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 - Bob Cole Division

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-02-2013, 10:12 AM
  #176
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,509
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vecens24 View Post
One thing I did notice that Tarasov said in both books is that he was already down to 50 second shifts by 1967. Was that normal in the NHL as well during that time? Or would he be one of the few people at the time with modern shift-style?
Fred Shero was an NHL pioneer in short shifts and may have followed Tarasov's lead.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vau...78/3/index.htm

Quote:
The key part of Shero's plan, though, was much like his anti-Orr strategy: wear out the Connection by quick line changes.

Shero's plan became operative the moment*Perreault, Martin*and*Robert*skated out Thursday night for their first shift in Game One. The Connection was on the ice for exactly 97 seconds, and during that time Shero threw three different lines at them. On their next shift of 106 seconds, the Connection faced another three lines. And those line changes were done s-l-o-w-l-y, also according to Shero's design. "We wanted to disrupt any momentum they might have been building up,"*Clarke*said.

Quote:
Shero became a disciple of the Russian school of hockey while coaching at St. Paul in the mid-1960s. "Anatoli Tarasov's book became my bible," he says. "I've read it at least 100 times. Even now I still don't know all there is to coaching. I'm still learning, which is why I went to*Russia*for a coaching clinic last summer. At least I realize I don't know everything.*

overpass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2013, 10:13 AM
  #177
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,463
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
Mystery Alaskans



Anatoli Tarasov
Arkady Chernyshev

Aurele Joliat - Howie Morenz - Jack Walker
George Hay - Pierre Turgeon - Jarome Iginla "C"
Pavol Demitra - Russell Bowie - Vic Stasiuk
Ray Getliffe - Red Sullivan "A" - Billy Boucher

Hod Stuart - Earl Seibert "A"
Sergei Gonchar - Bob Goldham
Rod Seiling - Yuri Liapkin

Bill Durnan
Alec Connell


Spares: Saku Koivu, Ken Randall, Alexander Gusev


Power Play #1
Aurele Joliat - Howie Morenz - Jarome Iginla
Sergei Gonchar - Yuri Liapkin

Power Play #2
Russell Bowie - Pierre Turgeon - Vic Stasiuk
Hod Stuart - Earl Seibert

Penalty Kill #1
Jack Walker - Red Sullivan
Hod Stuart - Earl Seibert

Penalty Kill #2
Howie Morenz - Aurele Joliat
Rod Seiling - Bob Goldham

Penalty Kill #3
Ray Getliffe - George Hay
I like:
+ the reunited coaching duo
+ solid goaltending
+ interesting approach without a traditional checking 3rd line, thus a lot of offensive depth

I don't like:
- the overall checking from forwards is mediocre at best
- Gonchar on 2nd pairing is a catastrophe waiting to happen

MadArcand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2013, 10:15 AM
  #178
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 Dreakmur View Post
The only problem I see with the system is the assumption that the leagues were exactly equal. I believe they were close, but the NHL was stronger. That strength, in my opinion, came from depth and not top-end talent. I think that is proven in 1927, when the incoming Western players rule the offensive leaderboards. Since only the best players from each league are going to be involved in the top end here, I don't see much impact of the lack of depth in the West.
I meant to respond to this earlier. A couple of points:

- the consolidated western leagues in 1924-25 and 1925-26 were probably just as strong and deep as the NHL (maybe even a tick stronger), and split the Stanley Cup 1-1 with NHL teams over those two playoffs. Bill Cook and Frank Boucher were beginning to peak by that point, Frank Frederickson was still in his prime, and there was generally a lot of offensive talent out west.

- the same is not true of the WCHL from 1921-22 through 1923-24, which was still just a prairie league and had not yet integrated PCHA stars like Frederickson, Boucher, MacKay, etc.

- the "non-integrated" WCHL was probably the shallowest of the three north american leagues at the time. Its leaderboards are full of unfamiliar names (like Art Gagne, Harry Oliver, Rabbit McVeigh and Ty Arbour) - players who would fade into obscurity or mediocrity as the leagues consolidated and there were fewer openings and thus more competition for scoring roles in professional hockey.

- top talents in shallow leagues often end up getting a bigger slice of the pie in terms of scoring than do the same players in deeper leagues. This is likely due to a number of factors: weaker goaltending and defense allows stars more time and space to operate; stars are given a greater proportion of scoring opportunities, etc. You can see pretty clearly in the chart below the effect of expansion on the "slice of the scoring pie" enjoyed by star players in the NHL:



- the dotted line is teams in the league
- the blue line is VsX scoring/goals-per-game (our "slice of the pie" statistic)

The single biggest permanent jump in our "slice-of-the-pie" stat happens simultaneous to the 1967-68 expansion. It seems clear that expansion led to a thinning of talent across the league, and that with less intra-team competition for scoring opportunities and probably less pressure from specialized checking units, the stars of the league were able to score a larger share of the goals league-wide. This should really not surprise us, as it makes a lot of sense.

So I am somewhat skeptical of the scoring exploits of early WCHL stars - mainly Keats, Hay and Simpson, particularly as they could not reproduce their high-scoring exploits with any consistency once the leagues got thicker with talent. All three of the leagues were thin by the standards of the post-consolidation NHL, but the early WCHL especially so, and I believe the league's paucity of talent inflated the scoring (relative to the league and in general) of the few good scorers who were playing on the prairies at the time.

Sturminator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2013, 11:08 AM
  #179
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,581
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
I don't like:
- the overall checking from forwards is mediocre at best
Do you mean hitting or defensive play?

If you mean hitting, then I'd agree. If you mean defensive ability, I'd disagree.

Jack Walker is one of the vety best defensive forwards of all time. Red Sullivan, thanks to new information found by overpass, should be considered a good checking center. Ray Getliffe and Vic Stasiuk bring good forechecking annd backchecking abilties. Even many of my top players are very good defensively - Howie Morenz, Aurele Joliat, and George Hay.

Quote:
- Gonchar on 2nd pairing is a catastrophe waiting to happen
Once again, Sergei Gonchar may have defensive issues, but his offensive skills more than make up for it. On a list of defensemen, Gonchar ranking about #70, and that means is a very good #3 in a draft this size, so there should be no question about his ability to play on a 2nd pairing.

Like any other offensive defenseman with defensiveissue, Gonchar would ideally be paired with defenseman who could cover for his weaknesses. We feel that Bob Goldham, not only covers for his weaknesses, but is a very good 2nd pairing defenseman. Goldham would rank about #90 on that same list, and that means he is a passable #3.

Dreakmur is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2013, 11:27 AM
  #180
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,581
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sturminator View Post
I meant to respond to this earlier. A couple of points:

- the consolidated western leagues in 1924-25 and 1925-26 were probably just as strong and deep as the NHL (maybe even a tick stronger), and split the Stanley Cup 1-1 with NHL teams over those two playoffs. Bill Cook and Frank Boucher were beginning to peak by that point, Frank Frederickson was still in his prime, and there was generally a lot of offensive talent out west.
Agreed.

Quote:
- the same is not true of the WCHL from 1921-22 through 1923-24, which was still just a prairie league and had not yet integrated PCHA stars like Frederickson, Boucher, MacKay, etc.
It looks like the WHCL actually had the majority of the offensive talent. The three players you listed above are the only guys who could crack the top-10s when the leagues merged.

Quote:
- the "non-integrated" WCHL was probably the shallowest of the three north american leagues at the time. Its leaderboards are full of unfamiliar names (like Art Gagne, Harry Oliver, Rabbit McVeigh and Ty Arbour) - players who would fade into obscurity or mediocrity as the leagues consolidated and there were fewer openings and thus more competition for scoring roles in professional hockey.
Disagree.

The WCHL looks like it was much deeper than the PCHL at that time. Art Gagne, Harry Oliver, and Charlie McVeigh all had good NHL careers, with multiple times on the leaderboard. That's not a bad secondary wave of offensive guys.

A guy like Corb Denneny, who went back and forth between the leagues, showed that the offensive talent is comparable between the NHL and WCHL.

Quote:
- top talents in shallow leagues often end up getting a bigger slice of the pie in terms of scoring than do the same players in deeper leagues. This is likely due to a number of factors: weaker goaltending and defense allows stars more time and space to operate; stars are given a greater proportion of scoring opportunities, etc. You can see pretty clearly in the chart below the effect of expansion on the "slice of the scoring pie" enjoyed by star players in the NHL:
I agree that the stars score more in a shallower league, but how much shallower was the WCHL than the NHL?


Quote:
So I am somewhat skeptical of the scoring exploits of early WCHL stars - mainly Keats, Hay and Simpson, particularly as they could not reproduce their high-scoring exploits with any consistency once the leagues got thicker with talent. All three of the leagues were thin by the standards of the post-consolidation NHL, but the early WCHL especially so, and I believe the league's paucity of talent inflated the scoring (relative to the league and in general) of the few good scorers who were playing on the prairies at the time.
Keats and Hay both produced in the NHL.

Dreakmur is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2013, 11:57 AM
  #181
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,463
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
Once again, Sergei Gonchar may have defensive issues, but his offensive skills more than make up for it. On a list of defensemen, Gonchar ranking about #70, and that means is a very good #3 in a draft this size, so there should be no question about his ability to play on a 2nd pairing.

Like any other offensive defenseman with defensiveissue, Gonchar would ideally be paired with defenseman who could cover for his weaknesses. We feel that Bob Goldham, not only covers for his weaknesses, but is a very good 2nd pairing defenseman. Goldham would rank about #90 on that same list, and that means he is a passable #3.
Would you play Phil Housley on second pairing at even strength?

MadArcand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2013, 12:19 PM
  #182
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,581
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
Would you play Phil Housley on second pairing at even strength?
I would under the right circumstances. Housley is probably right on the edge between a #3 and #4, so I see no reason to not use an excellent #4 defenseman on the 2nd pairing.

There are a lot of guys who struggle defensively, but bring enough other aspects to the table to be effective players. Gonchar and Housley are among them, and the list is quite large. Off the top of my head, Dan Boyle, Gary Suter, Joe Simpson, Reed Larson, Flash Hollett, Lloyd Cook, Brian Rafalski, Harry Cameron are all being used as 2nd pairing defensemen in this draft. They are all guys who are somewhere within the spectrum of needing a reliable partner.

Dreakmur is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2013, 02:04 PM
  #183
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 Dreakmur View Post
It looks like the WHCL actually had the majority of the offensive talent. The three players you listed above are the only guys who could crack the top-10s when the leagues merged.
Both Foyston and Morris came to the end of their respective primes just before the merger. The PCHA was starting to thin out a bit towards the end there, you are right, which is probably one of the major reasons why the Patricks decided on realignment and consolidation. I can buy the argument that the leagues were equal in 1923-24, and the WCHL may have even been a bit better given the fact that Calgary beat the PCHA champ in the playoffs. But before that, no way was the WCHL as good - not with Foyston, Morris, MacKay and Frederickson all in their primes.

Quote:
The WCHL looks like it was much deeper than the PCHL at that time. Art Gagne, Harry Oliver, and Charlie McVeigh all had good NHL careers, with multiple times on the leaderboard. That's not a bad secondary wave of offensive guys.
- Art Gagne came to the NHL at the age of 29 and had one respectable offensive season with 30 points, which was good for 79% of the #2 scorer.

- Harry Oliver came to the NHL at the age of 28, and put up seasons of 79% and 66% of the #2 scorer before fading into obscurity.

- Timothy "Rabbit" McVeigh's only appearances on NHL leaderboards were in the games played column.

I shouldn't have to remind you what guys like Foyston and Morris did to NHL teams in their primes.

Quote:
A guy like Corb Denneny, who went back and forth between the leagues, showed that the offensive talent is comparable between the NHL and WCHL.
Corb Denneny never cracked 80% of the #2 scorer in the NHL, either. In his one good year in the WHL, he was at 91% of the #2 scorer in that league.

Quote:
Keats and Hay both produced in the NHL.
Between the two of them, their best scoring percentages in the NHL are:

90, 66, 66, 62, 61, 53

Hay's big season was actually the only time that any of these players ever broke the 80% scoring barrier in the NHL.

Sturminator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2013, 02:11 PM
  #184
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,278
vCash: 500
Sturm, the WCHL had definitely surpassed the PCHA by the time they merged. The two of them played an interlocking schedule for several years, and the WCHL usually won.

Check out this blog post by Iain Fyffe on Art Duncan's huge season:

http://hockeyhistorysis.blogspot.com...m-defence.html

Quote:
But there's still something else to consider. In 1922/23 and 1923/24, the PCHA played an interlocking schedule with Canada's other western major league, the WCHL. In 1924, for example, Vancouver played 11 games against each of Victoria and Seattle, the other PCHA clubs, and two games against each of Calgary, Edmonton, Regina and Saskatoon of the WCHL. Although Vancouver was technically in the PCHA, they played 27% of their regular-season matches against WCHL clubs. For all intents and purposes, the PCHA and WCHL were two conferences of the same league, a league with an imbalanced schedule. And just as we don't give Henrik Sedin a 2012 scoring championship because he led the Western Conference in scoring, we shouldn't be looking at interlocking leagues as being separate.

This is especially important in this case, because it's clear that the WCHL was the higher-quality league in 1924. In the "inter-league" games, the WCHL teams had a combined 17-5-2 record. This means that Art Duncan had lesser competition to beat for the scoring championship of his league. If we combine the WCHL and PCHA scoring leader lists, we get the following:

(Iain includes a long table of the combined leaderboard)

Bill Cook of the Saskatoon Crescents led the WCHL/PCHA in goals, assists and points. He outscored Art Duncan by five goals and four assists, or nine points, almost 30% more than Duncan. Crediting Art Duncan with a scoring championship is silly; he technically led the PCHA in scoring, but the PCHA was not a self-contained league at the time. Duncan only wins the scoring title if you ignore two-thirds of the teams that he played against in 1924.

So while Art Duncan was certainly a defenceman when he scored 31 points in 1924, he should not be given credit for a scoring title. The PCHA and WCHL were separate leagues in name only; since they played against each other they were simply conferences of the same effective league. Bill Cook led this league in all offensive categories. Duncan's numbers were certainly very impressive, but Bobby Orr is alone in leading a major professional league in scoring from the blueline.
So by 1923-24, the WCHL was definitely better than the PCHA. I'm not sure what the record was in PCHA vs WCHL in 1922-23 and don't feel like calculating it myself. What do you think of Iain's method of treating them as two conferences of the same league for the two seasons they played an interlocking schedule and just combining their scoring tables?

Edit: We discussed this a bit during the HOH goalies project, but it appears that while the WCHL was composed of home-grown prairie talent, the PCHA mostly relied on outbidding the NHL for Eastern players. As the PCHA suffered financial problems, they stopped being able to steal easterners from the NHL.


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 04-02-2013 at 02:30 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2013, 02:30 PM
  #185
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, the WCHL had definitely surpassed the PCHA by the time they merged.
Yeah, I know. See above.

Quote:
So by 1923-24, the WCHL was definitely better than the PCHA. I'm not sure what the record was in PCHA vs WCHL in 1922-23 and don't feel like calculating it myself. What do you think of Iain's method of treating them as two conferences of the same league for the two seasons they played an interlocking schedule and just combining their scoring tables?
1922-23 was the swan song for basically the whole Seattle team as effective hockey players. Foyston and Walker would pop back up as shift guys for Victoria a couple years later, but they were over the hill starting in 1923-24, which is when Bill Cook began peaking. By the time that season rolled around, Frederickson and MacKay were pretty much the only old PCHA scoring stars left, Adams having gone back to the NHL a couple years before. Yeah, the prairie league was better.

The WCHL champs automatically went to the Cup Finals in 1922-23 (strangely, the playoff was between the PCHA and NHL champs), and proceeded to get swept by the Sens after years of nail-biters between the PCHA and NHL. That Edmonton team looks like it was largely carried by Joe Simpson, who was certainly an unusual scorer for a defenseman, but is neither here nor there in a discussion of scoring forwards. I don't recall the exact league standings, but I believe the PCHA was still the better league in the 1922-23 interlocking schedule. At any rate, in the early 20's just before they merged, both of those leagues were pretty clearly inferior to the NHL.

edit: I think Iain's method is probably sound, although I don't recall to exactly what extent they were interlocking. Did the leagues play half of their respective games against one another, or was it a 3/4 - 1/4 kind of deal?

Sturminator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2013, 02:50 PM
  #186
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,581
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sturminator View Post
Yeah, I know. See above.



1922-23 was the swan song for basically the whole Seattle team as effective hockey players. Foyston and Walker would pop back up as shift guys for Victoria a couple years later, but they were over the hill starting in 1923-24, which is when Bill Cook began peaking. By the time that season rolled around, Frederickson and MacKay were pretty much the only old PCHA scoring stars left, Adams having gone back to the NHL a couple years before. Yeah, the prairie league was better.

The WCHL champs automatically went to the Cup Finals in 1922-23 (strangely, the playoff was between the PCHA and NHL champs), and proceeded to get swept by the Sens after years of nail-biters between the PCHA and NHL. That Edmonton team looks like it was largely carried by Joe Simpson, who was certainly an unusual scorer for a defenseman, but is neither here nor there in a discussion of scoring forwards. I don't recall the exact league standings, but I believe the PCHA was still the better league in the 1922-23 interlocking schedule. At any rate, in the early 20's just before they merged, both of those leagues were pretty clearly inferior to the NHL.

edit: I think Iain's method is probably sound, although I don't recall to exactly what extent they were interlocking. Did the leagues play half of their respective games against one another, or was it a 3/4 - 1/4 kind of deal?
1923 was an imbalanced interlocked schedule. Looks like the PCHA won 15 games and the WCHL won 10 games.

Dreakmur is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2013, 05:59 PM
  #187
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,278
vCash: 500
Mystery Alaskans review

I'm going to write this review under the assumption that Tarasov will run this team with an emphasis on 5-man units that can play in all situations, but will have some amount of flexibility in the style of hockey that those units play.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
Mystery Alaskans



Anatoli Tarasov
Arkady Chernyshev

Aurele Joliat - Howie Morenz - Jack Walker
George Hay - Pierre Turgeon - Jarome Iginla "C"
Pavol Demitra - Russell Bowie - Vic Stasiuk
Ray Getliffe - Red Sullivan "A" - Billy Boucher

Hod Stuart - Earl Seibert "A"
Sergei Gonchar - Bob Goldham
Rod Seiling - Yuri Liapkin

Bill Durnan
Alec Connell


Spares: Saku Koivu, Ken Randall, Alexander Gusev


Power Play #1
Aurele Joliat - Howie Morenz - Jarome Iginla
Sergei Gonchar - Yuri Liapkin

Power Play #2
Russell Bowie - Pierre Turgeon - Vic Stasiuk
Hod Stuart - Earl Seibert

Penalty Kill #1
Jack Walker - Red Sullivan
Hod Stuart - Earl Seibert

Penalty Kill #2
Howie Morenz - Aurele Joliat
Rod Seiling - Bob Goldham

Penalty Kill #3
Ray Getliffe - George Hay

Estimated Minutes:
ForwardsESPPPKtotal
Howie Morenz144220
Aurele Joliat144220
Jack Walker120315
Pierre Turgeon123015
George Hay120214
Jarome Iginla144018
Russell Bowie123015
Pavol Demitra121013
Vic Stasiuk122014
Red Sullivan80311
Ray Getliffe80210
Billy Boucher8008
Total1382114173

DefensemenESPPPKTotal
Earl Seibert192425
Hod Stuart192324
Sergei Gonchar155020
Bob Goldham150419
Yuri Liapkin125017
Rod Seiling120315
Total921514120


As stated earlier, we will be using the Aurele Joliat - Howie Morenz - Jack Walker line in most head-to-head match-up situations. In some situations, Jarome Iginla will replace Jack Walker on the 1st line, so that's why Iginla plays 2 minutes more than his line mates and Walker plays 2 fewer.
Coaching and Leadership

We've talked a lot about the two great founders of the Soviet system. I definitely think they are above average coaches here, even if they aren't going to focus so much on getting matchups. I know seventieslord really pushes for Tarasov to be considered a top 5 coach of all time, and you guys seem to agree, but I don't know. I still think he gets a little too much credit for things that would be the role of the GM in North American hockey.

To the extent that on-ice leadership actually matters, it seems below par to some extent. Maybe it isn't fair to Iginla to judge his leadership on the fact that his teams have only made it past the 1st round once, but fair or not, the playoffs are where guys who are recognized as all-time great leaders are made. Seibert and Sullivan seem like character players, but I don't really know much about their leadership credentials, and I didn't see anything while skimming your profiles.

First Unit

Morenz is my pick for the #4 center of all-time, and was even before your excellent bio. We knew that many people considered him the best player who ever played before 1950, but you did a great job of showing why they thought that by illustrating Morenz's all-round game and his fearless style. Joliat is an above average 1st line winger, who brings more speed, stickhandling and a well-rounded offensive game. They form a dynamic duo for sure. Jack Walker adds an excellent defensive presence which would be useful if this line is going to be matched against the top lines of opponents, but his offense is sure weak for a first line.

Seibert and Hod Stuart were both physical beasts, but didn't seem to go out of their way to engage in the rough stuff, which Tarasov will like. Well, young Hod Stuart certainly threw his weight around, but Tarasov would prefer the older, less violent version. Seibert was defense-first, but was still a solid puck mover, and Hod Stuart was the ultimate two-way player of his era. I see Seibert as an average #1. Hod Stuart is tough to get a handle on, but I think he's at least an average #2. So the pairing is at least average (and possibly better), and I think they will fit into Tarasov's system nicely.

Overall, a strong two-way first unit that could be better if Walker was more of a scorer.

Second Unit

Iginla would be a solid 1st line power forward, so he's obviously good for a second line. I think his offense might be a tad overrated here - he's really no better offensively than Martin St. Louis, but there is always a premium on physical players here. I like the George Hay pick - he's another one of those excellent stick handlers who Tarasov will like, and he seems to bring a decent defensive game. Turgeon is definitely a below average 2nd line center in a 32 team draft, but he really isn't that far behind and above average 2nd line center, since there are so many centers who are close together. Turgeon's linemates do do a good job of covering for his issues, but I can't help but think that Tarasov will absolutely hate a me-first player like Turgeon.

I see Gonacher as a below average #3 who was obviously much better offensively than defensively. I definitely like him better than Housley, but I'm not sure how much better. Goldham is a very solid defensive-minded #4 who will help compensate for Gonchar a lot. Still, if the goal is to build 5-man units that can play in all situations, I would prefer more defensive play from the forwards who play in front of Gonchar. George Hay is acceptable as a defensive conscience, but he's not a strong one.

Iginla is a standout, but overall I see a fairly average second unit.

Third unit

Is the third line "Russell Bowie and two slaves?" The partners do have talent, that's for sure. Pavol Demitra brings that rare playmaking from the wing, and really could be drafted higher than he is. Stasiuk would be a good second line glue guy, so he's a luxury on a third scoring unit. The effectiveness of this line will depend largely on what GMs think of Russell Bowie - I think Bowie would be a very good second line goal scoring winger if he played wing, so as the primary goal scorer of a third scoring line, he is strong. Pavol Demitra plays the traditional center role as playmaker of the line, and I don't think he's outstanding, but he's certainly adequate as a third line playmaker.

The bottom pairing seems somewhat below average - I see both guys as ideal #6s to be honest. I know Liapkin was the best goal scoring defenseman of his generation in the Soviet domestic league by a wide margin, but he effectively didn't get any all-star recognition on the Soviet squad, so it really does seem like his overall game was lacking. On the other hand, Yakushev apparently depending heavily on Liapkin's outlet passes, so there is that.

Overall, a pretty strong third unit in terms of scoring. They will definitely bring more secondary scoring than more third units. They could be in trouble if they get stuck in their own zone at times though.

4th line

In European hockey, I believe there were enough roster spots for four 5-man units. Not the case in North American hockey. That said, I can't see Tarasov not giving his 4th line ice time, but he might use them less than most, as he prefers to keep together his 5-man units. A shame, since apparently Red Sullivan was a steal when you got him as one of the top defensive players of his era. Getliffe and Boucher are solid but unspectacular gritty fourth liners, and Getliffe brings at least some amount of defense as well.

Goaltending

In a 32 team draft, I see Bill Durnan as a pretty average starter. He was 14th on the HOH Top goalies list, which is pretty fair though I had him a bit lower in my second round of voting. He was Brimsek's equal in regular season peak, but had a short career, and probably wasn't as good in the playoffs as he should have been. That said, he pretty much stands alone as the 2nd best goalie in the division, though I think he's closer to Lehman/Hainsworth than he is to Brodeur. Connell is an above-average backup who can play reasonably well if Durnan has a meltdown in the playoffs.

Special Teams

I'm honestly not sure if Tarasov would break up his 5-man units for the powerplay, but if he didn't, that's a pretty strong blow to you, and in the absence of concrete evidence, I'll assume that he will.

Above average 1st PP - Howie Morenz is strong for his role, and Gonchar and Liapkin are something of power play specialists at this level. Gonchar, in particular, is probably underrated as a PP QB because he played in a low scoring era - he's probably pretty average for a 1st unit top QB in the ATD.

Solid second PP, with the point men pretty strong for a second PP.

First PK is above average, with Walker, Seibert, and Sullivan all standing out strong.

Second PK is solid.

Overall

I like:
  • Morenz/Joilat/Seibert/Stuart form 4/5ths of a very strong two-way 5 man unit that Tarasov would be proud of.
  • Scoring depth with a third unit that will definitely score more than most
  • The first PP and first PK are both above average (assuming Tarasov is actually willing to break up his 5-man units)

Potential issues:
  • The second unit seems below average defensively, and good but not great offensively, as you spread the secondary scoring between the second and third units
  • Pierre Turgeon does not strike me as a Tarasov player
  • Third unit is better offensively than most third units, but could run into trouble against strong two-way units, as I think they are somewhat lacking defensively, as well.

Suggestion:

Find a way to move Jack Walker to either the second or third unit to beef them up defensively. I guess you'd then move Iginla up to the top unit - the only possible concern there is that Iginla isn't fast enough to keep up with Joliat/Morenz.

Building a good Tarasov team is not easy. I think you guys did mostly good job, but I can still see some potential issues there.


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 04-02-2013 at 06:11 PM. Reason: clarified that Liapkin was the best soviet goal scoring defenseman of his generation, not throughout the world
TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2013, 06:57 PM
  #188
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,581
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
I'm going to write this review under the assumption that Tarasov will run this team with an emphasis on 5-man units that can play in all situations, but will have some amount of flexibility in the style of hockey that those units play.
That's a lot of focus on just one part of his career.

More importantly, you can't have 5-man units with 4 lines and 3 defense pairs. Even if he wanted to use the 5-man units, he couldn't, and you would hope one of the the best coaches in the draft would be able to figure that out.


Quote:
Second Unit

I see Gonacher as a below average #3 who was obviously much better offensively than defensively.
Sergei Gonchar is not even close to below average in the #3 role.

Dreakmur is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2013, 07:04 PM
  #189
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,463
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
Sergei Gonchar is not even close to below average in the #3 role.
Aye, he's a #5.

MadArcand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2013, 07:12 PM
  #190
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,581
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
Aye, he's a #5.
He's about the 70th best defenseman of all time.

Dreakmur is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2013, 07:21 PM
  #191
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,278
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
That's a lot of focus on just one part of his career.
But it's the only part of Tarasov's career we really know a lot about, right? 5-man units seemed to be his ideal, weren't they?

Quote:
More importantly, you can't have 5-man units with 4 lines and 3 defense pairs. Even if he wanted to use the 5-man units, he couldn't, and you would hope one of the the best coaches in the draft would be able to figure that out.
I can see him rolling 5-man units at most times. Basically, I see each of the top 3 lines playing almost exclusively with a certain defensive pairing, but when the 4th line plays, it will be with any of the pairings, mostly in defensive situations.

Given the makeup of the 4th line, he could use them as defensive specialists with limited minutes, kind of like how Chicago 2010 used their 4th line. Actually, Chicago 2010 might be the ideal Tarasov team - three two-way lines that could be played in all situations, and a 4th shutdown line that would receive limited minutes. I do think Tarasov would link the defensemen to the forwards as units more than Chicago did though.

That fits Tarasov's philosophy of the importance of chemistry between defensemen and forwards but also allows for him to use a 4th line, as happens in the modern game.

In that case, I think it makes sense that your 4th line is specialized, while the other lines are not.

Quote:
Sergei Gonchar is not even close to below average in the #3 role.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
He's about the 70th best defenseman of all time.
I think the 70th best defenseman of all-time is about where Gonchar fits. But so much of that is because of his value on the PP - he's likely a top 20 PP defenseman of all-time, as he's behind only Nicklas Lidstrom on the PP of defensemen of his generation. But at even strength, I think he's below average as a #3.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2013, 07:23 PM
  #192
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,509
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Seibert and Sullivan seem like character players, but I don't really know much about their leadership credentials, and I didn't see anything while skimming your profiles.
Sullivan was named captain of the Rangers in only his second season with the club, and filled that role for four seasons. He also became an NHL head coach at the age of 33.

overpass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2013, 07:24 PM
  #193
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,278
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
Sullivan was named captain of the Rangers in only his second season with the club, and filled that role for four seasons. He also became an NHL head coach at the age of 33.
That's certainly good stuff, though I don't really like the idea of giving a letter to a 4th liner.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-02-2013, 07:54 PM
  #194
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,581
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
But it's the only part of Tarasov's career we really know a lot about, right? 5-man units seemed to be his ideal, weren't they?
It's the only part of Tarasov's career that we think we know about.

As an example, a lot of Tarasov's philosphy talks about forwards and defensemen working together. Before Tarasov, forwards were completely separate from the defensemen. One of his biggest developments was getting them to work as one unit. That doesn't mean the same forwards played with the same defensemen all the time, but that the defensemen helped on offense and the forwards helped on defense. A lot of the talk about 5-man units refers to them working together rather than a unit of 5 guys who play together.

Quote:
I can see him rolling 5-man units at most times. Basically, I see each of the top 3 lines playing almost exclusively with a certain defensive pairing, but when the 4th line plays, it will be with any of the pairings, mostly in defensive situations.

Given the makeup of the 4th line, he could use them as defensive specialists with limited minutes, kind of like how Chicago 2010 used their 4th line. Actually, Chicago 2010 might be the ideal Tarasov team - three two-way lines that could be played in all situations, and a 4th shutdown line that would receive limited minutes. I do think Tarasov would link the defensemen to the forwards as units more than Chicago did though.
Asside from the questionable logic about the 5-man units, Tarasov did not believe in passive hockey. He definately would not use the 4th line in defensive situations

Quote:
I think the 70th best defenseman of all-time is about where Gonchar fits. But so much of that is because of his value on the PP - he's likely a top 20 PP defenseman of all-time, as he's behind only Nicklas Lidstrom on the PP of defensemen of his generation. But at even strength, I think he's below average as a #3.
Gonchar was a better even strength socrer, compared to his peers, than he was a powerplay scorer.

Dreakmur is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 10:06 AM
  #195
EagleBelfour
Registered User
 
EagleBelfour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,125
vCash: 500
I got curious, so it's my own version of Mark's team if the trade goes through

Quote:
Originally Posted by markrander87 View Post
Cincinnati Fireworks




GM: Markrander87
Coach: Mike Kennan
Captain: Ted Kennedy
Alternate Captains: Mike Grant, Charlie Conacher, Red Kelly

Frank Mahovlich - Ted Kennedy (C) - Charlie Conacher (A)
Harry Watson - Duke Keats - Bobby Rousseau
Lynn Patrick - Henrik Sedin - Wilf Paiement
Sami Pahlsson Patrick Marleau - Steve Kasper - Cully Wilson (defensive zone draw line when 1st line needs rest)


Red Kelly (A) - Mike Grant (A)
Ken Reardon - Gennady Tsygankov
Bill Hajt - Lennart Svedberg

George Hainsworth
Olaf Kolzig


Spares: Sami Pahlsson C/LW, D Jack "Tex" Evans, LW Dennis Hextall, F Patrick Sharp

PP 1:

Mahovlich – Keats – Conacher
Kelly – Rousseau

PP 2:

Patrick - Kennedy - Sedin
Svedberg - Grant

PK 1:

Kasper - Kennedy
Hajt - Tsygankov

PK 2:

Rousseau - Kelly
Reardon - Grant
1st line: I'm having a hard time trying to mesh all the pieces together, but that is my best guest. I remember some people didn't like the combination of Lindsay - Kennedy - Conacher, but with the pieces available, I decided I want my best three forwards together, and I think they mesh very well. A terrific offensive line with two wingers that can score goals in bunch, the centre is Ked Kennedy, the best playmaker of this team, one of the best faceoff man of all time (Kennedy taking faceoff in the O zone, with Kelly, Mahovlich & Conacher surrounding him, wow!). He's not a great skater, but Kennedy is a good defensive player, and although Conacher his not a defensive player, a happy Frank Mahovlich is definitely a capable backchecker. I want this line to be use as much as I can, and against the opposition best lineup.

2nd line: Definitely a below-average 2nd line, but this is a line with great intangible. Duke Keats is a better playmaker, but he can score goals and bring a lot of grit. Harry Watson is kind of a LW, lesser version of Duke Keats, while Rousseau is a reliable two-way RW.

3rd line: Henrik Sedin is a terrific 3rd line playmaker, and if a team goes with Sedin on the third line, better bring the best offensive player you can. Lynn Patrick brings solid bottom 6 offense, while Wilf Paiement decent all around play.

4th line: 'The' defensive line, but will not play much of a prominent role, especially with that first line playing a throng of minutes. Steve Kasper is a great defensive centre and shadower, Cully Wilson an elite 4th liner that brings the crash-&-bang desited. Never been a fan of Sami Pahlsson as an ATD regular, especially on the left side, but he will bring defence ... and not much else. I would venture to switch him with Marleau or Hextall, but I guess you want Pahlsson PK input. Actually, scratch Pahlsson, put Marleau in and you'll see why later

1st pairing: I understand why Mark wanted to give Ken Reardon instead of Eddie Gerard; not only because Gerard is better, but because now the pairing up seems a bit ackward. Red Kelly is a fantastic defenceman at both side of the ice. Elite offensively, great defensively, can play in any situation. Mike Grant is a well known for his offensive flair and speed, but although we were able to dig up a few things on his play defensively, I would prefer him on a 2nd pairing, especially since his offence might be a bit wasted next to Red Kelly, who will lead the rush. I flip-flop between him and Gennady Tsygankov, whom in theory is the perfect defenceman for Kelly, but IMO just too weak to play on a ATD 1st pairing, especially since you don't want Kelly to focus on his partner, but on himself. However, I'm still flip-flopping that one. Your guess is as good as mine ...

2nd pairing: A good overall 2nd pairing. Ken Reardon is a great 2nd pairing defenceman, elite offensively. Kamikaze. Tsygankov is a reliable defensive defenceman, an average-to-good #4. They mesh very well.

3rd pairing: Another duo that mesh very well, and a very good one to boot. Bill Hajt is an excellent defensive defenceman, Lennart Svedberg an excellent offensive defenceman. Both plays role on your special team. I very much like that combination.

Goaltending: Georges Hasinworth is a below-average starter, flirting with the low-end, but not totally. He's a workhorse, so he shouldn't need much help from his backup. Olaf Kolzig is a mediocre backup. A, not so impressive tandem, but it could be worst.

Coach: Hopefully Keenan will take the time and appreciate the 'situation' of Frank Mahovlich, and won't threat him the way Imlach did. The happy Frank Mahovlich (the MTL version) will make the first line one of the very best in the draft. Hopefully Keenan will also relax his rules of Charlie 'the golden boy' Conacher.

PP: The first PP unit is terrific. All the pieces works well, and they will score in bunch. As to be one of the very best first unit in the draft. The second unit is far more awkward. A decent one in term of player icing it though.

PK: I really like both of those unit. You see what I did there? Put Kelly on the 2nd PK as a centre. That's the beauty of having an elite versatile player. I know that Kelly & Kennedy are heavily used on all ES, PP and PK, so that's why both Kelly on the 2nd PK only, tougher minutes. I don't think the 2nd PP will see much icetime overall, and the 2nd PK is strong enough to see more icetime than a regular 2nd PK, so I think it works very well in term of ice time.

Why they will win:
- One of the very best first line in the draft
- Excellent special team unit
- Decent offensive depth
- An elite #1D with good defensive depth

Why they will lose:
- One of the worst goalie tandem in the draft
- A weak 2nd line
- A certain lack of purpose from the bottom-6


Overall, it's a very good entry.


Last edited by EagleBelfour: 04-03-2013 at 11:31 AM.
EagleBelfour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 10:39 AM
  #196
vecens24
Registered User
 
vecens24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 5,002
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EagleBelfour View Post
Lynn Patrick brings solid bottom 6 offense with some grit,
Lynn Patrick is all kinds of soft. Guy was literally nicknamed "Sonja" after figure skater Sonja Henie and "twinkletoes" by the New York crowd. I think he's somewhat underrated and he's a pretty decent fit with Henrik in that he scores and passes like Daniel Sedin. But he does not bring any sort of physical presence.

vecens24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 11:00 AM
  #197
markrander87
Registered User
 
markrander87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,524
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EagleBelfour View Post
I got curious, so it's my own version of Mark's team if the trade goes through
I appreciate the review (especially considering the situation my team is in) I'm very curious myself to how my lines will end up


Quote:
1st line: I'm having a hard time trying to mesh all the pieces together, but that is my best guest. I remember some people didn't like the combination of Lindsay - Kennedy - Conacher, but with the pieces available, I decided I want my best three forwards together, and I think they mesh very well. A terrific offensive line with two wingers that can score goals in bunch, the centre is Ked Kennedy, the best playmaker of this team, one of the best faceoff man of all time (Kennedy taking faceoff in the O zone, with Kelly, Mahovlich & Conacher surrounding him, wow!). He's not a great skater, but Kennedy is a good defensive player, and although Conacher his not a defensive player, a happy Frank Mahovlich is definitely a capable backchecker. I want this line to be use as much as I can, and against the opposition best lineup.

2nd line: Definitely a below-average 2nd line, but this is a line with great intangible. Duke Keats is a better playmaker, but he can score goals and bring a lot of grit. Harry Watson is kind of a LW, lesser version of Duke Keats, while Rousseau is a reliable two-way RW.
It's a very interesting spot with these top 6. there is a number of ways that the liens could be arranged. I am very intrigued by your suggestion of the
Mahovlich - Kennedy - Conacher top line.

What are your thoughts on:

Mahovlich - Keats - Conacher
Watson - Kennedy - Rousseau

I realize Keats in not an ideal 1st line Center, but he is known to be an excellent playmaker (as noted as one of the best of his times) and was also an excellent back checker.

Mahovlich and Conacher would have free roam in the offensive end and Kets will be the safety valve.

By doing this I also get Ted Kennedy on my 2nd line which allows me to use that line as my "shut down line" all three players have defensive ability and Ted was always known as making his wingers better.



Quote:
3rd line: Henrik Sedin is a terrific 3rd line playmaker, and if a team goes with Sedin on the third line, better bring the best offensive player you can. Lynn Patrick brings solid bottom 6 offense with some grit, while Wilf Paiement decent all around play.
Wow, I would not have thought to use Kelly as a 2nd unit PK Center, I must say that was pretty clever of you thanks.

I have been thinking back and forth of slotting Patrick with Sedin and Paiement. Paiement does have the physical play to protect them and adds scoring himself. This give Henrik two wingers who can capitalize on his playmaking abilities.



Quote:
4th line: 'The' defensive line, but will not play much of a prominent role, especially with that first line playing a throng of minutes. Steve Kasper is a great defensive centre and shadower, Cully Wilson an elite 4th liner that brings the crash-&-bang desited. Never been a fan of Sami Pahlsson as an ATD regular, especially on the left side, but he will bring defence ... and not much else. I would venture to switch him with Marleau or Hextall, but I guess you want Pahlsson PK input. Actually, scratch Pahlsson, put Marleau in and you'll see why later

I actually really like this line you proposed. My plan all along was 2 use my 4th line as a defensive zone draw line whenever Kennedy can't take the draw. This will allow for Sedin to take a lot of offensive zone draws (which he does in real life)


I will get to the defense if I have time this afternoon, but overall that was a very very helpful review and I will absolutely take use of some of those idea, thanks again.

markrander87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 11:30 AM
  #198
EagleBelfour
Registered User
 
EagleBelfour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,125
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vecens24 View Post
Lynn Patrick is all kinds of soft. Guy was literally nicknamed "Sonja" after figure skater Sonja Henie and "twinkletoes" by the New York crowd. I think he's somewhat underrated and he's a pretty decent fit with Henrik in that he scores and passes like Daniel Sedin. But he does not bring any sort of physical presence.
Ah, so true! I remember now. That's what happen when you make reviews using only your brainpower. I will rectify, thanks for catching me in the wrong

EagleBelfour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 11:43 AM
  #199
EagleBelfour
Registered User
 
EagleBelfour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,125
vCash: 500
I thought about switching Keats & Kennedy, but I guess what turn me off this idea is that there's only 60 minutes of play in a game. If you put Kennedy on that second line, they will play good minutes at ES against the opposing best line. That first line, with or without Kennedy, as to be the one that play the most minutes. What it means is now your third line, which you pay premium for Henrik Sedin, will have minimal ice time. It's not a terrible option, maybe in games where you play against two strong lines, but I would just go all-in with your best three players, and play them against the opposing team best line. That second will be able to contain most second line anyway.

EagleBelfour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2013, 12:31 PM
  #200
Hawkey Town 18
Moderator
 
Hawkey Town 18's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 4,069
vCash: 500
Count me as another guy who likes Kennedy on the 1st line. Like EB said, with Teeder there you can play that line for big minutes. As far as playmaking is concerned, they're likely going to be out there with Red Kelly a lot of the time, so he will contribute. I also think Keats' playmaking is overrated, and that he is more of a balanced scorer. If you check out my Frank Fredrickson bio, there's an analysis that Sturminator did a couple years ago that includes Keats and part of the conclusion is that the numbers don't back up Keats as a great playmaker. His prior rep could be due to some different use of the word "playmaker" back then, that some people seem to have uncovered.

Also, glad to see you and MB were able to work out a more fair deal.


Last edited by Hawkey Town 18: 04-03-2013 at 02:11 PM.
Hawkey Town 18 is online now   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 05:29 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.