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.

All-Time Draft #12, Part IV

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-19-2009, 04:59 PM
  #26
Sens Rule
Registered User
 
Sens Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,366
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf Lander View Post
select # 32 Steve Thomas LW
Steve Thomas was one clutch player. He might not have been really great in an ATD context but he was truly one of the best clutch players I have seen. And otherwise a pretty decent goal scorer as well. I'd love to have him on any team I cheered for...

Sens Rule is offline  
Old
10-19-2009, 05:01 PM
  #27
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,992
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nik jr View Post
a few days ago, i watched a '59 playoff game between TML and montreal.

dick duff was fast, all over the ice, tenacious on the boards, and won the game in OT.
I know exactly which game you're talking about. Great game to watch. It's the only full game in which I was able to see Maurice Richard, although he was not at his best and rarely played.

Quote:
i saw harvey for the 1st time in that game.
now i understand why everyone talks about his puck control. he often looked very casual. he was by far the best at controlling the puck. the play was often chaotic, but never when harvey had the puck. sometimes he looked like he was walking around, but sometimes he also joined the rush with speed.

i was surprised at something he did while defending, though. he once defended a 2 on 2 rush by getting on his knees. not to block a shot, but to trip the attacker. it worked, but seemed strange.

harvey looked basically like a modern player.
This is the biggest thing I noticed about this game as well. As soon as Harvey got the Puck, it was his puck. His game.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby Ryan Getzlaf View Post
Yes, you did say Rayner was outstanding, but then made his team in 1950 to be great compared to Worters' in 1929, which just wasn't true.
Not compared to 1929 in particular, but to what he typically had in front of him. 1929 was not typical.

Quote:
And yes, Worter would without a doubt be the #1 player all time with the Americans. But being the best player the Americans ever had isn't that impressive considering how bad of a franchise they were. Conversely, Rayner would never come close to claiming to be the top Ranger of all time because they are such an old and distinguished franchise who have had many a good player come through their ranks. Rayner, during his era, though, is most certainly the top Ranger(hell, opposing players referred to them as the "Rayngers"), so that's a bit of a wash. I'm not here saying Worters is bad, I had him inches behind Rayner, but if we're gonna pimp shrimp, then I want Bonnie Prince Charlie to get on some of that action as well.
If you want, pretend that the entire history of the NY Rangers was Rayner's 8-year career. What would their all-time top-10 players look like? I guess you could start here:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/pp/p...rder_by=points

This is no star-studded cast, but it's not the NYA.

Quote:
Didn't realize how bad the league average was. Wow, yeah it's a nice difference then. But, from what I recall, that Canadiens team still wasn't an offensive juggernaut(again I'm going solely off memory so I could easily be wrong. Also, I didn't realize the Canadiens allowed that many shots during that era.
- I'm not going to verify it right now, but I think with Morenz and Joliat they had to be average offensively at worst.

- That many, or that few? 30 was not many based on the totals I have seen for that era. It was close to the lowest in the league.

seventieslord is online now  
Old
10-19-2009, 05:02 PM
  #28
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,565
vCash: 500
Geez I have been deciding between Reed Larson and my pick all evening and now I see Larson's long gone.

Anyway, the Whalers fill a need for an offensive, good skating defenseman who can handle defense very well and is a proven playoff performer. That means Brian Rafalski, D.


MadArcand is online now  
Old
10-19-2009, 05:08 PM
  #29
Gibsons Finest
Beast
 
Gibsons Finest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Saskatoon/Brandon
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,350
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Not compared to 1929 in particular, but to what he typically had in front of him. 1929 was not typical.
Yeah, I was just comparing Hart year vs. Hart year.


Quote:
If you want, pretend that the entire history of the NY Rangers was Rayner's 8-year career. What would their all-time top-10 players look like? I guess you could start here:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/pp/p...rder_by=points

This is no star-studded cast, but it's not the NYA.
That's fair enough, but the point remains the same, neither had anything special in front of them.



Quote:
- I'm not going to verify it right now, but I think with Morenz and Joliat they had to be average offensively at worst.

- That many, or that few? 30 was not many based on the totals I have seen for that era. It was close to the lowest in the league.
Hmm learn something new every day I guess. Kind of verifys a theory I've had about that era(well, before 29-30, anyway), that they basically just shot whenever they could. I don't see how it'd be any other way for a team to allow 30 shots and be near the lowest in the league.

Gibsons Finest is offline  
Old
10-19-2009, 05:10 PM
  #30
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,790
vCash: 500
On the Fuhr/Cheevers front: I think Fuhr's the better goalie. I don't think Fuhr gets enough credit around here. Maybe guys are just looking too hard at the stats. Maybe they don't appreciate what makes Fuhr so special. I have Fuhr in my top 20 for goalies; Cheevers is in my top 25.

I think what separates Fuhr from Cheevers (and a lot of other goalies) is his ability to handle a high workload. In 87-88, he set a new league record for GP by a goalie with 75. That record stood for eight years, until 1995-96, when Fuhr set a new record with 79. (He also set a new league record for consecutive starts in a season). His performance in 1995-96 rates among the best I've ever seen for a goalie. He was second in Hart voting in 88, and he should have been second or third (behind Mario and possibly Messier) in 1996. He carried St. Louis on his back all season. They didn't gel until April. St. Louis doesn't come close to the playoffs in 1995-96 without Fuhr.

Those first two years in St. Loo, Fuhr carried the Blues. We talk about his ability to make big saves in the clutch, and he was fantastic at it. But the Blues in those two years needed to win 2-1 or 3-2 to have a chance at the playoffs. Fuhr gave them that chance.

Just as an aside, to tie-in what we discussed earlier with Worters and Hart voting. In 95-96, Fuhr, I believe was the top vote-getter for the Hart among goalies. (He had at least one second place vote and he may have had a first-place vote). He didn't get on an all-star team (voted by the media), and he wasn't in the top three for Vezina voting (voted by the GMs).

God Bless Canada is offline  
Old
10-19-2009, 05:15 PM
  #31
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,565
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by God Bless Canada View Post
Just as an aside, to tie-in what we discussed earlier with Worters and Hart voting. In 95-96, Fuhr, I believe was the top vote-getter for the Hart among goalies. (He had at least one second place vote and he may have had a first-place vote). He didn't get on an all-star team (voted by the media), and he wasn't in the top three for Vezina voting (voted by the GMs).
6th in all of Hart (1-3-2-2-5, 52pts), Vezina (2-3-2, 22pts) and All-Star Team (2-2-6, 22 pts) votings. I accidentally had the 95-96 yearbook right next to my table.

Anyway that was a very impressive season. It's his Edmonton years I find overrated (granted he was fairly good, but not that much better than XXX XXX) due to playing on an insane dynasty, and I think his utterly disastrous years in Toronto, LA and Buffalo get overlooked.

MadArcand is online now  
Old
10-19-2009, 05:16 PM
  #32
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 39,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post



Shouldn't it be the opposite? As in, a smaller player would have an easier time on the PP and would get used there more often in order to shelter him from physicality and traffic.
:
I've read that the reason Beliveau was used on the powerplay in the 50s and Henri Richard wasn't was because Beliveau had the size and power to dominate the front of the net. After that, I assume it was an "if it ain't broke..." type thing.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now  
Old
10-19-2009, 05:23 PM
  #33
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 39,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
Geez I have been deciding between Reed Larson and my pick all evening and now I see Larson's long gone.

Anyway, the Whalers fill a need for an offensive, good skating defenseman who can handle defense very well and is a proven playoff performer. That means Brian Rafalski, D.

Only if he is paired with an elite defensive force to cover his weaknesses. Rafalski is a great defensive system player but pretty bad one on one. Basically, he's really smart and skilled but doesn't have the size to handle most guys one on one. Perfect guy to pair with Scott Stevens or Nicklas Lidstrom, but if he's the best defensive guy on the pairing... watch out.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now  
Old
10-19-2009, 05:25 PM
  #34
Gibsons Finest
Beast
 
Gibsons Finest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Saskatoon/Brandon
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,350
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
I've read that the reason Beliveau was used on the powerplay in the 50s and Henri Richard wasn't was because Beliveau had the size and power to dominate the front of the net. After that, I assume it was an "if it ain't broke..." type thing.
Yeah, I would agree on that front. If their powerplay was built around their centerman, Beliveau, using his size and power to dominate the front of the net, then Richard's not really the guy to replace that.

Gibsons Finest is offline  
Old
10-19-2009, 05:29 PM
  #35
Transplanted Caper
Registered User
 
Transplanted Caper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Internet Underbelly
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,677
vCash: 500
Miners select, Orland Kurtenbach, C.


Last edited by Transplanted Caper: 10-19-2009 at 05:41 PM.
Transplanted Caper is offline  
Old
10-19-2009, 05:32 PM
  #36
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,992
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sturminator View Post
70's pimping of Worters and criticism of Hainesworth are odd bookends of opinion, considering how much the two had in common.
Explain.

I see them as quite different. One played on a terrible team and earned plenty of individual praise. One played on a very good team and earned a grand total of zero in terms of individual praise (as in hart votes or all-star teams). His three Jennings trophies from back when it was called something else don't count.

Quote:
Of course, part of 70's pimping of Worters looks more complimentary than it really is because he just hates Fuhr, Smith and apparently Gardiner and Holecek, as well. The arguments against Fuhr and Smith I sort of understand (though having watched both men play, I disagree) and I do think Gardiner gets a bit overrated, but the placement of Holecek I really don't get.
What? Where did you get this idea?

I don't hate any of those guys. Gardiner and Holecek both made my last top-120. Smith made the list last time around, and I pushed hard for him to make that final cut into the top-100 (do you remember this?) and he was an agonizing final cut from this year's top-120.

What's wrong with my placement of Holecek? I'm pretty sure that by having him in my top-120 I ranked him higher than most people would. Is there something wrong with this?

Gardiner does get overrated. So does Hainsworth. Worters, and to a lesser extent, Thompson, get underrated. Then there's Alec Connell. All from the 1930s. If you agree with me that Hainsworth is overrated and shouldn't make the top-20 (and I'm pretty sure I remember you saying he wouldn't make your list this year), then who from that era should? Nobody? When 4 goalies from the 1950-1970 era and three from 1985-present are in the top-10? Doesn't seem right. Someone had to have been the best of that time. I think it was Worters. I have shown many times why. Followed closely by Gardiner, then Thompson, then Hainsworth, then Connell. A few of them had to be among the top-20 ever. It could be argued that by placing my top-3 of that time in the 17th, 18th, and 20th spots, that I still underrepresented that era. Am I being unreasonable?

If you separate the history of hockey into six sections (pre merger, post merger, early O6, late O6, expansion, modern), my top-rated goalies from each era are 1st, 2nd, 4th, 7th, 11th, and.... 17th. The 17th is of course Worters, the best of the early NHL era. You think I'm overpimping the guy, a breakdown of my list says otherwise. We have historically undervalued the goalies of this time, probably because there's not much to choose from between the four best and everyone has their own ideas about why one should be higher.

Quote:
I like the Worters pick, but I see little reason to rate him above a guy like Eddie Giacomin, another great regular season goalie with a questionable playoff record. Hart voting in that era is just hard to take at anything approaching face value. Red Dutton has more top-5 Hart placements than Nick Lidstrom. And that means what, exactly? That being said, if Worters is as good as Giacomin (which I think he probably is), he's a good pick at this point.
Keep in mind we never compared hart votes from goalies in different eras (like the absure Dutton/Lidstrom comparison). Pit and I have both shown what type of hart consideration goalies received, specifically in Worters' time.

Giacomin is to Worters what Thornton is to Kovalchuk. One, you know is bad in the playoffs. The other, you don't know either way. I would like my odds with Worters, personally.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cup 2010 Sens Rule View Post
Steve Thomas was one clutch player. He might not have been really great in an ATD context but he was truly one of the best clutch players I have seen. And otherwise a pretty decent goal scorer as well. I'd love to have him on any team I cheered for...
He's my 3rd favourite player of all-time, but I'd have a hard time taking him as a regular, even with 32 teams. He's definitely clutch. Never top-10 in goals, but top-10 in GWG 3 times. Was the career OT goal leader. Scored an OT goal for the Leafs in the playoffs. Also set up and scored other big late goals in 1999, 2000, and 2001. He will also fight the likes of Jason Wiemer and get pummelled because he's a good team guy.

seventieslord is online now  
Old
10-19-2009, 05:39 PM
  #37
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 39,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
He's my 3rd favourite player of all-time, but I'd have a hard time taking him as a regular, even with 32 teams. He's definitely clutch. Never top-10 in goals, but top-10 in GWG 3 times. Was the career OT goal leader. Scored an OT goal for the Leafs in the playoffs. Also set up and scored other big late goals in 1999, 2000, and 2001. He will also fight the likes of Jason Wiemer and get pummelled because he's a good team guy.
And he's one of my least favorite players of all time, for reasons that aren't all his fault. He's the guy the Devils got back when they traded Claude Lemieux over a contract dispute and they tried to force him into Lemieux's role. And Steve Thomas couldn't handle the defensive responsibilities and floated and whined a lot. Also, he had his skate in the crease on more than one called back goal in the 1997 choke job to the Rangers. For the Devils, he never fit in and was pretty anti-clutch.

(end mini-rant)

But yes, he was good for Toronto.

Edit: And considering how he didn't fit in with the late 90s Devils (the height of their trapping days), I'm not sure how well he'd do on a Punch Imlach coached team.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now  
Old
10-19-2009, 05:41 PM
  #38
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,992
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
Geez I have been deciding between Reed Larson and my pick all evening and now I see Larson's long gone.

Anyway, the Whalers fill a need for an offensive, good skating defenseman who can handle defense very well and is a proven playoff performer. That means Brian Rafalski, D.

He's better than Larson anyway.

Earlier today jarek and I Identified him as the BDA and a great start to our 3rd pairing. Picking at 490, we knew we wouldn't get him, but of course wanted to aim high.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby Ryan Getzlaf View Post
Hmm learn something new every day I guess. Kind of verifys a theory I've had about that era(well, before 29-30, anyway), that they basically just shot whenever they could. I don't see how it'd be any other way for a team to allow 30 shots and be near the lowest in the league.
That's the impression I get. It's either that, or the way they tracked shots was more liberal.

Can't wait till the HSP is done for these seasons.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
I think his utterly disastrous years in Toronto, LA and Buffalo get overlooked.
He was not bad in Toronto. He is still praised as a major part of the turnaround there. He and Anderson brought a winning history and a lack of tolerance for losing that rubbed off on the kids. Before that it was like, "oh well, we're the Leafs, and the Leafs suck, so I guess we suck."

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
I've read that the reason Beliveau was used on the powerplay in the 50s and Henri Richard wasn't was because Beliveau had the size and power to dominate the front of the net. After that, I assume it was an "if it ain't broke..." type thing.
On the second part, yes. On the first part, I think it had more to do with Beliveau just being a better player. Though I guess they could have put Henri on the wing if they really wanted.

seventieslord is online now  
Old
10-19-2009, 05:41 PM
  #39
Sens Rule
Registered User
 
Sens Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,366
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
Geez I have been deciding between Reed Larson and my pick all evening and now I see Larson's long gone.

Anyway, the Whalers fill a need for an offensive, good skating defenseman who can handle defense very well and is a proven playoff performer. That means Brian Rafalski, D.

Nice, nice pick. I loved how that signing was slammed when Detroit signed him, on the HFboards. IMO he has been better on Detroit than he was in New Jersey.

Sens Rule is offline  
Old
10-19-2009, 05:44 PM
  #40
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,992
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
And he's one of my least favorite players of all time, for reasons that aren't all his fault. He's the guy the Devils got back when they traded Claude Lemieux over a contract dispute and they tried to force him into Lemieux's role. And Steve Thomas couldn't handle the defensive responsibilities and floated and whined a lot. Also, he had his skate in the crease on more than one called back goal in the 1997 choke job to the Rangers. For the Devils, he never fit in and was pretty anti-clutch.

(end mini-rant)

But yes, he was good for Toronto.

Edit: And considering how he didn't fit in with the late 90s Devils (the height of their trapping days), I'm not sure how well he'd do on a Punch Imlach coached team.
After his time in NJ, I was not looking forward to seeing him in a Leafs jersey. He won me over, that's for sure.

True story: after his dismal 2001 regular season, while my playoff draft was underway at my house, a friend of mine was ragging on him and I boldly guaranteed he'd lead the team in playoff goals. He did. I made $10 on that side bet. I love Stumpy.

seventieslord is online now  
Old
10-19-2009, 05:45 PM
  #41
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 39,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cup 2010 Sens Rule View Post
Nice, nice pick. I loved how that signing was slammed when Detroit signed him, on the HFboards. IMO he has been better on Detroit than he was in New Jersey.
He was great in NJ when he skated next to Stevens. Then... not so good when he was asked to be the #1. Downright awful against Tampa Bay and Ottawa in the playoffs. Then went to Detroit and got to play next to Lidstrom. Stevens, then Lidstrom, is Rafalski the luckiest offensive defenseman in the league or what? '

That said, he'd probably be great on a 3rd pair in this thing next to a defensive minded guy.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now  
Old
10-19-2009, 05:45 PM
  #42
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 20,808
vCash: 500
Murray Murdoch

Thanks GBC. I felt like picking Murdoch was reach (and thought about Kurtenbach for my 4th line) at this point, but frankly, as my 3rd LW, he justified being picked at this point. Murdoch will obviously play with his long-time partner Cecil Dillon.

MXD is offline  
Old
10-19-2009, 05:45 PM
  #43
Leaf Lander
Registered User
 
Leaf Lander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: BWO Headquarters
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,745
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Leaf Lander Send a message via MSN to Leaf Lander
#32 Steve Thomas Bio
Quote:

Signed as a Free Agent by the leafs in 84 Thomas became one the most consistent scorers in the game during most of his 20 yr career.

Thomas had a very strong desire to succeed.Speedy Steve thrived with play making forwards.A very quick shooting with great instincts. A tough nosed player who will go anywhere on the ice to get a chance to score. He has a high on ice IQ hockey sense wise. Has a pair of decent hands and he could slam a blast past any goalie from any angle on the ice. He was not afraid to tread away from rough stuff on the ice. Stumpy was competitive and a combative fore checker. Can ride shotgun on any top line because he was always willing to pay the price to get his team ahead.

He has a rep as one of the best big game player during his era.Shows his courage and toughness when all is on the line.
RS: 1235 421 512 933
PO: 174 54 53 107
Era: Mid 80's Mid 2000's
Seasons 20
Best Season 1992–93 New York Islanders 79 37 50 87
Stanley Cup Finals 1
60 Points+ Seasons -8
20 Goal Seasons + 10
30 Goal Seasons+ 5
40 Goal Seasons 2
Game winning Goals 23rd all time with 78
Overtime Goals 12th all time with 10
Playoff Shots on Goal All Time 20th with 444
All Time Points - 85th with 933
All Time Goals- 68th with 421
Highest All Time Scoring player from England
Toronto Maple Leafs Top 100 Book Ranked 64th


Last edited by Leaf Lander: 10-20-2009 at 02:05 AM.
Leaf Lander is offline  
Old
10-19-2009, 05:46 PM
  #44
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,527
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by God Bless Canada View Post
I think what separates Fuhr from Cheevers (and a lot of other goalies) is his ability to handle a high workload. In 87-88, he set a new league record for GP by a goalie with 75. That record stood for eight years, until 1995-96, when Fuhr set a new record with 79. (He also set a new league record for consecutive starts in a season). His performance in 1995-96 rates among the best I've ever seen for a goalie. He was second in Hart voting in 88, and he should have been second or third (behind Mario and possibly Messier) in 1996. He carried St. Louis on his back all season. They didn't gel until April. St. Louis doesn't come close to the playoffs in 1995-96 without Fuhr.
Isn't that less valuable in the ATD than in real life, considering that his backup is going to be pretty good? In fact, his backup could very well be a better regular season goalie than him.

overpass is offline  
Old
10-19-2009, 05:47 PM
  #45
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,790
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
6th in all of Hart (1-3-2-2-5, 52pts), Vezina (2-3-2, 22pts) and All-Star Team (2-2-6, 22 pts) votings. I accidentally had the 95-96 yearbook right next to my table.

Anyway that was a very impressive season. It's his Edmonton years I find overrated (granted he was fairly good, but not that much better than XXX XXX) due to playing on an insane dynasty, and I think his utterly disastrous years in Toronto, LA and Buffalo get overlooked.
I don't think the Edmonton years are overrated. He backstopped a dynasty. You look at the goalies who backstopped a dynasty - Broda, Plante, Bower, Dryden, Smith, Fuhr, to a lesser extent Sawchuk - that's elite company. I don't think you can overrate a goalie who is the No. 1 for a dynasty. Fuhr was the perfect guy for that Oilers team - the guy who could make the big save when it counts in that 5-4, 6-4 or 6-5 game.

Hard to explain why he struggled so much at times from 1991 to 1995. He lost the No. 1 job to Potvin in Toronto because Potvin was younger and outplaying Fuhr. He lost the No. 1 job to Hasek in Buffalo because Fuhr showed up to camp way out of shape, got injured and then Hasek broke out. And he sucked in the lockout year, although a lot of players sucked in the lockout year. It looked like he was done. And when he showed up for camp out of shape in St. Loo in 1995, it appeared the final chapter was being written on his career. Then he responded by playing some of the best hockey of his life.

Incidentally, he was incredible in the 1993 playoffs for Buffalo. It's hard to say a goalie stole a series in a four-game sweep, but he stole that series against a very good Boston team.


Last edited by God Bless Canada: 10-19-2009 at 05:53 PM.
God Bless Canada is offline  
Old
10-19-2009, 05:47 PM
  #46
Sens Rule
Registered User
 
Sens Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,366
vCash: 500
So Rafalski is great with a great mate on defence.... Hmmm that is even more reason to take him in an ATD. As almost any team would have some pretty great defencemen to pair him with. I almost.... wish I had taken him last pick. In the 400's... as a D-Man with such great success on teams that did a ton of damage in the playoffs he looks really good.

Sens Rule is offline  
Old
10-19-2009, 05:47 PM
  #47
Gibsons Finest
Beast
 
Gibsons Finest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Saskatoon/Brandon
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,350
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cup 2010 Sens Rule View Post
Nice, nice pick. I loved how that signing was slammed when Detroit signed him, on the HFboards. IMO he has been better on Detroit than he was in New Jersey.
The reason it was slammed was because it was such a large contract for quite some time, and Rafalski isn't exactly young(nor was he there). IMO it's also not hard for him to look pretty good in Detroit when he plays with the best defensive defenseman in the game. A lot of scrubs have looked decent filling the same role. But yes, he's a very talented offensive defenseman, and with the right partner he could be a very valuable addition.

Gibsons Finest is offline  
Old
10-19-2009, 05:50 PM
  #48
Sens Rule
Registered User
 
Sens Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,366
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
He was great in NJ when he skated next to Stevens. Then... not so good when he was asked to be the #1. Downright awful against Tampa Bay and Ottawa in the playoffs. Then went to Detroit and got to play next to Lidstrom. Stevens, then Lidstrom, is Rafalski the luckiest offensive defenseman in the league or what? '

That said, he'd probably be great on a 3rd pair in this thing next to a defensive minded guy.
No he would be a great guy to pair with Stevens or Lidstrom. He may be lucky with his pairings but he is good also. It is an ATD. If one D-Man is a top ten in the NHL on a pairing with a great D-Man.. then freaking pair him with a great D-Man. Don't make him be the #1 D-Man. Coaching... GMing. It is like the 14th or 15th or 16th round. I think Rafalski here is a great pick.

Sens Rule is offline  
Old
10-19-2009, 05:51 PM
  #49
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,527
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cup 2010 Sens Rule View Post
So Rafalski is great with a great mate on defence.... Hmmm that is even more reason to take him in an ATD. As almost any team would have some pretty great defencemen to pair him with. I almost.... wish I had taken him last pick. In the 400's... as a D-Man with such great success on teams that did a ton of damage in the playoffs he looks really good.
Looking at it that way, as a valuable defenceman on a great team whose best attribute was his power play prowess...is Stefan Persson a good comparable?

overpass is offline  
Old
10-19-2009, 05:51 PM
  #50
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,790
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
Isn't that less valuable in the ATD than in real life, considering that his backup is going to be pretty good? In fact, his backup could very well be a better regular season goalie than him.
Fair question. If you give me a goalie who I can count on to play 65 to 70 games (a realistic number for Fuhr) at a high level, then it means I don't have to worry about getting a back-up until the 20th or 21st rounds. It's a nice luxury to have.

God Bless Canada is offline  
Closed Thread

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 11:12 AM.

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.