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 Line-up Assassination Thread

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-12-2009, 02:57 PM
  #101
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,792
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arrbez View Post
I, for one, see no problem with having a guy on a scoring line who's only good for one thing: scoring.

If you put a player like Dye with fast players, people say "can Dye keep up with his linemates?". If you put him with slow players, people say "That line will be too slow to be effective". It's like there's no winning when you pick a slow player in this, regardless of the fact that Dye dominated his era while presumably being the slowest player on his line at all times. There's certainly room for one sub-par defensive player on a scoring line, isn't there?
Sure there is. But you missed my point.

If you swapped Gare and Dye, you'd have Dye on the first line, which would add a little more offensive potency. He's great in tighet. And Gare would be on the second, which would give you a fantastic two-way line that would have excellent offensive potential while playing against the opponent's best line.

God Bless Canada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 03:01 PM
  #102
nik jr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Congo-Kinshasa
Posts: 10,551
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
Only as much as it limited him when he played....
but the game is different.

modern game requires a much higher level of skill, finesse and precision, which require good hands.

the skill level of johnson's time was not above what he was capable of doing, but, imo, it probably is now.



my goalie was 5'6. let's say that is 5'9 in modern terms. high shots were not much of a problem for him then, but would definitely be a problem now, b/c the game is different.

my goalie was also a bad skater. did not learn to skate until he was a teenager, and wore boots in net early in his career.

his lack of mobility was not as much a problem then, when goalies almost always stayed in net, but it would be now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sturminator View Post
It depends. In the particular case of prewar players of limited speed, one wonders, due to the speed of the game, how much the negative attribute was actually "counted" during their careers...hence my enduring dislike of Buck Boucher and Cy Denneny (to name the most prominent players who fall into this category) relative to most other GMs. This gets more extreme the further back we go until we get to very slow hockey in which the "starters" played virtually the entire game.

There is also the question of "bad team" players who didn't respond well to pressure, tight checking or not being the star. You can't really get away with that in the ATD. But these are the exceptions to the rule, and in general, I agree. Double jeopardy is a dangerous precendent.
good point

i have been trying to think of other examples of players and aspects of players that would probably not do well in modern times, but i have not thought of many.

but i think lack of speed would have to be due to some kind of physical limitation, so that a player could not compete with modern athletes, even with the advantages of modern science.

Quote:
Originally Posted by raleh View Post
haha, sorry man. I absolutely hate Coffey. I don't vote accordingly, because I know what he brings to the table and I vote with my head, so don't worry about that. He is my least favorite player in NHL history.

BUT, I actually do think you'd be better off not having him kill penalties. Not because he won't generate offense, but simply because he makes your PK more average. Looking through your lineup, I think you have the best PK as a whole in the draft. Not because I think you'll be getting a ton of shorties, because that won't happen in the ATD, but because it'll be almost impossible to score against. That isn't the case with Coffey out there. Yeah, there's more of a threat of giving up a SHG, but to me there's no way that outweighs the fact that it's now a 5 on 3.5.

To me Coffey is as one dimensional as they come, and I'll admit, it's one hell of a dimension. But your goaltending and two-way forwards are probably your team's best attributes and your kick ass PK is something that I personally would vote very strongly for. I think Coffey makes it glaringly worse defensively, and on the PK, doesn't come close to making up for that offensively (which I will begrudgingly admit he does at even strength).
i also hate coffey. he was almost comical at times in the defensive zone.

nik jr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 03:10 PM
  #103
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 40,975
vCash: 500
I'm pretty new to this, so I'm not going to have that many details. I will, however make a few brief comments about what I like and dislike about certain teams.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
Hamilton Bettmans (Johnny Engine and Dreakmur)

Coach - Don Cherry
Assistant Coach - Roger Neilson

Vladimir Krutov - Mario Lemieux [A] - Hooley Smith [C]
Tommy Smith - Darryl Sittler [A] - Billy Boucher
Tommpy Phillips - Art Chapman - Blair Russel
Percy Galbraith - Red Berenson - Mush March

Valery Vasiliev [A] - Moose Johnson
Jan Suchy - Bert Corbeau
Dunc Munro - Red Dutton

Clint Benedict
Tom Paton

Spares: Corb Denneny and Jack Campbell

Minor League : Jim Riley - Clare McKerrow - Cully Wilson - Bobby Trapp - Jim McKenny - Nicklas Backstrom

Powerplay
Unit #1: Vladimir Krutov - Mario Lemieux - Hooley Smith - Jan Suchy - Bert Corbeau
Unit #2: Tommy Smith - Darryl Sittler - Tommy Phillips - Valery Vasiliev - Moose Johnson

Penalty Kill
Unit #1: Hooley Smith - Tommy Phillips - Valery Vasiliev - Moose Johnson
Unit #2: Art Chapman - Blair Russel - Dunc Munro - Red Dutton
Unit #3: Red Berenson - Percy Galbraith

Shut-down Unit: Tommy Phillips - Art Chapman - Blair Russel - Valery Vasiliev - Moose Johnson
I love the Lemieux-Hooley Smith combo. Not sure about Krutov, for reasons listed before. I'm not as down on him as some, but I think he has enough questions where he's ideally a second liner. If I had Lemieux, I would personally give him a winger with the most offensive talent possible. Smith oozes intangibles and is an elite glue guy for the first line, but in terms of offense only, Lemieux will have to do a lot himself. But then, if there's any player in the history of the NHL who can do so, it is Lemieux.

Sittler is a great center for the 2nd line. His wingers are questionable, but that doesn't make them bad choices. Just be prepared to make cases for them as this thing goes along.

Benedict is one of the Top 10 guys in the draft, and I sometimes wonder if era alone is the only thing that seperates him from the second tier of goalies all-time (Sawchuk, Brodeur, Dryden, Tretiak, Hall in my mind). You should never lose a series do to goaltending with Benedict in net.

Your D is tough and will be a ***** to play against. But I'm concerned by the lack of offense from your D. This could very well hurt your second powerplay unit, in particular. I would strongly look into putting a forward on the point on the PP, so you can take Johnson off of it.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 03:15 PM
  #104
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,990
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nik jr View Post
but the game is different.

modern game requires a much higher level of skill, finesse and precision, which require good hands.

the skill level of johnson's time was not above what he was capable of doing, but, imo, it probably is now.
These guys aren't just getting into a time machine, and coming to 2009. We're not actually playing todays game, and we're not actually playing by today's rules.

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 03:16 PM
  #105
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 40,975
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jungosi View Post
Betelgeuse Hitchhikers



Coach : Harry Sinden
Assistant : Bill Dineen

Keith Tkachuk - Wayne Gretzky - Jari Kurri
Alexander Yakushev - Vyacheslav Starshinov - Helmut Balderis
Nick Metz - Doug Jarvis - Rusty Crawford
Johnny Peirson - Paul Ronty - Don Maloney
Ron Duguay

Rod Langway - Larry Murphy
Sergei Zubov - Leo Reise jr.
Glen Harmon - Dave Langevin
Dan Boyle

Jiri Holecek
Roger Crozier

Spare team

Rick Kehoe - Erich Kuehnhackl - Serge Bernier
Udo Kiessling - Hy Buller
Evgeni Nabokov

Special teams :

Powerplay unit 1 : Tkachuk - Gretzky - Kurri - Murphy - Harmon
Powerplay unit 2 : Yakushev - Starshinov - Balderis - Zubov - Reise
Penalty kill unit 1 : Jarvis - Metz - Langway - Zubov
Penalty kill unit 2 : Gretzky - Kurri - Murphy - Langevin

I'll try to review some teams tomorrow.
First off, your first line is a strong candidate for best line of the draft. Gretzky-Kurri is lethal, and Kurri's defensive instincts allow Wayne to do what Wayne does best. Tkachuk is a pretty poor first liner in a vaccuum, but an excellent compliment to Gretzky-Kurri as a skilled bodyguard.

Your second line should have great chemistry, but I'm uncertain as to the skill. Starshinov is a legit 2nd liner in this thing IMO. I actually have more concerns with his wingers. Yakushev is better known to North Americans because of his exploits in 72, but from everything I've read, that was the absolute highlight of his career. Nobody can ever accuse Starshinov and Yakushev of being your stereotypical soft Soviet forwards, though.

Your defense lacks a game breaker, but they are solid 1-6 and very versatile.

Love the forwards on your PK units. Two elite defensive guys on 1. And Gretzky-Kurri on the 2nd PK will make 2nd PP units crap their proverbial pants. I don't like the defensive pairs on your PK units. Zubov was average at best defensively pre-lockout (most of his career), so I would take him off the first PK unit. He might be good enough for the 2nd unit, but he still wouldn't be ideal.

I'm not sold on Harry Sinden as an all-time coach, but one thing he did was figure out ways to get skill players to produce (he's the guy who finally figured out how to use Phil Esposito effectively). And the Gretzky-Kurri combo has shown what they can do when they play for a coach who lets them play their game and gives them lots of minutes.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 03:26 PM
  #106
nik jr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Congo-Kinshasa
Posts: 10,551
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
These guys aren't just getting into a time machine, and coming to 2009. We're not actually playing todays game, and we're not actually playing by today's rules.
it is not johnson's era that would prevent him from having the skills necessary to compete. it is his lack of a right hand.



they are playing today's game. (if not, how would active players play?) they are probably not using post-lockout rules, though, but rules are modern.

players from earlier eras adapt to the different conditions of modern hockey, and have access to all modern advantages.

but not all players would adapt equally well, b/c things like technology and nutrition and physiology are not the only differences.

short goalies would be at a disadvantage. players with 1 functioning hand are at a disadvantage. players who had injuries that physically limited them from being athletic would be at a disadvantage.

some players have inherent liabilities. some of those liabilities may be severe.

nik jr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 03:28 PM
  #107
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 40,975
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arrbez View Post
The Inglewood Jacks

Coach: Jacques Demers
Assistant: Rudy Pilous

Frank Mahovlich - Frank Nighbor (C) - Danny Gare
Doug Bentley - Vladimir Petrov - Babe Dye
Alf Smith (A) - Bobby Holik - Floyd Curry
Eddie Shack - Ken Linseman - Wilf Paiement

Extra: Brian Rolston - Pierre Turgeon - Tony Granato
Daniel Sedin - Henrik Sedin

Doug Harvey (A) - Jimmy Watson
Babe Siebert (A) - Jim Schoenfeld
Jack Laviolette - Goldie Prodger

Extra: Yuri Fedorov - Jay Bouwmeester

Hap Holmes
Tom Barrasso

Extra: Olaf Kolzig


Special Teams
PP1: Mahovlich-Petrov-Dye-Harvey-Siebert
PP2: Bentley-Nighbor-Smith-Laviolette-Prodger
PK1: Nighbor-Gare-Watson-Schoenfeld
PK2: Curry-Smith-Harvey-Siebert
In sum - I love your first two lines and have questions about your third line.

First off, your top line is a definite candidate for best two-way line in the draft. Nighbor is the early era's answer to Bobby Clarke, and Gare is a 50 goal scorer with an elite defensive presence. Gare isn't good enough offensively to be a traditional 1st line guy, but I love the fit with Nighbor and Mahovlich. Speaking of Mahovlich, he's probably your best offensive guy, and he gives the line that elite offensive punch a first line needs.

Petrov and Dye is a very good one-two offensive punch for the second line, though neither is anything special defensively (and Dye is outright awful). But Doug Bentley should provide a defensive conscience, without giving away much offensively.

I'm not sure if I'm sold on Holik as a 3rd line center in this thing. 4th line, sure. 3rd line? I'm not sure if his terrible skating translates well as a 3rd line center in this thing. He was at his best at the height of the dead puck era, when he could clutch and grab oppositing centers as much as he wanted (Sundin most notably). But even in the dead puck era, he would have trouble against smaller faster forwards like Sakic. The flipside is that he has the strength to go up against a Jean Beliveau probably better than almost any modern checking center. And that Joe Sakic is, well, Joe Sakic. And then, when you have a speedy checking guy like Nighbor, you can save Holik for the big guys.

I personally prefer 3rd lines that are a threat to chip in offensively, and I'm not sure I see much of that from your 3rd line. No matter how well you defend, you can't stop everything, and if you can't score, you'll end up a minus.

Just use Harvey on your first PK unit. I'm of the personal belief that if your dman is the best option you have, you use him on PK first, PP second, and cut down his even strength time if you have to sacrifice minutes somewhere.


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 11-12-2009 at 03:34 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 03:32 PM
  #108
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,618
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
These guys aren't just getting into a time machine, and coming to 2009. We're not actually playing todays game, and we're not actually playing by today's rules.
We're certainly playing by today's roster size. Because of that, the game will be some form of the modern game, not the pre-merger game where stars rarely came off the ice.

I guess it's up to you what kind of game your team plays, but I plan to have my team play a modern game, with forward passing, defencemen crossing the blueline on the attack, etc.

I'm not entirely sure what to think about Moose Johnson's missing fingers, but at the very least I can't see him on a power play.

overpass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 03:36 PM
  #109
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,990
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
I love the Lemieux-Hooley Smith combo. Not sure about Krutov, for reasons listed before. I'm not as down on him as some, but I think he has enough questions where he's ideally a second liner. If I had Lemieux, I would personally give him a winger with the most offensive talent possible. Smith oozes intangibles and is an elite glue guy for the first line, but in terms of offense only, Lemieux will have to do a lot himself. But then, if there's any player in the history of the NHL who can do so, it is Lemieux.
Lets compare Krutov to some of the other 1st line left wingers:
Bun Cook, Woody Dumart, Rick Martin, John Tonelli, Gary Roberts, Pete Mahovlich, Gord Roberts, Clark Gillies, and Mats Sundin. He's way better suited to 1st line duty than these guys.

Here's some more 1st line left wingers:
Paul Kariya, Bert Olmstead, Keith Tkachuk, Michel Goulet, Sid Smith, Bill Barber, and Brendan Shanahan. Krutov belongs in **** group, which makes him an average 1st line left winger.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Sittler is a great center for the 2nd line. His wingers are questionable, but that doesn't make them bad choices. Just be prepared to make cases for them as this thing goes along.
Here's a list of 2nd line left wingers that Tommy Smith is clearly better than:
Mats Naslund, Yvon Lambert, Marc Tardiff, Esa Tikkanen, Petr Bondra, Jiri Holik, Brian Bellows, Dick Duff, Kevin Stevens, Brian Sutter, Smokey Harris, Lynn Patrick, Ray Getliffe, Wendel Clark, and Dean Prentice.

Here's a list of 2nd line left wingers that Tommy Smith is close:
Markus Naslund, Wayne Cashman, Ilya Kovalshuk, Steve Shutt, Brian Propp, and Glenn Anderson.

Maybe Tommy Smith isn't that bad after all?

Here's a list of 2nd line right wingers that Billy Boucher is clearly better than:
Harry Westwick, Anders Hedberg, Ed Litzenberger, Rick Tocchet, Claude Lemieux, Pat Verbeek, Martin St. Louis, Daniel Alfredsson, Ziggy Palffy, and Steve Larmer.


Here's a list of 2nd line left wingers that Billy Boucher is close to:
Joe Mullen, Theo Fleury, Reggie Leach, and Helmut Balderis.

Maybe Billy Boucher isn't that bad either?

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Benedict is one of the Top 10 guys in the draft, and I sometimes wonder if era alone is the only thing that seperates him from the second tier of goalies all-time (Sawchuk, Brodeur, Dryden, Tretiak, Hall in my mind). You should never lose a series do to goaltending with Benedict in net.
It's just too bad there's isn't more info out there. It would be nice to know were he really fits in!

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Your D is tough and will be a ***** to play against. But I'm concerned by the lack of offense from your D. This could very well hurt your second powerplay unit, in particular. I would strongly look into putting a forward on the point on the PP, so you can take Johnson off of it.
Behind Suchy, there isn't a real offensive threat from the blueline. Our guys, however, are all skilled at moving the puck. Corbeau, Johnson, and Dutton all have multiple top-5s and top-10s in defense scoring.

Johnson has 10 top-5s in scoring for defense. Everyone knows he's not Paul Coffey, but he sure as heck isn't Hal Gill either!

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 03:37 PM
  #110
jarek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arrbez View Post
I, for one, see no problem with having a guy on a scoring line who's only good for one thing: scoring.

If you put a player like Dye with fast players, people say "can Dye keep up with his linemates?". If you put him with slow players, people say "That line will be too slow to be effective". It's like there's no winning when you pick a slow player in this, regardless of the fact that Dye dominated his era while presumably being the slowest player on his line at all times. There's certainly room for one sub-par defensive player on a scoring line, isn't there?
The Bill Cowley clause. His speed didn't keep him from becoming one of the finest playmakers of his day, better than many guys much faster than him. Oates is another legendary example. Dye is fine.

jarek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 03:44 PM
  #111
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,990
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nik jr View Post
it is not johnson's era that would prevent him from having the skills necessary to compete. it is his lack of a right hand.
If his era isn't a disadvantage, and he excelled in his era......

Quote:
Originally Posted by nik jr View Post
they are playing today's game. (if not, how would active players play?) they are probably not using post-lockout rules, though, but rules are modern.
Moose Johnson died in 1963. How is he going to play today?

Quote:
Originally Posted by nik jr View Post
players from earlier eras adapt to the different conditions of modern hockey, and have access to all modern advantages.
Does that mean Johnsoh wouldn't have to work a side job to make enough money? If Johnson played in a more recent era, he never would have lost his fingers....

Quote:
Originally Posted by nik jr View Post
some players have inherent liabilities. some of those liabilities may be severe.
Some players can overcome those liabilities.

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 03:46 PM
  #112
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,955
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arrbez View Post
I, for one, see no problem with having a guy on a scoring line who's only good for one thing: scoring.

If you put a player like Dye with fast players, people say "can Dye keep up with his linemates?". If you put him with slow players, people say "That line will be too slow to be effective". It's like there's no winning when you pick a slow player in this, regardless of the fact that Dye dominated his era while presumably being the slowest player on his line at all times. There's certainly room for one sub-par defensive player on a scoring line, isn't there?
I've seen both sides of the coin, too. I think picking a player with such a glaring weakness has turned into a catch 22. You try to offset a slow player with a fast one, but then the slow one won't keep up, apparently. What's the solution? Probably a more open mind on everyone's part, to recognize what other things a player brings to the game, in Dye's case, a serious knack for geting open, and a powerful, accurate shot.


Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass
I'm not entirely sure what to think about Moose Johnson's missing fingers, but at the very least I can't see him on a power play.
Me neither. The ten all-star teams show that he was obviously a very good defenseman, but his point totals show that he was not a very high scoring defenseman. At best, he was the 5th-best PCHA defenseman offensively after the Patricks, Cook and Duncan.

10 top-5s in points by defensemen, isn't that great in the PCHA when there were usually 3 teams and 6 starting defensemen. top-3s, sure. How many top-3s did Johnson have?

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 03:49 PM
  #113
nik jr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Congo-Kinshasa
Posts: 10,551
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arrbez View Post
I, for one, see no problem with having a guy on a scoring line who's only good for one thing: scoring.

If you put a player like Dye with fast players, people say "can Dye keep up with his linemates?". If you put him with slow players, people say "That line will be too slow to be effective". It's like there's no winning when you pick a slow player in this, regardless of the fact that Dye dominated his era while presumably being the slowest player on his line at all times. There's certainly room for one sub-par defensive player on a scoring line, isn't there?
certainly better to have 2 faster players with dye than 2 slow players.

dye may not be able to keep up with them, but hockey is not always north/south.

when your team has possession in the offensive zone, dye would be a great threat.

nik jr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 03:51 PM
  #114
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,618
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
Here's a list of 2nd line right wingers that Billy Boucher is clearly better than:
Harry Westwick, Anders Hedberg, Ed Litzenberger, Rick Tocchet, Claude Lemieux, Pat Verbeek, Martin St. Louis, Daniel Alfredsson, Ziggy Palffy, and Steve Larmer.


Here's a list of 2nd line left wingers that Billy Boucher is close to:
Joe Mullen, Theo Fleury, Reggie Leach, and Helmut Balderis.

Maybe Billy Boucher isn't that bad either?
Come on, you're way overselling Boucher here. He has four good years in a split-league setup, and in three of these he was a top-10 NHL scorer (which, again, doesn't have all the talent). St. Louis, Alfredsson, Palffy and Litzenberger can all match that offensive resume and played in far deeper leagues. Larmer is massively better defensively and is a decent scorer himself.

Boucher's not all that close to Mullen, Fleury, or Balderis either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nik jr View Post
certainly better to have 2 faster players with dye than 2 slow players.

dye may not be able to keep up with them, but hockey is not always north/south.

when your team has possession in the offensive zone, dye would be a great threat.
Dye might be best with a possession-type, slow the game down centre like Forsberg or Thornton (or the Sedins).

overpass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 03:52 PM
  #115
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,990
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
10 top-5s in points by defensemen, isn't that great in the PCHA when there were usually 3 teams and 6 starting defensemen. top-3s, sure. How many top-3s did Johnson have?
8 of his top-5s were 4th or better

two top-2s in points
three top-2s in goals (and another 3rd)
two top-2s in assists (and 2 more 3rds)

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 03:55 PM
  #116
jarek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nik jr View Post
it is not johnson's era that would prevent him from having the skills necessary to compete. it is his lack of a right hand.



they are playing today's game. (if not, how would active players play?) they are probably not using post-lockout rules, though, but rules are modern.

players from earlier eras adapt to the different conditions of modern hockey, and have access to all modern advantages.

but not all players would adapt equally well, b/c things like technology and nutrition and physiology are not the only differences.

short goalies would be at a disadvantage. players with 1 functioning hand are at a disadvantage. players who had injuries that physically limited them from being athletic would be at a disadvantage.

some players have inherent liabilities. some of those liabilities may be severe.
Well then, I guess Roy Worters is useless in an ATD because he'll never stop high shots.

This should be about a guy's greatness in his own era, not his body parts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
First off, your first line is a strong candidate for best line of the draft. Gretzky-Kurri is lethal, and Kurri's defensive instincts allow Wayne to do what Wayne does best. Tkachuk is a pretty poor first liner in a vaccuum, but an excellent compliment to Gretzky-Kurri as a skilled bodyguard.

Your second line should have great chemistry, but I'm uncertain as to the skill. Starshinov is a legit 2nd liner in this thing IMO. I actually have more concerns with his wingers. Yakushev is better known to North Americans because of his exploits in 72, but from everything I've read, that was the absolute highlight of his career. Nobody can ever accuse Starshinov and Yakushev of being your stereotypical soft Soviet forwards, though.

Your defense lacks a game breaker, but they are solid 1-6 and very versatile.

Love the forwards on your PK units. Two elite defensive guys on 1. And Gretzky-Kurri on the 2nd PK will make 2nd PP units crap their proverbial pants. I don't like the defensive pairs on your PK units. Zubov was average at best defensively pre-lockout (most of his career), so I would take him off the first PK unit. He might be good enough for the 2nd unit, but he still wouldn't be ideal.

I'm not sold on Harry Sinden as an all-time coach, but one thing he did was figure out ways to get skill players to produce (he's the guy who finally figured out how to use Phil Esposito effectively). And the Gretzky-Kurri combo has shown what they can do when they play for a coach who lets them play their game and gives them lots of minutes.
And a stereotype it was. You should read the Tarasov bio. The Soviets back then were just as rough as the North Americans, if not rougher. However, Yakushev has never been accused of being tough. He was Phil Esposito tough in the slot. But he wasn't going to be the first guy to knock someone over the head.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
Lets compare Krutov to some of the other 1st line left wingers:
Bun Cook, Woody Dumart, Rick Martin, John Tonelli, Gary Roberts, Pete Mahovlich, Gord Roberts, Clark Gillies, and Mats Sundin. He's way better suited to 1st line duty than these guys.

Here's some more 1st line left wingers:
Paul Kariya, Bert Olmstead, Keith Tkachuk, Michel Goulet, Sid Smith, Bill Barber, and Brendan Shanahan. Krutov belongs in **** group, which makes him an average 1st line left winger.



Here's a list of 2nd line left wingers that Tommy Smith is clearly better than:
Mats Naslund, Yvon Lambert, Marc Tardiff, Esa Tikkanen, Petr Bondra, Jiri Holik, Brian Bellows, Dick Duff, Kevin Stevens, Brian Sutter, Smokey Harris, Lynn Patrick, Ray Getliffe, Wendel Clark, and Dean Prentice.

Here's a list of 2nd line left wingers that Tommy Smith is close:
Markus Naslund, Wayne Cashman, Ilya Kovalshuk, Steve Shutt, Brian Propp, and Glenn Anderson.

Maybe Tommy Smith isn't that bad after all?

Here's a list of 2nd line right wingers that Billy Boucher is clearly better than:
Harry Westwick, Anders Hedberg, Ed Litzenberger, Rick Tocchet, Claude Lemieux, Pat Verbeek, Martin St. Louis, Daniel Alfredsson, Ziggy Palffy, and Steve Larmer.


Here's a list of 2nd line left wingers that Billy Boucher is close to:
Joe Mullen, Theo Fleury, Reggie Leach, and Helmut Balderis.

Maybe Billy Boucher isn't that bad either?



It's just too bad there's isn't more info out there. It would be nice to know were he really fits in!



Behind Suchy, there isn't a real offensive threat from the blueline. Our guys, however, are all skilled at moving the puck. Corbeau, Johnson, and Dutton all have multiple top-5s and top-10s in defense scoring.

Johnson has 10 top-5s in scoring for defense. Everyone knows he's not Paul Coffey, but he sure as heck isn't Hal Gill either!
Wow, what a load of hyperbole. Care to back up all these statements? Krutov was by a large margin the third best player on the KLM line, the best line of the '80s. Makarov was an elite playmaker for that line, and Larionov added that great steadying presence and was the defensive conscience for them. Krutov can dig pucks out of the corner and play a tough game, but his relatively low amount of elite goal scoring finishes in the RSL, despite having Makarov on the other side tells me that he just wasn't all that skilled. Makarov himself had about half as many firsts in goal scoring as Krutov had TOTAL top-10s in goal scoring. Krutov certainly benefited greatly from playing with such an elite player. He's one of the worse first line LWs in this draft in my mind.

As for the other guys, I'm not knowledgeable enough about them to make fair assessments, but I'm sure the others will be more than happy to address it.

jarek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 04:00 PM
  #117
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,990
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
Come on, you're way overselling Boucher here. He has four good years in a split-league setup, and in three of these he was a top-10 NHL scorer (which, again, doesn't have all the talent). St. Louis, Alfredsson, Palffy and Litzenberger can all match that offensive resume and played in far deeper leagues. Larmer is massively better defensively and is a decent scorer himself.

Boucher's not all that close to Mullen, Fleury, or Balderis either.
Even if you're right on all those, that still leaves a lot of 2nd line right wingers that Boucher is better than.

Yeah, his career was short, but his peak is much better than most of the guys I listed.

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 04:02 PM
  #118
jarek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
Even if you're right on all those, that still leaves a lot of 2nd line right wingers that Boucher is better than.

Yeah, his career was short, but his peak is much better than most of the guys I listed.
As far as Dick Duff, can Boucher touch his ability to play in the clutch?

jarek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 04:04 PM
  #119
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 40,975
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jareklajkosz View Post
Well then, I guess Roy Worters is useless in an ATD because he'll never stop high shots.

This should be about a guy's greatness in his own era, not his body parts.



And a stereotype it was. You should read the Tarasov bio. The Soviets back then were just as rough as the North Americans, if not rougher. However, Yakushev has never been accused of being tough. He was Phil Esposito tough in the slot. But he wasn't going to be the first guy to knock someone over the head.



Wow, what a load of hyperbole. Care to back up all these statements? Krutov was by a large margin the third best player on the KLM line, the best line of the '80s. Makarov was an elite playmaker for that line, and Larionov added that great steadying presence and was the defensive conscience for them. Krutov can dig pucks out of the corner and play a tough game, but his relatively low amount of elite goal scoring finishes in the RSL, despite having Makarov on the other side tells me that he just wasn't all that skilled. Makarov himself had about half as many firsts in goal scoring as Krutov had TOTAL top-10s in goal scoring. Krutov certainly benefited greatly from playing with such an elite player. He's one of the worse first line LWs in this draft in my mind.

As for the other guys, I'm not knowledgeable enough about them to make fair assessments, but I'm sure the others will be more than happy to address it.
Not sure that I agree that Krutov was the worst member of the KLM line. Careerwise, he's in last by a good margin, because he let himself go to crap (or perhaps had a reason to go to crap) before he hit 30. Maybe that's what you meant.

But when KLM played together, most thought Krutov was at least as good, if not better than Larionov. His Canada Cup scoring record is much better than Larionov's and almost as good as Makarov's, though that is a small sample. His MVP voting record is also much better than Larionov's (though not close to Makarov's).

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 04:05 PM
  #120
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,990
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jareklajkosz View Post
Krutov was by a large margin the third best player on the KLM line, the best line of the '80s. Makarov was an elite playmaker for that line, and Larionov added that great steadying presence and was the defensive conscience for them. Krutov can dig pucks out of the corner and play a tough game, but his relatively low amount of elite goal scoring finishes in the RSL, despite having Makarov on the other side tells me that he just wasn't all that skilled. Makarov himself had about half as many firsts in goal scoring as Krutov had TOTAL top-10s in goal scoring. Krutov certainly benefited greatly from playing with such an elite player. He's one of the worse first line LWs in this draft in my mind.
Larionov and Makarov benefited from Krutov as much as he benefited from them - maybe more. Without his work along the boards, they would have been in big trouble.

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 04:05 PM
  #121
nik jr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Congo-Kinshasa
Posts: 10,551
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
If his era isn't a disadvantage, and he excelled in his era......
cannot ignore how he would adapt to modern conditions.

would short goalies from long ago be as successful when everyone can shoot high from anywhere in the offensive zone?

Quote:
Moose Johnson died in 1963. How is he going to play today?
he would learn the modern game as players do now.


ATD is in the fantasy hockey talk section for a reason.

Quote:
Does that mean Johnson wouldn't have to work a side job to make enough money? If Johnson played in a more recent era, he never would have lost his fingers....
that is an irrelevant "what if?" statement about life outside of hockey.

and we cannot say whether he would have lost his fingers or not. he may have been killed or lost his legs. maybe he would have rather been a TV actor if he lived today.


players' injuries are facts of their careers.

johnson had 1 functioning hand. that would limit his puck skills. imo, probably to a severe degree.

Quote:
Some players can overcome those liabilities.
but i don't think a man with one hand is one of those players.

nik jr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 04:06 PM
  #122
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,990
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jareklajkosz View Post
As far as Dick Duff, can Boucher touch his ability to play in the clutch?
I said Tommy Smith was better than Duff.

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 04:10 PM
  #123
jarek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
Larionov and Makarov benefited from Krutov as much as he benefited from them - maybe more. Without his work along the boards, they would have been in big trouble.
Somehow I think Makarov's incredible stick handling game would have survived just fine without Krutov. He didn't put up the numbers he did because he'd be in big trouble without Krutov.

jarek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 04:10 PM
  #124
nik jr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Congo-Kinshasa
Posts: 10,551
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jareklajkosz View Post
Well then, I guess Roy Worters is useless in an ATD because he'll never stop high shots.

This should be about a guy's greatness in his own era, not his body parts.
body parts stop shots. stats cannot stop shots.


Quote:
Wow, what a load of hyperbole. Care to back up all these statements? Krutov was by a large margin the third best player on the KLM line, the best line of the '80s. Makarov was an elite playmaker for that line, and Larionov added that great steadying presence and was the defensive conscience for them. Krutov can dig pucks out of the corner and play a tough game, but his relatively low amount of elite goal scoring finishes in the RSL, despite having Makarov on the other side tells me that he just wasn't all that skilled. Makarov himself had about half as many firsts in goal scoring as Krutov had TOTAL top-10s in goal scoring. Krutov certainly benefited greatly from playing with such an elite player. He's one of the worse first line LWs in this draft in my mind.

As for the other guys, I'm not knowledgeable enough about them to make fair assessments, but I'm sure the others will be more than happy to address it.
imo, krutov was the 2nd best member of KLM.

but there are big questions about krutov that sturminator raised in ATD 9 or 10.

Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
Dye might be best with a possession-type, slow the game down centre like Forsberg or Thornton (or the Sedins).
agreed

nik jr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-12-2009, 04:11 PM
  #125
jarek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
I said Tommy Smith was better than Duff.
Either way..

jarek 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 06:06 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.