HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Fantasy Hockey Talk > All Time Draft
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
All Time Draft Fantasy league where players of the past and present meet.

Lineup Assassination

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-06-2007, 11:50 AM
  #76
LapierreSports
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 346
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to LapierreSports
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Middleton View Post
Working my way through the teams based on when they posted them.

Strengths
  • Love the 1st, 2nd and 3rd lines. We know precisely what you're going to get from them.
  • PK units look to be rock solid. I'm a huge Dave Poulin fan, the combo of Poulin and Larmer should be a shut-down type of unit

Weaknesses
  • Not sure what to make of your defense corps. There are some prominent names, but no one that really pops out at me as being your go-to guy. I'm unsure of your 2nd unit, will Hollett and Reise Jr. make a good pairing? I presonally couldn't say yes or no.
  • Size. Welcome to my world. Your team is equally small if not smaller. Secord and Lambert are your only legitimate sizeable players. Larmer isn't a cream-puff but he won't intimidate anyone either.
  • Amonte on the 4th line. Not sure if he's there to be the offensive component of the line or a shut down type of player. Either way it's not a great fit IMO.
  • Lindbergh might not be a good back-up. Career was too short, could have been great, could have been the next flash-in-the-pan goalie.

Thanks for the review Rick. I will do the same as soon as possible.
Besides from the Amonte thing, the obvious observation from my team resides in the defensive corp. Ive put a lot of effort in the draft to put together three superb scoring lines which is a rare trend considering that pretty much everyone has 2 way type of players or guys that bring more of a physical presence than scoring on the third line and obviously the 4th line.

The results of these 3 lines, is a defensive corp which is tough to anaylze. Lets just start by being clear here because this is a comment that I will be reading a lot : <<There are some prominent names, but no one that really pops out at me as being your go-to guy>> Well the go-to guy is our leader, our captain, Butch Bouchard, a superb number 1 D on any all time team. He is the D that will be in every situation, logging the most minutes of every player on our team.


Last edited by LapierreSports: 11-06-2007 at 12:14 PM.
LapierreSports is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2007, 12:05 PM
  #77
Rick Middleton
Registered User
 
Rick Middleton's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Ottawa, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 71,939
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Rick Middleton
Quote:
Originally Posted by reckoning View Post
Can somebody please do me?
You're in the wrong board, buddy. We don't honour those kinds of requests.

__________________
Rick Middleton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2007, 12:17 PM
  #78
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 21,917
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Your top line is perfect, but it caused you to have to scrape the middle of the barrel for top defensemen, and your starting goalie too. It will be interesting to see how that plays out. Anderson is a guy I targeted for his grit, speed, and playoff ability, but you took him sooner than I would have taken him. I am stunned that you are so deep at forward that you have Keon on a third line. I think he's a top 2nd-liner, or even a stretch for the first line. I wanted him to balance out Nels Stewart, but you got him before I could. Steen plays a good two-way game, but is too soft for a 4th line. I like the other two though! On D, you managed to get a #2 guy as your #1, then a bunch of guys who can be #4-6. After Zubov and Quackenbush, who will rush the puck? Your second PP unit even has 4 forwards for this reason, I imagine. I wonder what the other GMs are going to see more: how elite your forwards are, or how mediocre your D is. That said, your D can play D, so if your forwards can make up for their offensive shortcomings, you will be alright.
Thanks for the comments.. You pretty much see my team as I do when it comes down to how will it work : a solid corps of backchecking forwards meant that I didn't really need an squad full of transition-play aces, no do I absolutely need D-Mens to put up points. And backchecking forwards + solid defense on the defensive side of the game meant that there was more "productive" moves than taking a keeper extremely early, as the discrepancies between 'tender no.1 and 'tender no. 26 (that's exactly where I rate Connell, if you combine playoffs and regular season) isn't THAT WIDE : after all, those guys all won a playoff round (or more) by themselves in the past, unless we're talking about overrated netminders. (That's also why I took my goalie late, as I think my "order" when it comes down to goaltender is...let's say, not making consensus here).

Three things, however :
- I think Quackenbush qualifies as a legit #1 in this draft. Absolutely not a top-flight one, but I have a hard time beleiving a guy who's top notch at anything except physical play isn't a 1st D-Men in this draft. Litteraly, there are 28 #1. And he was certainly a better player, overall, than some guys taken ahead of him.

- #4 is stretching it a bit for Vasko. Twice on the All-Star team, on a team where he was the big conscience for the smaller, and riskyier, player. I would qualify him as my #3, but the familiarity with Quackenbush game (Pilote was tougher, but was much more penalized. The best D-Men shouldn't spend time in the box, quite simple, as the best d-men should see time on the PK) made him a good candidate for the first pair : there's also obvious similarities between Vasko and Black Jack's game. Not implying that Vasko is Black Jack's equal -- but his game is certainly alike. And I think Sergei Zubov is a 2nd pairing guy by now. As for puck rushers, Phil Russell was certainly not bad at it, and is noted as an excellent skater considering era and size, as did Gary Bergman. Not aces by any stretch, but enough to get the job done.

- Steen... Well, I wanted a responsible, but able line when it comes down to scoring goals. Steen wasn't, let's say, Bridgman, when it comes down to aggressivity, but he was certainly not soft, either. John Ferguson (a man who knows what he's talking about when it comes to tougness) said Steen was the toughest swede he ever saw play (Salming wasn't a wuss). Not exactly as aggressive as some other 4th liners for sure, but not soft. Would lay hits, would receive them... I wouldn't have selected him if I didn't had already some toughness in my Top-6 (in fact, every guy on my top-6 have to receive the epithet "tough" at some time in their career).

- As for Glenn Anderson... I'm afraid that's where he's going in this draft. Especially with murphy and GBC picking not so far from where I picked him (I really had the feeling you would pick him, hence why I traded up at the time). Offense, toughness, clutch-scoring, and some more clutch-scoring comes with a price.


Last edited by MXD: 11-06-2007 at 12:23 PM.
MXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2007, 12:47 PM
  #79
pappyline
Registered User
 
pappyline's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Mass/formerly Ont
Country: United States
Posts: 4,162
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
- #4 is stretching it a bit for Vasko. Twice on the All-Star team, on a team where he was the big conscience for the smaller, and riskyier, player. I would qualify him as my #3, but the familiarity with Quackenbush game (Pilote was tougher, but was much more penalized. The best D-Men shouldn't spend time in the box, quite simple, as the best d-men should see time on the PK) made him a good candidate for the first pair : there's also obvious similarities between Vasko and Black Jack's game. Not implying that Vasko is Black Jack's equal -- but his game is certainly alike. .
Just a quick note on Vasko. He was actually quite good at rushing the puck. He was big & he was fast. In fact his nickname was not only related to his size but to his resemblance to a charging bull moose. It sounded if he was being booed but the fans were actually yellinh MOOSE as he charged up the ice. He never went deep & pretty much dummped it in when he got to the imposing blueline. Pilote & Vasko played together for years & covered for each other. Pilote was by far the better playmaker & playeed a more physical 2 way game.

pappyline is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2007, 03:51 PM
  #80
raleh
Registered User
 
raleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Dartmouth, NS
Posts: 1,764
vCash: 500
I'd just like to direct everyone's attention to the finals of the last minor league. I believe I said that after working with Arrbez I was pretty sure he was going to win the next main draft. Well I said that before I knew I would get to be part of this one, but I just wanted to point it out because that is one hell of a team!

raleh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2007, 04:01 PM
  #81
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 21,917
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by raleh View Post
I'd just like to direct everyone's attention to the finals of the last minor league. I believe I said that after working with Arrbez I was pretty sure he was going to win the next main draft. Well I said that before I knew I would get to be part of this one, but I just wanted to point it out because that is one hell of a team!
I don't know if arbez will win it, but I nominated him as the most improved GM (or team...) since last time in my mid-draft analysis. Considering I was a rookie by last draft, and that I REALLY like my team this time around, I think that means something...

MXD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2007, 04:17 PM
  #82
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,791
vCash: 500
I'm going to do my best to get TGH18 and 70s done today. I'm also going to try to write something up for BB. Even though he technically isn't a new GM, the draft sure has changed a lot since his last appearance in ATD 3.

God Bless Canada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2007, 04:33 PM
  #83
vancityluongo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 11,349
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LapierreSports View Post
The first thing that comes to mind when I see your lineup is that your team lacks scoring, especially from the center position. I would be pissed if Bobby Smith was my 2nd line center in an all time draft and Lafontaine my first line center. This is the price you pay for drafting Jagr in the first round. A lot of people have made a much bigger deal of what it should be concerning that pick but this explains the lack at center. By the way, I dont have a problem where you picked Jagr. But then you went the Brodeur route which is also ok... I am huge fan of Joliat which everyone would be happy to have as a 1st line LW. The 3rd and 4th line will bring zero offense but they are nice two- way lines. Combined that with a defensive defense and a top 10 goalie of all time and you have a team that will rely heavily on shutting down the opposition. Good luck !
Thanks for the review Lappy. I'm not really sure why exactly you feel we'll have scoring problems. I think you underrate Bobby Smith; he wasn't the most dynamic offensive center, but he was good enough, IMHO, to be a gritty 2nd line center in a ATD. But yes, we are fairly weak at Center. But I'd counter that by saying that we have lots of depth down the wings.

Quote:
Originally Posted by God Bless Canada View Post
I don't think scoring is an issue with Winnipeg. The first line will score in bushels. LaFontaine's a lower tier first line centre (I think he's better off as a No. 2), but he's got linemates who are top 10 all-time, arguably top five, at their respective positions.

And I think you underrate Bobby Smith. In a 28-team draft, he's definitely good enough to be a No. 2 centre. He's not in that upper tier of second line centres, but his size, stickhandling and toughness make him a good No. 2. And he's in the top 20 all-time for post-season scoring. That counts. He should be fine working with Gilbert and Robitaille. Smith will also open up room for them.

The third and fourth lines won't score much, although Peca has that big-game mentality, and Ryan Walter isn't a slouch in the offensive zone. I don't think Walter's a stretch in the fourth line role. Very smart player in his own zone.

I do have concerns about scoring from the back end. Once you get past Housley and Savard, it dries up in a hurry. Savard was never a big point producer, but his talent is undeniable. Daneyko, Plager and Harper are rock-solid (especially Harper), but I have doubts about their ability to move the puck. That's where Schneider will come in handy.
Thanks for the review GBC. Agree with most points, but I do have to say one thing: you aren't giving Graham Drinkwater much credit. Yeah, Plager, Harper and Daneyko are literally useless offensively. But 4 of my 7 defensemen were decent offensively. Housley is one of the top offensive d-men ever IMO. Schneider is a PP expert. And although none of us have ever seen him play, according to some articles, Drinkwater was one of the best puck-rushing d-men of all time as well.

According to Wikipedia, Drinkwater was actually a forward, but also played defense.

Quote:
Drinkwater left McGill in 1895 to sign with the Victoria Hockey Club of Montreal, where he figured he would get more playing time. He scored nine goals in eight contests, helping Victoria win the Stanley Cup. Drinkwater would also win the cup in 1896, 1897 and 1899. Drinkwater's excellent skating and smarts made him one of the best players early in the game of hockey. He was inducted to the Hockey Hall of Fame in 1950.
I agree overall, my defense will not be scoring like the teams that have the Nanaimo and Orr, Darthmouth and Coffey. But I think our transition game is being a tad bit underrated.

But once again, thanks for doing the reviews. I'll try and do a few myself for some of the teams whose players I know about.

vancityluongo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2007, 05:23 PM
  #84
vancityluongo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 11,349
vCash: 500
Whoa, didn't realize I missed these posts..thought I already replied to them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
I love Joliat on your first line. I think he has everything you want in a player except for size, but Jagr is a monster on the other side. Lafontaine is, by comparison, a weak link on the line, and is probably one of the weakest first-line centers in the draft. Your second line seems appropriate and a guy like Robitaille makes it more skilled than it even needs to be. I like the third line, except Peca is miscast. Looking at the guy's skill set, he's gotta be a 4th liner in the ATD. Your 4th line is great defensively and also won't hurt you with penalties, but I question if Madden and Pandolfo have anything in the way of ATD upside.

Savard is obviously a good choice, but I'd never give Housley top-pairing minutes in this format. He's gonna get eaten alive by any highly skilled line that can forecheck at all. Not a fan of Daneyko from an ATD standpoint. He has nothing in the way of puck skills, and he wasn't really an elite defensive guy like a Ken Morrow or Jimmy Watson, he was just a guy who was your basic stay at home defenseman. I wouldn't even put him on the same level as a Macoun or Jason Smith. If played at all, he needs to be on the 3rd pairing. If it were me, I might put Schneider in, to provide the puck skills that aren't exemplary on the 2nd and 3rd pairings.

In goal, Brodeur is in the top 1/3 for starters, but wasn't the greatest value for when you got him. But that said, if he was the guy you wanted, it was then or never. Hextall is a fair backup with some fire, and he has sat for long periods before. I don't understand McLean being here, when you have Brodeur who can play 70+ games. You, of all GM's, should not be concerned with having a 3rd goalie. An assistant coach or second spare forward would have served you better.
Thanks for the review. Agree with most of the comments.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VanIslander View Post
Luc as a second line player totally blows my mind and is contrary to how second liners are usually conceived. Are you gonna line match him against the opposition's top right winger? And wouldn't Lucky Luc and LaFontaine weave magic together? Patty and JJ are plenty physical enough to handle themselves. Joliat seems more second line material.

But maybe your lines will be used differently than often conceived. In that case, indicate how so. (my coach Shero, for example, breaks convention)

Drafting Pandolfo is a bad idea in an all-time context except for the obvious chemistry he has with Madden makes it a stroke of genius and a great penalty killing duo. Nice.

Holmstrom and Schneider are sitting exactly where they deserve to sit: on the bench, as offensive fill-ins, specialists. Excellent choices strategically.

Captain Kirk is not an ideal third goalie especially on a team where Brodeur will log heavy minutes. McLean has said he needs work to get into his game, can be a bit cold coming off the bench or starting a season. He gets better and better with a workload. But we can assume that he will be sent down to a minor league and called up if needed, and in such a case he provides depth even if it doesn't seem necessary behind workhorse healthy Brodeur.

An extra centre to cover for injury-prone Peca and Lafontaine might have been a good idea.
Thanks VanI. I have Joliat there for two reasons: one, with Robitaille, a player that's IMO, pretty similar to Jagr, we really use Luc to his full potential. second, Joliat opens up a lot of space for Jagr to do his thing. Plus, I think Joliat would be a good finisher with Jagr, and he seems like someone who'd have good chemistry with LaFontaine. Having Robitaille with Gilbert gives him a good passer to set him up for a few goals. Smith can be the guy who allows them to have room.

vancityluongo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2007, 05:45 PM
  #85
vancityluongo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 11,349
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Hockey_Guy18 View Post
The Dartmouth Subways

Coach: Teddy Nolan

#33 Patrick Roy
#1 Dave Kerr

#7 Paul Coffey (A)-#52 Adam Foote
#24 Doug Wilson (A)-#4 Dave Burrows
#43 Al Iafrate-#23 Petr Svoboda

#11 Joe Malone-#10 Dale Hawerchuk (A)-#8 Teemu Selanne
#6 Ace Bailey-#7 Neal Broten-#7 Joe Mullen
#17 Tomas Sandstrom-#14 Kent Nilsson-#12 Hakan Loob
#9 Adam Graves (C)-#9 Dan Bain-#92 Rick Tocchet (A)

#39 Brian Skrudland, #15 Goldie Prodgers, #4 Barry Ashbee


PP1: Malone-Hawerchuk-Selanne-Coffey-Iafrate
PP2: Bailey-Broten-Mullen-Foote-Wilson
PK1: Bain-Graves-Wilson-Burrows
PK2: Broten-Tocchet-Svoboda-Foote


I was able to put my forward lines together pretty easily, with only some minor changes in view, depending on my opponent. However, I'm having a little trouble figuring out my D pairings. Can't seem to find something that works.
I'll give you guys a review, although I've already told you a few things by PM HG.

Nice first line. Not the best in the draft, but fairly solid. Joe Malone was one of the best players of his era according to many differnt sources, and he was supposedly a helluva goal scorer. On your right side, you have Selanne, who is also a helluva goal scorer. I'd probably switch up Bailey and Malone to add more scoring to your 2nd line, and a set-up guy on your first. Speaking of Bailey, I personally love the guy. Very underrated, IMO. Just don't let him get hit by Eddie Shore. I like Tocchet too. You have a solid defense, although you may have taken Foote a little early. Wilson was a good pick. At the backend, you have Roy, who is a Top 3 goalie of all time. Kerr is a decent backup. Your weakest link may be coaching. Nolan is a ATD worthy coach, but he is nowhere near the upper tier of coaches. Still a solid team. Nice work.

vancityluongo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2007, 05:55 PM
  #86
Evil Sather
YOU KILL THE JOE
 
Evil Sather's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: YOU MAKE SOME MO
Posts: 1,899
vCash: 500
New York Rangers:

Coach: Pat Quinn
Assistant Coach: Jacques Martin

Brian Propp - Jean Beliveau (C) - Harry "Punch" Broadbent
Mats Naslund - Peter Forsberg - Mickey Redmond
Don Maloney - Bob Bourne - Bobby Nystrom (A)
Brian Rolston - Chris Drury - Claude Lemieux
Mike Keane

Mark Howe - Joe Hall
Craig Ludwig (A) - Ebbie Goodfellow
Jerry "King Kong" Korab - Lester Patrick
Paul Reinhart

Billy Smith
Andy Moog

The entire team was built specifically for the playoffs. After the debacle last time, I decided that it would be populated as such with a premium on winners, grit, Cups, and clutch scoring.

Forwards: 10 of 13 won Cups, many had multiple Cups, minus Propp who is, as we all know, the leading LW playoff scorer ever, Redmond who had his career derailed by injuries as it was taking off, and Maloney who played on middling Rangers teams minus the one Cup run. The center corps is among the best in the draft with a legit #1 playing the second line in Forsberg, an upper level 3rd liner, and for my money one of the top couple 4th liners. Loads of grit and toughness up and down the wings. Couple excellent penalty killing forwards centered on the 4th line should help keep the other lines fresh, instead of tiring out top liners chasing around pucks a man down.

Defense: A lower-end #1 yes, but a #1 nonetheless, Mark Howe was spectacular in every way but being a banger, something his partner should take very good care of; Joe Hall would have made a great Flyer. Ebbie Goodfellow is at the higher end of offensive 2nd-pairing guys while he's balanced by Craig Ludwig's singular attention to defense. Third pairing is above-average while Reinhart will certainly sub in the playoffs, given his track record. The PK should be rock solid while the PP might need a 4th forward on the 2nd unit if Reinhart isn't available or Howe is too tired to double duty. Woulda liked one extra offensive guy.

Goal: The best playoff goalie in my opinion, there needs to be little said about Billy Smith. Andy Moog might actually get slightly more games in the regular season, but is a solid backup and knows his role.

Strengths:

The Second Season: It's all about the playoffs, baby. Jean Beliveau, 10 cups, Smythe, duh. Punch Broadbent has a Cup winning goal and 3 cups of his own. Propp just scores. Forsberg is a playoff warrior with very good numbers and chemistry with Claude Lemieux, who has a Smythe of his own and oh, 4 cup rings with 3 different teams and 80 goals in the playoffs, 8th most all time and more than Beliveau to go along with 19 playoff winning goals, 3rd all-time. Naslund led the Habs in scoring his Cup year. Bourne and Nystrom were Islander dynasty stalwarts, each putting up prime scoring numbers, Bourne leading the loaded Islanders in playoff scoring one Cup year, Nystrom with a Cup winning goal of his own. Chris Drury has oh, 15 career playoff game winners of his own at the ripe old age of 31 to go with a Cup. Mike Keane is one of 8 guys to have a Cup with three different teams, and even Brian Rolston has experience as a rookie on the Devils in 95. Goodfellow has 3 Cups, Ludwig has a couple as well as Patrick, and Paul Reinhart is one of the few defensemen to up his PPG the playoffs. Billy Smith, 19 straight series wins, Conn Smythe, 'nuff said. Bring it.

Sir, yes sir!: Almost everyone on the team has been a Captain or alternate captain at some point in their career. If it is challenged I could look it up (or try to) but I'd say 16 of the 23, if not more, had leadership positions on a team. Beliveau is one the most decorated Captains in history, Goodfellow captained cup teams, and Lester Patrick didn't just become a good coach magically, he learned during his captaincy. There isn't a flake on the team, minus Billy Smith, who's his own special brand of flake, and it's just smarter to leave him alone. There isn't anyone on the team who was ever accused of dogging it. Redmond and Bourne had minor confidence issues, but this shouldn't be an issue with leadership oozing everywhere, and Quinn behind the bench.

Still hungry after that knuckle sandwich? Here, have an elbow: There's toughness, grit, and a bit of dirty play (or chippyness as a nicer way to put it) through the lineup. Lemieux needs absolutely no primer, Punch Broadbent was called "Old Elbows" for a reason, and Beliveau didn't get those triple digit PIM seasons to start his career for hooking. Nystrom and Maloney were both wrecking balls and plus fighters. Joe Hall... heh heh. Craig Ludwig wasn't above throwing a Messier style elbow in the corners, and "King Kong" Korab wasn't Marek Malik, if ya know what I mean. I'm not worried at all about guys like Propp and Naslund getting knocked around, and if they are, they own't be for long. Forsberg, I've heard on occasion, can be physical as well.

Weaknesses:

If we give up 6, we ain't scorin 7. So don't give up 6: There isn't a dynamic goal scoring wing on the team aside from Redmond, and his injury history dramatically dampens his explosiveness. Le Gros Bill is obviously a fantastic scorer, Punch Broadbent had a couple fantastic seasons (32 goals in 24 games one year), and Mats Naslund doesn't get the acclaim his skill should. That said, a lot of scoring is going to have to come from trap-and-transition offense and good ol' dump n chase. Not saying this team can't do it (I tend to think they're one of the better down low teams and can make a lot of offense off the back boards) but in a less structured, free flowing game, we're in trouble and going to need some good goaltending.

Who's Number 1! Um, I don't know: No elite wing in any fashion, offensive or otherwise on the roster, and a bottom-tier #1 defenseman in Mark Howe. No top-flight defensive pairing for those ultra-scary first lines. No stellar 100% shutdown forwards, and no Coffey-esque rushers. This is a team that does several things well, but nothing exceptionally. We may not be able to hand a team that blows us out of the water in one particular area.

Final Evaluation: This team will likely be a middling regular season team. Probably won't get the best seeding. But there are several players whose reputations and history bump them up a point on a 10 point scale; some, like Lemieux get bumped up two or three points, and guys like him will be playing the 2nd line (or even the first?!?) over a guy like Mickey Redmond. With the right draw, the Rangers could be in the championship game.

Evil Sather is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2007, 06:39 PM
  #87
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,791
vCash: 500
Dartmouth Subways evaluation

Coach: Teddy Nolan

#33 Patrick Roy
#1 Dave Kerr

#7 Paul Coffey (A)-#52 Adam Foote
#24 Doug Wilson (A)-#4 Dave Burrows
#43 Al Iafrate-#23 Petr Svoboda

#11 Joe Malone-#10 Dale Hawerchuk (A)-#8 Teemu Selanne
#6 Ace Bailey-#7 Neal Broten-#7 Joe Mullen
#17 Tomas Sandstrom-#14 Kent Nilsson-#12 Hakan Loob
#9 Adam Graves (C)-#9 Dan Bain-#92 Rick Tocchet (A)

#39 Brian Skrudland, #15 Goldie Prodgers, #4 Barry Ashbee

To reiterate what I said with my team: When you've got two goaltenders this good, you don't need a back-up. I'll reiterate past comments that I would never take a goalie in the first round, because there's so little to choose between the best in this draft. Roy's No. 2 on my list (behind Roy), and you can make a case for him at No. 1 all-time, especially in the playoffs. You didn't need an upper-tier back-up, but you got one anyways.

You shouldn't have any problem finding defencemen to play on your power play. Coffey, Iafrate, Wilson and Svoboda all have talent. Coffey-Foote is a very intriguing combo. And having Burrows as a partner will allow Wilson to pinch in the offensive zone. I said it before: I have big concerns about Svoboda-Iafrate as a pairing. I think it's gong to be exposed. I'd suggest moving Ashbee into the line-up, and relegating Iafrate or Svoboda to No. 7. But my fellow GMs can tell you that I'm not sold on Iafrate's inconsistencies. Bottom line is I don't think your defence is going to be too intimidating in its own zone.

Your forward lines might need a tweek. Malone's better at C, and Nilsson mostly played LW, so that might be a switch. Malone-Hawerchuk-Broten at C, and Nilsson-Bailey-Sandstrom looks a little better. I think Hawerchuk's a middling second line C, and Broten's a good two-way centre. Broten's likely the best defensive forward on your team. Ace Bailey's topped our list for No. 2 LW's due to his skill and toughness. He's the one guy in your top six forwards who's going to have a legit physical presence.

If you keep Sandstrom and Nilsson together, it might be the least liked line in the draft. Neither was popular with teammates; Sandstrom because of his penchant for turtling; Nilsson because he wasn't the most likeable guy to ever play the game. Loob's one of the better No. 3 offensive RWs in the draft. Great shot and a guy who could make a difference offensively. Nilsson is a potential game-breaker, he has terrific skill, while Sandstrom's offensive ability is very underrated.

Love the fourth line. We wanted Graves for our second line LW spot to play with Buddy and Taylor. Tocchet's one of my all-time favourites. It's not a true defensive line, but it'll be one of the best forechecking lines in the draft, one of the most physical lines in the draft, and they can score, too.

This is a team that has excellent offence and excellent goaltending. Roy's going to have a lot of work. Not just because he'll play a lot of games, but because there aren't a lot of defensive stalwards on this team. Dartmouth and Gwinnett might be the league leaders in shots for per game, but they'll also allow the most shots on goal.

I'm not a fan of Ted Nolan as an ATD coach (you're picking him based on three seasons in the show) but he should like the talent and offensive aggression on this team. Guys like Graves and Tocchet are Ted Nolan types.

God Bless Canada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2007, 07:04 PM
  #88
Frightened Inmate #2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Calgary
Posts: 4,385
vCash: 500
Calgary Mustangs

Coach: Crisp

Delvecchio - Messier - Maltsev
Bucyk - Nieuwendyk - Fleury
Gagne - Holik - Linden
Corson - Kuhnhackl- Smyl
Probert

Hatcher - Clapper
Samuelsson - Ruotsalainen
Vadnais - Patrick
Lutchenko

Tretiak
Giguere
Martin

Strengths
- Solid offensive potential from all four lines
- Good speed mixed throughout the lineup.
- Durability:13 players have played over 1000 games in the NHL, six of whom have played for over 20 seasons.
- Strength: This is a team that isn't going to get pushed around and has the strength to protect the players who don't play a physical game. This is supplemented by likely the best enforcer, or at least most infamous, in NHL history in Bob Probert.

Weaknesses
- #2 defenseman: Dit Clapper is a great #1 and the team has 4 solid #3-4 defensemen but I see the Mustangs as lacking a solid #2 defenseman.

Steals
Tretiak - Say what you will about the guy but all you need to look at is the New Years Eve game against the high flying Canadians to know what he is capable of.
Bucyk - Not going to lead the team in scoring but will be a huge part to a winning team.

To Soon
Giguere - I needed a backup who is obviously capable of performing in the playoffs though so that isn't such a big deal.
Samuelsson - He may be dirty but he could play defense and will put the fear of god into onrushing forecheckers no matter who they are.


Last edited by Frightened Inmate #2: 11-06-2007 at 07:31 PM.
Frightened Inmate #2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2007, 07:04 PM
  #89
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by God Bless Canada View Post

Roy's No. 2 on my list (behind Roy),
That's kinda how I feel about goalies too.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2007, 07:06 PM
  #90
arrbez
bad chi
 
arrbez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,610
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to arrbez
Quote:
Originally Posted by reckoning View Post
Ottawa 67s

Head Coach: Mike Keenan

Paul Thompson - Syl Apps - Reggie Leach
Patrik Elias - Ron Francis - Ken Wharram
Dan Maloney - Ken Linseman - Kevin Dineen
Marty Pavelich - Gregg Sheppard - Jere Lehtinen

Jimmy Roberts
Marc Tardif

Bob Goldham - Eddie Shore
Ken Reardon - Ian Turnbull
Mike Ramsey - Ron Stackhouse
Rod Seiling

Bernie Parent
Roberto Luongo

You have a great cast of versatile centres. Apps and Francis speak for themselves, but I think Linseman is very underrated. Very similar IMO to Claude Lemieux, but doesn't get nearly the respect. He had an outstanding playoff track record, could skate like the wind, and was genuinely dispised by everyone he played against. Sheppard is solid in his role.

My biggest concern for your team is the scoring line wingers. Not one of them was ever a consistantly elite offensive threat on a year-to-year basis. Thompson is solid, but Wharram really only had one big year, and Leach and Elias are as inconsistant as they come. I think scoring could be an issue.

I like your checking line a lot. Pavelich-Sheppard-Lehtinen won't pound anyone into the ground, but they'd be extremely frustrating to play against. Insert Linseman for pure infuriation .

I like your Shore-Goldham pairing a lot. Goldham should allow Shore to go about his business offensively. I do have some concerns about your second pairing though. I don't like Turnbull as a partner for Reardon at all. From what I know about Reardon, he was a bit of a gambler both with the puck and with the body, and I really can't see a hot-and-cold player like Turnbull being a good match. I think Mike Ramsey or even Rod Seiling would be a better fit.

Parent's one of the better goaltenders in this draft. Luongo...eh...as great as I know he is currently, he's still a lower-end backup at this point of his career IMO.

Mike Keenan is, well, a giant ass. He can be very successful, or just a terrible burden. Some ugly Keenan-Shore drama isn't out of the question IMO.

arrbez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2007, 07:25 PM
  #91
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,791
vCash: 500
Regina Wildhearts review.

Wendel Clark (A) - Nels Stewart - Marcel Dionne
Cy Denneny - Bernie Nicholls - Babe Dye
Dick Duff (A) - Joe Thornton - Steve Thomas
Ryan Smyth - Jamie Langenbrunner - Scott Mellanby

Nicklas Lidstrom (A) - Bobby Baun
Sergei Gonchar - Buck Boucher (C)
Jimmy Watson - Robert Svehla

Bill Durnan
John Ross Roach

extras:
Mike Ricci, F
Peter McNab, F
Dave Ellett, D

gm: seventieslord
coach: Lindy Ruff

I'll be honest with the goaltending: I'm not a big Bill Durnan fan. His regular season run is on par with Hasek and Dryden, but he wasn't as strong in the playoffs. The Habs consistent losses to the Leafs in the playoffs were often a reflection of Broda's outplaying Durnan.

Didn't notice that you picked Roach. Good pick. Solid back-up for this draft.

I think your defence is your strong suit. I look at your defence, and I see one guy who'll be a liability in his own zone: Gonchar. The only thing you're lacking is that six-foot-two, mean, rugged physical defenceman who takes care of his own zone. (Think Adam Foote or Kevin Lowe). Every one of your defencemen can move the puck. Boucher and Baun aren't big, but they're mean and tough. Lidstrom and Watson are terrific in their own zone. I'm not a big Svehla fan, but as far as a No. 6 goes, he won't hurt you.

Your forward lines need tweaks. You have a centre playing right wing (Dionne) and a right wing playing centre (Langenbrunner). Dionne-Stewart-Thornton-Nichols would probably be one of the most potent C corps in the draft. It would leave you without a bonafide checking line, but I don't think you have one now anyways. (Smyth and Langenbrunner aren't the guys you'd expect to see on a shut-down line). Dye's the only RW who's suited to a scoring line role. McNab and Thomas would be a reach for that second line spot.

I'm not sure about Clark as a first line LW, but he has a bullet of a shot and a physical presence. I love Denneny on the second line. Lots of grit and skill. Not big, but he's tough enough to make a scoring grinder's contribution.

McNab was one of the top three 13th forwards available, IMO, along with Steen and Craig Simpson. His multi-position versatility makes him an excellent addition for a team that could use an offensive player.

I think Lindy Ruff is the best coach in the game. This is the type of team I can see him guiding: a mobile defence that can move the puck to the forwards, and forwards who play an offensively aggressive game, with scoring potential from every line.

God Bless Canada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2007, 08:14 PM
  #92
Rowdy Roddy Peeper
**** You, Duthie
 
Rowdy Roddy Peeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 43,657
vCash: 500
Portage la Prairie Plains


Coach: Toe Blake
Captain: Ted Lindsay
Alternates: Bill Cook, Eddie Gerard

Ted Lindsay - Elmer Lach - Didier Pitre
Bun Cook - Sid Crosby - Bill Cook
John Tonelli - Walt Tkaczuk - Larry Aurie
Harry "Rat" Westwick - Frank Frederickson - Scotty Davidson

Sprague Cleghorn - Eddie Gerard
Jack Stewart - Eddie Ivanov
Harvey Pulford - Pat Egan

Gerry Cheevers
Lorne Chabot

Mike Grant
Harry P. Watson
Eddie Johnston


Alright boys, have at 'er. I'll save my own assessment for later, as I have the distinct feeling that it'll be more of an apologia than a statement of purpose.

Rowdy Roddy Peeper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2007, 08:28 PM
  #93
vancityluongo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 11,349
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by doctordark View Post
Portage la Prairie Plains


Coach: Toe Blake
Captain: Ted Lindsay
Alternates: Bill Cook, Eddie Gerard

Ted Lindsay - Elmer Lach - Didier Pitre
Bun Cook - Sid Crosby - Bill Cook
John Tonelli - Walt Tkaczuk - Larry Aurie
Harry "Rat" Westwick - Frank Frederickson - Scotty Davidson

Sprague Cleghorn - Eddie Gerard
Jack Stewart - Eddie Ivanov
Harvey Pulford - Pat Egan

Gerry Cheevers
Lorne Chabot

Mike Grant
Harry P. Watson
Eddie Johnston


Alright boys, have at 'er. I'll save my own assessment for later, as I have the distinct feeling that it'll be more of an apologia than a statement of purpose.
Okay.

I'll start off by saying that I love your first line. Maybe not the most offensively dynamic, but they're solid. Lindsay...I think we've discussed him enough, eh? I'm a fan of your 2nd line as well. Is Sidney Crosby a legit ATD 2nd liner? I don't know. But with the Cooks on his wings, I think he'll be fine. But how much will your team score? That's the biggest question around your team, IMHO. Your third line is solid plain and simple. I also love your top pairing on D. Cleghorn-Gerard is solid, solid, solid. Goaltending won't be an issue either. Cheevers is a legit number 1, Top 15-ish of all time. Chabot is a high-end backup. Coach Toe Blake is one of the best ever.

Overall, you have a solid team in every department, with no real glaring weaknesses IMO. But at first glance, I don't look at your team and say "Wow, are they going to score a lot" or "KILL THE TRAP!!!!". Depends on what you prefer, that could be a good thing or a bad thing. Either way, nice drafting.


Last edited by vancityluongo: 11-06-2007 at 08:50 PM. Reason: One sentence didn't make sense.
vancityluongo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2007, 08:37 PM
  #94
VanIslander
17/07/2014 ATD RIP
 
VanIslander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 18,639
vCash: 500
Evil Speaker didn't ask for his line-up to be assassinated but it's an interesting team and I need to get a clearer sense of it and so I took the perrogative to look it over.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evil Speaker View Post
Boston Bruins

Art Ross

Frank Mahovlich-Sid Abel (C)-Bernie Geoffrion
Vsevolod Bobrov-Billy Burch-Tim Kerr
Nick Metz-Joel Otto-Alf Smith
Gerard Gallant-Pit Lepine-Odie Cleghorn
Ken Randall
Ron Duguay

Doug Harvey (A)-Ott Heller
Pat Stapleton-Keith Magnuson
Dollard St. Laurent-Reed Larson
Joe Simpson

George Hainsworth
Curtis Joseph
Championship-experienced first line:
Playmaking centre Abel doesn't have Lindsay and Howe to win a Hart trophy between, but he does have a tough-enough fellow Hart MVP in "Boom Boom" to help make up for the super-talented left wing who at times caved under pressure but was resilient and talented enough to shine anyways. A wonderful first line.

Playoff experience-challenged second line:
This line has no Stanley Cups and plenty of question marks. There is relentless effort from soccer-star scoring '50s Soviet Bobrov but how good was Soviet hockey two decades before 1972? (Better a backline player on an atd team to be safe). The centre on the line is a Hart and Lady Byng centre but with zilch in terms of playoff experience how would he handle playoff hockey? He has zero points in only two NHL postseason games ever played. The big finisher of a right winger had three good playoffs yet only five great healthy years leaving one to wonder how reliable a second liner he'd be in an all-time context? There are plenty of talented right wingers for that spot.

Defense-oriented third line:
This line drank from Lord Stanley's eight times with a 4-Cup penalty killing left winger and a 3-Cup bruisin' pre-NHL right winger each playing alongside Cup-winning defensive-skilled Otto. This line won't score but they'll play shutdown hockey in key situations. Otto is not "two way" in an all-time context and may be better on the fourth line ideally.

Skilled, all-around talented fourth line:
This line features a fightin' 30-goal scorin' left winger (woulda looked good on my Raiders), the top centre on an early Habs team with two-way skill and a hockey-committed scoring right winger. A quality multi-faceted backline.

A gem of an extra forward:
6'2 skating Duguay is a serviceable replacement at centre ice but the Bruins have one of the best 13th forwards in the draft is multidimensional versatile Ken Randall (1917-1927).

(what an ugly mean mug, eh?)
tough and dirty playin' "PepperKid" Randall can be said to be one of the first enforcers in NHL history with his 2+ PIM per game average and rep as a "hooligan" or "thug" who was stockier than Pitre yet had remarkable hustle winning a cup as a right winger and another as a defenseman, getting suspended and fined as an original bad boy of the early NHL who had a 10-year NHL career on some top lines.

Great top defensive pairing:
5-Cup Harvey we all want on our top pairing and 2-Cup Heller had a nice long career and a few clutch playoff goals. Not the best top pairing in this draft but Harvey almost makes it so. Solid.

Competitive-spirited second pairing:
A do-anything to win duo who never won the cup, one a short, poke-checkin' defender and the other a fighting PIM character guy who only played four full seasons and a few part seasons, under 600 games in all. This pairing should be a third pairing in an all-time context. As a second pairing it's lacking.

Decent second pairing masked as the third pairing:
There must be a mistake. This IS the team's second pairing, right? A 4-cup, 5-all-star game, stay-at-home bodychecker with a good first pass and a US HHOF Calder runner-up who played in 3 all-star games and recorded 8 seasons of 60 points and 200+ career goals.

Extra defenseman an ol' hall of famer:
I dunno much about "Bullet" Joe Simpson other than he was a fast, end-to-end rushing defenseman called the greatest hockey player in the world by Lalonde during his WCHL days BEFORE his NHL days: he only scored 21 goals in 228 NHL games. Seems like the sort of x-factor question mark that's great as an extra skater on an atd team.

Goaltending is alright:
The most shutouts in pro hockey history, second most ever in the NHL, is a gawdy stat, and while the forward pass nixed such accomplishments he did go on from then to win a couple of stanley cups and certainly was a top goalie of his era which makes him easily a decent starter in a 30-team all-time draft. Contrary to what some used to say about his backup, CuJo is not a clutch goalie, he's a guy who wins often but when it matters most, doesn't often. I recall time and again him playing below average against a divisional rival. He is a good backup who could play 20-30 games a season easily, which will help with Hainsworth never having played more than 48 games a season but that was the max and he was known as a workhorse and probably could have handled 70 games a season.

VanIslander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2007, 08:57 PM
  #95
Frightened Inmate #2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Calgary
Posts: 4,385
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post

Calgary RCAF

- I think Messier went too early ; I always think Messier goes too early, as people promptly forget the “bad” in his career.
- Even there… your Top-6 is impressive. I’m not sold on Fleury being a quality Top-6 guy (AFAIK, he’s okay…) in this draft, but every team that has Johnny Bucyk and Alex Delvecchio on the left flank will get lots of respect from me.
- There are mixes of players I would never do, and Messier/Linden is right there with Roy/Schneider, H.Richard/Al McNeil (as coach…) in the DON’T department.
- Pairing Tretiak with Giguere is a good idea, except for one thing : Giguere will have to goal more games than he could manage in the regular season. Now I saw that you just drafted Seth Martin… If it means Giguere will goal less games, good thing.
- Your defense gives you a bit of defense, and a bit of offense, and falls pretty middle of the pack at best in every aspects. No serious “miscasts” here, the only “?!?!?!” I have is with Ulfie, more of a 3rd pairing guy, but could work in this role. He hits, but not exactly a great defensive player. Reijo’s defensive game is underrated. Not good ATD-wise, but no floater, either.
- You have one of the best 7th D-Men of the draft in Lutchenko.
- You also arguably have the worst 13th forward of the draft in Probert. Nothing against him, but I see spares as “guys to replace a player in the lineup if someone goes down”. Your best bet for Top-6 replacement is Stan Smyl, and while Probert would make a fine Smyl’s replacement, Smyl wouldn’t make a fine, let’s say, Maltsev replacement. And who knows what Probert is doing when he isn’t playing…
Probert is there just for the nuclear deterrent aspect that he brings to the team, it minimizes the risk that there will be a goon who will go out and reek havoc on the ice putting our more skilled players at risk. Furthermore having someone on the team who reduces the chance that the more skilled tough guys will have to fight in turn reduces their chances of getting injured. In terms of talented players you are right, Probert won't replace anyone on the first or second line (part of the reason I selected durable players by the way) but still that isn't why he is on the team. He is the team goon who will act as a bodyguard on the ice.

Messier had some bad seasons near the end on that everyone will agree but even then he was a 42 year old who was putting up 40-50 points a season in a low scoring era, that isn't to shabby, especially when you consider what his body has gone through over the course of his career. The Mustangs would further like to promote Messier's legacy by changing the team name to the Pylons for a single game.

Linden and Messier weren't the problem. Keenan was the problem in Vancouver.

I think that Fleury provides that spark that many teams are lacking, he has the offensive instincts but he also provides that reckless abandon which can provide the energy for a team that is in a lull as every team is from time to time. He doesn't fit in anywhere other than on the second line as he isn't big enough to be a grinder and he is more talented than a fourth line pest. I think he fits in perfectly on the second line next to a familiar face in Joe Who.

Frightened Inmate #2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2007, 09:19 PM
  #96
pitseleh
Registered User
 
pitseleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,645
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by doctordark View Post
Portage la Prairie Plains


Coach: Toe Blake
Captain: Ted Lindsay
Alternates: Bill Cook, Eddie Gerard

Ted Lindsay - Elmer Lach - Didier Pitre
Bun Cook - Sid Crosby - Bill Cook
John Tonelli - Walt Tkaczuk - Larry Aurie
Harry "Rat" Westwick - Frank Frederickson - Scotty Davidson

Sprague Cleghorn - Eddie Gerard
Jack Stewart - Eddie Ivanov
Harvey Pulford - Pat Egan

Gerry Cheevers
Lorne Chabot

Mike Grant
Harry P. Watson
Eddie Johnston
Here are my thoughts quickly:

Strengths:

Double Tough: Your team is going to be one of the tougher teams in the draft to play against. With Lindsay, Lach the Cooks and your entire third line up front then having to deal with Cleghorn, Pulford and Stewart on the backend will make it a tough matchup for your opponent night in and night out. And, not only is your lineup tough, it also has very good relative size (well...other than Aurie ) meaning that the toughness factor is mulitplied through.

Balanced Scoring Attack: Your team doesn't have the offensively dynamic lines that some other teams have, but you have the ability to see consistent production top to bottom on all four forward lines and three defense pairings. You'll likely see a different line step up on any given night.

Strong Leadership: With three great leaders in Lindsay, Cook and Gerard and a great coach in Blake, your team is loaded in terms of leadership. It'll bode well for your playoff success.

Weaknesses

Goaltending: Now Cheevers isn't a bad starting goaltender, slightly below average in a 28 team draft, IMO, and far from the worst in the draft. But I feel your team really would have been served well with a great goaltender to fit the style I imagine your team playing (I know you wanted one, so it's unfortunate that it wasn't in the cards).

Lack of a True Shutdown Line: Tkaczuk was a very good defensive player, but I can't see either Tonelli or Aurie, while both were tough and defensively responsible, being true shutdown guys. Your third line will score more than most teams', but it may hurt you not having that true defensive presence on either your third or fourth lines.

Overall, I think you have a very strong team and I'm glad I don't have to grind it out with you in my division.

pitseleh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2007, 09:25 PM
  #97
EagleBelfour
Registered User
 
EagleBelfour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,234
vCash: 500
No one want to get a look at my team? I've post it on the second page, but no one took their chance on it.

EagleBelfour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2007, 09:31 PM
  #98
Evil Speaker
Registered
 
Evil Speaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: NorthVan
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,731
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanIslander View Post
Competitive-spirited second pairing:
A do-anything to win duo who never won the cup, one a short, poke-checkin' defender and the other a fighting PIM character guy who only played four full seasons and a few part seasons, under 600 games in all. This pairing should be a third pairing in an all-time context. As a second pairing it's lacking.
Pat Stapleton is alot more than 'a poke checking defenseman', allow me to enlighten you a bit, on who seems to be one of the more forgotten D men of his time.
Pat Stapleton was a very consistent all around player. Pat finished top 5 in scoring by defensemen six times (2nd,3rd,3rd,4th,4th,5th). On three of those years he was named to the 2nd all-star team and placed top 4 in Norris voting. He was also outstanding in the playoffs. Each of the two times his team made the stanley cup finals ('71,'73) he finished 1st in scoring. He also finished in the top 6 on three other ocasions (2nd,5th,6th). Pat was one of the best offensive defensemen of his day, in fact only 3 defensemen of the 1960's averaged more points than Stapleton. Bobby Orr, Doug Mohns, and Pierre Pilote. Here's a quote that HO used last draft for Stapleton
Quote:
Along with defensive partner Bill White, "Whitey" was probably Team Canada's finest defensemen during the [1972 Summit] Series. He was always Head Coach Harry Sinden's first choice on defense when it came to protect a lead in the final minutes.
If he didnt to move to the WHA perhaps he'd get more recognition.


I chose Keith Magnuson as my character guy. I was very attracted to his toughness, work-ethic, agressive defensive play, and the fact that he has experience playing with Stapleton. Keith may be the hardest working player on my team, and thats not a bad thing. He was a great team player and the kind of guy everyone should have on their team. Even though he was a stay-at-home defender, he was still voted a 3rd team all-star in 1971.

I'll respond to your other comments later.

Evil Speaker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2007, 09:40 PM
  #99
ck26
Free Raptor Reagan
 
ck26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Coyotes Bandwagon
Country: United States
Posts: 7,137
vCash: 297
Review: Calgary Mustangs

Calgary Mustangs
Coach: Crisp
Delvecchio - Messier - Maltsev
Bucyk - Nieuwendyk - Fleury
Gagne - Holik - Linden
Corson - Kuhnhackl- Smyl
Probert

Hatcher - Clapper
Samuelsson - Ruotsalainen
Vadnais - Patrick
Lutchenko

Tretiak
Giguere
Martin


Like has already been said, of all the top 10-15 players, Messier is the least eye-popping. He's more physical than Bryan Trottier but otherwise they're about the same. Delvecchio and Messier can do the work and create the opportunities, but can they keep up with Maltsev? Don't know if that line is playing at the same pace.

I don't think Hatcher is good enough to be a 1st pairing guy, but next to Dit Clapper is a good place for him. They have a nice mix of skills and they're both meaner than 10 miles in new shoes when you get them going. The rest of the defense is well-balanced and overall pretty good. I like both Ruotsalainen and Vadnais.

Nieuwendyk-Fleury is a nice 2nd line combo, but Bucyk on that line gives me pause. I want to see Bucyk and Messier go out there together and play with a physical edge.

Tretiak is a charismatic, idol goalie in the Hasek/Esposito mold ... Giguere is one of the most under-stated, unassuming goalies in recent memory. Not sure how the contrasting styles will play out behind your defense, but it might be a source of friction and confusion for your defensemen.

Overall, this is an OK team, but nothing makes me stand up and say wow. The goaltending is supurb, but I don't like the way you arranged your top 6 forwards. The defense is well-balanced but I wouldn't call it a strength or weakness before I see them matched up against a specific opponent.

ck26 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-06-2007, 09:51 PM
  #100
Hockey Outsider
Registered User
 
Hockey Outsider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,385
vCash: 500
Here's a "short" review of the Guelph Biltomores.

STRENGTHS

- One of the best top lines in the draft. Hull and Boucher is an outstanding combination as it combines the greatest goal-scorer in hockey history (IMO) with a top-ten playmaker that had a good defensive game. (Boucher is pretty similar to Oates, but was better defensively). Nedomansky provides some additional goal-scoring ability on what is already one of the most potent offensive lines in the draft.

- Speed. This team has great speed at all positions. With Hull, Boucher, Smith, Mosienko, Sjoberg and Mohns leading the way, opponents will have a hard time catching up with any line you put on the ice.

- Great defensive defensemen. Earl Seibert was like the Rod Langway of his era, except he was stronger, tougher, and his prime last much longer. Opponents simply won't score very much when he's on the ice. Coulter is a nasty, tough shutdown defenseman that is very underrated. He was one of the toughest and most defensively-conscious players of his era and most people forget he was a four-time all-star. Brewer is another very good defensive player that has a bit of an edge to his game. Mohns was big for his era but was a great skater and a terrific positional player. I don't know too much about Sjoberg or Colville's defensive games, so I'm assuming they're around average. Overall this is one of the best defensive bluelines in the draft.

- Strength down the middle. Boucher was a steal at 108; I said before he was like Adam Oates, but with a better defensive game, and I still don't think that does justice to him. Ted Kennedy is one of the best leaders and highest-scoring playoff performers in league history (relative to his peers) and played a tough two-way game. Kurtenbach provides some size and toughness, while Stanfield provides consistent all-around play to stabilize the fourth line.

WEAKNESSES

- Lack of experience for goalies. Your three netminders have played a combined 47 games in the playoffs and only one of them (Chuck Rayner) has posted as many as four wins in a single playoff year. Your goalies are good for the regular season (and are underrated from an all-time perspective) but there is a serious lack of experience in the playoffs.

- Lack of offensive defensemen. Your top four defensemen are all defense-oriented guys. None of them could be an offensive catalyst and none are likely to lead rushes. I think this point is clear from the fact that none of your top four defensemen are on your powerplay (aside from Mohns, but all of his highest-scoring years were as a forward). I really like Sjoberg and Colville, but this means your top two offensive defenseman are stuck on the third pair.

- Lack of secondary scoring. Aside from your top line and Sid Smith, there are no elite scorers on your team. (Kennedy could light it up in the playoffs, which is more important obviously, but some regular scoring is needed too). If your top line gets shut down, your team will really struggle to score. (Fortunately, you have one of the best top lines in the draft so this isn't likely, but it's still possible).

Overall, Pappyline, this is your best team so far. Your team's excellent defensive blueliners should be able to neutralize most opponents while your speed and devastating top line should give you enough offense to win low-scoring games. Your team also has a rare combination of speed and toughness (favouring the former, but still a good mix of both). The lack of experienced playoffs goalies hurts, but they are protected by a great blueline, and you have perhaps the best captain for the circumstances in Ted Kennedy. Your biggest problem is that your team relies too heavily on the top line, though this could be addressed (at least to some extent) by some lineup shuffling.

Hockey Outsider 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 08:43 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.