HFBoards

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

The MLD 2012 Assassination Thread

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-21-2012, 11:32 PM
  #301
vecens24
Registered User
 
vecens24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 5,002
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Its so strange to me to see Kamensky referred to as a physical player in the USSR because I don't think he was at all with the Avs

But that does seem like his reputation at that point in his career
I've been saying this pretty much all along. The Kamensky we saw over here was a totally different guy because of the injuries.

vecens24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-21-2012, 11:35 PM
  #302
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,199
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vecens24 View Post
I have no evidence outside of what Iain Fyffe told me in a PM. I can show you that part of the PM here (actually ended up being the full PM lol):



I assume Iain knows him better than any of us do as he has looked over material that we just don't have access to (also, Iain is a western Canadian guy I believe so he probably WOULD have access to older newspapers we don't have). It's at least SOMETHING to show about Breen's playmaking. I'm not even calling him a very good playmaker at the moment until I see further. I'm simply saying basically that he is a fine passer.
The HHOF committee makes mistakes, but I can't see them overlooking Breen if he was as complete a player as you guys say. His goal scoring record is excellent!

Did Breen participate in Cup Challenges? Is that the issue?

Also, if Iain is a valid source for the very good playmaking, does that mean the source about Breeb being a good checker is wrong?

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-21-2012, 11:40 PM
  #303
vecens24
Registered User
 
vecens24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 5,002
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Iain's from Nova Scotia.
I have NO idea why I thought he was a western guy. Don't know where I got that impression. Why in god's name did I think that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
The HHOF committee makes mistakes, but I can't see them overlooking Breen if he was as complete a player as you guys say. His goal scoring record is excellent!

Did Breen participate in Cup Challenges? Is that the issue?

Also, if Iain is a valid source for the very good playmaking, does that mean the source about Breeb being a good checker is wrong?
Yeah I already mentioned before that (i think in the draft thread), again assuming that Iain has had access to this stuff and wasn't just randomly spouting off things (extremely unlikely that he would do that obviously), then yeah I'd actually tend to err with Iain on this one personally. That was one of the things I specfiically asked him about, which is why he made the statement on his checking at all.

Plus as we know, there coudl always be differing opinions out there, just as there are for all players throughout history. Also, that noted checker quote came from I believe just a random Winnipeg dictionary/encyclopedia that wasn't necessarily even hockey or if I remember right even sports-based. It's something there to at least say he wasn't outwardly bad at it, but that quote by itself isn't really enough to prove to me (and I haven't really hid this or anything from anyone in my view either) that he was a strong checker by any means.

As far as Cup Challenges, I'm pretty sure he only participated in one Cup Challenge, losing to Ottawa 2 games to 1 in 1904.


Last edited by vecens24: 08-21-2012 at 11:46 PM.
vecens24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2012, 12:02 AM
  #304
Canadiens1958
Moderator
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 10,447
vCash: 500
Fredericton, NB

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Iain's from Nova Scotia.
Data below his avatar refers to Fredericton, NB and I'm pretty sure that means born and raised as well.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2012, 12:12 AM
  #305
VanIslander
Hockey in the blood.
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 17,340
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Its so strange to me to see Kamensky referred to as a physical player in the USSR because I don't think he was at all with the Avs

But that does seem like his reputation at that point in his career
Kamensky with Forsberg and C. Lemieux was one of my favorite lines in the Dead Puck Era. He fought through the clutching and grabbing, really earned his open space at times. He was physical in a I'm-gonna-get-there sort of way, not as a power forward, more as a determined struggler in traffic. He was NOT a shrinking violet!

Here is Valeri slashing Ulf Samuelsson: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EOiI9MrCj8

And here is Valeri knocking out Ulf Samuelsson! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19Jw2IsW_yM

Here Valeri retaliates by hitting and then goes after Jovanovski in the playoffs: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3-PFABAP2g

Valeri had a temper and a determination that made him a great competitor. I loved the guy. He's twice or thrice the battler that a Hejduk is!

VanIslander is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2012, 12:53 AM
  #306
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,199
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanIslander View Post
Kamensky with Forsberg and C. Lemieux was one of my favorite lines in the Dead Puck Era. He fought through the clutching and grabbing, really earned his open space at times. He was physical in a I'm-gonna-get-there sort of way, not as a power forward, more as a determined struggler in traffic. He was NOT a shrinking violet!

Here is Valeri slashing Ulf Samuelsson: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EOiI9MrCj8

And here is Valeri knocking out Ulf Samuelsson! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19Jw2IsW_yM

Here Valeri retaliates by hitting and then goes after Jovanovski in the playoffs: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3-PFABAP2g

Valeri had a temper and a determination that made him a great competitor. I loved the guy. He's twice or thrice the battler that a Hejduk is!
In the USSR, he was apparently the most physical player on his line. In the NHL, he was the least physical member of the Kamensky-Forsberg-Lemieux line, though that's not exactly an insult.

I'm not sure if that means anything here at all

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2012, 01:00 AM
  #307
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,322
vCash: 500
speaking Of Iain, I've been messaging him myself. This should interest you:

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord
there is a lot of MLD talk right now about Billy Nicholson and where he belongs vis-a-vis guys like Hern, Moran, Hutton and LeSueur.

A quick analysis of their numerical resumes indicates that there is not much, if anything, separating him from them. But there is much more to it. For example, his GAA is right in line with theirs. But was he in higher scoring leagues, at higher scoring times? Was he the GAA leader? Should his dominant GAA be taken less seriously due to league quality? What about the other players on his team who have strong defensive reputations, did they make his job easier? And so on.

I could do all this, but it would take me forever, and Nicholson isn't even my player this time around. I am pretty sure you've already done the work on him and other goalies of this time. I will head over to the blog to see what the career numbers say, but do you have a year by year breakdown for these guys, to see what kind of "career value" they added at different points of their careers?
say what you will about Iain's methodology, it really does make a lot of sense in the days of 7-man hockey. Also, our comments on the quality of the leagues these goalies played in would be somewhat educated but mostly subjective and possibly partisan. Iain's on the outside and has looked into this a lot more than we have (equivalency between leagues and stuff). So here's what he said:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iain Fyffe
Hutton and LeSueur are more consistent than the others. Hutton of course benefits from a short career in that sense. Their TPAK numbers:

Hutton (starting in 99/00): 3.88, 3.01, 4.23, 4.15, 4.77.

LeSueur (starting in 04/05): 2.08, 2.75, 3.48, 4.42, 4.67, 3.73, 4.54, 4.10, 3.62, 3.90, 2.33, 3.63.

Moran (starting in 00/01): 0.83, 2.25, 0.71, 3.48, 3.90, 2.55, -0.28, 3.62, 2.96, 2.42, 2.52, 4.19, 4.79, 4.48, 3.50, 4.07. You can see the effect of his team on his numbers, he played behind some awful defences early in his career and there's only so much you can do in a systematic way.

Nicholson is fairly similar to Hern, the latter had a higher peak, but it seems pretty clear that's at least partly team-based, since his earlier career numbers are all over the place.

Hern (starting in 97/98): 2.88, 0.85, 1.94, 3.04, -3.95, 2.81, 2.00, 2.90, 4.40, 3.94, 4.17, 4.98, 3.04

Nicholson (starting in 99/00): 4.29, 1.15, 4.23, 3.94, 1.71, 2.67, -0.19, 1.54, 3.40, 3.52. He seems to have peaked early, which might make some sense since "Big" Bill was apparently quite an apropos nickname.
There are many ways to analyze these numbers. I think the preferred method is to cut off fluff (8th+ best seasons or something like that), and assign more weight to the best seasons and go from there. I'll start, and you can adjust as you see fit.

First, let's arrange all their seasons from best to worst:

Hutton LeSueur Moran Nicholson Hern
4.77 4.67 4.79 4.29 4.98
4.23 4.54 4.48 4.23 4.4
4.15 4.42 4.19 3.94 4.17
3.88 4.1 4.07 3.52 3.94
3.01 3.9 3.9 3.4 3.04
3.73 3.62 2.67 3.04
3.63 3.5 1.71 2.9
3.62 3.48 1.54 2.88
3.48 2.96 1.15 2.81
2.75 2.55 -0.19 2
2.33 2.52 1.94
2.08 2.42 0.85
2.25 -3.95
0.83
0.71
-0.28  

I've been using "6 seasons" a lot this draft, for example, with percentage scores, so I'll go with that.

Let's weight their top-6 seasons as follows:
1st: 20%
2nd: 18%
3rd: 17%
4th: 16%
5th: 15%
6th: 14%

Their "scores" would look like this:

Lesueur: 4.27
Moran: 4.22
Hern: 4.01
Nicholson: 3.74
Hutton: 3.49

Notes:

- feel free to weight this differently if you like.
- It looks clear that Nicholson and Hutton aren't in the class of the other three. Hutton suffers by this method by not having a 6th-best season, but to be honest, he should suffer.
- weight this the same except without a 6th season and it goes LeSeuer 4.35, Moran 4.32, Hern 4.17, Hutton 4.06, Nicholson 3.91.
- It looks clear that Lesueur and Moran are very strong regular season goalies with a gap to Hern, then a gap to Hutton and Nicholson. I can't speculate on where this means they should be placed draftwise unless I am able to do a similar exercise with another group of contemporaries of more known values and more canonized draft positions (i.e. if I had Esposito, Parent, Dryden, Cheevers and Vachon's figures, I could say "Nicholson should be taken approximately x% more picks below Moran just like Cheevers and Vachon are taken that far below Esposito who is taken this far below Parent and Dryden")
- What's not included? Playoffs. And just try determining who has the best playoff record:

- Nicholson has the best GAA but the lowest win%; he faced the toughest competition though (Winnipeg, featuring Bain, Scanlan, Gingras, and the Flett brothers), earning this GAA more honestly than the others did. His final playoff game was in 1904, where he earned a 5-5 draw with Hutton in what I believe is the only time any of these goalies played eachother in the playoffs.
- Moran has the next-best GAA and never lost or tied a game; however, his playoff record is half the length of the next-shortest (Nicholson), and his 4 games are against Moncton (Tommy Smith, Louis Berlinguette and scrubs) and Sydney (Ken Randall, Rusty Crawford and scrubs). These 4 games were a joke; the closest of the four was 6-2.
- LeSueur has the worst GAA but it's just 3.71 if you take out his first two losses against the Sens (who apparently liked what they saw and signed him). However, that seven game record includes just one game against legitimate competition (the 1906 wanderers, who scored 3 times, oops, 2nd time two of these goalies met) and 6 against Galt (a joke, 15-4 over 2 games), Edmonton (Whitcroft, Ross & scrubs, 21-11 over 2 games, seriously, 11 GA?), Galt again (this time decent with a mallen/Smith/Berlinquette line, but scored 4 times) and Port Arthur (Jack Walker and scrubs).
- Hern has the longest playoff record (14 games) but against who? In 1906 the Wanderers took out New Glasgow (featuring Jacks Marks & McDonald & scrubs) 17-5 over 2 games, then 4 against worthy opponent Kenora, who lit him up for 20 goals in those 4 games (the unknown Geroux also allowed 20 in these 4 games). In 1908 they had two games against the Ottawa Vics (no one of note) and won 22-4 over 2 games. then 2 games against Winnipeg (Holden, Lake, Shore) who were an "OK" opponent but still fell 20-8 over 2 games. then a 6-4 win over Toronto, featuring a very green Lalonde, Corbeau and Ridpath. In 1909 the Wanderers just barely beat an Edmonton team 13-10 over 2 matches. Pitre, Lester Patrick and Whitcroft were there, but the stars were said to be Deeton and Millar for Edmonton. Still, a pretty good opponent, but at the same time, 10 goals against in 2 games. In 1910 Hern beat Berlin 7-3. They had Oren Frood at forward, and Hugh Lehman in net but they were the champs of a clearly lesser (but decent) league.
- that leaves Hutton. In 1903 Ottawa first dismantled the Victorias, who, despite Russell and Bowie, were no match for this dynasty. Then they took on Rat Portage, sans Tommy Phillips. Still, pretty good opponents and he allowed just 2 goals per game against them. In 1904 there were 8 games: 3 against an "OK" Winnipeg team featuring Breen, very young Joe Hall, and little else (8 GA), then a two-game, 11-5 romp of a Toronto team (Tommy Phillips and no one else, poor opponent), then a legitimate opponent (Wanderers) put in 5 on them, then a 15-6 two-game romp of Brandon, who had Lester Patrick as a ringer on point, and no one else.

To make sense of all that, we have this:

Nicholson: 3 games vs. an 8 (Winnipeg), 4 games vs. a 6 (Winnipeg sans Bain), 1 game vs. a 10 (dynasty caliber Sens) Average: 7.25. GAA: 1.88.

Moran: 4 games vs. a 3 (Sydney, Moncton) Average: 3.00. GAA: 2.00.

Lesueur: 2 games vs. a 10 (dynasty sens), 1 vs. a 10 (dynasty wanderers), 2 vs. a 2 (Galt), 2 vs. a 5 (Edmonton), 1 vs. a 5 (Galt), and 1 vs. a 1 (port arthur) Average: 5.55. GAA: 4.44.

Hern: 2 games vs. a 2 (new glasgow), 4 vs. an 8 (Kenora), 2 vs. a 1 (ottawa vics), 2 vs. a 6 (late Winnipeg), 1 vs. a 5 (young Toronto) 2 vs. a 6 (Edmonton), 1 vs. a 5 (Berlin). Average: 5.14. GAA: 3.86.

Hutton: 2 vs. a 6 (Vics), 2 vs. a 6 (rat portage), 3 vs. a 6 (winnipeg), 2 vs. a 3 (toronto), 1 vs. a 10 (wanderers), 2 vs. a 2 (edmonton). Average: 5.17. GAA: 2.33.

It looks clear that Nicholson was the best playoff performer of the four. He had the lowest GAA and faced the hardest competition. Moran performed well against garbage. Lesueur, Hern and Hutton faced about the same average caliber opponent, with the regular season greatness reversd among them. Hutton allowed just over half as many goals per game as LeSeuer, with Hern between them.

This was fun, but it's also possible that small sample size negates the whole playoff thing. They represent 4%, 9%, 5%, 2% and 23% of each goalie's total career GP (Nicholson, Hern, LeSeuer, Moran, Hutton). By comparison, playoffs are 14-19% of the total GP of Roy, Brodeur, and Hasek, and even 10% of Tony Esposito. Your mileage may vary. Nicholson is not my player this time. This was fun. Hope you enjoyed it.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2012, 01:02 AM
  #308
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Data below his avatar refers to Fredericton, NB and I'm pretty sure that means born and raised as well.
NB, NS... same thing

I take solace in that I was only about 10% as wrong as vecens24.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2012, 08:57 AM
  #309
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,199
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
speaking Of Iain, I've been messaging him myself. This should interest you:



say what you will about Iain's methodology, it really does make a lot of sense in the days of 7-man hockey. Also, our comments on the quality of the leagues these goalies played in would be somewhat educated but mostly subjective and possibly partisan. Iain's on the outside and has looked into this a lot more than we have (equivalency between leagues and stuff). So here's what he said:



There are many ways to analyze these numbers. I think the preferred method is to cut off fluff (8th+ best seasons or something like that), and assign more weight to the best seasons and go from there. I'll start, and you can adjust as you see fit.

First, let's arrange all their seasons from best to worst:

Hutton LeSueur Moran Nicholson Hern
4.77 4.67 4.79 4.29 4.98
4.23 4.54 4.48 4.23 4.4
4.15 4.42 4.19 3.94 4.17
3.88 4.1 4.07 3.52 3.94
3.01 3.9 3.9 3.4 3.04
3.73 3.62 2.67 3.04
3.63 3.5 1.71 2.9
3.62 3.48 1.54 2.88
3.48 2.96 1.15 2.81
2.75 2.55 -0.19 2
2.33 2.52 1.94
2.08 2.42 0.85
2.25 -3.95
0.83
0.71
-0.28  

I've been using "6 seasons" a lot this draft, for example, with percentage scores, so I'll go with that.

Let's weight their top-6 seasons as follows:
1st: 20%
2nd: 18%
3rd: 17%
4th: 16%
5th: 15%
6th: 14%

Their "scores" would look like this:

Lesueur: 4.27
Moran: 4.22
Hern: 4.01
Nicholson: 3.74
Hutton: 3.49

Notes:

- feel free to weight this differently if you like.
- It looks clear that Nicholson and Hutton aren't in the class of the other three. Hutton suffers by this method by not having a 6th-best season, but to be honest, he should suffer.
- weight this the same except without a 6th season and it goes LeSeuer 4.35, Moran 4.32, Hern 4.17, Hutton 4.06, Nicholson 3.91.
- It looks clear that Lesueur and Moran are very strong regular season goalies with a gap to Hern, then a gap to Hutton and Nicholson. I can't speculate on where this means they should be placed draftwise unless I am able to do a similar exercise with another group of contemporaries of more known values and more canonized draft positions (i.e. if I had Esposito, Parent, Dryden, Cheevers and Vachon's figures, I could say "Nicholson should be taken approximately x% more picks below Moran just like Cheevers and Vachon are taken that far below Esposito who is taken this far below Parent and Dryden")
- What's not included? Playoffs. And just try determining who has the best playoff record:

- Nicholson has the best GAA but the lowest win%; he faced the toughest competition though (Winnipeg, featuring Bain, Scanlan, Gingras, and the Flett brothers), earning this GAA more honestly than the others did. His final playoff game was in 1904, where he earned a 5-5 draw with Hutton in what I believe is the only time any of these goalies played eachother in the playoffs.
- Moran has the next-best GAA and never lost or tied a game; however, his playoff record is half the length of the next-shortest (Nicholson), and his 4 games are against Moncton (Tommy Smith, Louis Berlinguette and scrubs) and Sydney (Ken Randall, Rusty Crawford and scrubs). These 4 games were a joke; the closest of the four was 6-2.
- LeSueur has the worst GAA but it's just 3.71 if you take out his first two losses against the Sens (who apparently liked what they saw and signed him). However, that seven game record includes just one game against legitimate competition (the 1906 wanderers, who scored 3 times, oops, 2nd time two of these goalies met) and 6 against Galt (a joke, 15-4 over 2 games), Edmonton (Whitcroft, Ross & scrubs, 21-11 over 2 games, seriously, 11 GA?), Galt again (this time decent with a mallen/Smith/Berlinquette line, but scored 4 times) and Port Arthur (Jack Walker and scrubs).
- Hern has the longest playoff record (14 games) but against who? In 1906 the Wanderers took out New Glasgow (featuring Jacks Marks & McDonald & scrubs) 17-5 over 2 games, then 4 against worthy opponent Kenora, who lit him up for 20 goals in those 4 games (the unknown Geroux also allowed 20 in these 4 games). In 1908 they had two games against the Ottawa Vics (no one of note) and won 22-4 over 2 games. then 2 games against Winnipeg (Holden, Lake, Shore) who were an "OK" opponent but still fell 20-8 over 2 games. then a 6-4 win over Toronto, featuring a very green Lalonde, Corbeau and Ridpath. In 1909 the Wanderers just barely beat an Edmonton team 13-10 over 2 matches. Pitre, Lester Patrick and Whitcroft were there, but the stars were said to be Deeton and Millar for Edmonton. Still, a pretty good opponent, but at the same time, 10 goals against in 2 games. In 1910 Hern beat Berlin 7-3. They had Oren Frood at forward, and Hugh Lehman in net but they were the champs of a clearly lesser (but decent) league.
- that leaves Hutton. In 1903 Ottawa first dismantled the Victorias, who, despite Russell and Bowie, were no match for this dynasty. Then they took on Rat Portage, sans Tommy Phillips. Still, pretty good opponents and he allowed just 2 goals per game against them. In 1904 there were 8 games: 3 against an "OK" Winnipeg team featuring Breen, very young Joe Hall, and little else (8 GA), then a two-game, 11-5 romp of a Toronto team (Tommy Phillips and no one else, poor opponent), then a legitimate opponent (Wanderers) put in 5 on them, then a 15-6 two-game romp of Brandon, who had Lester Patrick as a ringer on point, and no one else.

To make sense of all that, we have this:

Nicholson: 3 games vs. an 8 (Winnipeg), 4 games vs. a 6 (Winnipeg sans Bain), 1 game vs. a 10 (dynasty caliber Sens) Average: 7.25. GAA: 1.88.

Moran: 4 games vs. a 3 (Sydney, Moncton) Average: 3.00. GAA: 2.00.

Lesueur: 2 games vs. a 10 (dynasty sens), 1 vs. a 10 (dynasty wanderers), 2 vs. a 2 (Galt), 2 vs. a 5 (Edmonton), 1 vs. a 5 (Galt), and 1 vs. a 1 (port arthur) Average: 5.55. GAA: 4.44.

Hern: 2 games vs. a 2 (new glasgow), 4 vs. an 8 (Kenora), 2 vs. a 1 (ottawa vics), 2 vs. a 6 (late Winnipeg), 1 vs. a 5 (young Toronto) 2 vs. a 6 (Edmonton), 1 vs. a 5 (Berlin). Average: 5.14. GAA: 3.86.

Hutton: 2 vs. a 6 (Vics), 2 vs. a 6 (rat portage), 3 vs. a 6 (winnipeg), 2 vs. a 3 (toronto), 1 vs. a 10 (wanderers), 2 vs. a 2 (edmonton). Average: 5.17. GAA: 2.33.

It looks clear that Nicholson was the best playoff performer of the four. He had the lowest GAA and faced the hardest competition. Moran performed well against garbage. Lesueur, Hern and Hutton faced about the same average caliber opponent, with the regular season greatness reversd among them. Hutton allowed just over half as many goals per game as LeSeuer, with Hern between them.

This was fun, but it's also possible that small sample size negates the whole playoff thing. They represent 4%, 9%, 5%, 2% and 23% of each goalie's total career GP (Nicholson, Hern, LeSeuer, Moran, Hutton). By comparison, playoffs are 14-19% of the total GP of Roy, Brodeur, and Hasek, and even 10% of Tony Esposito. Your mileage may vary. Nicholson is not my player this time. This was fun. Hope you enjoyed it.
While we are judging goalies by GAA, are you ready to finally admit Brodeur is a better goalie than Hasek?

The part based on Iain stats is interesting - Based on my reading, Leseuer and Moran seem like the best of the era, followed closely by Hern (peak Hern is right with them, but lacks the longevity). Iain's formula provides awful results in the 1920s, when we have a much better idea of player value, so I do take it with a huge grain of salt though.

But no offense, as soon as I saw judging playoff performance by GAA, I stopped paying attention.

I can't speak of the others, but i can speak to Moran and Leseuer. Moran played behind a run and gun team, even later in his career when it was a good team. This can be found in Iain's profiles of Leseuer. Leseuer played for the Senators, who were usually defensively sound, right?

More importantly, I find it very hard to believe that Nicholsson faced better competiton in the playoffs than Moran. Who were the best players in the world in 1902 and 1903 when Nicholsson won his Cups? Russel Bowie and not much else. The overall quality of hockey was much better in 1912 and 1913 when Moran won his Cups, at least if you go by the ATD.


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 08-22-2012 at 09:46 AM.
TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2012, 10:39 AM
  #310
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
While we are judging goalies by GAA, are you ready to finally admit Brodeur is a better goalie than Hasek?
This isn't just based on GAA though. more reputable defensive players "take" defensive credit from the goalies appropriately so what you're left with is something more similar to sv% (in the absence of shot totals and shot quality data) than GAA. This would be impossible except for the fact that we know which 6 players were on the ice with these goalies at all times.

Quote:
But no offense, as soon as I saw judging playoff performance by GAA, I stopped paying attention.
it's not just GAA... it is GAA in relation to quality of competition.

Quote:
I can't speak of the others, but i can speak to Moran and Leseuer. Moran played behind a run and gun team, even later in his career when it was a good team. This can be found in Iain's profiles of Leseuer. Leseuer played for the Senators, who were usually defensively sound, right?
Yes, LeSueur played for the defensively sound Senators, and those defensively sound players take some of the credit for Lesueur's strong GAA.

Quote:
More importantly, I find it very hard to believe that Nicholsson faced better competiton in the playoffs than Moran. Who were the best players in the world in 1902 and 1903 when Nicholsson won his Cups? Russel Bowie and not much else. The overall quality of hockey was much better in 1912 and 1913 when Moran won his Cups, at least if you go by the ATD.
it's not really a question of whether you believe it or not. There are only 12 playoff games in question here. 8 for Nicholson and 4 for Moran. Look who they were against. This part of it is not rocket science or very extensive... nor is it very debatable.

Your implication here is that a legitimate Stanley Cup contender in 1902 and 1903 - the Winnipeg team led by Bain and Gingras - was less of an opponent than the terrible Sydney and Moncton squads that got demolished just a decade later. It almost doesn't matter who Nicholson played in the 1902 and 1903 playoffs, they would have been much more worthy opponents than Sydney and Moncton. Look no further than the scores of pre-1914 stanley cup games for evidence of how competitive they are.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2012, 10:51 AM
  #311
Canadiens1958
Moderator
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 10,447
vCash: 500
Iffy

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
This isn't just based on GAA though. more reputable defensive players "take" defensive credit from the goalies appropriately so what you're left with is something more similar to sv% (in the absence of shot totals and shot quality data) than GAA. This would be impossible except for the fact that we know which 6 players were on the ice with these goalies at all times.



it's not just GAA... it is GAA in relation to quality of competition.



Yes, LeSueur played for the defensively sound Senators, and those defensively sound players take some of the credit for Lesueur's strong GAA.



it's not really a question of whether you believe it or not. There are only 12 playoff games in question here. 8 for Nicholson and 4 for Moran. Look who they were against. This part of it is not rocket science or very extensive... nor is it very debatable.

Your implication here is that a legitimate Stanley Cup contender in 1902 and 1903 - the Winnipeg team led by Bain and Gingras - was less of an opponent than the terrible Sydney and Moncton squads that got demolished just a decade later. It almost doesn't matter who Nicholson played in the 1902 and 1903 playoffs, they would have been much more worthy opponents than Sydney and Moncton. Look no further than the scores of pre-1914 stanley cup games for evidence of how competitive they are.
Unsupportable assumption that hockey remained constant between 1902 / 1903 and 1912/1913. Worthiness of opponents is not the same as quality of opponents.

The 1902/1903 era was amatuer hockey while by 1912/1913 the pro element had entered the game. Then you have rule changes, tactical changes and other factors.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2012, 11:31 AM
  #312
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,199
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
This isn't just based on GAA though. more reputable defensive players "take" defensive credit from the goalies appropriately so what you're left with is something more similar to sv% (in the absence of shot totals and shot quality data) than GAA. This would be impossible except for the fact that we know which 6 players were on the ice with these goalies at all times.
I know how Iain's formula works. I think it's a vast improvement off of raw GAA, but still has some issues (as you can see by the results from the 1920s).
Quote:
it's not just GAA... it is GAA in relation to quality of competition.
Yeah, I know. I just think team defense s more important than quality of competition for GA. Also, your estimates seem to be based off the names of the people on the opponents, not GF.

I donno, I just don't think judging goalies based off GA is a very useful endeavor, based off the Brodeur/Hasek example.

Quote:
Yes, LeSueur played for the defensively sound Senators, and those defensively sound players take some of the credit for Lesueur's strong GAA.
In Iain's system, not your brief look at GAA in the playoffs right?

Quote:
it's not really a question of whether you believe it or not. There are only 12 playoff games in question here. 8 for Nicholson and 4 for Moran. Look who they were against. This part of it is not rocket science or very extensive... nor is it very debatable.
I think looking at GAA from players from long ago without considering their team situation is a waste of time, personally. But if you want to go through the effort, why don't you post the rosters, records, and most importantly, the average goals scored per game by the opponents

Quote:
Your implication here is that a legitimate Stanley Cup contender in 1902 and 1903 - the Winnipeg team led by Bain and Gingras - was less of an opponent than the terrible Sydney and Moncton squads that got demolished just a decade later. It almost doesn't matter who Nicholson played in the 1902 and 1903 playoffs, they would have been much more worthy opponents than Sydney and Moncton. Look no further than the scores of pre-1914 stanley cup games for evidence of how competitive they are.
Yeah, that was my implications.

I don't know. I guess with the Cup challenge system, rather than a playoff system, it's possible for the challenger in 1903 to be stronger than in 1913. You're saying winning the NHA to get to the Cup challenge in 1912 and 1913 was much more impressive than the teams that were beaten in the challenge?

You're comparing tiny samples using GAA and I just don't think it's very helpful.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2012, 11:55 AM
  #313
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Yeah, I know. I just think team defense s more important than quality of competition for GA. Also, your estimates seem to be based off the names of the people on the opponents, not GF.
To improve upon this, I could build off of Iain’s formula and look at the defensive quality of the teams they were on using regular season data, not just who were they against, but this is so much work for such a small sample size, I understand.

Quote:
I donno, I just don't think judging goalies based off GA is a very useful endeavor, based off the Brodeur/Hasek example.
But sv% is more useful, and in a roundabout way this attempts to do that. Except…

Quote:
In Iain's system, not your brief look at GAA in the playoffs right?
That’s right. Sorry. Limited in what I can do.

Quote:
I think looking at GAA from players from long ago without considering their team situation is a waste of time, personally. But if you want to go through the effort, why don't you post the rosters, records, and most importantly, the average goals scored per game by the opponents
Well, I did give a pretty good rundown of who they played and who was on the teams, and in most cases the goals they allowed.

Quote:
Yeah, that was my implications.

I don't know. I guess with the Cup challenge system, rather than a playoff system, it's possible for the challenger in 1903 to be stronger than in 1913. You're saying winning the NHA to get to the Cup challenge in 1912 and 1913 was much more impressive than the teams that were beaten in the challenge?

You're comparing tiny samples using GAA and I just don't think it's very helpful.
Oh hell yeah, winning the NHA was really the championship in 1910-1913. Winning the playoff afterwards was a joke. The closest of all the games those 4 seasons was 6-2. The closest!

Whereas in that earlier era, those Manitoba teams (led by Bain, Scanlan, Gingras, Phillips, Breen, McGimsie, Griffis and the Flett brothers, but not all at the same time of course) were proving to be a real thorn in the balls of the eastern champs and incumbents every time they played them.

It really is a shame that the two senator dynasties and the two montreal dynasties never had a full-on series against eachother, for a lot of reasons, not the least of which being to see how their mystery goalies stacked up to eachother. (as I showed you, there were two times they played eachother, one game each time) Unfortunately, the best and most entertaining Stanley Cup hockey of the era was likely the Kenora challenges, with the other Winnipeg challenges not too far behind, and beyond that it was few and far between. It makes judging “clutch” play among goalies of the time really difficult. And makes me wonder if we shouldn’t be considering this Geroux character in the AAA draft.

Nicholson did have 7 very close, very tight games with these Winnipeg teams, the games where they held onto their lead like warriors to the bitter end, earning the nickname “Little Men Of Iron”. One mistake by him and those games could have ended up differently. I can’t say that about any game Moran played. Lesueur, same, except he almost lost the Edmonton series for them. 4 of Hern’s games qualify (the Kenora matches). And only one match for Hutton qualifies. It was vs. Nicholson, and they dueled to a 5-5 draw.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-22-2012, 01:39 PM
  #314
Rob Scuderi
Registered User
 
Rob Scuderi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 2,572
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Coaching

This is the major issue. The team just not look like an Alain Vigneault type team. He micromanages a team. Doubt that this works well with a creative Russian first unit forward line. Also you have four very similar defencemen - Jarret,Burke,Shields, Evans. Solid group but not the variety Vigneault likes to micromanage.

Offence is there, put Koivu with Cloutier and you have two solid lines. Tom Bladon is wasted if not on a PP.

Defence is there from the forwards if properly matched with defenmen pairings and left to play. PK is solid.

Goalies. Two solid and complimentary goaltenders.
Vecens pretty much covered it all already but I'll still respond a bit. Do you think there's any players in the league right now who'd compare to our first line better than the Sedins? Vigneault handles them fine and has gotten two President's Trophies using them with his focus on zone starts. I think he's the perfect man honestly to employ a line like that honestly.

No one plays four defensive pairs, I'm not sure if that was made clear or not. Bladon would certainly be on the PP if he was dressing every night, and Evans hardly offsets a balance of the defense by not dressing. Young can carry the puck as well as anyone in this draft if not better, Mike O'Connell is a puckmover who was regularly used on the PK, and Gut was an offensive-minded defenseman who Tikal had to babysit (enter Allan Shields). I don't think they're too one-dimensional.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
So which Russian forward plays the Alex Burrows role? Major problem right there. The micromanaging interrupts flow and chemistry while taking away the lines strength of stretching the ice.

Breen with Cloutier. Similar to a lite version of Hull and Esposito. One will always be shorted on scoring chances. Cloutier needed a playmaking center with size. Koivu fits the bill. Goal scoring centers need wingers who can do the corner work, play defense.
This line did fine against squads made up of NHLers throughout their careers so I don't think they'll struggle with Kamensky as the puck winner and physical presence instead of a Burrows type. If Vigneault really does prove to be the unsatisfied taskmaster there's plenty of heart and soul guys who were just alright scorers that he could pick from in a pinch. I really don't see it being that big an issue though, as Vecens said these players survived under one difficult coach.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VanIslander View Post
Kamensky with Forsberg and C. Lemieux was one of my favorite lines in the Dead Puck Era. He fought through the clutching and grabbing, really earned his open space at times. He was physical in a I'm-gonna-get-there sort of way, not as a power forward, more as a determined struggler in traffic. He was NOT a shrinking violet!

Here is Valeri slashing Ulf Samuelsson: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EOiI9MrCj8

And here is Valeri knocking out Ulf Samuelsson! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=19Jw2IsW_yM

Here Valeri retaliates by hitting and then goes after Jovanovski in the playoffs: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3-PFABAP2g

Valeri had a temper and a determination that made him a great competitor. I loved the guy. He's twice or thrice the battler that a Hejduk is!
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
In the USSR, he was apparently the most physical player on his line. In the NHL, he was the least physical member of the Kamensky-Forsberg-Lemieux line, though that's not exactly an insult.

I'm not sure if that means anything here at all
I don't think it's too damning. If one were somebody like a Tanguay type I'd definitely be worried, but Lemieux is a given and I can deal with less than Forsberg.

I think VI has it though. We have quotes about how "physical" he was following the Canada Cup and Rendezvous games, but I don't think it was really referring to him laying people out. Kamensky's physicality shows up in the sense that when he's carrying the puck he was a force driving the net. I think the Soviet who could blow by you as you got a piece of him was much rarer than the Soviet who just blew by you wide with speed or agilely ducked a check.

He did retaliate against Samuelsson and Jovo, and there's the fight with him and Scott Niedermayer where he pulls his jersey over his head, so he won't be taking repeated gloved punches to the face with no reaction however

edit: I split the WC Finishes chart into two groups. 1970-1994 and 1995-2012. I'm hoping to post the finishes for the Olympics and Canada Cups combined with World Cups next.


Last edited by Rob Scuderi: 08-22-2012 at 03:21 PM.
Rob Scuderi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 10:39 AM
  #315
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,322
vCash: 500
I know we still want to do the whole "pimp five players" thing, but I was thinking of something else I could do. What if I just off the top of my head listed 15 players at each spot that I was thinking of including in my votes? This would give other guys the opportunity to say "Why _____?" and "Why not _______?" You could make a case for a player on your own team that seems to you to obviously stand out above someone I have listed, or a player on another team too. I will listen to your cases and my final votes will be private, but it allows more input to go into my votes and I'd feel better about what I am submitting.

The downside: If I'm the only one that does this, there is a chance that it can have an "influencing" effect on the votes of other GMs. I don't want that to happen; I want people to have a mind of their own. the other thing is that maybe it creates a disadvantage for my own players in the voting because I wouldn't be naming any of them. This can all be remedied by me not being the only one publicly posting my preliminary votes. What do you think? Should I do this? And who else will do this?

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 10:42 AM
  #316
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,322
vCash: 500
I find these votes very important, because let's face it, the ATD is not perfect. There were 240 players selected as top-6 forwards and 240 as bottom-6 forwards; surely 15 of each could be replaced by the 15 best here. Same with the 280 or so defensemen. There are probably closer to 40 who could be replaced. These serve as a guide to any ATD GM who is paying attention, and especially to MLD GMs who "suspect" that a player is good enough to make the leap, but might need a little "reassurance" that there is some support behind the pick if they make it.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 10:58 AM
  #317
VanIslander
Hockey in the blood.
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 17,340
vCash: 500
Line-ups posted on thread but not reviewed yet (except for a couple of token remarks by one GM):

Chicago Blaze
Montreal Maroons
Pittsburgh Duquesne
Medicine Hat Tricks (was self-reviewed)


Assassinations received:

Regina Capitals (1/2)
Brynäs IF
Sherbrooke Castors
Winnipeg Monarchs
Raleigh Icecaps
Winston-Salem Polar Twins
Connecticut Whale
Yarmouth Mariners (2)
Zambia Mania (2)
Montreal Orfuns (3)

Assassinations given:

BillyShoe1721 (5)
tony d (3)
TheDevilMadeMe (2)
VanIslander
Dave G
Dreakmur
Canadiens1952 (1/2)

VanIslander is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 11:01 AM
  #318
VanIslander
Hockey in the blood.
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 17,340
vCash: 500
If everyone assassinated a team or two we could move onto the regular season voting and get rankings for playoff match-ups. There will be eight series in the first round and four rounds in all.

It would be nice if these assassinations didn't drag into September.

VanIslander is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 11:09 AM
  #319
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,199
vCash: 500
Pittsburgh Duquesne Review

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bring Back Scuderi View Post
Pittsburgh Duquesne

Coach: Alain Vigneault

Valery Kamensky-Slava Bykov (A)-Andrei Khomutov
Butch Keeling-Billy Breen-Real Cloutier
Don Grosso-Mikko Koivu-Bill Fairbairn
Martin Gelinas-Michal Pivonka-Jimmy Herbert
Paul Holmgren, Glen Murray

Doug Jarrett-Weldy Young (C)
Marty Burke-Mike O'Connell
Karel Gut (A)-Allan Shields
Stewart Evans, Tom Bladon

Marty Turco
Dan Bouchard

PP 1: Kamensky-Bykov-Khomutov-Young-O'Connell
PP 2: Keeling-Breen-Cloutier-Gut-Jarrett

PK 1: Koivu-Fairbairn-Jarrett-Shields
PK 2: Pivonka-Grosso-Burke-O'Connell
Extras: Gelinas, Young
Coaching and leadership:

Vigneault is a decent coach at this level. He's definitely a big time micromanager, which has its strengths and drawbacks.

Weldy Young years was captain for 2 back in ancient times, which is something, but not sure I'd make him my captain here. Given the makeup of your team, Bykov might be a better choice. Gut is a solid assistant. I don't see that much secondary leadership, but not sure if it matters.

Forwards:


2/3 of a great first line. Bykov's scoring credentials make him one of the top centers here, and I've really been sold on Kamensky's abilities before his injury. I don't think you can just assume Kamensky will play like pre-injury Kamensky here, but he's still better offensively than most puck winners out there. Khomutov is the one I'm not sold on. He had a few good tournaments, but his overall offensive seems to fall behind his linemates, and he doesn't provide much other than offense. *When you reunite real life lines, you get known chemistry, but also are stuck with the weak link.

The chemistry of the second line really depends on how much you buy Breen's ability to do anything but score goals. He's a fantastic goal scorer at this level (better than HHOF contemporary McGimsie), but I really haven't seen anything compelling as to the rest of his game. Cloutier is an overall offensive player. I do think some of Cloutier's well-rounded offensive game will be wasted, as he won't get many opportunities to shoot, as I really don't see Breen as much of a passer. Keeling is a good glue guy - tough but doesn't take penalties. But he's also more of a goal scorer than a playmaker. This is one of the most talented second lines in the draft, but comes with a big question - can Cloutier carry the playmaking for the line? And what does that do to his goal scoring?

Three two-way players for a very effective two-way third line and Fairbairn brings some grit. Not as good defensively as a pure shutdown line, but more well-rounded. I expect them to get a lot of defensive zone draws under Vigneault.

Well rounded 4th line that brings a little of everything. I especially like Herbert - he's tough but can score.

Overall, one of the best bottom 6s in the draft at even strength. But you sacrificed penalty killing ability to get that (more on that later).

Your spares are both RWs; what happens if a center is injured?

Defense:

Its hard to tell how good Weldy Young actually was, but I think he's good enough to be a top pairing guy here. He reads like an extremely hard hitting puck mover. Lack of discipline is his big weakness. Jarrett is one of the better shut down guys here IMO and he's a good fit for Young - calm and uses his size and long reach to shut guys down.

Burke is a good second pairing anchor who doesn't seem to really have a weakness. Mike O'Connell is a good offense-first guy who doesn't neglect his own zone. I think you drafted O'Connell too high; but he'll do you well as a #4.

Anyone who has issues with the quality of Czech hockey when Zabrodsky played should have even bigger issues with Gut. Gut's international career (1952-1960) almost perfectly coincides with the "lost generation" of Czechoslovakian hockey. On the other hand, Gut was the long term captain of that team, so he brings much needed leadership. Shields is ok as a #6 - I like his hard hitting game, but is he good enough defensively to cover for Gut, who was known to take chances?

Stewart Evans seems to have a better record than Shields; any reason you have him benched? Bladon is pure offensive specialist at this level.

Goalies:

Before the draft, I came up with a list of 12 goalies I would feel comfortable with, and you have 2 of them. I think Bouchard's playoff record scares people away, but his regular season All Star and unofficial save percentage records are better than a lot of starters here. I thought he was easily the best modern goalie in MLD 2011, but the goalie pool there was much shallower than here, since it was after a 40 team draft.

I actually think Bouchard is a better regular season goalie than Turco, but Turco's playoff record is "average," compared to "poor" for Bouchard.

Powerplay:

Forwards are the same as at even strength. *On the first unit, Bykov and Kamensky are very good, and Khomutov less good but possibly propped up by chemistry with his linemates. Second unit has the talent, but is going to force Cloutier to be a playmaker, rather than a well-rounded offensive player.

On the point, I like O'Connell, but I'm not sure if Young's puck moving translates into quite enough offense.

Gut is solid on the second PP; Jarett reads as a guy who shouldn't be on the PP at all - do you think Burke would be better?

Penalty kill:

I honestly think your PK forwards are very weak - you have 4 two-way players, but none of them particularly known as top PKers in the NHL. I'd be fine with any of them on a second unit, but I'd want a stronger first unit, considering your captain, Weldy Young, is going to take a lot of penalties.

On D, Jarrett is one of the top PK defensmen in the draft. Shields and Burke are okay. O'Connell isn't ideal, but should be fine.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 12:26 PM
  #320
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,322
vCash: 500
Jarrett is a good physical and defensive defenseman, but he is one of those cases where the PK record is more the result of someone else. Bill White was the biggest reason that Chicago generated such solid numbers, so take his "44%, 0.85" numbers with somewhat of a grain of salt.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 12:33 PM
  #321
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,199
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Jarrett is a good physical and defensive defenseman, but he is one of those cases where the PK record is more the result of someone else. Bill White was the biggest reason that Chicago generated such solid numbers, so take his "44%, 0.85" numbers with somewhat of a grain of salt.
Yeah, but there are quotes about his PKing too

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 01:36 PM
  #322
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,199
vCash: 500
I'll hit up the Chicago Blaze by tomorrow; unless someone else really wants to do them

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 01:44 PM
  #323
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 30,321
vCash: 500
Ok, here is a retooled Polar Twins lineup that takes into account some of the feedback I've received so far.

Winston-Salem Polar Twins


Power Play 1
Horvath - Nilsson - Kehoe
Ellett - Maxwell

Power Play 2
D. Brown - Juneau - Bernier
Langlois - Guevremont

Penalty Kill 1
Burns - Henning
A. Brown - Butcher

Penalty Kill 2
Yelle - D. Brown
Langlois - Guevremont



Changes

Scratched Jim Riley. Good player, doesn't really fit in this particular lineup. As a spare, he can plug into an offensive role on the left wing. If anyone is interested in trading for Riley, let me know via PM. He's wasted value as a spare.

Buzz Boll takes Riley's spot as third-line LW. Boll's an energy guy with modest scoring touch, pretty much a typical third-line winger in any era.

Henning fills the vacant LW space on the fourth line, where he is "elite" in that role. I feel very, very good about Henning-Yelle-Brown as a shutdown line.

It pains me to do it, but I sent Kiessling to the press box. I don't want to fight that kind of uphill battle in my first MLD.

Kiessling's spot on the third pair is taken by Arnie Brown, creating a shutdown pair with Butcher. This releases a bit of pressure on the other pairings.

Horvath shifts to the LW slot on the first PP. This is out of position for him, but I assume that isn't going to be penalized too heavily considering the role has virtually no defensive responsibility. Nilsson now has a legitimate sniper on either wing.

On the 2nd PP, Juneau shifts to C where he will be the primary playmaker. In a bit of a surprise, to myself at least, I realized that Dustin Brown actually gets a big chunk of his offense on the PP (13 of his 17 goals in 2006-07!). I put him at LW to round out the line a bit, providing some physicality and net presence. And maybe even the occasional 5-on-3 when he div... gets tripped

Langlois takes Kiessling's spot on the second PP unit. He is not a great offensive machine, but he proved competent in a supporting offensive role. This means both the PP pairings are identical to the ES pairings, leaving the third pair intact for the post-PP momentum shift.

On the first PK unit, Burns and Henning are a strong top pair of forwards. The shutdown pair of Arnie Brown and Garth Butcher stays intact for PK duty.

On the second PK unit, Juneau heads to the bench and is replaced by Dustin Brown. I think Yelle-Brown as a second forward PK line is pretty good. Once again, Langlois-Guevremont stay intact from ES, allowing Ellett-Maxwell to provide a post-PK offensive spark along with the first or second line, none of whom are asked to kill penalties.

I agree with TDMM that it's odd to have a young fourth-liner wear the C, so I switched Dustin Brown to an A and gave the captainship to Garth Butcher. Butcher was a Cherry kind of guy all the way, and highly respected by his teammates. In the process of researching Burns, I uncovered the following:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shorthanded: The Untold Story of the Seals: Hockey's Most Colorful Team
"He was a good assistant captain who spent time with the younger players. He brought a lot to the table; a good playmaker who set up his wingers." -- Tracy Pratt on Charlie Burns

... "despite all of these surface differences [being American, wearing a helmet, having coaching experience], one thing Burns had from all his teammates was respect."

... "Burns's coaching experience gave Burns insight into Bert Olmstead's methods and the wily veteran forward respected the Seals first-year coach."

... "Burns was not one to make excuses, however. While many players complained about the extensive travel West Coast teams had to endure, Burns refused to do so. "Everybody goes through ups and downs," Burns said. "People use [travel] as an excuse. Winning is a habit and so is waiting to win. Losing is a habit and so is waiting to lose."
This guy is worth an "A" patch in my book.

Also, bowing to popular opinion I have moved Mike Karakas into the starting position. If he struggles or breaks his toe at an inopportune time, Irbe is more than serviceable to take over while trailing a game or series and find a way to win.

Spares are now the multi-positional Dolly Swift, two-way defenseman (and a good one! ) Udo Kiessling and a very solid goal-scorer in Jim Riley.


Last edited by tarheelhockey: 09-03-2012 at 07:52 PM.
tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 02:21 PM
  #324
vecens24
Registered User
 
vecens24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 5,002
vCash: 500
Questions about centers being out: Herbert and Grosso are both possible C's as being two positional. We have six C's.

PK: Fairbairn is absolutely an awesome PKer here, and Koivu is as well. BBS has the stats on them, but they're very, very good for both. Pivonka's are also solid, and Grosso was definitely known as a two-way guy.

I guess a possible question here for the secon line is: do you think Swapping Grosso and Keeling makes sense. Definitely a better playmaker.

Evans I also agree on. We're between Shields and Evans, and I thi k Evans is a better fit here. BBS likes Shields better, he can post why soon enough. To be honest though in the regular season they probably will split the duties.

vecens24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-23-2012, 02:36 PM
  #325
Rob Scuderi
Registered User
 
Rob Scuderi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 2,572
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Coaching and leadership:

Vigneault is a decent coach at this level. He's definitely a big time micromanager, which has its strengths and drawbacks.

Weldy Young years was captain for 2 back in ancient times, which is something, but not sure I'd make him my captain here. Given the makeup of your team, Bykov might be a better choice. Gut is a solid assistant. I don't see that much secondary leadership, but not sure if it matters.

Forwards:


2/3 of a great first line. Bykov's scoring credentials make him one of the top centers here, and I've really been sold on Kamensky's abilities before his injury. I don't think you can just assume Kamensky will play like pre-injury Kamensky here, but he's still better offensively than most puck winners out there. Khomutov is the one I'm not sold on. He had a few good tournaments, but his overall offensive seems to fall behind his linemates, and he doesn't provide much other than offense. *When you reunite real life lines, you get known chemistry, but also are stuck with the weak link.

The chemistry of the second line really depends on how much you buy Breen's ability to do anything but score goals. He's a fantastic goal scorer at this level (better than HHOF contemporary McGimsie), but I really haven't seen anything compelling as to the rest of his game. Cloutier is an overall offensive player. I do think some of Cloutier's well-rounded offensive game will be wasted, as he won't get many opportunities to shoot, as I really don't see Breen as much of a passer. Keeling is a good glue guy - tough but doesn't take penalties. But he's also more of a goal scorer than a playmaker. This is one of the most talented second lines in the draft, but comes with a big question - can Cloutier carry the playmaking for the line? And what does that do to his goal scoring?

Three two-way players for a very effective two-way third line and Fairbairn brings some grit. Not as good defensively as a pure shutdown line, but more well-rounded. I expect them to get a lot of defensive zone draws under Vigneault.

Well rounded 4th line that brings a little of everything. I especially like Herbert - he's tough but can score.

Overall, one of the best bottom 6s in the draft at even strength. But you sacrificed penalty killing ability to get that (more on that later).

Your spares are both RWs; what happens if a center is injured?

Defense:

Its hard to tell how good Weldy Young actually was, but I think he's good enough to be a top pairing guy here. He reads like an extremely hard hitting puck mover. Lack of discipline is his big weakness. Jarrett is one of the better shut down guys here IMO and he's a good fit for Young - calm and uses his size and long reach to shut guys down.

Burke is a good second pairing anchor who doesn't seem to really have a weakness. Mike O'Connell is a good offense-first guy who doesn't neglect his own zone. I think you drafted O'Connell too high; but he'll do you well as a #4.

Anyone who has issues with the quality of Czech hockey when Zabrodsky played should have even bigger issues with Gut. Gut's international career (1952-1960) almost perfectly coincides with the "lost generation" of Czechoslovakian hockey. On the other hand, Gut was the long term captain of that team, so he brings much needed leadership. Shields is ok as a #6 - I like his hard hitting game, but is he good enough defensively to cover for Gut, who was known to take chances?

Stewart Evans seems to have a better record than Shields; any reason you have him benched? Bladon is pure offensive specialist at this level.

Goalies:

Before the draft, I came up with a list of 12 goalies I would feel comfortable with, and you have 2 of them. I think Bouchard's playoff record scares people away, but his regular season All Star and unofficial save percentage records are better than a lot of starters here. I thought he was easily the best modern goalie in MLD 2011, but the goalie pool there was much shallower than here, since it was after a 40 team draft.

I actually think Bouchard is a better regular season goalie than Turco, but Turco's playoff record is "average," compared to "poor" for Bouchard.

Powerplay:

Forwards are the same as at even strength. *On the first unit, Bykov and Kamensky are very good, and Khomutov less good but possibly propped up by chemistry with his linemates. Second unit has the talent, but is going to force Cloutier to be a playmaker, rather than a well-rounded offensive player.

On the point, I like O'Connell, but I'm not sure if Young's puck moving translates into quite enough offense.

Gut is solid on the second PP; Jarett reads as a guy who shouldn't be on the PP at all - do you think Burke would be better?

Penalty kill:

I honestly think your PK forwards are very weak - you have 4 two-way players, but none of them particularly known as top PKers in the NHL. I'd be fine with any of them on a second unit, but I'd want a stronger first unit, considering your captain, Weldy Young, is going to take a lot of penalties.

On D, Jarrett is one of the top PK defensmen in the draft. Shields and Burke are okay. O'Connell isn't ideal, but should be fine.
Interesting thoughts as always, really appreciate the assassination.

I don't think Khomutov is too out of place. He played forever for the national team and as you said had a few nice tournaments. He and Bykov were also first and second in the Swiss league scoring five times, with injuries interfering in two seasons and only finally in 1997 are they beaten without missing games. Not a huge deal, but they beat out Mats Naslund and Kent Nilsson their first year for example. Also I'm not really sure what else Khomutov brings. I noticed the announcers during the Canada Cup say his nickname was "The Rat" but they didn't really explain why. I now found a quote talking about it more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Newsday - Feb 11, 1987
Andrei Khomutov - No. 15, LW, 5-9, 160, 25 years old, Central Red Army. Nickname is "The Russian Rat," as he plays like Boston's Ken Linseman. Always in motion. Complements 20-year-old center Valeri Kamensky, a future star.
The questions regarding the second line are definitely fair. Part of the problem with the amateurs is finding out about their playmaking and Vecens and I both found absolutely nothing on Breen out there, about his playmaking or otherwise. I think he should go ahead of McGimsie but it's frustrating how little there is out there about him.

Also regarding centers, Herbert and Grosso were both versatile center/wingers . Grosso seems to have played center during his career year with Abel playing left wing. Herbert's career year was when he was on a line with Carson Cooper who was a right winger so I'm assuming he spent that year at center as well, but I haven't checked the newspapers on that one like I have with Grosso's.

I think Shields makes a fine defensive conscience for Gut. He played with Conacher and was nothing more than a stay-at-home type. He's a big body and a RHS so he seemed to fit well next to Gut.

Shields and Evans are basically interchangeable I think. Both play the same style, Evans record is a bit better, Shields was slightly bigger and a RHS. One played with Cy Wentworth, the other played with Lionel Conacher. Maybe that one's worth looking at again.

Agreed on Bladon, he was basically what PP defenseman looks good now.

Honestly if I were to double-shift any defenseman on the PP (ignoring TOI management), it'd be Weldy Young. That's how valuable I think he was offensively, but I'm just not sure I'll be able to demonstrate it. Mike Grant is an ATDer based on his offense and he scored 10 goals from 1893 to 1900. During that period Weldy had 11 goals according to Trail and we know his career started a few years earlier. I think his game would be great on the PP and his rushing abilities would be great for zone entries just to begin with.

Burke is probably the better choice than Jarrett for the second unit.

I think Koivu looks good on a top PK unit here.
Year% KilledTeam Rating
200616%0.65
200721%0.74
200841%0.90
200955%0.56
201037%1.01
201137%0.95
201235%1.07

Fairbairn's numbers: 36%, 0.97
Pivonka: 19%, 0.80


Last edited by Rob Scuderi: 08-23-2012 at 02:44 PM.
Rob Scuderi 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 01:54 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.