HFBoards

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

AAA 2013 A. O'Brien divisional semi-final: Regina Direwolves vs Birmingham Barracudas

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-04-2013, 12:38 AM
  #1
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,322
vCash: 500
AAA 2013 A. O'Brien divisional semi-final: Regina Direwolves vs Birmingham Barracudas

Coach: Brian Sutter
Assistant Coach: Jacques Laperriere

John Sorrell - Petr Nedved - Mike Murphy (C)
Tony Granato - Art Jackson - Alexander Golikov
Buzz Boll - Cully Dahlstrom - Billy Harris
Jack McDonald - Lorne Henning - Willi Plett
Martin Havlat (LW/RW), Ron Murphy (LW/RW)

Ivan Tregubov - Brad Marsh (A)
Reg Hamilton - Al Hamilton (A)
Art Moore - Patrice Brisebois
Bob Turner (D/W)

Kelly Hrudey
Earl Robertson

PP1: Sorrell - Jackson - Harris - Nedved - Tregubov
PP2: McDonald - Boll - Golikov - A.Hamilton - Brisebois
PK1: Henning - Murphy - Marsh - R.Hamilton
PK2: Dahlstrom - Granato - Tregubov - Moore

VS

Burmingham Barracuda's

Coach - Jacques Martin

Greg Adams - John Cullen - Phil Kessel
Justin Williams - Dan Quinn - Wayne Connelly
Randy Burridge - Thomas Plekanec - Pat Boutette
Rick Dudley(C) - Radek Bonk - Matt Cooke

Mark Hardy - Paul Martin (A)
Barret Jackman (A) - Brad Stuart
Lyle Odelien - Jaro Spacek

Goaltenders
Jose Theodore (1)
Viktor Zinger (2)

Spares
Frank Rankin (Rover)C/D
Mark Hunter RW
Lou Lameroux D
Joffery Lupul LW

PP1
Adams - Quinn - Kessel
Spacek - Hardy

PP2
Burridge - Cullen - Connelly
Stuart - Martin

PK1
Plekanec - Cooke
Jackman - Martin

PK2
Bonk - Boutette
Stuart - Odelien

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2013, 01:42 PM
  #2
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,322
vCash: 500
Best of luck to my opponent; this is a team I respect a lot.
*
Our first lines aren’t too terribly far off. Nedved is way more talented than Cullen, but due to being on the lazy side, his results aren’t better than Cullen’s to the degree that you’d think. His best 6 percentage scores are 420 vs. 393 for Cullen. Also of note is that he is much more balanced offensively than Cullen, who has a large percentage of assists. Cullen’s more competitive and has a little bit of defense but is outmatched as a first line center. He’s the Bozak of this first line. Sorrell and Kessel are very comparable as top scoring wingers. Kessel’s got the better two-season peak, but Sorrell has an edge if you’re looking at best six seasons. Also, Sorrell played a whole season’s worth of playoff games and maintained his scoring pace (when scoring typically went down 30% in the playoffs) and Kessel currently has about a quarter of a season worth of playoff games to his name. Whatever edge Sorrell had as a player in the regular season (and I freely admit it is not huge, whatever it is) gets magnified in the playoffs. Both of these players will make the next MLD, assuming 1100 players are selected by the end of the MLD. As far as our complementary players go, you managed to get a pretty good one in Adams, which not everyone could do. At his best, when healthy and “on”, he was as good as Mike Murphy. Their best 6 offensive seasons match up almost perfectly. Both are proven that they won’t damage the offensive potential of a scoring line. Murphy was simply a better physical and defensive player who will help his one-dimensional linemates more than Adams will. Adams is solid though. Although I don’t hold a massive edge in any area, I think it’s safe to say Regina’s first line will be more effective.
*
Your second line is a bit hurting. Art Jackson is a superior center to Dan Quinn who is a bargain basement 2nd liner. Don’t take that as meaning he sucks in his role, but he’s exactly what you took – a good value on a player who’s “almost” as good as comparable guys but taken much later. Jackson on the other hand, was a priority for me to get. *After wartime adjustments, this two-way player’s best 6 percentage scores are 382, as opposed to 387 in a post-expansion one-dimensional scorer in Quinn, and as I had to admit to your last opponent, it’s been demonstrated that he did profit quite a lot from a collaboration with Lemieux on the PP. Connelly and Golikov are one-dimensional scoring RWs who are practically impossible to compare as one was in the WHA and one was a Soviet. But using WHA conversions (1973 and 1974 are two of his six most impressive scoring seasons) his “best-6” score would be 335 and Golikov is at 395 based on a preliminary system I’ve been trying out for Soviets that appears to work. If that’s not good enough, another way to look at it is that there are still about 10 post-expansion wingers out there who would beat Connelly in a one-on-one comparison but there are no soviet wingers left with an offensive resume comparable to Golikov. (maybe one.) Connelly is an OK 2nd line AAA winger, but Golikov is a special AAA 2nd line winger. On the left side you have an offensive player with a little two-way ability and I have a less-talented but more useful player. Granato’s best 6 percentage scores are 309, and Williams is 345. But with that said, I think Granato’s going to be the far more useful and valuable member to the line. For starters, he’s a guy who will be remembered much longer and more fondly than Williams is. He was tough, pretty good defensively, fearless, a great leader and a legitimate agitator. Williams is simply a solid complementary winger. Thanks to Granato’s presence, my 2nd line has some of everything (except size) and yours is a little lacking. Regina’s line will be more effective.
*
Plekanec and Dahlstrom are close enough as 3rd line centers to call them a toss-up. Boll and Burridge are comparable types of players. Workmanlike wingers with some upside and a wide range of good skills. But Boll was much more prominent in his era than Burridge was, with best-6 percentage scores of 340 as opposed to 285 for the post-expansion Burridge. Both bring a good amount, though not a great amount, of intangibles for 3rd line play. Harris and Boutette played at almost the exact same time and actually scored at a similar rate. Harris played 140 more games and scored 105 more points in them, so there’s a small advantage there. In peak offense, Harris topped 50 points seven times as opposed to three for Boutette, who appeared more linemate-dependent on for offense (Blaine Stoughton, Mike Rogers). Harris’ postseason record is better too, though it’s a shame he had to be traded to get Goring so the dynasty could have its missing piece. Harris was better defensively, earning selke votes and having better quotes supporting him. And Harris ahs six inches and 20 pounds on Pat. Harris was a physically assertive and aggressive player but was not mean. Boutette was MEAN. He was dirty and he could fight. He would be a poor man’s Granato, plus fighting. I like him here on a 3rd line but Harris is the better two-way player. That said, it’s not a complete whitewashing. Boutette does do some things Harris doesn’t. You built a solid 3rd line that has some of everything and although mine lacks a mean element, it is not a line that backs down either. Advantage Regina.
*
Bonk is an outstanding even strength player to have on your fourth line and is better than the PK specialist Henning. Dudley is a solid all-around player but so is McDonald. McDonald crushes Dudley in offensive ability but Dudley likely has a solid edge in intangibles, too. On the right, Plett is a beast who is better than Cooke at everything except defense and agitation (though he legitimately scares people rather than agitating, so there’s that). Considering my better wingers are centered by a guy who, at even strength, is nothing special, the fourth line matchup can go either way at even strength.
*
Defense is your team’s best area. Right off the bat, I see two third pairings that match up perfectly well. I wanted Odelein, couldn’t get him and settled on Moore. You wanted Brisebois, couldn’t get him and settled on Spacek. The skillsets of these 4 players match up fairly perfectly to eachother. As a bonus, Odelein is a heavyweight fighter. On the second pairing, Reg Hamilton was a similar-styled player to Jackman, just a better version who was more prominent in his era than Jackman was in his. Al Hamilton was a balanced player, but so was Stuart and at this point you have to give Stuart the edge to a similar degree. These two pairings are even.
*
On the first pairing we have four guys who don’t compare well at all. A soviet, two two-way guys and a pure defensive guy. I have the best skater and the worst skater of the four, and I also have the best and worst offensive players of the four. Mine is a pairing that makes good use of one* player’s strengths while offsetting their weaknesses and/or question marks. Yours does the same, though neither player has weaknesses as pronounced (i.e. Martin being soft). All four should be in the MLD. The all-star voting seems to favour my two guys but I honestly think they underrated your guys. These pairings are, again, reasonably close. Overall, our three defense pairings should be a wash.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2013, 05:08 PM
  #3
BudsBuster
Registered User
 
BudsBuster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Regina, Sask
Country: Canada
Posts: 145
vCash: 500
I tend to agree with you on the Defense front. To close to give an advantage to either one. but is it safe to say Mine could be seen as a tougher group? out side of Mr Martin of course.

Top line I like how you pointed out that Cullens Point totals were largely assist. This is good, Because he has a pure speedy Goal scorer on his right. This works so well. And Im glad you pointed it out. Adams effective or not will clear space for those two to run wild. Also Kessel Is a player that boosts and makes his line mates better. I don't Think Sorrell fits that bill. And like you said Nedved is lazy.

Goalies.... YOu had even said to me pre draft that you had Thoedore just a slight edge behind Hurdey. I dont think either one makes a difference in this match up,

I even tried to trade you Martin for Jackson... LOL.

I cant say much about the 2nd line. Like you said I got a bargin late on my center. And seeing he was a PP specialist, He will do great things on my PP.

CAnt forget to point out that Williams is slightly under rated in this draft. Have to say he scored and was a key part in all areas to both teams he won a cup with. And is clutch.

I personally see our bottom 6 as a wash. But Bonk Being the best player in them both,

Its kinda crazy to see that we built our teams very similar. Im interested to see how the votes turn out.


Last edited by BudsBuster: 12-05-2013 at 05:17 PM.
BudsBuster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2013, 10:47 PM
  #4
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BudsBuster View Post
I tend to agree with you on the Defense front. To close to give an advantage to either one. but is it safe to say Mine could be seen as a tougher group? out side of Mr Martin of course.
Nah, it's pretty much even. You have two softish guys (Martin and Spacek) and I have one (Brisebois). You have a brawler (Odelein) who is likely the toughest but not by a particularly large amount over Marsh, Jackman or Reg Hamilton. Art Moore would be next toughest - probably belongs in the above group but the evidence isn't quite as strong. He'd be in the Hardy range. Followed by Hamilton, Stuart and Tregubov. I don't see a toughness edge either way.

Quote:
Top line I like how you pointed out that Cullens Point totals were largely assist. This is good, Because he has a pure speedy Goal scorer on his right. This works so well. And Im glad you pointed it out. Adams effective or not will clear space for those two to run wild. Also Kessel Is a player that boosts and makes his line mates better. I don't Think Sorrell fits that bill. And like you said Nedved is lazy.
The point of Cullen's high bias towards assists was not a positive, it was to point out that he's less valuable offensively than someone like Nedved. (and it doesn't bother me that Nedved was lazy, even with laziness considered he was reasonably ahead of Cullen in production at their respective peaks) Yes, he can pass, but you're implying that if he could also score goals he would be less effective for you, which is just silly.

Adams was physical at times, but other times he wasn't. At the AAA level he is still about as effective of a complementary player you can get, but don't assume he will always be a wrecking ball out there:

http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...1&postcount=11

And saying Kessel will boost his linemates and Sorrell won't is baseless.

Quote:
Goalies.... YOu had even said to me pre draft that you had Thoedore just a slight edge behind Hurdey. I dont think either one makes a difference in this match up,
It's not a huge edge but the edge is there:

- Hrudey averaged 6 sv% points over the league average in his career, Theodore averaged 1 point over.
- Hrudey averaged 2.5 sv% points below the league playoff average in his career, Theodore averaged 6 points under.
- Hrudey was top-10 in minutes 4 times, Theodore was top-10 once.
- Theodore's excellent peak season was the only year anyone thought it a good idea to send him all-star and norris votes. Hrudey had five such seasons.
- Hrudey took a team to the finals, Theodore never got to the 3rd round; in fact, Hrudey's playoff resume is twice as long as Theodore's.

I will definitely receive better goaltending in this series. Will it make a difference? Up to the voters.

Quote:
I cant say much about the 2nd line. Like you said I got a bargin late on my center. And seeing he was a PP specialist, He will do great things on my PP.
Yep, and we'll talk about special teams soon here. For now we're talking about the forward lines, as in even strength.

Quote:
CAnt forget to point out that Williams is slightly under rated in this draft. Have to say he scored and was a key part in all areas to both teams he won a cup with. And is clutch.
Someone help me out here. Am I too rough on Williams? I see him as a guy who is "adequate" defensively in real life, making him slightly less than that in an all-time context. He won't hurt you, but he really won't help you either.

Or am I being too generous? The first scouting report I pulled out (McKeen's 2007-08) says "must focus mainly on his defensive play, which slipped last season - was guilty of missed assignments and lax coverage".

Quote:
I personally see our bottom 6 as a wash. But Bonk Being the best player in them both,
There's no way the 3rd line is a wash... it's only a wash at center. The 4th line, yes, I agree. At even strength. But my 4th line has two players who greatly help my PP and PK, which we'll talk about soon.


Last edited by seventieslord: 12-05-2013 at 11:56 PM.
seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2013, 11:20 PM
  #5
VanIslander
Hockey in the blood.
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 17,352
vCash: 500
Kessel just might be a series star given the four GMs who voted for him in the regular season!

There is a TSN profile on Kessel today: "Is he soft or smart?" was the question. And Johnson gushed about how wise Kessel was in not going into high traffic areas, in playing the perimeter and keeping himself healthy, uninjured by not getting involved in physical play. Major spin! The fact is he is soft and smart.

An upset may be brewing (certainly the NHL has a ton of upsets between regular season rankings and the playoffs; the President's trophy winner rarely goes all the way).

VanIslander is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-05-2013, 11:45 PM
  #6
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,322
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanIslander View Post
Kessel just might be a series star given the four GMs who voted for him in the regular season!

There is a TSN profile on Kessel today: "Is he soft or smart?" was the question. And Johnson gushed about how wise Kessel was in not going into high traffic areas, in playing the perimeter and keeping himself healthy, uninjured by not getting involved in physical play. Major spin! The fact is he is soft and smart.

An upset may be brewing (certainly the NHL has a ton of upsets between regular season rankings and the playoffs; the President's trophy winner rarely goes all the way).
The president's trophy winner rarely goes all the way, but at any given time, the president's trophy winner has a better chance than any other team. It's just that there are 30 teams...

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-06-2013, 04:09 AM
  #7
Hawkman
Moderator
A Man and The Blues
 
Hawkman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,754
vCash: 500
The GM from Regina who may be a SK Roughriders fan will win this series.

__________________
Hawkman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-06-2013, 04:36 PM
  #8
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,322
vCash: 500
Miscellaneous (but certainly not unimportant) Matters
*
Previously I demonstrated that although our teams are a wash at even strength on the blueline and on the fourth line, my forwards on the first three lines do hold a significant and measurable advantage, and Kelly Hrudey is a clearly better goalie than Jose Theodore. Let’s look at some more details:
*
Coaching:
*
I don’t see it being a major factor in the series. These are two of the best coaches in the draft (3rd and 4th in all-star voting) and had similarly long careers. They both had a better win% in the regular season than the playoffs, where their teams tended to disappoint. Both have excellent Jack Adams voting records for this level. Martin’s specialty is boring defense and Sutter’s is in intensity and motivation.
*
In Sutter’s bio I showed what happened to the teams he coached for, both before and after he arrived. Except in the case of Calgary, he demonstrated great improvements in the teams he coached, gains which were subsequently lost after he left. Using the same methodology for Martin:
*
St. Louis: .529 before Martin, .485 with Martin, .504 after Martin.
Ottawa: .218 before Martin, .560 with Martin, .665 after Martin.
Florida: .442 before Martin, .520 with Martin, .455 after Martin.
Montreal: .601 before Martin, .533 with Martin, .654 after Martin.
*
In St. Louis, Martin did not seem to make the situation any better. They got worse when he was there, and they got better after he left.
*
Ottawa was an expansion team clearly on the rise, but credit is due to Martin for the turnaround he helped with. The .218 record represents 1995 and the part of the 1996 season that he did not coach. Specifically in that season, the other two coaches went .193, then he came in and went .316. By the time he left, they had amassed such a collection of talent, though, that they weren’t any worse off without him. This tenure was long and maybe the numbers are polluted by the middle years. It might best be described as, .218 before Martin, .421 after hiring Martin, .655 before firing Martin, .665 after firing Martin. Conclusion: in Ottawa, he clearly made the team better when he got there but they continued to improve even after he left.
*
In Florida, it’s clearly demonstrable that he came in and made the team better than they were, and they declined after he left. (like Sutter did three times)
*
In Montreal, it certainly appears the team got worse when he was there, and better after he left, like the St. Louis situation.
*
Conclusion: Although Martin has demonstrated a clear ability to improve a team, he does not appear to have been as consistent at it as Sutter was.
*
Power Play:
*
The potential success of our power plays can be best ascertained by the raw offensive abilities of the players on our units, coupled with the skill set blend.
*
On Birmingham’s PP1 we have:
*
NameCareer $PPP$PPP/S6 season Peak $PPP
Greg Adams22917109
Dan Quinn26025165
Phil Kessel15223148
Jaroslav Spacek17917123
Mark Hardy1131093
*
On Regina we have:
NameCareer $PPP$PPP/S6 season Peak $PPP
Billy Harris15113132
Petr Nedved23919147
*
Regina also has John Sorrell and Art Jackson, whose PP numbers are incomparable because the 1930s did not have PP stats tracked. We would only be able to go by their raw statistics. We also have Ivan Tregubov, whose numbers from the USSR and international tournaments are even more impossible to compare. All we know is that as an overall player he is likely well overqualified for this draft, in international tournaments he scored at 90% of the rate of Russia’s Bobby Orr, Nikolai Sologubov, and at about 2/3 his rate in the soviet league while both were in their primes (1955-1964), and that they said his shot could cut off a leg.
*
Off the bat I see Adams and Harris as comparables. Adams has a longer and more established history of being used on the PP. However, Harris’ peak PP production was much better. Both guys aren’t here to be big scorers but assumedly the digger and net presence. They should be reasonably close in effectiveness. Jackson is a guy who I’d say is about 20% more potent offensively than Quinn with all things considered, but Quinn was pretty much a PP specialist so if we’re going to criticize him as an ES 2nd liner we should at least give credit where it’s due on the PP. Quinn should be able to equal Jackson. Kessel and Sorrell, as I’ve been saying, are about equal as PP performers since they are as overall performers. So we’re even at forward. At the point, Spacek is a pretty good pointman for the AAA level. So is Nedved. Nedved is a legitimate QB with elite vision though – is Spacek a QB or was he just a guy with a big shot? Mark Hardy is a very weak 1st unit PP guy for the AAA, with just 113 career adjusted PP points – he’s the lowest on either list in career total, career average, and 6 year peak. He’s not going to be very effective on the PP. Tregubov is, of course, a question mark, but he appears to have the offensive instincts to score points and the shot to both make use of Nedved’s vision and make up for Nedved’s lack of a slapshot in his arsenal. Our first PP unit should perform better thanks to better pointmen.
*
On the second unit we have for Birmingham:
*
NameCareer $PPP$PPP/S6 season Peak $PPP
Randy Burridge1161391
John Cullen20526179
Wayne Connelly*16115153
Brad Stuart100992
Paul Martin11616101
*
*Connelly’s numbers are estimated using a reasonable proportion of PP to ES points and WHA adjustments.
*
On Regina:
*
NameCareer $PPP$PPP/S6 season Peak $PPP
Patrice Brisebois22718137
Al Hamilton*991180
*
*Hamilton’s are estimated the same way as Connelly’s.
*
Analysis: Again, Regina’s forwards are stacked with older offensive players so all we have is raw stats to go by. Cullen is much more of a PP specialist than I ever realized. He shows up well here in all PP metrics. This is similar to the Quinn/Jackson comparison. Though Boll is approximately as potent overall, Cullen did appear to specialize on the PP and there’s no evidence that Boll did. Cullen should be more effective. On the LW, we’re comparing Burridge, whose career numbers for the PP are very weak, with a guy whose offensive stats put him up in first line territory when it comes to this draft. Obviously there is no way to judge McDonald as a PP scorer specifically, but he is immensely more talented than Burridge. Connelly is an OK PP player but he’s up against a Kessel-level talent in Sorrell. Advantage to Regina there. On the points, Brisebois has, by far, the best PP peak, the best career average (better than Martin who hasn’t gotten old enough to decline) and more career points than Stuart and Martin combined. Brisebois is, simply put, an outstanding AAA 2nd unit PP QB. Stuart and Martin are both quite underwhelming in that regard. Note that Stuart is not even a regular PP player in real life; almost all of his career PP points came in 6 of his 13 seasons. That said, Hamilton is not particularly impressive in this regard, either. He’s more similar to Stuart and Martin – passable but nothing special. Brisebois on the point is the trump card for the Regina unit.
*
So in both cases it really comes down to superior pointmen. Birmingham just can’t touch ours.
*
Penalty Kills
*
On Birmingham’s 1st unit:
*
NameCareer GPUsageSuccess
Tomas Plekanec62832%+15%
Matt Cooke96530%+14%
Barret Jackman67048%+10%
Paul Martin60745%+16%
*
On Regina’s:
*
NameCareer GPUsageSuccess
Lorne Henning54357%+25%
Mike Murphy96536%-6%
Brad Marsh108649%+10%
*
Reg Hamilton, a 1930s player, is not included. All we can go by is his team’s defensive results. Looking at the 8 seasons in which he played the most games, his teams averaged 9% better than the league average defensively, so it’s a reasonable assumption that they were about that good on the PK. Hamilton played 8.64 seasons worth of games. He was one of four main defensemen on the team and one of the more defensively oriented ones. On the other hand, teams split PK minutes among six defensemen now instead of 4. If I had to estimate, Hamilton’s numbers would read “708/50%/+9%”. Hamilton and Jackman would approximately wash out. Marsh is better than Martin. If you take his best 600 games, to put them on an even playing field for averages, he was killing 43% for teams 22% better than average. Martin is good though. Up front, Cooke has had more success than Murphy (Murphy’s greater usage doesn’t outweigh the team success) but Henning absolutely destroys Plekanec and every other AAA forward. The minor advantages for Marsh and Cooke wash out, leaving Regina with a huge edge at center. As good as Plekanec is, Henning is a pure PK specialist who will be far more successful.
*
On Birmingham’s 2nd unit:
*
NameCareer GPUsageSuccess
Radek Bonk96917%+6%
Pat Boutette75627%-16%
Brad Stuart94647%+2%
Lyle Odelein105627%0
*
Regina has:
*
[table]Name|Career GP|Usage|Success
Tony Granato|774|20%|-4%[/quote]
*
Also on the Regina unit: Cully Dahlstrom (pre-expansion), Ivan Tregubov (soviet), and Art Moore (pre-NHL).
*
Boutette and Granato are about a wash. They are similarly styled players and I think Boutette’s slight edge in usage is offset by the fact that his teams were terrible on the PK and Granato’s were about average. From there we’re comparing Bonk and Dahlstrom. Bonk was an excellent ES player and I gave him credit for that in the 4th line comparisons. But as a PKer, he’s pretty weak. Passable at best on a AAA 2nd unit. 17% usage is the big problem here. Dahlstrom, on the other hand, is frequently mentioned as a penalty killer in contemporary reports, which is very significant considering it’s rare that you see specific mentions of it. It’s reasonable to assume he was one of the best PK forwards of his day. Big advantage for Dahlstrom. On D, Stuart is solid, with good usage for average teams. Odelein’s 27% usage means he didn’t even kill more than his share of penalties (33% if it was split evenly among defensemen). He’s quite underwhelming here. On the other hand, Regina’s got two guys for whom a lot of guesswork must be done. Moore was a stay at home physical player who helped anchor an early dynasty. Tregubov, again, as an overall player, is overqualified for this draft. His bio discusses his physical strength, smarts in his own zone, knocking the puck away, speed and one-on-one defense. With those skills, it’s safe to say that, at a minimum, he is a good AAA PKer. He and Stuart wash out. Moore, question marks and all, should be at least average, which is more than I can say for the little-used Odelein. Thanks to advantages at Moore and especially Dahlstrom, Regina’s 2nd unit is better.
*
Special teams conclusions: Regina’s pointmen make their 1st unit better. Wingers plus Brisebois make the 2nd unit easily better. Henning is the trump card on the first PK units and Dahlstrom on the 2nd.
*
Leadership
*
Regina’s significantly stacked in terms of leadership. This is important in a playoff series as you want the guys who know how to motivate the team and smooth out those highs and lows – people who won’t let the team lose, or will will them to win. We have so many leaders we couldn’t even give them a letter. Birmingham struggled to even figure out who could wear a C:
*
Regina’s leaders:
*
1.****** Mike Murphy (C) – captained the LA kings for six seasons, scouting reports said he was “very respected in NHL circles”
2.****** Brad Marsh (A) – outstanding leadership skills well-supported in his bio. Wore the C for a season in Atlanta and again in Ottawa
3.****** Al Hamilton (A) – 4 year Edmonton captain in the WHA
4.****** Art Moore – captained the Ottawa Silver Seven for their last Stanley Cup
5.****** Tony Granato – outstanding leadership skills well-supported in his bio, wore an A most of his career.
6.****** Ivan Tregubov – “dedication, ruthlessness, loathing for defeat”
7.****** Billy Harris – some decent mention of leadership in his bio
*
Birmingham’s leaders:
1.****** Rick Dudley (C) – captained Cincinnati in the WHA for 2 seasons
2.****** Barret Jackman (A) – usually wears an A in St. Louis
3.****** Paul Martin (A) – has he even worn an A in real life???
4.****** Lyle Odelein – first captain of Columbus
5.****** Matt Cooke – good dressing room guy, I did find one picture with an A
*
I searched really hard but could not find pictures of most of Birmingham’s guys even wearing an A. the best 4 leaders in this series are all on Regina.
*
Defense from the forwards
*
We’ve agreed our defensive corps are about equal in terms of overall ability. My forwards enjoy a sizeable edge offensively. But how do they stack up defensively against this team of grinders? I’ll try to isolate even strength play as best as I can. Rankings are based on the player’s reputations based on quotes, stats, and whatever else is relevant.
*
Radek Bonk
Tomas Plekanec
Mike Murphy
Billy Harris
Art Jackson
Lorne Henning
Cully Dahlstrom
Buzz Boll
*
Matt Cooke
Pat Boutette
Randy Burridge
Tony Granato
Greg Adams
Rick Dudley
Jack McDonald
*
Justin Williams
John Cullen
Willi Plett
Alexander Golikov
Wayne Connelly
*
John Sorrell
Petr Nedved
Phil Kessel
Dan Quinn
*
Explanations: I think stats, award voting and recognition support Bonk and Plekanec being the best defensive players here. However, Regina’s forward corps is filled with guys (Murphy, Harris, Jackson, Henning, Dahlstrom and Boll) that have good to great quotes supporting their defensive, checking, or two way play. The next tier is filled with guys who are more on the “plus” side but not great. Cooke, Boutette and Burridge make it this high by being gritty hard working players who killed some penalties but not known as “checking guys” per se. Granato belongs with them, as shown by his quotes in his bio. Not skilled defensively, but works hard enough to be in the right places. Adams and Dudley are a bit lesser version of those guys; their extremely low PK numbers (9%, 5%) indicate their defensive resumes are not particularly strong. The next tier is guys who have some reason to believe they can be good or bad. Williams plays with strong defensive forwards so he doesn’t have to be one, but my opponent thinks he’s great, but the first scouting report I pulled said he was bad. Cullen was better when his offense faded, worse when he was scoring. Plett was called a two-way player early in his career but was called weak later. Golikov was criticized for his work ethic earlier but became a valuable penalty killer later. Connelly reads as a one-dimensional goal-scoring forward, except I’m pretty sure I read he actually played defense for a short time, so some ability exists there. The last group is guys who we have no reason to believe are any good. Sorrell tops the list as he’s at least called a hustling player. Nedved had the size to be effective if he had to be, plus his excellent faceoff skills are a defensive asset. Kessel was known to be bad his whole career and is still not yet average. Quinn… was always bad.
*
Conclusion: Regina should receive better defensive play throughout its lineup.
*
Toughness at forward:
*
We’ve already touched on toughness on defense and it’s about even. Does anyone have the edge in toughness/grit/physicality at forward? Same type of exercise I used regarding defense:
*
Willi Plett
*
Pat Boutette
Tony Granato
Matt Cooke
*
Mike Murphy
Rick Dudley
Randy Burridge
*
Greg Adams
Billy Harris
Jack McDonald
Cully Dahlstrom
Buzz Boll
*
John Cullen
Radek Bonk
Tomas Plekanec
*
Art Jackson
Lorne Henning
Justin Williams
Wayne Connelly
Petr Nedved
Alexander Golikov
Dan Quinn
John Sorrell
Phil Kessel
*
Explanations: Plett is on another level for toughness here, easily. Boutette, Granato and Cooke are all pretty similar and I think belong in this order. Murphy, Dudley and Burridge belong in the “pretty physical” range. Adams, Harris, McDonald, Dahlstrom and Boll are there for a variety of reasons. Adams was physical and inconsistent, Harris was physical but not mean, McDonald was “powerful” yet extremely small, Dahlstrom was courageous but not necessarily physical, and Boll was an all-around player with no real weaknesses. The next group is guys who were more or less average. Cullen showed some grit later. Bonk was big and could be physical but usually wasn’t. Plekanec isn’t soft but certainly isn’t physical.* The last group is guys with no physicality to speak of. Jackson and Henning were checkers but relied on smarts. Williams is quite docile. Connelly we know little to nothing about. Nedved at least had size. Golikov is a mystery. Quinn was very non-physical. Sorrell is never mentioned as physical at all, and has tiny PIM numbers. Kessel is not quite “soft” but is the least physical player here.
*
Conclusion: There is no discernable edge in physicality/grit/toughness among forwards or defensemen on these teams.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-06-2013, 06:06 PM
  #9
BudsBuster
Registered User
 
BudsBuster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Regina, Sask
Country: Canada
Posts: 145
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkman View Post
The GM from Regina who may be a SK Roughriders fan will win this series.
lol I bet your right

BudsBuster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-06-2013, 06:26 PM
  #10
BudsBuster
Registered User
 
BudsBuster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Regina, Sask
Country: Canada
Posts: 145
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Miscellaneous (but certainly not unimportant) Matters
*
Previously I demonstrated that although our teams are a wash at even strength on the blueline and on the fourth line, my forwards on the first three lines do hold a significant and measurable advantage, and Kelly Hrudey is a clearly better goalie than Jose Theodore. Let’s look at some more details:
*
Coaching:
*
I don’t see it being a major factor in the series. These are two of the best coaches in the draft (3rd and 4th in all-star voting) and had similarly long careers. They both had a better win% in the regular season than the playoffs, where their teams tended to disappoint. Both have excellent Jack Adams voting records for this level. Martin’s specialty is boring defense and Sutter’s is in intensity and motivation.
*
In Sutter’s bio I showed what happened to the teams he coached for, both before and after he arrived. Except in the case of Calgary, he demonstrated great improvements in the teams he coached, gains which were subsequently lost after he left. Using the same methodology for Martin:
*
St. Louis: .529 before Martin, .485 with Martin, .504 after Martin.
Ottawa: .218 before Martin, .560 with Martin, .665 after Martin.
Florida: .442 before Martin, .520 with Martin, .455 after Martin.
Montreal: .601 before Martin, .533 with Martin, .654 after Martin.
*
In St. Louis, Martin did not seem to make the situation any better. They got worse when he was there, and they got better after he left.
*
Ottawa was an expansion team clearly on the rise, but credit is due to Martin for the turnaround he helped with. The .218 record represents 1995 and the part of the 1996 season that he did not coach. Specifically in that season, the other two coaches went .193, then he came in and went .316. By the time he left, they had amassed such a collection of talent, though, that they weren’t any worse off without him. This tenure was long and maybe the numbers are polluted by the middle years. It might best be described as, .218 before Martin, .421 after hiring Martin, .655 before firing Martin, .665 after firing Martin. Conclusion: in Ottawa, he clearly made the team better when he got there but they continued to improve even after he left.
*
In Florida, it’s clearly demonstrable that he came in and made the team better than they were, and they declined after he left. (like Sutter did three times)
*
In Montreal, it certainly appears the team got worse when he was there, and better after he left, like the St. Louis situation.
*
Conclusion: Although Martin has demonstrated a clear ability to improve a team, he does not appear to have been as consistent at it as Sutter was.
*
Power Play:
*
The potential success of our power plays can be best ascertained by the raw offensive abilities of the players on our units, coupled with the skill set blend.
*
On Birmingham’s PP1 we have:
*
NameCareer $PPP$PPP/S6 season Peak $PPP
Greg Adams22917109
Dan Quinn26025165
Phil Kessel15223148
Jaroslav Spacek17917123
Mark Hardy1131093
*
On Regina we have:
NameCareer $PPP$PPP/S6 season Peak $PPP
Billy Harris15113132
Petr Nedved23919147
*
Regina also has John Sorrell and Art Jackson, whose PP numbers are incomparable because the 1930s did not have PP stats tracked. We would only be able to go by their raw statistics. We also have Ivan Tregubov, whose numbers from the USSR and international tournaments are even more impossible to compare. All we know is that as an overall player he is likely well overqualified for this draft, in international tournaments he scored at 90% of the rate of Russia’s Bobby Orr, Nikolai Sologubov, and at about 2/3 his rate in the soviet league while both were in their primes (1955-1964), and that they said his shot could cut off a leg.
*
Off the bat I see Adams and Harris as comparables. Adams has a longer and more established history of being used on the PP. However, Harris’ peak PP production was much better. Both guys aren’t here to be big scorers but assumedly the digger and net presence. They should be reasonably close in effectiveness. Jackson is a guy who I’d say is about 20% more potent offensively than Quinn with all things considered, but Quinn was pretty much a PP specialist so if we’re going to criticize him as an ES 2nd liner we should at least give credit where it’s due on the PP. Quinn should be able to equal Jackson. Kessel and Sorrell, as I’ve been saying, are about equal as PP performers since they are as overall performers. So we’re even at forward. At the point, Spacek is a pretty good pointman for the AAA level. So is Nedved. Nedved is a legitimate QB with elite vision though – is Spacek a QB or was he just a guy with a big shot? Mark Hardy is a very weak 1st unit PP guy for the AAA, with just 113 career adjusted PP points – he’s the lowest on either list in career total, career average, and 6 year peak. He’s not going to be very effective on the PP. Tregubov is, of course, a question mark, but he appears to have the offensive instincts to score points and the shot to both make use of Nedved’s vision and make up for Nedved’s lack of a slapshot in his arsenal. Our first PP unit should perform better thanks to better pointmen.
*
On the second unit we have for Birmingham:
*
NameCareer $PPP$PPP/S6 season Peak $PPP
Randy Burridge1161391
John Cullen20526179
Wayne Connelly*16115153
Brad Stuart100992
Paul Martin11616101
*
*Connelly’s numbers are estimated using a reasonable proportion of PP to ES points and WHA adjustments.
*
On Regina:
*
NameCareer $PPP$PPP/S6 season Peak $PPP
Patrice Brisebois22718137
Al Hamilton*991180
*
*Hamilton’s are estimated the same way as Connelly’s.
*
Analysis: Again, Regina’s forwards are stacked with older offensive players so all we have is raw stats to go by. Cullen is much more of a PP specialist than I ever realized. He shows up well here in all PP metrics. This is similar to the Quinn/Jackson comparison. Though Boll is approximately as potent overall, Cullen did appear to specialize on the PP and there’s no evidence that Boll did. Cullen should be more effective. On the LW, we’re comparing Burridge, whose career numbers for the PP are very weak, with a guy whose offensive stats put him up in first line territory when it comes to this draft. Obviously there is no way to judge McDonald as a PP scorer specifically, but he is immensely more talented than Burridge. Connelly is an OK PP player but he’s up against a Kessel-level talent in Sorrell. Advantage to Regina there. On the points, Brisebois has, by far, the best PP peak, the best career average (better than Martin who hasn’t gotten old enough to decline) and more career points than Stuart and Martin combined. Brisebois is, simply put, an outstanding AAA 2nd unit PP QB. Stuart and Martin are both quite underwhelming in that regard. Note that Stuart is not even a regular PP player in real life; almost all of his career PP points came in 6 of his 13 seasons. That said, Hamilton is not particularly impressive in this regard, either. He’s more similar to Stuart and Martin – passable but nothing special. Brisebois on the point is the trump card for the Regina unit.
*
So in both cases it really comes down to superior pointmen. Birmingham just can’t touch ours.
*
Penalty Kills
*
On Birmingham’s 1st unit:
*
NameCareer GPUsageSuccess
Tomas Plekanec62832%+15%
Matt Cooke96530%+14%
Barret Jackman67048%+10%
Paul Martin60745%+16%
*
On Regina’s:
*
NameCareer GPUsageSuccess
Lorne Henning54357%+25%
Mike Murphy96536%-6%
Brad Marsh108649%+10%
*
Reg Hamilton, a 1930s player, is not included. All we can go by is his team’s defensive results. Looking at the 8 seasons in which he played the most games, his teams averaged 9% better than the league average defensively, so it’s a reasonable assumption that they were about that good on the PK. Hamilton played 8.64 seasons worth of games. He was one of four main defensemen on the team and one of the more defensively oriented ones. On the other hand, teams split PK minutes among six defensemen now instead of 4. If I had to estimate, Hamilton’s numbers would read “708/50%/+9%”. Hamilton and Jackman would approximately wash out. Marsh is better than Martin. If you take his best 600 games, to put them on an even playing field for averages, he was killing 43% for teams 22% better than average. Martin is good though. Up front, Cooke has had more success than Murphy (Murphy’s greater usage doesn’t outweigh the team success) but Henning absolutely destroys Plekanec and every other AAA forward. The minor advantages for Marsh and Cooke wash out, leaving Regina with a huge edge at center. As good as Plekanec is, Henning is a pure PK specialist who will be far more successful.
*
On Birmingham’s 2nd unit:
*
NameCareer GPUsageSuccess
Radek Bonk96917%+6%
Pat Boutette75627%-16%
Brad Stuart94647%+2%
Lyle Odelein105627%0
*
Regina has:
*
[table]Name|Career GP|Usage|Success
Tony Granato|774|20%|-4%
*
Also on the Regina unit: Cully Dahlstrom (pre-expansion), Ivan Tregubov (soviet), and Art Moore (pre-NHL).
*
Boutette and Granato are about a wash. They are similarly styled players and I think Boutette’s slight edge in usage is offset by the fact that his teams were terrible on the PK and Granato’s were about average. From there we’re comparing Bonk and Dahlstrom. Bonk was an excellent ES player and I gave him credit for that in the 4th line comparisons. But as a PKer, he’s pretty weak. Passable at best on a AAA 2nd unit. 17% usage is the big problem here. Dahlstrom, on the other hand, is frequently mentioned as a penalty killer in contemporary reports, which is very significant considering it’s rare that you see specific mentions of it. It’s reasonable to assume he was one of the best PK forwards of his day. Big advantage for Dahlstrom. On D, Stuart is solid, with good usage for average teams. Odelein’s 27% usage means he didn’t even kill more than his share of penalties (33% if it was split evenly among defensemen). He’s quite underwhelming here. On the other hand, Regina’s got two guys for whom a lot of guesswork must be done. Moore was a stay at home physical player who helped anchor an early dynasty. Tregubov, again, as an overall player, is overqualified for this draft. His bio discusses his physical strength, smarts in his own zone, knocking the puck away, speed and one-on-one defense. With those skills, it’s safe to say that, at a minimum, he is a good AAA PKer. He and Stuart wash out. Moore, question marks and all, should be at least average, which is more than I can say for the little-used Odelein. Thanks to advantages at Moore and especially Dahlstrom, Regina’s 2nd unit is better.
*
Special teams conclusions: Regina’s pointmen make their 1st unit better. Wingers plus Brisebois make the 2nd unit easily better. Henning is the trump card on the first PK units and Dahlstrom on the 2nd.
*
Leadership
*
Regina’s significantly stacked in terms of leadership. This is important in a playoff series as you want the guys who know how to motivate the team and smooth out those highs and lows – people who won’t let the team lose, or will will them to win. We have so many leaders we couldn’t even give them a letter. Birmingham struggled to even figure out who could wear a C:
*
Regina’s leaders:
*
1.****** Mike Murphy (C) – captained the LA kings for six seasons, scouting reports said he was “very respected in NHL circles”
2.****** Brad Marsh (A) – outstanding leadership skills well-supported in his bio. Wore the C for a season in Atlanta and again in Ottawa
3.****** Al Hamilton (A) – 4 year Edmonton captain in the WHA
4.****** Art Moore – captained the Ottawa Silver Seven for their last Stanley Cup
5.****** Tony Granato – outstanding leadership skills well-supported in his bio, wore an A most of his career.
6.****** Ivan Tregubov – “dedication, ruthlessness, loathing for defeat”
7.****** Billy Harris – some decent mention of leadership in his bio
*
Birmingham’s leaders:
1.****** Rick Dudley (C) – captained Cincinnati in the WHA for 2 seasons
2.****** Barret Jackman (A) – usually wears an A in St. Louis
3.****** Paul Martin (A) – has he even worn an A in real life???
4.****** Lyle Odelein – first captain of Columbus
5.****** Matt Cooke – good dressing room guy, I did find one picture with an A
*
I searched really hard but could not find pictures of most of Birmingham’s guys even wearing an A. the best 4 leaders in this series are all on Regina.
*
Defense from the forwards
*
We’ve agreed our defensive corps are about equal in terms of overall ability. My forwards enjoy a sizeable edge offensively. But how do they stack up defensively against this team of grinders? I’ll try to isolate even strength play as best as I can. Rankings are based on the player’s reputations based on quotes, stats, and whatever else is relevant.
*
Radek Bonk
Tomas Plekanec
Mike Murphy
Billy Harris
Art Jackson
Lorne Henning
Cully Dahlstrom
Buzz Boll
*
Matt Cooke
Pat Boutette
Randy Burridge
Tony Granato
Greg Adams
Rick Dudley
Jack McDonald
*
Justin Williams
John Cullen
Willi Plett
Alexander Golikov
Wayne Connelly
*
John Sorrell
Petr Nedved
Phil Kessel
Dan Quinn
*
Explanations: I think stats, award voting and recognition support Bonk and Plekanec being the best defensive players here. However, Regina’s forward corps is filled with guys (Murphy, Harris, Jackson, Henning, Dahlstrom and Boll) that have good to great quotes supporting their defensive, checking, or two way play. The next tier is filled with guys who are more on the “plus” side but not great. Cooke, Boutette and Burridge make it this high by being gritty hard working players who killed some penalties but not known as “checking guys” per se. Granato belongs with them, as shown by his quotes in his bio. Not skilled defensively, but works hard enough to be in the right places. Adams and Dudley are a bit lesser version of those guys; their extremely low PK numbers (9%, 5%) indicate their defensive resumes are not particularly strong. The next tier is guys who have some reason to believe they can be good or bad. Williams plays with strong defensive forwards so he doesn’t have to be one, but my opponent thinks he’s great, but the first scouting report I pulled said he was bad. Cullen was better when his offense faded, worse when he was scoring. Plett was called a two-way player early in his career but was called weak later. Golikov was criticized for his work ethic earlier but became a valuable penalty killer later. Connelly reads as a one-dimensional goal-scoring forward, except I’m pretty sure I read he actually played defense for a short time, so some ability exists there. The last group is guys who we have no reason to believe are any good. Sorrell tops the list as he’s at least called a hustling player. Nedved had the size to be effective if he had to be, plus his excellent faceoff skills are a defensive asset. Kessel was known to be bad his whole career and is still not yet average. Quinn… was always bad.
*
Conclusion: Regina should receive better defensive play throughout its lineup.
*
Toughness at forward:
*
We’ve already touched on toughness on defense and it’s about even. Does anyone have the edge in toughness/grit/physicality at forward? Same type of exercise I used regarding defense:
*
Willi Plett
*
Pat Boutette
Tony Granato
Matt Cooke
*
Mike Murphy
Rick Dudley
Randy Burridge
*
Greg Adams
Billy Harris
Jack McDonald
Cully Dahlstrom
Buzz Boll
*
John Cullen
Radek Bonk
Tomas Plekanec
*
Art Jackson
Lorne Henning
Justin Williams
Wayne Connelly
Petr Nedved
Alexander Golikov
Dan Quinn
John Sorrell
Phil Kessel
*
Explanations: Plett is on another level for toughness here, easily. Boutette, Granato and Cooke are all pretty similar and I think belong in this order. Murphy, Dudley and Burridge belong in the “pretty physical” range. Adams, Harris, McDonald, Dahlstrom and Boll are there for a variety of reasons. Adams was physical and inconsistent, Harris was physical but not mean, McDonald was “powerful” yet extremely small, Dahlstrom was courageous but not necessarily physical, and Boll was an all-around player with no real weaknesses. The next group is guys who were more or less average. Cullen showed some grit later. Bonk was big and could be physical but usually wasn’t. Plekanec isn’t soft but certainly isn’t physical.* The last group is guys with no physicality to speak of. Jackson and Henning were checkers but relied on smarts. Williams is quite docile. Connelly we know little to nothing about. Nedved at least had size. Golikov is a mystery. Quinn was very non-physical. Sorrell is never mentioned as physical at all, and has tiny PIM numbers. Kessel is not quite “soft” but is the least physical player here.
*
Conclusion: There is no discernable edge in physicality/grit/toughness among forwards or defensemen on these teams.[/QUOTE]



LOL Man I just don't have time to make that kind of bio and comparison for both teams. Good job. Your commitment is unchallenged here. And thanks for shredding my team up so gently.....

BudsBuster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-06-2013, 11:51 PM
  #11
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,322
vCash: 500
LOL! I didn't shred you.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2013, 03:59 AM
  #12
Hobnobs
Pinko
 
Hobnobs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,784
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
[b]
Toughness at forward:
*
We’ve already touched on toughness on defense and it’s about even. Does anyone have the edge in toughness/grit/physicality at forward? Same type of exercise I used regarding defense:
*
Willi Plett
*
Pat Boutette
Tony Granato
Matt Cooke
*
Mike Murphy
Rick Dudley
Randy Burridge
*
Greg Adams
Billy Harris
Jack McDonald
Cully Dahlstrom
Buzz Boll
*
John Cullen
Radek Bonk
Tomas Plekanec
*
Art Jackson
Lorne Henning
Justin Williams
Wayne Connelly
Petr Nedved
Alexander Golikov
Dan Quinn
John Sorrell
Phil Kessel
*
Explanations: Plett is on another level for toughness here, easily. Boutette, Granato and Cooke are all pretty similar and I think belong in this order. Murphy, Dudley and Burridge belong in the “pretty physical” range. Adams, Harris, McDonald, Dahlstrom and Boll are there for a variety of reasons. Adams was physical and inconsistent, Harris was physical but not mean, McDonald was “powerful” yet extremely small, Dahlstrom was courageous but not necessarily physical, and Boll was an all-around player with no real weaknesses. The next group is guys who were more or less average. Cullen showed some grit later. Bonk was big and could be physical but usually wasn’t. Plekanec isn’t soft but certainly isn’t physical.* The last group is guys with no physicality to speak of. Jackson and Henning were checkers but relied on smarts. Williams is quite docile. Connelly we know little to nothing about. Nedved at least had size. Golikov is a mystery. Quinn was very non-physical. Sorrell is never mentioned as physical at all, and has tiny PIM numbers. Kessel is not quite “soft” but is the least physical player here.
*
Conclusion: There is no discernable edge in physicality/grit/toughness among forwards or defensemen on these teams.
I made the mistake of lending my grandpa an iPad...

Quote:
Originally Posted by jkrx
Rick Dudleys toughness seems to somewhat of a hyperbole around here. While he wasn't afraid to drop the gloves nor play gritty he wasn't that tough that I would put him in the same range as Burridge. Both Cully and Buzz was probably tougher. In todays NHL I would probably compare him to someone like Abdelkader but with a dirtier stick work. Tenacious fore checker who isn't afraid to drop em.

As for Connelly, he was soft dor his era. Not that he was Paul Kariya soft but no physical aspect worth noting

Hobnobs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2013, 10:32 AM
  #13
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,517
vCash: 844
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Regina defeats Birmingham in 5 games

Three Stars:

1. Kelly Hrudey
2. Petr Nedved
3. Justin Williams

BillyShoe1721 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 10:06 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.