if paul coffey was on my team would had still lost the series
old players are great but we are guessing with them
and when a current great is choosen over oen wit ha longer resumee igice credit where i can I dont guess
All tiem greats drop i my lists of great players because of their small amount of games played
They only get incluided when you consider there greatness for there era
The game wasn't even very evolved in soem cases
Many would not last in atd format
but that's just my sober opinion
and no i do not drink
But why does it matter that they played fewer games? It isn't their fault that the schedules were short. They did great things with the short amount of time they had to do them. The rest is all relative.
We assume that they can adjust to an 82 game schedule, or else even a guy like Cyclone Taylor is junk. Have you seen the kind of equipment they used to wear? I could go outside during winter with my clothes, a toque, a winter jacket and track pants, and I'd be more protected from a puck hitting me than they were. We assume that they can adjust to modern equipment, modern rules, modern everything. Where does this put a guy like Eddie Shore, who wouldn't survive 2 games in the modern game without adjusting for relativity. Those guys used to crack each other over the head with their sticks, and this was considered tough hockey back then that, to my knowledge, didn't even lead to fines. Marty McSorley, for example, was banned from the league for hitting Donald Brasher in the head with his stick. This was a REGULAR OCCURRANCE in the PCHA/NHA days. How would a guy like Jack Walker survive without adjusting for relativity, or Frank Nighbor? Both of them used hook checks as their defensive asset. It was legal back then, but these days if you even think about hooking a guy, you get penalized for it. Almost all of this is under the assumption that everyone from earlier eras can adjust, or else I'd be drafting Wade Belak and Aki Berg before drafting Moose Johnson or Art Ross.
Jeez, LL, there is no need to get so vengeful. I have no doubt that you see this as something persona, but nothing could be further from the truth. I call it as I see it. Always have. I'll never win Mr. Congeniality of the ATD but I'm not biased.
If you haven't noticed, I try to comment on every single series. I can't help but reply to the most outlandish comments and, well, in round 1 you just about had the market cornered on outlandish comments.
You're out in round 1 again. You can blame me if you like. I'm sure you think I was "campaigning" against you with the "garbage that I call my thoughts" but if you want to know why you're out yet again after another 7th-place finish, look in the mirror. Every draft you do the exact same thing - draft the same players (mostly leafs, sentimental picks, and recent players), present no new information to value them better, and use weak arguments like career totals and "they can score whenever they want". Everyone here is learning but I'm not sure you are.
It's always someone else's fault when you lose. It's usually the voters who don't know a good team when they see one, or the "old boys club" keeping you down (speaking of which, if there was an old boys club wouldn't you be a member?) but if I have to be your goat this time, LL, so be it.