Spitfire - I have Henderson as a LW. You put "W" which makes me wonder if he also played on the right. Is that the case?
My understanding is that he played mostly RW and played on the left side for the Summit Series. I think he's played on the right side on every ATD team he's been on for the last few drafts. But I always thought he was first and foremost a RW.
Moran made his big-league debut with the Quebec Bulldogs of the Eastern Canada Amateur Hockey Association in 1905-06 and stayed with a Quebec-based team for all but one year of his career. He led the National Hockey Association in games won with ten in the 1911-12 season and followed up with a league leading 16 wins in 1912-13. The Bulldogs won the Stanley Cup in both of those seasons and Moran was picked to play for the NHA All-Stars in a 1912 exhibition series.
His Quebec teams, however, tended to lose more games than they won early on and Moran would attempt to keep the puck out of the net in any way possible. Moran played in the days prior to a goal crease being painted in front of the net and guarded his area like a stray dog with a bone. His quick stick was used for more than just deflecting shots and opposition players soon developed a healthy respect for Paddy's self-created "crease." He was a clutch goalie and in the big games was hard to beat.
Paddy Moran was inducted into the Hockey Hall of Fame in 1958.
Sorry for the delay fellas, the Trail Smoke Eaters are proud to select C/LW Ray Getliffe.
Legends:
Quote:
Forward Ray Getliffe played nearly 400 NHL games for the Boston Bruins and Montreal Canadiens in the 30s and 40s. He was a fine goal scorer who could check and battle for the puck along the boards and in the slot.
...
The clever centre/left-winger scored 16 goals for Boston as a rookie in 1936-37 and remained a regular for two more years. In 1938-39 he formed a solid two-way line with Dit Clapper and xxxxxx helped Boston win its second Stanley Cup.
From the Canadiens official site:
Quote:
The 5-foot-11, 175-pounder was among the speediest forwards in the league, a skilled two-way performer, equally adept at attacking the enemy net or playing in a defensive role.
Remembering of course that in his era that was a pretty decent size. He's listed at 190 on hockey db.
Getliffe gives us the option of going with three scoring lines or moving to having a more traditional line-up depending on our playoff match up. If we want to create two shut down units we can move Simmer to the first line and Gillies to the third line. Then drop Balon to the fourth and replace Nilsson with Getliffe... and boom goes the dynamite. Gives us more of a two way line but a line that can still score. He did score 273 points in 393 games in a low scoring era without being given top line minutes.
Plus he also played left wing so helps for any injuries and all that noise. I like it!
Last edited by shawnmullin: 05-08-2009 at 05:40 PM.
My understanding is that he played mostly RW and played on the left side for the Summit Series. I think he's played on the right side on every ATD team he's been on for the last few drafts. But I always thought he was first and foremost a RW.
I remember Henderson mainly as a LW. He played for years as a LW on the Henderson-ullman-xxxxx line. I know he did play a little RW & he was a right hand shot.
I remember Henderson mainly as a LW. He played for years as a LW on the Henderson-ullman-xxxxx line. I know he did play a little RW & he was a right hand shot.
I was always under the impression that Henderson played RW in the show. Of course, he played the best hockey of his life at LW, in 1972 on a line with Bobby Clarke and Ronnie Ellis.
If he did play mostly LW, then we're kicking ourselves, because we probably take Henderson ahead of Lonsberry. We like Lonsberry. But raleh and I are both Henderson fans. (One of the biggest thrills of my career came two months into my time in Estevan, when I got to interview Henderson).
Now that I've been able to take several guys at or near the top of my "always wanted him" list - Richard, Clapper, Boucher, Goring, Bourne, Lonsberry and O'Reilly - and a few players I haven't had since forming the tandem with raleh - Linden, Fleury and Brewer are guys we've always wanted to get - Henderson is near the top of my "always wanted him" list.
Broten was a great pick. When formulating the list for our 13th Fs, he was the one who stood out the most for offensive ability.
Good to see Getliffe in the ATD. Solid hockey player. Very good hockey sense. Good enough to be a left wing on a two-way line. He also played centre, but let's face it - there's more depth at centre than LW.
I was always under the impression that Henderson played RW in the show. Of course, he played the best hockey of his life at LW, in 1972 on a line with Bobby Clarke and Ronnie Ellis.
If he did play mostly LW, then we're kicking ourselves, because we probably take Henderson ahead of Lonsberry. We like Lonsberry. But raleh and I are both Henderson fans. (One of the biggest thrills of my career came two months into my time in Estevan, when I got to interview Henderson).
Now that I've been able to take several guys at or near the top of my "always wanted him" list - Richard, Clapper, Boucher, Goring, Bourne, Lonsberry and O'Reilly - and a few players I haven't had since forming the tandem with raleh - Linden, Fleury and Brewer are guys we've always wanted to get - Henderson is near the top of my "always wanted him" list.
Broten was a great pick. When formulating the list for our 13th Fs, he was the one who stood out the most for offensive ability.
It was my mistake. I'm sure Raleh is right. Henderson was mostly a RW.
Broten was a good pick right now. Not as good as Weight, mind you, but good.
He's the guy I was 95% sure I wanted until I took one last look at weight. The only edge I saw for Broten was two more finals appearances which gave him an even more extensive playoff record. Weight's a better passer, neither can really score goals that well, and they have the same two-way game... Weight has better size and grit, though.
Maybe you had Weight pegged as a 3rd/4th line center and not a 13th F, otherwise you'd have to have him ahead of Broten, right?
It was my mistake. I'm sure Raleh is right. Henderson was mostly a RW.
Broten was a good pick right now. Not as good as Weight, mind you, but good.
He's the guy I was 95% sure I wanted until I took one last look at weight. The only edge I saw for Broten was two more finals appearances which gave him an even more extensive playoff record. Weight's a better passer, neither can really score goals that well, and they have the same two-way game... Weight has better size and grit, though.
Maybe you had Weight pegged as a 3rd/4th line center and not a 13th F, otherwise you'd have to have him ahead of Broten, right?
I have Weight and Broten pegged for offensive fourth line duty. Weight can also play a decent grinder role. (Although I wouldn't rate him as an overly physical guy, or a guy who's going to bring the type of presence that I want for a grinding fourth line).
I watched Broten and Weight, and I'd say that Broten's a better playmaker, a smarter player, and a better defensive player. Weight's a better goal-scorer, and certainly a grittier, more physical, player. Both were on the radar for our 13th forward role, as both have the character and the abilities that we want from our 13th forwards.
Good to see Getliffe in the ATD. Solid hockey player. Very good hockey sense. Good enough to be a left wing on a two-way line. He also played centre, but let's face it - there's more depth at centre than LW.
I like that he could be both for us though if we're looking for a more defensive look.
It was my mistake. I'm sure Raleh is right. Henderson was mostly a RW.
I am probably one of the few guys that saw henderson play a lot. He was a right hand shot but mainly played LW. he was a LW on the Ullman line for years both in detroit & toronto. In fact the entire line was traded from detroit to Toronto. He was a LW in the Summit Series for a very good reason. That was the position he played.
I am probably one of the few guys that saw henderson play a lot. He was a right hand shot but mainly played LW. he was a LW on the Ullman line for years both in detroit & toronto. In fact the entire line was traded from detroit to Toronto. He was a LW in the Summit Series for a very good reason. That was the position he played.
I have Weight and Broten pegged for offensive fourth line duty. Weight can also play a decent grinder role. (Although I wouldn't rate him as an overly physical guy, or a guy who's going to bring the type of presence that I want for a grinding fourth line).
I watched Broten and Weight, and I'd say that Broten's a better playmaker, a smarter player, and a better defensive player. Weight's a better goal-scorer, and certainly a grittier, more physical, player. Both were on the radar for our 13th forward role, as both have the character and the abilities that we want from our 13th forwards.
I think that's all fair, with the exception of the playmaking. Why do you feel a guy who made the top-10 in assists once, is better than a guy who did it five times?
(in case you're curious, and you're not, the edge is 8-5 Weight in total top-20s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pappyline
I am probably one of the few guys that saw henderson play a lot. He was a right hand shot but mainly played LW. he was a LW on the Ullman line for years both in detroit & toronto. In fact the entire line was traded from detroit to Toronto. He was a LW in the Summit Series for a very good reason. That was the position he played.
I missed your post when I replied the first time. I'm inclined to believe you because you were there, and because I know he played on the Ullman line.
So, it's settled... a LW who can play RW if needed.
It was my mistake. I'm sure Raleh is right. Henderson was mostly a RW.
Broten was a good pick right now. Not as good as Weight, mind you, but good.
He's the guy I was 95% sure I wanted until I took one last look at weight. The only edge I saw for Broten was two more finals appearances which gave him an even more extensive playoff record. Weight's a better passer, neither can really score goals that well, and they have the same two-way game... Weight has better size and grit, though.
Maybe you had Weight pegged as a 3rd/4th line center and not a 13th F, otherwise you'd have to have him ahead of Broten, right?
I think a very good argument can be made for Broten over Weight in an ATD bottom 6/13th forward role. He didn't only play in two more Finals than Weight, he was a crucial player in two of those runs, and more important to both of them than Weight was to the Canes in '06. I want that sort of clutch experience in a role player.
If we're talking about pure offense, then Weight would be the way to go. But unlike Broten, he was only ever a Cup winner in a complementary role.
Further, Broten was the better defensive player. He was a PK mainstay with the Stars as early as '82-'83 and only became a more accomplished two-way player as he got older, whereas according to the data I have (from '02-'03 on), Weight hasn't even averaged a minute per game on the PK.
I think a very good argument can be made for Broten over Weight in an ATD bottom 6/13th forward role. He didn't only play in two more Finals than Weight, he was a crucial player in two of those runs, and more important to both of them than Weight was to the Canes in '06. I want that sort of clutch experience in a role player.
If we're talking about pure offense, then Weight would be the way to go. But unlike Broten, he was only ever a Cup winner in a complementary role.
Further, Broten was the better defensive player. He was a PK mainstay with the Stars as early as '82-'83 and only became a more accomplished two-way player as he got older, whereas according to the data I have (from '02-'03 on), Weight hasn't even averaged a minute per game on the PK.
Broten had 300+ PGA in his career. Weight has 94. So as I said to GBC, saying he's a better defensive player would be more than fair, since he was obviously relied on for penalty killing more than Weight was.
More playoff experience can never be a bad thing. Broten has more. You're also right that he was tremendous on two playoff runs.
I think Weight, despite not having those two extra finals runs, has been individually more consistent in the playoffs. In the super low-scoring playoffs of the past decade, he has the same PPG as Broten did in the high-flying 80s.
(strangely enough, they are both within .01 PPG of eachother in the regular season and playoffs)
Considering the era difference, I'd say Weight has an offensive advantage comparable to the defensive advantage Broten has. Somewhere between marginal and significant. I'd go so far as to say Broten would be an inedequate 2nd line fill-in and Weight would be inadequate on a shutdown line.
Two very similar players in terms of their resumes. I like Weight better. But it all depends on what you want.
