the ice after Apps scored on the 5 on 3 following March's penalty.


'34 finals
Quote:
Originally Posted by Border Cities Star: 4-4-1934
(Game 1) Before a crowd of 13,170 cash customers, Tommy Gorman's Chicago Black Hawks literally checked and double checked their way to a decision over the Red Wings last night. Despite the closeness of the score, the story of the game is the story of an invading horde that beat the Red Wings at their own favorite pastime--back-checking.
...
Weiland, Aurie and Lewis, the first string line of the Detroit Red Wings, was elected to start against the Hawks. .....Opposing the Detroiters was a forward line comprised of Mush March, Doc Romnes and Paul Thompson.
....
The Detroit team seemed to lack the customary fire. Hawks seemed to be stealing their defensive thunder as they checked the Detroit attack of Aurie, Weiland and Lewis at every opportunity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Border Cities Star: 4-6-1934
(Game 2) Jack Adams nominated his first string line of Weiland, Aurie and Lewis to play against March, Romnes and Thompson.
....
Coulter went to the penalty box after a vigorous protest. Jack Adams had Aurie, Weiland, Lewis, Goodfellow and Sorrell out against the shorthanded visitors. March, Thompson, Conacher and Jenkins defended the Chicago goal.


both teams generally played strong defensive hockey in '34 finals, but mush march's D seems to have not been especially noteworthy. his defensive play was mentioned more in '38, possibly because TML had bigger star F's.


some papers have deeper coverage of hockey, such as border cities star and ottawa citizen, but they are not available for '38 finals.


Quote:
Overall, I see a general lack of toughness throughout the top 9. Norm Ullman is really the only guy I see in your top 9 that I would call gritty, or has the ability to win pucks. You could give Peter Stastny a little bit of grittiness, but really not much. Overall, they could get pushed around by bigger defenses, or larger checking forwards. I also see an overarching problem of matchups. Your 4th line is the only one I would call overall "good" defensively. Ullman's two-way play cancels out Lafleur's struggles in that area, and Shutt got a little better defensively as his career went on. The second line your second best defensive line with a strong two-way player in LW, a guy that was probably a small plus at center, and then basically an offense only player at RW. That adds up to the line being a plus defensively, but not one I'd want to use as a line at the end of games IMO. Your 3rd line is the same, but I'm not sure Murdoch's defense is enough to make up for the basically all-offense Stamkos and Vikulov. That leaves your grinding 4th line, who would be a great secondary shutdown unit, but leave a bit to be desired as the main unit.
i basically agree. i made an offensive minded, puck-possession team, but i tried to avoid weakness in net and on the blueline.

i don't think diggers are as important as most others, b/c almost all players had to work on the boards to get pucks. there is also often a tradeoff between skill and toughness.

more important than having size and strength on the boards is ability to drive possession. for example, bruins' current line of lucic - krejci - horton is bigger and stronger than their line of marchand - bergeron - seguin, but is much worse in territorial play.


Quote:
Coaching
Ivan is one of the best coaches ever, so this will definitely be an advantage. Seems to have been very adaptable and put players in a position to succeed. I don't sense a real prevailing theme with your team, so I guess that works that he can adapt to whatever the situation is.
i want to point out that although tippett is rightly known for team D, he was also LAK's special teams coach before he became dallas' head coach. his teams have usually had strong PK's.


Quote:
PP

A very potent first unit, with real firepower because of the three howitzers you have, and the curve-shot from Cameron. Pronger has a bomb from the point, Cameron can curve his shots, Stamkos has a devastating one-timer, and Lafleur had a great shot as well. You better hope the pucks just goes in on the original shot because you've got nothing resembling a net presence at all. As impressive as the first unit is, the second unit is lacking some punch up front, specifically from the wingers. See my above comment about Pervukhin's actual offensive abilities, which I'm starting to doubt. Heller works on a 2nd unit.
i envision stastny and stamkos as the net presence. stastny was not a screener or man in the slot like andreychuk, but he often played around the net on PP.

most teams have done fine without a great net man.

Quote:
PK

Don Marcotte is good for a first unit, and Keith Primeau is brutal. He was a top two unit penalty killer just four times in his career(2, 3, 3, 4 finishes in SH TOI/G among forwards), and is definitely out of place. Pronger and Ramsay are very good PK defensemen though. Your 2nd unit forwards are pretty weak also. Basically, each one has one quote about their defensive play, and a Retro Selke. I can buy Murdoch, but I don't buy March. Unfortunately, looking at the rest of your forwards, you really don't have any other good options. If I was you, I would drop March and pick up the best defensive, penalty killing RW I could find. It would give the unit credibility as a shutdown unit, and improve your PK.
i have been thinking about who to use on 1st PK, and left primeau there b/c of his faceoff ability, which is more important on special teams than elsewhere. murdoch and marcotte both had the ability to play C, but i don't know how good they were on draws. that is a problem for almost all older C's, though.

i will probably switch primeau and murdoch, since murdoch was a 1st PKer for NYR, but primeau was generally not.


Last edited by nik jr: 03-29-2013 at 04:00 AM.
nik jr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-29-2013, 08:13 AM
  #21
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 Bring Back Scuderi View Post
Pittsburgh Athletic Club

Coach: Cecil Hart

Bert Olmstead - Jean Beliveau (C) - Andy Bathgate
Sweeney Schriner - Bernie Morris - Steve Larmer
Red Berenson (A) - Neil Colville - Jim Pappin
Ryan Walter - Thomas Steen (A) - Jimmy Ward
Barney Stanley, Murph Chamberlain

Brian Leetch - Alexei Kasatonov
Barry Beck - Pat Stapleton
Willie Mitchell - Frank Patrick
Ryan Suter, Bryan McCabe

Chuck Rayner
John Ross Roach

PP1:
Olmstead - Beliveau - Morris
Leetch - Bathgate

PP2:
Schriner - Colville - Larmer
Patrick - Stapleton

PK1:
Berenson - Larmer
Beck - Kasatonov

PK2:
Steen - Walter
Leetch - Mitchell
This is the best entry yet from one of the best of the new generation of ATD GMs. I always wanted to win the ATD with a firewagon team, and I think this is about as close as one can get to that model in the ATD and still ice a real contender, which this team absolutely is. One of this year's elite franchises from a talent perspective.

Forwards:

The top line is pretty much the hammer of Thor, and will win a lot of games by itself against teams that don't have the gear to check them effectively, which is quite a few teams. Not much to say about the individual players that hasn't already been said, other than that Andy Bathgate is probably better offensively than we thought before, which is saying something because we already thought he was great. He was pretty weak defensively as far as I know, however, and if the line has a weakness, it will be against opposing lines that can counterattack with speed up the wings, as Olmstead is also lacking in footspeed. It's sort of a pick your poison, though, as there are very few lines which will be able to effectively check this unit, and mount a strong counterattack.

The 2nd line is a quite talented unit, though it is soft and fairly one-dimensional. I like Morris more as a RW simply because the scoringline talent there is thinner (although with guys like Gaborik and Amonte popping up late, that may not really be true anymore), but he's still about average as a 2nd line center - probably a bit above average offensively, but lacking in intangibles. Schriner was one of the biggest beneficiaries of the VsX project, and I think deservedly so. His offensive record has been underrated in the ATD. His intangibles are hard to get a grip on. That quote comparing him to Busher Jackson looks like fluff, in my opinion. The thing that is actually most puzzling about Schriner is how badly he got creamed by Jackson in the all-star voting in the couple of seasons when both were at their peaks.

1934-35:

Jackson: 44 points / (33-0) AST - 1st
Schriner: 40 points / (0-3) AST - T-4th

1935-36:

This is a bad year for Jackson (22 points...injured?) and Schriner walks away with the 1st team all-star nod.

1936-37:

Jackson: 40 points / (15-4) AST - 1st
Schriner: 46 points / (3-8) AST - 2nd

-------------------------------------------------

The 1934-35 results can maybe be dismissed because Schriner was a rookie and they tend to not get a lot of all-star love, but the 1936-37 results are curious. Schriner outscored Jackson by 15% (that's only 6 points, but this was a lot back then) and was already an established star, and yet Jackson crushed him in the all-star voting. So what is going on here?

I have some insider information from Reen that hasn't been put into an updated bio yet (because I hate doing them, and Reen is back so he should do it himself...I guess I'll do it later this weekend if he isn't around...sigh) which indicates that Jackson was an aggressive physical player, which shouldn't really surprise us given his size and strength and what we know about his personality. So this is probably the main difference between the two. I don't know about Jackson's defensive reputation (I assume it is neutral?), but I get the impression that Schriner was something of a floater, so that may be part of the discrepancy, as well. At any rate, Schriner seems to be on pretty much the same level as Jackson as a scorer, which makes him an absolutely elite offensive 2nd liner, but I think he's only a scorer, in spite of the nice things his manager said about him in that press clip. [/schriner]

Larmer is a strong 2nd line glue guy to round out the unit, though TDMM is right that he is lacking in physicality, which you really could have used on this line. As it is, this unit should be deadly in transition - likely among the best 2nd lines in the draft in this area - and will really punish teams that lack footspeed among their second unit defesemen. I don't see this line being much of a cycling unit, though, so if it's not scoring in transition, it may not produce a whole lot. A very talented unit, but not extremely well-balanced, in my opinion.

The third line is an interesting unit. I like Colville as a two-way 3rd line center in the ATD. He doesn't seem to have had much defensive value other than penalty-killing as a forward, but I think he has to be credited for his good years on the blueline, and so ends up being a solid two-way center in the end. Colville also had some jam to his game, and generally seems to have been a strong, well-rounded player. The wings, I'm a little bit less in love with here. Berenson's scoring feats have to be taken in context, given that his Blues played 3/4 of their games against other expansion teams during Red's best years. The description of him as a "defensive specialist" in Montreal is pretty much a throwaway, as every young forward who came up in that system had to start off in a defensive role, and the fact that Berenson didn't stick with the Habs suggests that he wasn't all that great at it. I think he's ok as an offensive 3rd liner, but nothing special, and I'm not impressed by his intangibles. Pappin is a guy who I think is an excellent 4th liner in the ATD, and a viable, if low-end 3rd liner. He gives you some physicality and defensive play, and was also a pretty good goalscorer for a while there, especially in the playoffs. This looks like basically a 3rd scoringline, with enough two-way play between Colville and Pappin to be decent defensively.

The 4th line I like a lot. Thomas Steen is a guy who I think would actually be a pretty good two-way 3rd liner, but he keeps getting mistreated by ATD GMs for whatever reason and is underrated here, just as he was in real life. Jimmy Ward is another guy who I think is really a solid two-way 3rd liner here, so having him on your 4th line is something of a luxury. Walter is a fine 4th liner who will give you pretty good defense and physicality, though nothing special. Overall, it is a very good 4th line that I'd look to give a regular shift throughout the season.

Defense:

Leetch is a below-average, but viable #1, and Kasatonov is an above-average #2. Together, they are I think maybe a tick below the average, but not by much. I think both Stapleton and Beck are good as the #3 and #4, so it ends up being a strong, balanced 2nd pairing. Mitchell and Patrick are ok as a bottom pairing - well balanced, neither particluarly good nor bad, in my opinion. I'm not going to say a whole lot about your defense because there's not too much to say about it. It is an unspectacular group that manages to be roughly average, though it is maybe a little bit soft, with Beck the only real physical player in the group. It is somewhat remarkable that the defense manages to be average with such a talented set of forwards, so me calling it that is actually a compliment.

Other:

Cecil Hart is a good second-tier offensive coach in the ATD, and I think he'll like managing this team. You've got good offensive depth at both forward and on defense, so this looks like a team that will be able to maintain the fast-skating, transition-heavy firewagon style that Hart's teams favored. Hart really liked his puckmoving defensemen, and I like that you have given him a good one on each pairing. One thing that concerns me a bit is that Hart's Habs actually had a good deal more two-way play from their forwards than you've got on this team, both on the top unit (Joliat and Morenz) and on the 2nd unit, where Pit Lepine was one of the elite checking centers of his generation. I think Hart's teams could play defensively when protecting a lead, and I'm not sure how well this team can, so...full speed ahead. This is pretty similar to the setup of my ATD#10 championship team, which was also managed by Cecil Hart, although my team was definitely more defensive than this one. If you take the title this year, it will be Cecil Hart's third ATD championship, which would be kind of cool given the generally defensive bent of the draft.

Rayner is obviously the team's biggest weakness. At 32 teams, none of the starting goalies is going to be sorry, so having a low-end netminder is a perfectly viable tactic. I don't entirely agree with Rayner's placement in the top-40 goalies project. I definitely don't have him ahead of Tom Barrasso, at the least, and I think Holmes is questionable. Rayner is in my bottom-3 of ATD goalies, but like I said, none of these guys are terrible, and you've got a team that will control the play against a lot of opponents, so Rayner shouldn't be overworked.

The first unit powerplay is extremely strong, and will punish teams without high-end penalty-killers. The second unit is average to above-average. Schriner is a great weapon there and the points are pretty good, but Colville and Larmer are unspectacular.

The penalty kill looks like it may be something of an issue. I am not a fan of Red Berenson on an ATD penalty kill, nevermind a 1st unit. I really don't know what he's doing there. This is where the other weakness of this team (besides goaltending) gets exposed a bit, and that is a lack of defensive centers. You need someone to take draws on both PK units, but who? Berenson, Walter and Colville are your only real options here, as Steen was a poor faceoff man, and none of them are guys I'd want on a 1st unit PK. Larmer is ok as a 1st pairing PK wing, but you're really lacking that defensive center to take your draws and cover the points at a high level on the 1st unit PK, and I think your team is going to spend a lot of time running around in its own zone as a result. The defensemen are below average here, as well. Both are legit 1st pairing PKers, but at this level, I think both would be better as the 2nd best PKer on the unit, not the top guy. The defensemen aren't that bad, but with the issues at center and Rayner in goal, this is likely one of the weaker penalty kills in the league.

The 2nd unit PK is better relative to the competition, but it's not particularly strong.

Overall, this is a team that will really test opposing defenses. It has offensive strength all over the place, with an elite 1st line, good puckmoving on the blueline, and depth all the way down to the 4th unit. There's not much checking from the forwards, but this is a puck control team par excellence with a defense that is good enough not to give up a lot of quick goals. The best defense is a good offense, and many opponents will not see enough of the puck to keep up with the way this team will score. But there are teams with the gear to possess the puck even against this group's skill, and Pittsburgh's weak penalty kill, inability to sit on a lead, and relative dependence on transition offense will surely be put to the test. This is maybe the most exciting team in the draft, and I think one of the top contenders to take it all. Well done, BBS.

Sturminator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-29-2013, 11:29 AM
  #22
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,974
vCash: 500
Sturm, Busher Jackson was definitely a poor defensively player. I don't feel like doing a search now, but enough has been posted around here in the last couple of years as to where I'm confident saying that. I kind of "got away with one" in ATD 2010 by calling him an unknown defensively so therefore neutral, but well, he was unknown at that time. One quote I remember specifically was that for a brief period of time, Jackson - Apps - Drillion was a line, and they were broken up quickly because nobody on the line would backcheck, and Jackson (who was past his prime by then) would be replaced by a defensive forward.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-29-2013, 11:49 AM
  #23
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,974
vCash: 500
Also Sturm, keep in mind that Chuck Rayner is one of the biggest beneficiaries of the discovery that the 1st Team AS always went to the GAA-leader during that era, with the 2nd Team AS legitimately looking like it went to the best goalie who didn't lead the league in GAA.

That said, I would have liked to have seen a better goalie playing behind what is in a lot of ways a run-and-gun team, albeit a strong one.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-29-2013, 11:58 AM
  #24
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
Sturm, Busher Jackson was definitely a poor defensively player. I don't feel like doing a search now, but enough has been posted around here in the last couple of years as to where I'm confident saying that. I kind of "got away with one" in ATD 2010 by calling him an unknown defensively so therefore neutral, but well, he was unknown at that time. One quote I remember specifically was that for a brief period of time, Jackson - Apps - Drillion was a line, and they were broken up quickly because nobody on the line would backcheck, and Jackson (who was past his prime by then) would be replaced by a defensive forward.
Hmmm...ok. Well, that probably reinforces the idea that the intangible Jackson possessed which put him above Schriner was jam and aggressiveness (I'll have to post the information Reen gave me soon), and probably damns Schriner's intangibles all the more.

Sturminator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-29-2013, 12:05 PM
  #25
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
Also Sturm, keep in mind that Chuck Rayner is one of the biggest beneficiaries of the discovery that the 1st Team AS always went to the GAA-leader during that era, with the 2nd Team AS legitimately looking like it went to the best goalie who didn't lead the league in GAA.
Yeah, I gather that, but I still don't think he was better than Tom Barrasso, who I also think would be a better choice for a firewagon team, as his best years were spent getting peppered with shots in Pittsburgh. Though I realize that Barrasso was already taken when BBS took Rayner...so I guess all I'm saying is that I agree with the ATD draft order for late-round goalies this year.

Sturminator 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 03:12 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.