HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Fantasy Hockey Talk > All Time Draft
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

All Time Draft Fantasy league where players of the past and present meet.

ATD Draft Summary

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-03-2007, 05:11 PM
  #51
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,798
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockey Outsider View Post

Worst assembled line of the draft
- Seventieslord, your top line has three great players but I just don't see them working together in real life. Dionne, Denneny and Stewart were all primarily goal-scorers; the latter two appear to have been surprisingly weak playmakers given their roles on their teams. Three players with a shoot-first mentality won't work. Stewart and Denneny were also apparently terribly slow skaters, which isn't what you want on the top line. Your forwards have good potential but the current top line is just too slow and shooter-heavy.

.
I can see what you're saying, however, if you look at Denneny and Stewart's assist totals and their rankings on their teams, it's not really as bad as you think.

17-18 (no assists were awarded)
18-19 - he had 4 assists, tied for 3rd with the great Frank Nighbour and behind only Cleghorn and Gerard.
19-20 - he had 2 assists, 7th on the team... you win this one.
20-21 - he had 5 assists, tied for 3rd.
21-22 - 12 assists, 2nd on the team behind Broadbent who had 14.
22-23 - led the team with 10, ahead of guys like Boucher, Nighbor, Broadbent, Darrah, and Gerard.
23-24 - he had one assist.... not sure what happened there...
24-25 - he led the team with 15 assists, the rest of the team had 17 total!
25-26 - 12 assists, behind Nighbor by one, the rest of the team had 18 in total.
26-27 - 6 assists, tied for 3rd.
27-29 - we don't really need to talk about these seasons, at 36 and 37 he had lost it by then.

so in this 9-season period, his team leader had an average of 10.4 assists per season, and 2nd place had an average of 7.8. He averaged 7.4 per season. Roughly speaking, he was, on average, 2nd on his team in assists each season. I think that's par for the course with a pure goal-scorer. I'm sure you were wall aware that assist totals are extermely low across the board for these years.... I wasn't sure if this affected your assessment of Denneny's respectable playmaking abilities or not.

If I do the same exercise with stewart, using his 23-year old rookie season up to his 36-year old 2nd last season, the first, second, and third place assist leaders on his teams averaged 19.2, 16.2, and 13.4. He averaged 13.1. Roughly speaking, he was the 3rd best playmaker on his team. It's worth noting, though, that the higher numbers across the board in his later years tend to skew the results further away from my stance. if you take his true prime, in which he played mostly under the passing rules he grew up with, his assists per season of 9.5 match what 2nd on his team averaged.

Neither player was an elite playmaker, but both could hold their own in that area. They've both led their teams in assists. Dionne, on the other hand, was equally adept at setting up goals as he was at scoring them. He led his team in assists in 14 of his first 16 seasons, many times by a wide margin. (once he ended up behind Delvecchio by three and another time he was behind Nicholls by one, but he missed 14 games) - he is my team's elite offensive forward. His speed and playmaking ability will help to counter the mediocrity of the other two both areas. You make it sound like he'll be driving to the net while they'll be just huffing and puffing in the neutral zone. I don't recall that ever being a problem with Dave Andreychuk or Tim Kerr, who were both slow skaters for their time. They'll get open, just like Hull did.

That said, I reserve the right to change my lineup around before we get going, to better suit strengths and weaknesses.... I haven't even named captains yet. Thanks for the feedback!

(at least admit the PP will be dynamite!)

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2007, 05:20 PM
  #52
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,798
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nik jr View Post
Most overrated player taken
konstantinov was 1 of my favorite players, but i think he's almost always taken too high.
i have a low opinion of red horner. he was never an all star, and was a penalty machine.
i think gerry cheevers is overrated.
smyth, doan.
Konstantinov, agree. Too short of a career, and was really an elite player for just two seasons.
Red Horner, same. I'd never take a guy who takes that many penalties. Probably Mellanby and Baun are my worst offenders and I'm not the least bit worried about them.
Cheevers tends to get overrated too. He has no individual achievements to speak of, statistically or award-wise. He won two cups and was runner-up for two, but if you look at the lineup, it wasn't goaltending that won it. Like Osgood, he was just good enough to not lose it for them.

But Smyth and Doan? These guys are 30 goal scorers in the dead puck era. I don't think anyone is asking them to be major snipers. But they have 3rd/4th line mentalities and skill sets for the ATD. For where they're taken and what's being asked of them, they are not overrated at all.

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2007, 05:22 PM
  #53
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,798
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pitseleh View Post
A player always taken too high, finally getting picked where he should in the draft
Joe Thornton went much too high last draft.
.
OK, I've seen this three times now. I'm taking this as a compliment.

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2007, 05:28 PM
  #54
pitseleh
Registered User
 
pitseleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,049
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
OK, I've seen this three times now. I'm taking this as a compliment.
I wouldn't take Thornton ahead of Barry personally, but after that he was the best offensive center available. I think he was a good pick value wise at that point.

pitseleh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2007, 05:36 PM
  #55
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,798
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pitseleh View Post
I wouldn't take Thornton ahead of Barry personally, but after that he was the best offensive center available. I think he was a good pick value wise at that point.
his size, robust play, and demonstrated ability to make lesser players greater can't be ignored either!

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2007, 06:01 PM
  #56
Warm Cookies
Re-sign Kunitz
 
Warm Cookies's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 50,913
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Cheevers tends to get overrated too. He has no individual achievements to speak of, statistically or award-wise. He won two cups and was runner-up for two, but if you look at the lineup, it wasn't goaltending that won it. Like Osgood, he was just good enough to not lose it for them.
I especially disagree with that comment.

Quote:
By 1968 he was the number one man in Boston, the savior on a team that had the incomparable Bobby Orr and, soon, Phil Esposito and the other great scoring stars. While all the others were in the offensive zone putting the puck in the net, Cheevers was frequently left to his own devices to prevent goals.
- legendsofhockey

Cheevers is usually cited as the best big-game goalie of the late-'60s/early '70s (he has the record for most consecutive wins by a goalie in the playoffs), and the big games are what I got him for. Individual awards didn't concern him much, nor do they concern me. All he cared about was winning.

Quote:
Cheevers was considered the finest playoff goalie of his day thanks in part to his team attitude. He didn't care how many goals he let in as long as his Bruins scored one more. Shutouts and trophies meant nothing. Only the Stanley Cup counted. His career playoff record was 53-34, one of the best ratios in league history.
- legendsofhockey

Quote:
If I had to win a game, Gerry would be the goalie I'd want in the net for my team.
- Don Cherry

What's more, I think I've put together a very sturdy defense in front of him (which, in spite of Orr, he didn't have the benefit of in Boston due to their run-and-gun style) that should help his case further. Regardless, his regular season winning percentage is sparkling to begin with (230-102-74).


Last edited by Warm Cookies: 11-03-2007 at 06:07 PM.
Warm Cookies is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2007, 06:05 PM
  #57
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,798
vCash: 500
I've made two simple moves in my lineup. One involved switching Wendel Clark up to the first line left wing, and putting Denneny down to the 2nd. This is a very Lindy Ruff move as he prefers to roll four balanced line, and also provides other multiple benefits.

Wendel Clark admittedly, is from an ATD standpoint, lacking the pure natural skill to put up big numbers on a first line; however, his skating and defensive awareness are both significantly better than Denneny's, and his ability to leave opponents in a crumpled heap at center ice will have the opposition keeping their heads up more than they'd like to have to. Coupled with Old Poison on the first line, this creates a nastiness not usually seen on a top line, along with room for the undersized Dionne.

Denneny, primarily a shooter (who I've also proven can set them up) gets united with Nicholls, a great skater who is primarily a passer, but can also score; and Dye, who just likes to shoot. With Nicholls being the primary puck carrier and passer, expect a lot of goals to come from the wing on his pretty setups.

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2007, 06:24 PM
  #58
Sturminator
I voted for Kodos
 
Sturminator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: West Egg, New York
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 8,401
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalyd Psycho
Also, while both (Clancy and Vasiliev) played tough, due to their size, neither could be used as our crease clearing, corner battle winning, wear out the injury prone forwards, anti-power forward defender.
I dunno about wearing opposing forwards out, but Vasiliev could certainly clear a crease and win battles along the boards. In spite of "only" being about 6'0" 205 lbs (which in the 70's was above average, to begin with), Vasiliev was known for his exceptional strength. But then, you already knew that; Valery is the most prominent of your returning players.

The point about #2 defensemen is an interesting one. It's true. Shore-Clapper (and this happened only once) was the only pair of defensemen from the same team named as postseason all-stars in the entire era. I don't even know who the next pair was because I haven't had time to go far enough to check, but it's well into the 50's, at least. Johnson and Seibert? Nope. Never all-stars in the same year in New York. The instant Earl Seibert started getting all-star nods in New York, Johnson stopped getting them. Seibert and Coulter? Of course not. They both played in New York and Chicago, but they were traded for each other and never played for the same team at the same time.

None of the Leafs defensemen not named Clancy ever made an all-star squad. Flash Hollett never made a team until after Shore was done and Clapper was washed up. Ott Heller got his one all-star selection in New York the exact year after Art Coulter stopped winning his. Coincidence? It seems to have been something like league policy not to hand out all-star selections to multiple defensemen on the same team. The fact that Shore and Clapper were once 1st teamers in the same year was so notable it's mentioned in Dit Clapper's HHOF write-up seventy years later.

Sturminator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2007, 08:49 PM
  #59
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
 
Nalyd Psycho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: No Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,132
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sturminator View Post
I dunno about wearing opposing forwards out, but Vasiliev could certainly clear a crease and win battles along the boards. In spite of "only" being about 6'0" 205 lbs (which in the 70's was above average, to begin with), Vasiliev was known for his exceptional strength. But then, you already knew that; Valery is the most prominent of your returning players.

The point about #2 defensemen is an interesting one. It's true. Shore-Clapper (and this happened only once) was the only pair of defensemen from the same team named as postseason all-stars in the entire era. I don't even know who the next pair was because I haven't had time to go far enough to check, but it's well into the 50's, at least. Johnson and Seibert? Nope. Never all-stars in the same year in New York. The instant Earl Seibert started getting all-star nods in New York, Johnson stopped getting them. Seibert and Coulter? Of course not. They both played in New York and Chicago, but they were traded for each other and never played for the same team at the same time.

None of the Leafs defensemen not named Clancy ever made an all-star squad. Flash Hollett never made a team until after Shore was done and Clapper was washed up. Ott Heller got his one all-star selection in New York the exact year after Art Coulter stopped winning his. Coincidence? It seems to have been something like league policy not to hand out all-star selections to multiple defensemen on the same team. The fact that Shore and Clapper were once 1st teamers in the same year was so notable it's mentioned in Dit Clapper's HHOF write-up seventy years later.
Yes, obviously I'm aware of Vasiliev's qualities. But to me, he's best suited against the most skilled forwards, his years checking Kharlamov have him plenty trained. It would be a waste to make him the intimidator. Similar to Tim Horton, some players you don't want in the specialized role that you know they can succeed it. Both Vasiliev and Horton can play the brute, but their overall defensive game means they shouldn't be so confined. If that makes sense.

As for the teammates in post season all-stars.
Next was 1942 with Tommy Anderson and Pat Egan playing for the Brooklyn Americans. 1943 had Boston's pair of Jack Crawford and Flash Hollett on the 2nd pair. '45 had Montreal's Bouchard and Harmon. '46 had Bouchard and Reardon. 47 actually only had reps from two teams, Montreal's Bouchard and Reardon and Detroit's Stewart and Quackenbush.

So, it would appear to me that voters were very nervous to start the trend, but once Shore and Clapper broke the barrier, it was broken for good. Although, I imagine the shrinking size of the league contributed.

__________________
Every post comes with the Nalyd Psycho Seal of Approval.
Nalyd Psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2007, 09:11 PM
  #60
VanIslander
Don't waste my time
 
VanIslander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 21,960
vCash: 500
Vasiliev is said to have made a dirty hit on Martinec which knocked the tourney all-star right winger out of the gold medal game of the 1974 world championships. There was supposedly an intent to injure. But after what happened to the Soviets in the '72 Summit Series it might not have been so out of place in terms of rough and tumble 70's hockey.

VanIslander is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2007, 09:12 PM
  #61
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
 
Nalyd Psycho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: No Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,132
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanIslander View Post
Vasiliev is said to have made a dirty hit on Martinec which knocked the tourney all-star right winger out of the gold medal game of the 1974 world championships. There was supposedly an intent to injure. But after what happened to the Soviets in the '72 Summit Series it might not have been so out of place in terms of rough and tumble 70's hockey.
He was noted as one of the dirtiest players in Russia, but, the Russians then weren't as dirty as the NHL players, so it's relative.

Nalyd Psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-03-2007, 09:46 PM
  #62
Sturminator
I voted for Kodos
 
Sturminator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: West Egg, New York
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 8,401
vCash: 500
One small point about Red Horner and penalty minutes.

Horner's regular-season PIMs/game: 2.58
Horner's postseason PIMs/game: 2.39

Unlike many players, Horner's PIMs actually went down in the playoffs. Here are some of Horner's contemporaries among the more physical defensemen:

Ching Johnson's regular-season PIMs/game: 1.86
Ching Johnson's postseason PIMs/game: 2.65

Eddie Shore's regular-season PIMs/game: 1.87
Eddie Shore's postseason PIMs/game: 3.25

Sylvio Mantha's regular-season PIMs/game: 1.23
Sylvio Mantha's postseason PIMs/game: 1.88

Art Coulter's regular-season PIMs/game: 1.29
Art Coulter's postseason PIMs/game: 1.53

What you say? Red Horner goes from being arguably the most penalized "regular player" (meaning not a goon) in NHL regular-season history to being only the third most penalized defenseman of his own era in the postseason. Eddie Shore wins the crown going away, which should come as a surprise to absolutely no one, except for perhaps the GM who said he'd "never" take someone who drew that many penalties. If such stats were kept for the entirety of his career, I'd imagine that Sprague Cleghorn would probably end up somewhere in Shore territory, as well, but that's only a guess.

It's hard to say exactly why Horner's PIMs go down in the postseason while everyone else's go up, but it's probably nothing more than Dick Irvin telling Red to pick his spots more carefully come playoff time. Although he clearly liked to fight, Horner must have been a fairly disciplined player if he was able to lower his PIMs when he needed to while almost everyone else's were going up. I get the impression from reading about Horner that he was a good team guy who did what it took to win, whether that meant fighting or holding his temper and playing hockey.

Once again, the true picture of Red Horner the player has been distorted by his less-than-stellar Legends biography.


Last edited by Sturminator: 11-03-2007 at 09:56 PM. Reason: misspelled "stellar"
Sturminator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2007, 09:15 AM
  #63
nik jr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Congo-Kinshasa
Posts: 10,798
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
But Smyth and Doan? These guys are 30 goal scorers in the dead puck era. I don't think anyone is asking them to be major snipers. But they have 3rd/4th line mentalities and skill sets for the ATD. For where they're taken and what's being asked of them, they are not overrated at all.
yeah, i shouldn't have put them in there because i consider them overrated in the NHL, not the ATD.

i realize they're the coveted hard working, gritty forwards who can score, but they also aren't really great players. from the all the praise smyth gets, you'd think he was an elite player. then there's the video tribute in edmonton, as if his number were being retired.

i once heard ryan smyth described by a game commentator as "the perfect playoff performer."
????
of course, commentators often exaggerate, but let's be serious.

nik jr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2007, 10:55 AM
  #64
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Hôlle
Posts: 26,736
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by doctordark View Post
I especially disagree with that comment.



- legendsofhockey

Cheevers is usually cited as the best big-game goalie of the late-'60s/early '70s (he has the record for most consecutive wins by a goalie in the playoffs), and the big games are what I got him for. Individual awards didn't concern him much, nor do they concern me. All he cared about was winning.



- legendsofhockey



- Don Cherry

What's more, I think I've put together a very sturdy defense in front of him (which, in spite of Orr, he didn't have the benefit of in Boston due to their run-and-gun style) that should help his case further. Regardless, his regular season winning percentage is sparkling to begin with (230-102-74).

I agree with you that Cheevers went... actually where he belongs : one of the worst starting goalies as far as regular season is conerned (I have many backups ahead of him as well), but would come big in the playoffs. I wouldn't take him but... definitely a starter.

However, a Don Cherry quote saying he would use Cheevers whenever he needs a big game pretty much has negative value concerning Cheevers's value, as far as I am concerned...

MXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2007, 11:55 AM
  #65
Warm Cookies
Re-sign Kunitz
 
Warm Cookies's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 50,913
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
I agree with you that Cheevers went... actually where he belongs : one of the worst starting goalies as far as regular season is conerned (I have many backups ahead of him as well), but would come big in the playoffs. I wouldn't take him but... definitely a starter.

However, a Don Cherry quote saying he would use Cheevers whenever he needs a big game pretty much has negative value concerning Cheevers's value, as far as I am concerned...
I'd put him in about the middle-of-the-pack for regular season goalies.

I mean, despite his lack of individual accolades (which can be explained in part by the Bruins' style at the time), he did win more than twice as many games as he lost. The only other ATD starting goalie who can make that claim is Dryden.

Can't argue with your assessment that he was taken about where he should be though. The lack of hardware hurts him.

P.S. Hey, Grapes won a game or two in his day. I'd say his word holds value.

Warm Cookies is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2007, 12:12 PM
  #66
BlueBleeder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Looking for others
Country: United States
Posts: 1,677
vCash: 500
Responding to some of the thoughts on my team...

Naslund on the top line. I didn't want him on the top line at first, but when I missed out on my other picks at LW had to adjust. Even if we consider him inconsistant I have him lined up with two very constant performers in Yzerman and McDonald, and unlike the Canucks in years past with my balanced offense him scoring won't make or break the team.

Stastny, I could not beleive he was available that late. He is one of my favorite players of alltime and is very underated.

Svedberg. The way defense was going off the board, I decided not to wait on him.

Murray. A bad pick I admit, I don't know much about the older coaches. Came down to him and a couple of other playoff chokers.

BlueBleeder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2007, 02:20 PM
  #67
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,790
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by doctordark View Post
I'd put him in about the middle-of-the-pack for regular season goalies.

I mean, despite his lack of individual accolades (which can be explained in part by the Bruins' style at the time), he did win more than twice as many games as he lost. The only other ATD starting goalie who can make that claim is Dryden.

Can't argue with your assessment that he was taken about where he should be though. The lack of hardware hurts him.

P.S. Hey, Grapes won a game or two in his day. I'd say his word holds value.
I had Cheevers in the middle of my list for starting goalies. I throw the regular season stats out the window for him. A win was a win, a loss was a loss. It didn't matter how many goals he gave up, or the number of shots. All he wanted was to win.

He was terrific in the playoffs, and that's what matters most. One of the top clutch goalies of all-time.

God Bless Canada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2007, 03:13 PM
  #68
Sturminator
I voted for Kodos
 
Sturminator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: West Egg, New York
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 8,401
vCash: 500
Aside from the fact that he was a notorious wanderer, the one thing that bothers me about Cheevers is that despite his reputation as a great playoff performer, he was actually only a true #1 goalie once for a Cup winner. Gerry was fantastic in 69-70, going 12-1 in the playoffs and dropping his GAA by about half a goal from his regular-season numbers.

Ok, that's great, but he was actually in a playoff platoon with Ed Johnston in 71-72 when the Big Bad Bruins won their second Cup. Cheevers went 6-2 in 8 games and Johnston went 6-1 in 7. Cheevers gave up 21 goals and Johnston gave up 15. Of course, Gerry did have two shutouts in that Cup run (including the game 6 clincher against the Leafs), but he also got lit up a couple of times. It was a true platoon and Cheevers was arguably the weaker link, though Boston did win the Cup so there's not much to complain about either way.

Outside of the Cup years, Cheevers' playoff record is a bit up and down, though not badly so. He was outstanding in 68-69, arguably Boston's best player (including Bobby Orr) and only lost to the Habs in the second round on three overtime heartbreakers. He was good in 75-76, but the Bruins got beaten in the first round, anyway, and he was solid though unspectacular in the late 70's. He was pretty bad in 67-68 and may have cost the Bruins the Cup in 70-71 (they were by far the best regular-season team) when he got run through by Montreal to the tune of 12 goals in games six and seven of a heartbreaking first round series.

Cheevers is the best goalie taken after George Hainesworth, in my opinion (which means I've got him rated 19th best), but I think the gap is actually bigger than a lot of people realize. Cheevers definitely had his moments in the playoffs (two outstanding runs, at least, one of which culminated in a Cup), but in an all-time context, I think his reputation as a money goalie is a bit overblown. I think he went at least a round too early, though given the scramble for goalies early in this draft, I understand the reasoning completely. Concerning the GMs who missed out on the tier of goalies ending at Hainesworth, I think BM made the shrewdest move (and got the best value) with Lumley in the 11th round.

Sturminator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2007, 04:37 PM
  #69
Warm Cookies
Re-sign Kunitz
 
Warm Cookies's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 50,913
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by God Bless Canada View Post
I had Cheevers in the middle of my list for starting goalies. I throw the regular season stats out the window for him. A win was a win, a loss was a loss. It didn't matter how many goals he gave up, or the number of shots. All he wanted was to win.

He was terrific in the playoffs, and that's what matters most. One of the top clutch goalies of all-time.
That's the way I look at it. I tried to build my team around scrappy players driven to win, and Cheevers fits that mold perfectly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sturminator View Post
Aside from the fact that he was a notorious wanderer,
Plante.

Quote:
the one thing that bothers me about Cheevers is that despite his reputation as a great playoff performer, he was actually only a true #1 goalie once for a Cup winner. Gerry was fantastic in 69-70, going 12-1 in the playoffs and dropping his GAA by about half a goal from his regular-season numbers.

Ok, that's great, but he was actually in a playoff platoon with Ed Johnston in 71-72 when the Big Bad Bruins won their second Cup. Cheevers went 6-2 in 8 games and Johnston went 6-1 in 7. Cheevers gave up 21 goals and Johnston gave up 15. Of course, Gerry did have two shutouts in that Cup run (including the game 6 clincher against the Leafs), but he also got lit up a couple of times. It was a true platoon and Cheevers was arguably the weaker link, though Boston did win the Cup so there's not much to complain about either way.
True, though I've taken that into account and made sure that he does have a very high quality back-up in Chabot to help share the duties.

He was always a goalie who had a relatively light workload, and I never expected him to take on a Brodeur-like percentage of games played. He's got a platoon on the Plains too.

Quote:
Outside of the Cup years, Cheevers' playoff record is a bit up and down, though not badly so. He was outstanding in 68-69, arguably Boston's best player (including Bobby Orr) and only lost to the Habs in the second round on three overtime heartbreakers. He was good in 75-76, but the Bruins got beaten in the first round, anyway, and he was solid though unspectacular in the late 70's. He was pretty bad in 67-68 and may have cost the Bruins the Cup in 70-71 (they were by far the best regular-season team) when he got run through by Montreal to the tune of 12 goals in games six and seven of a heartbreaking first round series.
If you take the Cup years away from a superb playoff goalie like Parent, he doesn't look so hot either.

'67-'68 was Cheevers' first NHL playoff experience ever, so I don't hold a sub-par performance against him there. Cripes, even Benedict had an 8.67 GAA in his first 3-game playoff appearance. '70-'71 was a let-down in the final 2 games, but the Bruins did come up against a young phenom on a roll.

At any rate, even outside of the Cup years, Cheevers still had two consecutive runs to the Finals as a #1 goalie. Not too shabby in my book.

Quote:
Cheevers is the best goalie taken after George Hainesworth, in my opinion (which means I've got him rated 19th best), but I think the gap is actually bigger than a lot of people realize. Cheevers definitely had his moments in the playoffs (two outstanding runs, at least, one of which culminated in a Cup), but in an all-time context, I think his reputation as a money goalie is a bit overblown. I think he went at least a round too early, though given the scramble for goalies early in this draft, I understand the reasoning completely. Concerning the GMs who missed out on the tier of goalies ending at Hainesworth, I think BM made the shrewdest move (and got the best value) with Lumley in the 11th round.
The goalie scramble did catch me off-guard (I won't make any bones about the fact that I thought I could get Benedict in the late 3rd), but I'm confident I got the best goalie available. How much longer he would've remained on board is up for debate, but he went in the early 6th last ATD, if memory serves, and goalies were in higher demand this time around.

I agree about Lumley from a value standpoint, for sure. But if you're still working on that "take away the Cup year(s)" theory, it gets downright ugly for Lumley come playoff time.

Warm Cookies is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-04-2007, 09:25 PM
  #70
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,798
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nik jr View Post
yeah, i shouldn't have put them in there because i consider them overrated in the NHL, not the ATD.

i realize they're the coveted hard working, gritty forwards who can score, but they also aren't really great players. from the all the praise smyth gets, you'd think he was an elite player. then there's the video tribute in edmonton, as if his number were being retired.

i once heard ryan smyth described by a game commentator as "the perfect playoff performer."
????
of course, commentators often exaggerate, but let's be serious.
I agree with what you're saying, they've become Canadian folk heroes for their lunchpail work ethics, leadership by example, modest scoring (usually being the best player on mediocre teams) and the roles they've played for Team Canada.

All-stars, in today's NHL? No. First-line players today? Yes. Worthwhile 4th, or even 3rd-liners in the ATD? Yeah.

And the question could have been interpreted in two different ways, so I guess we just agree to agree now that we understand eachother

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2007, 02:00 AM
  #71
Sturminator
I voted for Kodos
 
Sturminator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: West Egg, New York
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 8,401
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by doctordark View Post
Plante.
Rayner...

As an aside, I'm fairly certain that the goaltending platoon in Boston in 71-72 was a direct result of Cheevers' meltdown against Montreal at the end of Boston's run in 70-71. Gerry became a steady playoff performer later on in his career, but he ran hot and cold as a young goalie. He had two great runs in 68-69 and 69-70 and then a major hiccup, to which the team reacted by platooning him the next season. Your investment in a strong backup goalie (though I'd have gone with Hap Holmes - BM's mid-round goalie picks were very strong) was wise, and not only for the regular season.

Cheevers could be a superb playoff goalie and often was, but you know me; I value consistency, moreso in goal than at any other position. I agree with you that Cheevers probably wouldn't have lasted until your late 6th rounder (I'm guessing Wisent would have taken him in the 5th or 6th, at the very least), so I guess you picked him where you had to. At any rate, Cheevers' reputation as a playoff goalie is still mostly deserved. He's really only got that one blemish (you're right that knocking him for not beating a great Habs team in his first playoff year is rather unfair), but I thought it should be noted, all the same. Reputations are often a good way of distorting reality, one way or another, which is probably why Nietzsche said that man can suffer a bad conscience more easily than a bad reputation.


Last edited by Sturminator: 11-05-2007 at 02:51 AM.
Sturminator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2007, 10:56 AM
  #72
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,790
vCash: 500
The new winner for biggest reach of the draft: Ilya Kovalchuk or Geoff Courtnall for LL's defensive line. (Not sure which one you're trying to pass off as your defensive line). Kovalchuk is poor defensively. We're all waiting for the confrontations and the meltdown between moody Ilya and hard-nosed Imlach. (Incidentally, I think Imlach is a terrific coach, in the right situation. Put him on a team loaded with hard-workers and high-character players, and a team that doesn't have hot dogs or cancers, and Imlach can be a championship-winning coach). If Imlach has Ilya on a defensive line, it would be a disaster.

I watched Geoff Courtnall played dozens of games when he was a Canuck. Not necessarily my type of player, but I couldn't help but be a fan of the guy. Maybe it's because his arrival from St. Louis was part of the trade that turned the Canucks around. Or maybe it's because he owned my favourite restaurant of all-time. He was gifted, but he was a streaky producer. Scored some of the biggest goals in Canuck history, including the goal to get us into the 1991 playoffs. But he was not reliable defensively. In fact, he could often be a non-factor. Put him on a checking line, and he will be a major liability.

God Bless Canada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2007, 11:20 AM
  #73
LapierreSports
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 346
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to LapierreSports
Biggest Steal of the draft

Lindsay at #30
Bathgate at #64
Lach at #86
D.Savard at #189

Biggest Reach of the draft

Gainey at #69
Lindros at #114
Carbonneau at #122
Alexei Kasatonov #137

Smartest/best strategic pick in the draft

Biggest blunder selection of the draft

A Player finally getting respect in the draft

A player always taken too high, finally getting picked where he should in the draft

A player you've discovered in this draft

Fleming Mackell, the guy who would always score on a rebound in front of the net.

Most underrated player taken

Bathgate
Ratelle

Most overrated player taken

Gainey at #69
Carbonneau at #122

Favourite line of the draft

Well its hard to choose between the French Connection Line and the Party Line. Good job MDX on reuniting Moore, Richard and Richard. Just watched the 1956-1960 Habs tribute on VHS, that line was on fire ! Also like the Kraut Line.

Best assembled line of the draft

Moore, Richard and Richard.

Worst assembled line of the draft

A funny/dramatic story (related to the ATD) you've learned about since the start of the draft

Well, Ive been working in a concession stand at the Bell Center for 6 years now and Ive read that Eddie Shore, as a coach, would force the scratch players to work the popcorn machines in the concession stands. Tought this was pretty funny and imagine working with the sracth guys of the Habs like Grabovski, Gorges ,etc.


Last edited by LapierreSports: 11-05-2007 at 12:54 PM.
LapierreSports is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2007, 11:40 AM
  #74
Murphy
Registered User
 
Murphy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,104
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pappyline View Post
Biggest Reach of the draft
Boivan @ 156. There were many better Dmen still out there.
Thats funny to me in that you were the guy I thought was going to select him, so I grabbed him early.

No doubt there were more talented defensemen out there at the time but not for the blueline corps I was looking to build. Still a hard hitting, hall of famer at that point doesn't seem to me to be that big a reach? Not many in that catagory left at that point of the draft.

Murphy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2007, 12:42 PM
  #75
LapierreSports
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 346
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to LapierreSports
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockey Outsider View Post
Joliat was the Theo Fleury of his era, but much more talented. What he lacked in size, he made up for in aggression and fearlessness.

Read Joe Pelletier's blog for stories about Joliat attacking Shore, fighting Punch Broadbent at age 70, and planning a comeback (who says old stars think they can't compete in today's NHL)?
Thanks for the link. Love the Proadbent incident ! Hilarious ! I still remember Joliat at the Forum in 1986 I think, skating like a little kid and falling all over the place. That was priceless.

LapierreSports is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:36 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2016 All Rights Reserved.