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.

ATD#8 Jim Robson Round 1: #4 New York vs. #5 Portage la Prairie

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-18-2007, 08:13 PM
  #1
VanIslander
17/07/2014 ATD RIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 18,039
vCash: 500
ATD#8 Jim Robson Round 1: #4 New York vs. #5 Portage la Prairie

The Jim Robson division:

First Round Match-Up



New York Raiders

Coach: n/a
Captain: Scott Stevens
Alternates: Doug Gilmour, Rod Brind'amour

J. P. Parise - Eric Lindros - Dino Ciccarelli
Dave Andreychuk - Doug Gilmour - Vladimir Martinec
John Ogrodnick - Rod Brind'Amour - John McKenzie
Steve Vickers - Don Luce - Mike Foligno
Ivan Hlinka, Ziggy Palffy

Guy Lapointe - Scott Stevens
Bill Gadsby - Charlie Huddy
Alexander Gusev - Joe Watson
Marty McSorley

Dominik Hasek
Pete Peeters



vs.



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 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


Last edited by VanIslander: 11-21-2007 at 11:56 PM.
VanIslander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2007, 08:14 PM
  #2
VanIslander
17/07/2014 ATD RIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 18,039
vCash: 500
New York Raiders

PP1: Ogrodnick - Lindros - Ciccarelli - Lapointe - Gadsby
PP2: Andreychuk - Gilmour - Foligno - Stevens - Huddy

PK1: Luce - Gilmour - Stevens - Gadsby
PK2: Brind'amour - Parise - Lapointe - Watson

vs.

Portage la Prairie Plains

PP1: Lindsay - Lach - Bill Cook - Pitre - Gerard
PP2: Tonelli - Crosby - Aurie - Cleghorn - Ivanov

PK1: Bun Cook - Tkaczuk - Stewart - Pulford
PK2: Aurie - Lach - Cleghorn - Gerard


Last edited by VanIslander: 11-20-2007 at 05:36 PM.
VanIslander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2007, 08:48 PM
  #3
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,790
vCash: 500
I think the guy who is happiest to see this match-up is Hockey Outsider. Assuming Halifax and Sherbrooke win their respective series (which I think they will), the Canadiens will face the winner of this series, which should be a tough, drawn-out war.

In a division rife with tough, physical teams, these are the two toughest, most physical teams. Both teams are loaded with guys who work hard, hit hard, but also play smart.

Portage has unarguably the two best forwards in the series (Lindsay and Bill Cook), and the third best forward in Elmer Lach. Portage has four well-assembled line. I think we should all give props to doc for his old-school fourth line, and for being the first guy to pick Scotty Davidson. It's not a traditional fourth line, but when you look at Portage's line-up, you realize they can use their first three lines in defensive/shut-down roles. As I said in Portage's evaluation, Crosby is the only weak spot in this line-up. If doc pulls the trigger, he could have Lindsay-Lach-Bill Cook, which would be one of the best lines in the draft.

New York doesn't have the personel that Portage does, but they've done their best to find lines that work. VanI's decision to wait on some selections resulted in some players being miscast - most notably Parise being on the first line. They don't have a true shut-down line, but they have four lines that can handle a defensive load. And VanI could just as easily toss out a line with Brind'Amour-Luce-McKenzie that would make life difficult for Portage's top two lines.

VanI has the top two defencemen in this series with Gadsby and Stevens. Those two, and Guy Lapointe, are all good enough to be No. 1 defencemen. The thought of a Scott Stevens vs. Black Jack Stewart hitting contest should be enough to cause sleepless nights for forwards on both teams. A lot of defence corps would have trouble with the relentless forecheck of forwards from New York and Portage. These defence corps won't.

On the surface, goaltending appears to be a big edge to New York. I'll give the edge to New York, but Cheevers is one of hockey's truely great clutch goalies. It's a much smaller gap than the regular season.

The same could be said for coaching, to a certain extent. On the surface, Portage has a big edge. Blake is the No. 2 coach of all-time in my books. Shero is somewhere around No. 10 on my list. But this is a Shero type of team. VanI knew what he wanted from the start, and he went for it.

Very, very tough series to call. I think I'll leave it up to the GMs to convince me. VanI and doc, make up my mind.

God Bless Canada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2007, 08:50 PM
  #4
pitseleh
Registered User
 
pitseleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,644
vCash: 500
This one is going to be fun, fun, fun with two of the toughest teams in the draft. I really think the coaching matchup is an interesting one as well.

As much as I love Cleghorn and Stewart, New York has a rather large advantage on the backend and in net. With Stevens/Gadsby/Lapointe playing upwards of 75 minutes on the back end then having to contend with Hasek will be tough for Portage la Prairie. That said, they do have a ton of scoring depth, so it may work in their favour.

New York is really going to need Lapointe and Gasby to step up offensively, as I see them having trouble keeping with their scoring up front. doctordark has one of the few teams I can see being effective playing the physical brand of defense that will be necessary to keep New York at bay.

pitseleh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2007, 10:06 PM
  #5
nik jr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Congo-Kinshasa
Posts: 10,526
vCash: 500
1st thing is that NY has a huge edge in net. cheevers is overrated, imo, and honestly i have no idea why some people think hasek was not fantastic in the playoffs.

cleghorn could be the best D, but i think NY has the edge overall.

gilmour vs crosby is advantage gilmour, imo. i don't think lach is a big advantage over lindros. portage certainly has a huge advantage among wingers.
i agree with GBC that lindsay--lach--cook would be a better way to go, since lindsay seems to have been better with great players. but then the 2nd line of cook--crosby--pitre is lacking.

portage lacks a real defensive line, but NY doesn't have a lot of firepower, so that shouldn't be a big problem. NY will need some offensive help from the D.

nik jr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-19-2007, 12:16 AM
  #6
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 nik jr View Post
1st thing is that NY has a huge edge in net. cheevers is overrated, imo, and honestly i have no idea why some people think hasek was not fantastic in the playoffs.
Not that Cheevers is terrible or anything, but I agree than a big edge has to go to Hasek. Of all the goaltenders I've seen, Hasek was on a whole different level in the 90's. I've never been more afraid to see any player take the ice against my team as with Hasek at his peak.

arrbez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-19-2007, 02:22 AM
  #7
shawnmullin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Swift Current
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,172
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to shawnmullin Send a message via MSN to shawnmullin
Hasek over Cheevers is significant IMO.

However, I think the top line and PP advantage is significantly in Doc's favour.

And the top 4 D are significantly in New York's favour.

Very interesting match up. I like New York up the middle. Strong two-way game there.

shawnmullin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-19-2007, 08:16 AM
  #8
Rowdy Roddy Peeper
You Suck McBain!
 
Rowdy Roddy Peeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 42,321
vCash: 500
So...how long before people get to vote on this bad boy? I'm not quite sure on how the playoff format works or how long each series lasts.

I really want to get a write-up in here, because I'm very confident in how my team stacks up against VanI's, and there are a few important misconceptions I have to clear up.

Rowdy Roddy Peeper is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-19-2007, 09:17 AM
  #9
BM67
Registered User
 
BM67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In "The System"
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,578
vCash: 500
I'd say let's see how active the talk is before making a vote date. It shouldn't be before the weekend at least anyway.

There's no rush. We aren't getting the playoffs done before Christmas unless we skip the discussion phase entirely.

BM67 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-19-2007, 10:42 AM
  #10
VanIslander
17/07/2014 ATD RIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 18,039
vCash: 500
Against some high powered offenses, the Raiders might have to score more than 2 or 3 goals a game to win, but the Plains isn't one of those. Sure they have scoring on all their lines but New York isn't built front-heavy when it comes to defense: every line and every defensive pairing equally buys into a team defense. The Raiders don't need a shutdown line against the Plains if every skater does his job. New York is more vulnerable against Gretzky's Seals or Beliveau and Forsberg's Rangers type of top end offensive lines than against spread out scoring. That said, for those key defensive situations, like when protecting a lead, the Raiders will ice a Brind'amour - Luce - MacKenzie third line. While "Terrible Ted" and Bill Cook could bully their way to the net against some teams, this NY team has the sort of centres and defensemen to cause them great difficulty doing what they do so well.

With both teams in this match-up playing physical, special teams will be key, and the Raiders are built to handle the penalty kill real well, in fact, a distinctive competitive advantage in this series. Brind'amour and Gilmour are Selke winners, and while many can recall some sweet Dougie shorthanded goals, Brindy and Luce are among the all-time leaders in SHG (was down on the top-30 list pnep posted somewhere). The Plains will be susceptible to interceptions and broken plays headed the other way quickly as their powerplay units are based more on passing than getting to the net, as their units are quarterbacked by a 5'9 playmaker extraordinaire Lach and a playoff-inexperienced Crosby, with Aurie liking to hold onto the puck. And if any team is built to withstand the net-crashing effort of Tonelli, Lindsay and/or Bill Cook, it is the Raiders! Those wingers are known to take the puck toward the net but the New York defense is built to handle such muscle. Stevens and Gadsby will be out there against Lindsay and Bill Cook, while Lapointe will have tough Watson and "Tank" Parise against the less-physical Tonelli-Crosby-Aurie unit. And, of course, the goalie is a team's number one penalty killer.

In comparison, the Plains penalty kill won't be as effective against the Raiders' powerplay. New York has true powerplay specialists when it comes to crashing the crease and parking oneself there for deflections, rebounds and screens: Ciccarelli and Andreychuk anchor each pp unit, literally, at the crease. Little Dino can be knocked down but that bugger ain't movin' away from the net unless you crosscheck or trip him and create a two man pp opportunity (which happened A LOT with Dino); Andreychuk is strong, tall, patient and has 291 NHL powerplay goals. The Raiders' ability to clog the net and frustrate the goalie runs deep as a third powerplay unit could be iced in a long battle-weary series with Brind'amour, who was great at tip-ins in Philly and knows how to earn space in the middle, and one of the top-30 all-time NHLers in powerplay goals per game over his career in "Pie" McKenzie. And I haven't even mentioned Vickers. So there will be a major contest for space around the crease, even for the Plains physical defense. More importantly - in that no one has mentioned it yet - this New York team has plenty of shooting from the point, as five of the top six defensemen had offensive talent. Many of Stevens 1000+ NHL points on defensive teams came from his shot, and Lapointe was deadly with his accuracy. Shooting was also part of Huddy and Gusev's game. Gusev is a sub, not on the pp units, as Gadsby is simply too good all around to leave off the pp, and he'll feed plenty of passes over to Lapointe, up to Lindros or Gilmour along the boards, behind the net or at the circle, and tossing it on net for those near the crease. The Plains second pk unit has 5'9 nonphysical Lach and really small "Little Rag Man" Aurie, neither of whom stack up well against the physical powerplay forwards of the Raiders.

The Raiders are built to play well on special teams and expect this to be a competitive advantage in this series in particular, with the Plains defensemen providing a match physically but New York not facing the sort of defensive forwards or goaltending needed to negate the Raiders' honed powerplay.

As for Raiders' scoring, it too is spread out, as each line and pairing is built to play the boards, the net and the point. This is not a team that will pass on the perimeter or tic-tac-toe galore like the NHL's Pittsburgh Penguins has long done it. It will be like the Hasek Sabres of the nineties in one respect: it'll have an aggressive forecheck, but of course it's more of a Devils and especially ol' Flyers type of team. I cannot imagine having made a better Shero-type team given the constraints that this is an all-time context and outright goons have no place in the line-up (McSorley wasn't just a goon! and as 7th d-man in a physical series you bet he'll see some early action, geared to goad a Plains d-man or scoring winger to sit in the box or set to have one of his 4-goal playoffs).

This series will have a lot of penalties on each side and a lot of 2-1, 3-2 games and that suits the Raiders style immensely. The Plains centers will be punished with a lot of finished checks when they play the puck in open ice and their goalie will face a lot of traffic around the net - more than in the battle of the Plains of Abraham - and if he - Cheevers - strays from his net to play the puck like he loves to do, well, goalies who do that outside their crease (and contemporary trapezoid) are open to being checked.

VanIslander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-19-2007, 10:43 AM
  #11
Frightened Inmate #2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Calgary
Posts: 4,385
vCash: 500
When I look at the Raiders the more I see them as a helicopter offense, very good to great centers, but there just isn't much on the wings in my opinion, a lot of solid complimentry players but I don't see a first line wing of the bunch and even their first line wingers I wouldn't qualify as an elite second liner in an all time format.

When looking at the wings I think it breaks down as follows:
First line (0): N/A
Second line (2): (Andreychuk, Ciccarelli)
Third line (4): (Parise, Ogrodnick, McKenzie, Foligno)
Fourth Line (1): Vickers
Have no place on a Shero coached team (2): Palffy, Martinec

I don't know what everyone else sees but I see really limited offensive potential, especially since there aren't any real snipers on the team, a lot of gritty playmakers and players who will bang in the garbage goals, but other than Martinec (who was known for being easily rattled and taken off his game by physical contact in European leagues, World Ice Hockey Championships and the like - which wasn't as physical as NHL contact - not really a Shero type player) I don't see much in the way of raw skill on the wings.

Past that Hasek is always great and a top 5 goaltender of all time and I really like the Raiders defense but the offense is somewhat suspect and could possibly hold them back from being a much more dynamic team.

Frightened Inmate #2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-19-2007, 10:58 AM
  #12
Frightened Inmate #2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Calgary
Posts: 4,385
vCash: 500
Portage la Prairie, other than having the most irritating name in the draft in my opinion has more offensive potential than the Raiders in terms of player skill but for some reason the team doesn't jive, I think it has a lot to do with a lackluster defensive corps and a nagging question in my mind as to how Cheevers will do without the best defenseman in the league and a powerhouse team in front of him. I know he is a money goaltender (whatever that really means) but I don't see much potential from the defensive pairings.

Frightened Inmate #2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-19-2007, 04:46 PM
  #13
Rowdy Roddy Peeper
You Suck McBain!
 
Rowdy Roddy Peeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 42,321
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frightened Inmate #2 View Post
Portage la Prairie, other than having the most irritating name in the draft in my opinion
Hey, that "irritating name" was good enough for Cyclone Taylor and Newsy Lalonde to wear on their jerseys, bub.

Rowdy Roddy Peeper is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-19-2007, 06:08 PM
  #14
Rowdy Roddy Peeper
You Suck McBain!
 
Rowdy Roddy Peeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 42,321
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanIslander View Post
Against some high powered offenses, the Raiders might have to score more than 2 or 3 goals a game to win, but the Plains isn't one of those. Sure they have scoring on all their lines but New York isn't built front-heavy when it comes to defense: every line and every defensive pairing equally buys into a team defense. The Raiders don't need a shutdown line against the Plains if every skater does his job. New York is more vulnerable against Gretzky's Seals or Beliveau and Forsberg's Rangers type of top end offensive lines than against spread out scoring. That said, for those key defensive situations, like when protecting a lead, the Raiders will ice a Brind'amour - Luce - MacKenzie third line. While "Terrible Ted" and Bill Cook could bully their way to the net against some teams, this NY team has the sort of centres and defensemen to cause them great difficulty doing what they do so well.

With both teams in this match-up playing physical, special teams will be key, and the Raiders are built to handle the penalty kill real well, in fact, a distinctive competitive advantage in this series. Brind'amour and Gilmour are Selke winners, and while many can recall some sweet Dougie shorthanded goals, Brindy and Luce are among the all-time leaders in SHG (was down on the top-30 list pnep posted somewhere). The Plains will be susceptible to interceptions and broken plays headed the other way quickly as their powerplay units are based more on passing than getting to the net, as their units are quarterbacked by a 5'9 playmaker extraordinaire Lach and a playoff-inexperienced Crosby, with Aurie liking to hold onto the puck. And if any team is built to withstand the net-crashing effort of Tonelli, Lindsay and/or Bill Cook, it is the Raiders! Those wingers are known to take the puck toward the net but the New York defense is built to handle such muscle. Stevens and Gadsby will be out there against Lindsay and Bill Cook, while Lapointe will have tough Watson and "Tank" Parise against the less-physical Tonelli-Crosby-Aurie unit. And, of course, the goalie is a team's number one penalty killer.

In comparison, the Plains penalty kill won't be as effective against the Raiders' powerplay. New York has true powerplay specialists when it comes to crashing the crease and parking oneself there for deflections, rebounds and screens: Ciccarelli and Andreychuk anchor each pp unit, literally, at the crease. Little Dino can be knocked down but that bugger ain't movin' away from the net unless you crosscheck or trip him and create a two man pp opportunity (which happened A LOT with Dino); Andreychuk is strong, tall, patient and has 291 NHL powerplay goals. The Raiders' ability to clog the net and frustrate the goalie runs deep as a third powerplay unit could be iced in a long battle-weary series with Brind'amour, who was great at tip-ins in Philly and knows how to earn space in the middle, and one of the top-30 all-time NHLers in powerplay goals per game over his career in "Pie" McKenzie. And I haven't even mentioned Vickers. So there will be a major contest for space around the crease, even for the Plains physical defense. More importantly - in that no one has mentioned it yet - this New York team has plenty of shooting from the point, as five of the top six defensemen had offensive talent. Many of Stevens 1000+ NHL points on defensive teams came from his shot, and Lapointe was deadly with his accuracy. Shooting was also part of Huddy and Gusev's game. Gusev is a sub, not on the pp units, as Gadsby is simply too good all around to leave off the pp, and he'll feed plenty of passes over to Lapointe, up to Lindros or Gilmour along the boards, behind the net or at the circle, and tossing it on net for those near the crease. The Plains second pk unit has 5'9 nonphysical Lach and really small "Little Rag Man" Aurie, neither of whom stack up well against the physical powerplay forwards of the Raiders.

The Raiders are built to play well on special teams and expect this to be a competitive advantage in this series in particular, with the Plains defensemen providing a match physically but New York not facing the sort of defensive forwards or goaltending needed to negate the Raiders' honed powerplay.

As for Raiders' scoring, it too is spread out, as each line and pairing is built to play the boards, the net and the point. This is not a team that will pass on the perimeter or tic-tac-toe galore like the NHL's Pittsburgh Penguins has long done it. It will be like the Hasek Sabres of the nineties in one respect: it'll have an aggressive forecheck, but of course it's more of a Devils and especially ol' Flyers type of team. I cannot imagine having made a better Shero-type team given the constraints that this is an all-time context and outright goons have no place in the line-up (McSorley wasn't just a goon! and as 7th d-man in a physical series you bet he'll see some early action, geared to goad a Plains d-man or scoring winger to sit in the box or set to have one of his 4-goal playoffs).

This series will have a lot of penalties on each side and a lot of 2-1, 3-2 games and that suits the Raiders style immensely. The Plains centers will be punished with a lot of finished checks when they play the puck in open ice and their goalie will face a lot of traffic around the net - more than in the battle of the Plains of Abraham - and if he - Cheevers - strays from his net to play the puck like he loves to do, well, goalies who do that outside their crease (and contemporary trapezoid) are open to being checked.
In light of such arguments based on blatant misinformation, I'll skip my opening salvo and get straight to chipping away at the propaganda.

First off, I'll admit that my offense is spread out all my lines, but by the same token, VanI's is spread just as much throughout his line-up. The main difference, however, is that my team is of a much higher offensive caliber. The Plains can boast 4 Art Ross winners (Cook, Lach, Crosby, and Lindsay; Lach and Cook both won twice), a player who almost certainly would've won an Art Ross were it not for a late-season injury (Larry Aurie), an NHA scoring champ (Pitre), and a PCHA scoring champ (Frederickson).

The Raiders don't have a single scoring champ at any major pro level. Lindros and Gilmour were the only ones who even got close, and while Gilmour still has Andreychuk, Lindros has probably the weakest top line wingers in the entire draft. If I were the Raiders, I'd be very concerned about where my offense is going to come from, particularly since my forward lines each have superb defensive players like Lindsay, Lach, Bun Cook, Tkaczuk, Aurie, Westwick, and Davidson to disrupt them.

What's more, my team is plenty proficient in the playoffs too. Aurie and Lach have both led the NHL post-season in scoring, and Pitre and Davidson have both led the NHA.

The Raiders' contention that they have the definitive special teams advantage is downright laughable. On the PK, Gilmour and Brind'Amour are quality, no doubt, but they're certainly no better than Lach, who Dick Irvin valued more for his defense than his offense (a telling statement considering Lach's considerable offensive talents) or Walt Tkaczuk, who completely neutralized a prime Esposito. That's to say nothing of the likes of Bun Cook and Larry Aurie, the latter of whom even earned a nickname for his penalty-killing prowess, for Pete's sake. And given their scoring exploits, I have no doubt that they'll be a threat to put up numbers short-handed, too.

Somehow, the Raiders are under the impression that the Plains are susceptible to broken plays because they're built for passing and not going hard to the net, but that's hard to swallow on two counts:

1) If the PPs are being run by proficient puck-distributors, which they are, broken plays shouldn't be any more common than during a shoot-and-deflect style powerplay, which is more prone to blocks and subsequent odd-man rushes the other way.

2) The Plains simply don't have any problems going hard to the net. Cook, Tonelli and Lindsay are more than capable of getting their noses dirty in the tough areas, and despite the Raiders' thought that Aurie would like to hold onto the puck during the PP - which would apparently detract from Crosby's possession, the "Little Rag Man" moniker was earned from his PKing abilities; he was usually stationed in front of the opposition's net during the man-advantage:

Quote:
"Aurie would fight a tiger to win and was a damn good hockey player. He was very small, only 145 pounds, but very strong. He would stand in front of the net and take on players 50 to 60 pounds heavier and handled it well. Much like (Dino) Ciccarelli, only Larry could fight. He would drop his stick at the drop of a hat."
http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:...lnk&cd=1&gl=ca

Damn, that's gotta hurt. Not only are you wrong, but your 1st liner gets compared unfavorably to my 3rd liner. Parry and thrust, baby.

Anyway, I have more to write, but this post is more than lengthy enough as it is, and I need to eat, so I'll address further issues in my 2nd installment, hopefully tomorrow.


Last edited by Rowdy Roddy Peeper: 11-19-2007 at 06:15 PM.
Rowdy Roddy Peeper is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-19-2007, 07:56 PM
  #15
VanIslander
17/07/2014 ATD RIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 18,039
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by doctordark View Post
Lindros has probably the weakest top line wingers in the entire draft.
Weakest? Of course, not in terms of physical play, not by a long shot. While Parise is not a prototypical first line winger he did play on a scoring line as a role player his whole career and recovered a lot of pucks forechecking along the boards and was effective as Esposito's wingman at the '72 Summit Series so against the highest level of competition he has shown a capacity to play a style of game this team was built to play. The Raiders aren't going to try and carry the puck across the blueline with a couple of cross ice dazzling passes. Each line has a forechecker, a net crasher and a shooter. Btw, Dino Ciccarelli is a legit first line right winger, maybe not as gifted in the wizardry dep't as Martinec but he has his strengths. New Yorks first line - given the team's style - cannot be divorced from the defensemen who will play the point when the Raiders have gotten the puck in deep and battling to keep it there, chipping a lot of points out to the d-men to handle. Coach Shero played a lot of 5-man units for regular shifts! modeled on Tarasov's approach (just like Bowman flirted a bit with in Detroit a couple of decades later). This is not a New York team that'll have a couple of forwards stickhandle the puck into the offensive zone and turn the puck over trying to pass toward the net. The puck will go to the boards, behind the net, carried to the net, chipped on net, and when battling deep, tossed back to the point. Look at the first line in combo with the top pairing as a well-oiled 5-man unit:

Parise-Lindros-Ciccarelli
Lapointe-Stevens

Visualize the style of play. Similarly with the second. The third and fourth lines will be matched with the third pairing and/or some of the Top-3 Raider defensemen, as any great team can rely on its three best defensemen to handle heavy minutes come playoff time.

Quote:
my forward lines each have superb defensive players like Lindsay, Lach, Bun Cook, Tkaczuk, Aurie, Westwick, and Davidson to disrupt them.
Your team has positionally-sound forwards but let's not be blinded by Lindsay's exceptional physicalty: several of the Plains forwards simply aren't that tough. To use a football metaphor: they are cornerbacks rather than linebackers, facing running backs instead of wide receivers. Lach was a 5'9 playmaker who had determination and hockey sense to be successful defensively against many puck carriers, though he had a lot of injuries, likely due to the rough play and hard checking he faced. Raiders' centres can plow through if not bowl over Lach. It's a mismatch in the physicality dep't. (Crosby too.) Your team has the playmaking excellence at centre ice but the defensive ability of those centres against a surging Brind'amour, Lindros and Gilmour is questionable (not to mention the open ice hits your smaller centres will be susceptible to trying to play the puck over the middle). As for Aurie, he was small even for his time, but "Little Dempsey" does have determination, commitment and willingness to tough it out, getting into traffic, but really not going to physically manhandle the Raiders centers. At least he gets into the mess, unlike Bun Cook, who was a passer whose skating ability and hard work helped him thrive. Bun is NO Bill Cook by what I have come across. Bun is physically strong and tough? That is not his game. I grant that Tkaczuk is a bull on skates like Lindsay and the Plains fourth line wingers Westwick and Davidson are presumably going to have limited minutes unless the Plains will play a more 4-line system game like Shero implemented. Westwick was a puckhandlin' rover whose success defensively comes from positional play and skating not from physicality and toughness (looks like Mike Myers in his photo) and Davidson "played the game cleanly" who at best is a good checker because of his positioning but I really dunno enough to get a clear sense of his ability to play the body. So, to recap, of the defensive forwards you mention:

physical, tough, strong Plains forwards: Lindsay, Tkachuk
tough but perhaps not strong physically: Davidson, Aurie
NOT physical or strong: Lach, Bun Cook, Westwick

Of the Plains defensive-talented forwards, only 2-4 of them can match the physicality of the Raiders. (Of course Bill Cook is physically strong but he wasn't mentioned among the Plains forwards who'll stop the Raiders forwards from owning the boards and surges toward the net)

Quote:
The Raiders' contention that they have the definitive special teams advantage is downright laughable.
No time to address this at the moment. Let's just say for now that we disagree on the effectiveness of Lach and Bun Cook on the penalty kill against Raiders' physical, surging forwards. And Aurie won't always be available to pk if he is as willing to fight as the quote you provided suggests because he'll be sitting in the box himself, provoked by NY pests and physical play.

VanIslander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-20-2007, 04:43 AM
  #16
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
 
Nalyd Psycho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: No Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,765
vCash: 500
Saying Lach and Cook were not tough is ridiculous, both were warriors.

But, ultimately this is about Lindsay vs Hasek. New York does an excellent job building around Hasek, and he's a player who can lead you to the promised land. When he's on, he gets into his opponent's head and makes them believe they can't win. If he can see shots, he can stop them. The way to beat New York is to take the fight to Hasek, crash the net, talk smack and gets some garbage goals. Get the psychological edge. And Lindsay is one of the best possible fits for that role. Stevens will have his hands full sheltering Hasek. If Lindsay fails, Portage falls. If Lindsay can break the Dominator's Mystique, New York falls.

__________________
Every post comes with the Nalyd Psycho Seal of Approval.
Nalyd Psycho is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-20-2007, 05:20 AM
  #17
VanIslander
17/07/2014 ATD RIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 18,039
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalyd Psycho View Post
Saying Lach and Cook were not tough is ridiculous, both were warriors
We are talking about BUN Cook (of course Bill Cook was tough and physical).

I just haven't read the same historical accounts, though I read what has been linked around here.

Everything I've read about Lach and Bun Cook seems to suggest they were NOT physical warriors (not able to prevent a big, strong forward from surging to the net, nor knock players off the puck, nor dominate the boards, etc), though of course they have work ethic, determination and good positional play.

VanIslander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-20-2007, 05:26 AM
  #18
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
 
Nalyd Psycho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: No Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,765
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanIslander View Post
We are talking about BUN Cook (of course Bill Cook was tough and physical).

I just haven't read the same historical accounts, though I read what has been linked around here.

Everything I've read about Lach and Bun Cook seems NOT a physical warrior, though of course they have work ethic, determination and good positional play.
Lach is noted as a guy who would play through any sort of injury, he wasn't big and strong, but is very tough, I've always viewed him as a more skilled Gilmour, both spark plugs who willfully bite off more than they could chew. Bun Cook from what I've gathered was a digger and what he offered the Bread line was his ability to do the dirty work in the corners. Bill did the dirty work in the crease and Bun in the corners.

Nalyd Psycho is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-20-2007, 09:22 AM
  #19
Rowdy Roddy Peeper
You Suck McBain!
 
Rowdy Roddy Peeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 42,321
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalyd Psycho View Post
Lach is noted as a guy who would play through any sort of injury, he wasn't big and strong, but is very tough, I've always viewed him as a more skilled Gilmour, both spark plugs who willfully bite off more than they could chew. Bun Cook from what I've gathered was a digger and what he offered the Bread line was his ability to do the dirty work in the corners. Bill did the dirty work in the crease and Bun in the corners.
Yup. I'll corroborate this with some quotes later.

Rowdy Roddy Peeper is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-20-2007, 05:33 PM
  #20
VanIslander
17/07/2014 ATD RIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 18,039
vCash: 500
"Tough" has many meanings.

Bun Cook and Lach are on the Plains penalty kill and these forwards sure seem not to have the size nor physical strength to knock off the puck, check or significantly slow down a surging Lindros or Foligno. A small point. That's what I meant when I said they are like cornerbacks taking on running backs.

Lack is a 5'9 playmaker who is tough in that he took checks and played through injuries but whom I can't find one piece of evidence that he played the body, threw checks himself!

Bun Cook (younger brother of the tough Bill Cook) was a fancy passer and yet he's a Plains penalty killer.

Look, my point isn't that these are all that bad, but that (a) they would have trouble handling the size and physicality of rushing Raiders on the pp and; (b) Brind'amour, Gilmour and Luce are better penalty killers, RENOWNED for that aspect of their game.

Until evidence is displayed of Bun and Lach's penalty killing or checking prowess, it'll seem like they are not elite penalty killers.

My claim stands: The Raiders have a competitive advantage in this series with special teams play.

VanIslander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-20-2007, 10:16 PM
  #21
BM67
Registered User
 
BM67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: In "The System"
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,578
vCash: 500
For Bun Cook see http://hfboards.com/showpost.php?p=8...postcount=1095

For Elmer Lach we have http://www.legendsofhockey.net:8080/...t=ByName#photo

and

Quote:
Lach was a passer extraordinaire, an offensive for, but Dick Irvin Sr. lauded his defensive abilities: "Lach was the only player I knew who could check four ways - forecheck, backcheck, and both sides of the rink as well."
- Ultimate Hockey

How much advantage does a 5'11", 177 lbs. Doug Gilmour have over a 5'10", 165 lbs. Elmer Lach?

BM67 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-20-2007, 10:59 PM
  #22
VanIslander
17/07/2014 ATD RIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 18,039
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BM67 View Post
How much advantage does a 5'11", 177 lbs. Doug Gilmour have over a 5'10", 165 lbs. Elmer Lach?
Lach was ever the best defensive forward in the league? if there had been a Selke award he would have won it?

Raiders penalty killing forwards were brilliant (not merely good) at that, and Raiders' powerplay crease crashers (as well as those who could muscle toward the net) and pp defensemen are better.

The difference in special teams seems obvious to me. *shrug* I have said more than enough on the matter and those who read the posts can decide for themselves either way.

VanIslander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2007, 02:26 PM
  #23
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,790
vCash: 500
Lach would be an exceptional penalty killer, one of the best in the draft. You don't have to be physical to be a top-notch penalty killing centre. Ron Francis was one of the best. He didn't hit. And if you want a smaller guy (for those with the hard-on for size), look at Adam Oates. 5'11". Didn't hit. But great hockey sense and anticipation. A few guys around here have compared Oates with Lach (although I think Lach was better). Lach will have no problems being one of the best penalty killers in the draft. Is Lach as physical as Gilmour? No. But I'll argue he's smarter. That counts.

Size is only an issue for those who allow it to become an issue. I watched five-foot-six Theo Fleury become one of the best players in the league for a decade, playing a fearless brand of hockey. He survived. So will Portage's players.

I could care less if Lindsay was 5'7": the guy's the second-best LW of all-time, he's as strong as an ox, and he's one of the most competitive players of all-time. For my money, he's the best player in this series, and it's by a fair margin. A better player than at least a third of those drafted ahead of him. Portage's players are as tough as nails, and they're fearless.

The question is whether they can crack the New York system. Most of the forwards are tough and physical. The Raiders' top three on defence is the best in the draft. And they're backstopped by a goalie who, when he's on, is the most unbeatable in the draft. Size is not an issue.

God Bless Canada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2007, 06:54 PM
  #24
VanIslander
17/07/2014 ATD RIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 18,039
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by God Bless Canada View Post
Lach would be an exceptional penalty killer, one of the best in the draft
exceptional? one of the best of all time? ...

please provide evidence of his superior penalty killing ability

this is very frustrating

... aw forget it... the bias in favour of old timers based on little evidence has now outweighed the bias against

VanIslander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2007, 06:59 PM
  #25
VanIslander
17/07/2014 ATD RIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 18,039
vCash: 500
If the Raiders special teams won't be more effective than the Plains' special teams then New York will loose the series for sure.

You decide.

VanIslander 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 07:42 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.