HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Fantasy Hockey Talk > All Time Draft
All Time Draft Fantasy league where players of the past and present meet.

ATD 12 Rene Lecavalier Semi-Final: 1 Detroit Falcons vs 7 Hamilton Bettmans

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-30-2009, 03:34 AM
  #26
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EagleBelfour View Post
I have the best PK
Hooley Smith and Tommy Phillips should be considered, by far, the best penalty-killing duo in the entire draft. Both are elite defensive players, and both are very dangerous on counter-attacks.

Blair Russel is just below the level of those two, and he will be paired with different guys depending on game situation. Percy Galbraith is a purely defensive penalty-killer, but is extremely strong in that area. Art Chapman will be a solid penalty-killer, but his counter-attack abilities will put the powerplay on their heels.

With Valery Vasileiv and Moose Johnson taking the bulk of the penalty-killing time, we have the strongest duo on penalty-killing defensemen. Red Dutton will be paired with any of the other 3 guys depending on the situation. If we need to counter-attack, Suchy, who is still a solid defensive presence, will be used to make slick passes to the breaking forwards.

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2009, 03:38 AM
  #27
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EagleBelfour View Post
You had me 6th? How come, what do you see as weaknesses on my team that drop my team into your standing? You know, I have absolutely no problem when someone say something against my team or players, but if you do I would like that you back it up, so I can at least get a chance to respond (maybe change your mind, you never know! ). It's the second or third time you say my team isn't good, but still gave no argument whatsoever.
The biggest weakness I see in your team is the 1st line. It did not affect my vote for you, but Brooks, to me, is not a very good coach. (those weaknesses pushed you all the way to 2nd in my rankings )

Your 2nd, 3rd, and 4th lines are very strong. Your defense is very strong. Your goaltending is very strong too.

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2009, 03:42 AM
  #28
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,517
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EagleBelfour View Post
You had me 6th? How come, what do you see as weaknesses on my team that drop my team into your standing? You know, I have absolutely no problem when someone say something against my team or players, but if you do I would like that you back it up, so I can at least get a chance to respond (maybe change your mind, you never know! ). It's the second or third time you say my team isn't good, but still gave no argument whatsoever.
Weakness? It's more like I see very little to be a real strength aside from Sawchuk. I have to point out that your team is IMO actually better than I ranked it if we go by sheer team quality, what caused me to rank it about 1-2 places lower was that I perceive it as attempt to not build the best team possible, but rather the least attackable team possible. There, I said it. I don't expect anyone to agree (or to consider it a negative), but oh well.

But, I don't really believe your team to be bad. Average, more like it. Compared to the Bettmans, it's still far better.

MadArcand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2009, 03:43 AM
  #29
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 38,118
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
Of 32 centers, he`s somewhere in the middle. I`d say he`s between 16th and 20th, and that makes him an average 1st liner.
I kind of agree with this. I think Schmidt is on the Sakic/Yzerman/Apps level as centers go. I see him as very slightly behind offensively, but a bit ahead defensively.

Edit: Looking at my list, that would make him more 10-15 than 16-20. I guess in a 32 team draft, that is a bit above average.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
Hooley Smith and Tommy Phillips should be considered, by far, the best penalty-killing duo in the entire draft. Both are elite defensive players, and both are very dangerous on counter-attacks.
Honestly, when you say things like this, it is a slap in the face of the other GMs. "By far" the best "in the entire draft."


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 11-30-2009 at 03:48 AM.
TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2009, 03:48 AM
  #30
EagleBelfour
Registered User
 
EagleBelfour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,232
vCash: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
Of 32 centers, he`s somewhere in the middle. I`d say he`s between 16th and 20th, and that makes him an average 1st liner.
No he's not. Come on, Tell me why you think Milt Schmidt is an average first liner. I hate when people make bold statement, but dosn't say as to why he thinks that way. We never know, maybe you're right? But if you mkae statement like that, you've got to back it up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
Chemistry is fine, but he`s still a very weak 1st line RW.
Agree, Bobby Bauer is a weak 1st line RW

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
He can be an average 1st line player if he`s providing intangibles. This line doesn`t need his intangibles.

His offense just isn`t good enough for 1st line duty. The fact that he had a hard shot is basically meaningless because the only thing that matters is how often he put the puck in the net.... and it`s not often enough for 1st line duty.

He`s got a 2nd and 9th in scoring and 2nd, 8th, 8th in goals. So he`s a 1st liner, but Billy Boucher, who has 3rd, 3rd, 7th in points, isn`t a 2nd liner...
This line need to play against the most creative and offensive talented center of All-Time, they need all the intangible they can get.

He didn't put more pucks in then net, because he was asked to counter the opposition top players. As a LW, he had to face Maurice Richard and Gordie Howe among others. I'm not saying he'll turn into a 50-goals scorer in the ATD, I'm only telling that Dumart as the ability to score goals.

And come on, Dumart is a far more complete player than Billy Boucher. They might be equally good to put goal in nets, but Dumart was just as strong as Boucher, but was winning Lady Bing for the way he played the games rather than putting 2.00 penalty per game ratio. And Dumart was a better playmaker, skater, leader, defensive conscience, playoff performer ... I could go on. There's absolutely no comparision to make between Billy Boucher and Woody Dumart.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
Russel`s offense pretty much blows Rousseau out of the water.

Rousseau`s point finishes = 2nd and 6th
Russel`s point finishes = 2nd, 3rd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th

You can make all the adjustments for era you want. It doesn`t make up the gap - not even close.

Defensively, both players seem pretty similar. They use their intelligence, speed, and skill to check rather than brawn. Legends of Hockey and Ultimate Hockey both praise Russel for his excellent defensive play - Ultimate Hockey called him the `Best Shadow`of his era and awarded him 2 retro selkes.
Competition Level. Taking points total of leagues in the late 1890's and start of the 1900's and show them as hard fact as to Russell offensive abilities is extremely misleading. Russell 23 goals in 10 games in 1906-07 to finish 3rd in scoring in the ECAHA is impressive, but that's pretty much it. Blair Russell is far less of an offensive threat in the ATD than Bobby Rousseau.

Defensively, I agree that both are pretty much alike. Russell two Retro Selke are impressive, but again competition level was somewhat bleak at the turn of the century. I can take into consideration his 3 years in the ECAHA, but everything before is just smoke. The Canadian Amateur Hockey League was not close of a league reuniting the best player of the World.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
I`d take 1st, 1st, 2nd, 5th in assists over Goyette`s finishes.

Also, he`s passing to Phillips and Russel, who are both superior offensively than your wingers.... so that helps
The all-around offensive abilities of Goyette are from me superior to Art Chapman, but it's true that the stats are impressive and it's not a stretch to think of Chapman as a better playmaker than Goyette. I disagree, but point taken.

And I alreadt adresses that I firmly believe that my third line do have more offensive potentials than yours.

EagleBelfour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2009, 04:02 AM
  #31
EagleBelfour
Registered User
 
EagleBelfour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,232
vCash: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
Weakness? It's more like I see very little to be a real strength aside from Sawchuk. I have to point out that your team is IMO actually better than I ranked it if we go by sheer team quality, what caused me to rank it about 1-2 places lower was that I perceive it as attempt to not build the best team possible, but rather the least attackable team possible. There, I said it. I don't expect anyone to agree (or to consider it a negative), but oh well.

But, I don't really believe your team to be bad. Average, more like it. Compared to the Bettmans, it's still far better.
It's alright, everyone is entitle to their opinions. I'll agree that I have far from an exciting team. I'm not here to win 5-4 contest, I'm here to win 2-1 games. I think my strength lies in the the depth and versatility of my team. I do have a ''Sawchuk'' in goals, but it's true I don't have a Lemieux or Bourque. However, as you said, my team do not have glaring weaknesses, and in a 32-teams league that's what I wanted to do.

Sometime it's the quietest teams that do the most damage by the end of the year!

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
I kind of agree with this. I think Schmidt is on the Sakic/Yzerman/Apps level as centers go. I see him as very slightly behind offensively, but a bit ahead defensively.

Edit: Looking at my list, that would make him more 10-15 than 16-20. I guess in a 32 team draft, that is a bit above average.
My list
1)Wayne Gretzky
2)Mario Lemieux
3)Jean Béliveau
4)Howie Morenz
5)Stan Mikita
6)Bobby Clarke
7)Edouard Lalonde
8A)Milt Schmidt
8B)Bryan Trottier
10) Syl Apps Sr.

I flip-flop Trottier and Schmidt all the time, VERY similar players. I'm sure some of you would have Phil Esposito or Mark Messier over Schmidt, and it's allright. Sakic, Yzerman, Bentley are a step below.

(BTW, I don't want to start discussion on Schmidt listing, it's was just to probve the point that if you have Schmidt in the 16-20 ranges, it's becasue you have guys like Forsberg, Richard or Dionne over him, which is ludicrous)

EagleBelfour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2009, 04:04 AM
  #32
EagleBelfour
Registered User
 
EagleBelfour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,232
vCash: 873
I'm off to sleep, I'll answer the new posts sometime this afternoon.

EagleBelfour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2009, 04:30 AM
  #33
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EagleBelfour View Post
No he's not. Come on, Tell me why you think Milt Schmidt is an average first liner. I hate when people make bold statement, but dosn't say as to why he thinks that way. We never know, maybe you're right? But if you mkae statement like that, you've got to back it up.
How about the fact that Schmidt only has 5 top-10s in scoring, and only 3 top-5s. That's really weak for a first line player. His intangibles bring him above some of his similarly accomplished peers, but how far does toughness and defensive play really raise him?

If you want to use your 1st line as a checking line, he's good for that, but if you want a 1st line to score, there's a lot of better options. Overall, he's average.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EagleBelfour View Post
This line need to play against the most creative and offensive talented center of All-Time, they need all the intangible they can get.

He didn't put more pucks in then net, because he was asked to counter the opposition top players. As a LW, he had to face Maurice Richard and Gordie Howe among others. I'm not saying he'll turn into a 50-goals scorer in the ATD, I'm only telling that Dumart as the ability to score goals.

And come on, Dumart is a far more complete player than Billy Boucher. They might be equally good to put goal in nets, but Dumart was just as strong as Boucher, but was winning Lady Bing for the way he played the games rather than putting 2.00 penalty per game ratio. And Dumart was a better playmaker, skater, leader, defensive conscience, playoff performer ... I could go on. There's absolutely no comparision to make between Billy Boucher and Woody Dumart.
The fact remains that Dumart did not score very much. You can make all the excuses you want, but he put up very mediocre scoring numbers.

Woody Dumart is a better player than Billy Boucher. Is Dumart a better 1st liner than Boucher is a 2nd liner?

You say Dumart was a better playmaker, skater, leader, defensive conscience, and play-off performer.... but how many of those statements are actually true?

Playmaking:
Boucher - 3rd and 3rd in assists
Dumert - 6th and 9th in assists

Skater:
Not once in your bio does it say that Dumart was anything more than an average skater. Boucher, certainly, was no worse than average - and in fact, he was a "strong skater" - so where do you get Dumart being a better skater?

Leader:
I'll give you that, but Boucher did protect and mentor Howie Morenz.

Defensive Consience:
By a very wide margine - I'll give you that too.

Play-offs:
Dumart - 5th in points
Boucher - 3rd, 3rd, 4th in points (also 1st in Stanley Cup Challenge)

Dumart - 5th and 6th in goals
Boucher - 2nd, 2nd, 3rd in goals (also 1st in Stanley Cup Challenge)

Again.... not so much....



Quote:
Originally Posted by EagleBelfour View Post
Competition Level. Taking points total of leagues in the late 1890's and start of the 1900's and show them as hard fact as to Russell offensive abilities is extremely misleading. Russell 23 goals in 10 games in 1906-07 to finish 3rd in scoring in the ECAHA is impressive, but that's pretty much it. Blair Russell is far less of an offensive threat in the ATD than Bobby Rousseau.
Why is it misleading to post his offensive production from certain seasons? I even gave the year beside the finish to make sure it wasn't misleading.....

Based on what I learned from 70s, once the Stanley Cup started being awarded, the leagues that contolled it had the vast majority of the top players.

Blair Russel was one of the elite scorers in his league. Bobby Rousseau never was.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EagleBelfour View Post
The all-around offensive abilities of Goyette are from me superior to Art Chapman, but it's true that the stats are impressive and it's not a stretch to think of Chapman as a better playmaker than Goyette. I disagree, but point taken.
Fair enough.

Art Chapman = better playmaker
Phil Goyette = better scorer

Overall offense..... I'd say it's a slight edge to Goyette.

With Phillips on the wing, we wanted the best playmaker. I think he fits nicely there.

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2009, 04:41 AM
  #34
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EagleBelfour View Post
My list
1)Wayne Gretzky
2)Mario Lemieux
3)Jean Béliveau
4)Howie Morenz
5)Stan Mikita
6)Bobby Clarke
7)Edouard Lalonde
8A)Milt Schmidt
8B)Bryan Trottier
10) Syl Apps Sr.

I flip-flop Trottier and Schmidt all the time, VERY similar players. I'm sure some of you would have Phil Esposito or Mark Messier over Schmidt, and it's allright. Sakic, Yzerman, Bentley are a step below.

(BTW, I don't want to start discussion on Schmidt listing, it's was just to probve the point that if you have Schmidt in the 16-20 ranges, it's becasue you have guys like Forsberg, Richard or Dionne over him, which is ludicrous)
I'm pretty sure Trottier, Esposito, Messier, Sakic, and Cyclone Taylor are far superior to Schmidt. I'd also have Frank Boucher, Syl Apps, Joe Malone, Frank Nighbor, Elmer Lach, Henri Richard, and Steve Yzerman over him.

For me, he's in a group with Bentley, Bill Cowley, and Marcel Dionne.

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2009, 11:49 AM
  #35
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pappyline View Post
Not imptrssed with Suchy & Johnson
Moose Johnson
You're not impressed by a 10-time All-Star?

What if he beat out Eddie Gerard, George Boucher, Harry Cameron, Lester Patrick, Hod Stuart, and Harvey Pulford to be selected to The Trail of the Stanley Cup, Vol 1's 1893-1926 All Star Team?

What if he led his team in play-off scoring in 1908?

Jan Suchy
You're not impressed with a guy who's ability to control the game is compared to Bobby Orr and Doug Harvey? Sure it wasn't the NHL, but by the late 1960s, both the Czechs and Soviets were starting to build some pretty strong leagues.

What if he was also solid defensively and a great shot-blocker?

What if this guy led his Czech team past the Soviets (twice) in 1969? He also led them to a victory over the Soviets in 1968.

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2009, 01:10 PM
  #36
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,642
vCash: 500
Great series so far, gentlemen. As much as I liked Hamilton, I really liked Nanaimo and thought they should move on. Kudos to Dreakmur. Just a couple things I felt the need to respond to:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
Hooley Smith and Tommy Phillips should be considered, by far, the best penalty-killing duo in the entire draft.
Hyperbole much? Jeez, any team can put together two defensively-minded players like this. It's not special. Nighbor/Gainey or something like that, would be special.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EagleBelfour View Post
No he's not. Come on, Tell me why you think Milt Schmidt is an average first liner. I hate when people make bold statement, but dosn't say as to why he thinks that way. We never know, maybe you're right? But if you mkae statement like that, you've got to back it up.
Nothing you've said about Milt Schmidt is untrue. He's got all the intangibles you could ask for. His "total package" of skills and accomplishments, make him approximately the 14th-15th best center of all-time. So as far as first line centers go, I have to agree that he is about average.

Quote:
Competition Level. Taking points total of leagues in the late 1890's and start of the 1900's and show them as hard fact as to Russell offensive abilities is extremely misleading. Russell 23 goals in 10 games in 1906-07 to finish 3rd in scoring in the ECAHA is impressive, but that's pretty much it. Blair Russell is far less of an offensive threat in the ATD than Bobby Rousseau.
I disagree here too. There is nothing to suggest that the CAHL was inferior to the ECAHA. It was just the predecessor to the ECAHA. I would say, based on the players in those leagues, that they both had a higher percentage of the top players in them than either the NHA or PCHA did. When the CAHL and ECAHA were around, the next-best leagues were the FAHL and OPHL and they were WHA-caliber, relatively speaking, whereas the PCHA and NHA were close to equal.


Last edited by seventieslord: 11-30-2009 at 01:24 PM.
seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2009, 01:21 PM
  #37
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,642
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
Playmaking:
Boucher - 3rd and 3rd in assists
Dumert - 6th and 9th in assists
pre-merger, though. Overall, that is about equal.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
I'm pretty sure Trottier, Esposito, Messier, Sakic, and Cyclone Taylor are far superior to Schmidt. I'd also have Frank Boucher, Syl Apps, Joe Malone, Frank Nighbor, Elmer Lach, Henri Richard, and Steve Yzerman over him.

For me, he's in a group with Bentley, Bill Cowley, and Marcel Dionne.
You're taking it a bit too far.

Here are the guys who should absolutely be ahead: Gretzky, Lemieux, Beliveau, Morenz, Mikita, Lalonde, Taylor, Clarke, Trottier, Esposito. (10)

Here are the guys who are most likely ahead: Messier, Yzerman, Sakic, Apps. (4)

Here are the guys that should be fairly close behind Schmidt: Nighbor, Malone, Dionne, Boucher, Richard (5)

I don't see Schmidt lower than 15th. I don't see him higher than 11th. I can see him ahead of 1-2 of the guys in that middle crowd. 13th-15th is fair. And it's fair to say he is an average first liner.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
Moose Johnson

What if he led his team in play-off scoring in 1908?
That's fine, but he was a LW at that time.

(Ernie Russell also scored 11 goals but only needed 3 games to do it, not 5 )

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2009, 01:34 PM
  #38
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Hyperbole much? Jeez, any team can put together two defensively-minded players like this. It's not special. Nighbor/Gainey or something like that, would be special.
Many teams can put a pair to match them defensively, I agree. How many teams can put out a pair that matches them defensively and offensively?


Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
pre-merger, though. Overall, that is about equal.
Which means Dumart isn't better....

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
You're taking it a bit too far.

Here are the guys who should absolutely be ahead: Gretzky, Lemieux, Beliveau, Morenz, Mikita, Lalonde, Taylor, Clarke, Trottier, Esposito. (10)

Here are the guys who are most likely ahead: Messier, Yzerman, Sakic, Apps. (4)

Here are the guys that should be fairly close behind Schmidt: Nighbor, Malone, Dionne, Boucher, Richard (5).
Schmidt has great intangibles, but his offensive production isn't great. 1st, 4th, 4th, 10th, 10th in points is very weak.

Frank Nighbor is better offensively and defensively. Does the fact that Schmidt can beat him up really make him better?

Frank Boucher and Elmer Lach both have offensive resumes that are quite a bit stronger than Schmidts. Both guys have some of the same intangibles as Schmidt.

Henri Richard has pretty much all the intangibles that Schmidt has... and then he's better offensively.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
That's fine, but he was a LW at that time.
He still did it....

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2009, 01:39 PM
  #39
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,512
vCash: 500
Schmidt lost three years right in the middle of his prime to serve his country. It's not surprising that his resume took a hit.

Also, it seems absolutely incredible that Dreakmur calls both Vladimir Krutov and Milt Schmidt average first liners. While there may be some possible justification for that, it's completely misleading as a statement about their abilities as hockey players, in both cases.

overpass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2009, 01:41 PM
  #40
jarek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,550
vCash: 500
If Johnson led his team in playoff scoring as a LW and he is being used as a defenseman, then I don't count that much at all.

jarek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2009, 01:43 PM
  #41
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
Schmidt lost three years right in the middle of his prime to serve his country. It's not surprising that his resume took a hit.
Lots of players took that same hit. It sucks, but it doesn't change anything.

Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
Also, it seems absolutely incredible that Dreakmur calls both Vladimir Krutov and Milt Schmidt average first liners. While there may be some possible justification for that, it's completely misleading as a statement about their abilities as hockey players, in both cases.
Center is extremely deep. Left wing is shallow.

Schmidt is definately the better all-around player, but Krutov is probably better offensively than Schmidt.

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2009, 01:44 PM
  #42
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jareklajkosz View Post
If Johnson led his team in playoff scoring as a LW and he is being used as a defenseman, then I don't count that much at all.
It's just another accomplishment that proves how good he was.

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2009, 01:51 PM
  #43
jarek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
It's just another accomplishment that proves how good he was.
Fair enough. However, like I said, he's being used as a defenseman and his best scoring accomplishment came as a LW. You can't just say his offensive game at LW immediately translates to how well he'd play offensively on defense, especially if he never matched that on defense.

jarek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2009, 01:53 PM
  #44
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,512
vCash: 500
I came across this quote on Vasiliev while researching Kharlamov and thought I'd share it.

From the Globe and Mail preview for the Challenge Cup on February 3, 1979, by Donald Ramsay. This is a scouting report provided by Derek Holmes, technical director of Hockey Canada, who prepared a scouting report on the Soviet teams for Scotty Bowman and had watched most of the Soviet players 40 to 50 times.

"Valeri Vasiliev - Had an outstanding start with the Soviet nationals, but trailed off in recent years. Still a fine, mobile defenceman but one who has never played consistently up to his potential."

overpass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2009, 01:59 PM
  #45
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
I came across this quote on Vasiliev while researching Kharlamov and thought I'd share it.

From the Globe and Mail preview for the Challenge Cup on February 3, 1979, by Donald Ramsay. This is a scouting report provided by Derek Holmes, technical director of Hockey Canada, who prepared a scouting report on the Soviet teams for Scotty Bowman and had watched most of the Soviet players 40 to 50 times.

"Valeri Vasiliev - Had an outstanding start with the Soviet nationals, but trailed off in recent years. Still a fine, mobile defenceman but one who has never played consistently up to his potential."
February 3, 1979..... was that before or after Vasiliev was named "Best Defenseman" of the 1979 World Championship??

Good scouting report Is that the same guy that said Tretiak wouldn't be a problem?

Even if the report is good, it doesn't change anything. The facts remain the same.


Last edited by Dreakmur: 11-30-2009 at 02:04 PM.
Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2009, 01:59 PM
  #46
jarek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
I came across this quote on Vasiliev while researching Kharlamov and thought I'd share it.

From the Globe and Mail preview for the Challenge Cup on February 3, 1979, by Donald Ramsay. This is a scouting report provided by Derek Holmes, technical director of Hockey Canada, who prepared a scouting report on the Soviet teams for Scotty Bowman and had watched most of the Soviet players 40 to 50 times.

"Valeri Vasiliev - Had an outstanding start with the Soviet nationals, but trailed off in recent years. Still a fine, mobile defenceman but one who has never played consistently up to his potential."
Wow. I can't say that helps the Bettmans much.

jarek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2009, 02:02 PM
  #47
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jareklajkosz View Post
Fair enough. However, like I said, he's being used as a defenseman and his best scoring accomplishment came as a LW. You can't just say his offensive game at LW immediately translates to how well he'd play offensively on defense, especially if he never matched that on defense.
It shows he was able to bring his game up when it matters most. He can do that from defense, can't he?

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2009, 02:04 PM
  #48
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jareklajkosz View Post
Wow. I can't say that helps the Bettmans much.
Why would it hurt? It doesn't change anything that Vasiliev accomplished.

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2009, 02:16 PM
  #49
jarek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
It shows he was able to bring his game up when it matters most. He can do that from defense, can't he?
But I already knew that.

jarek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2009, 02:22 PM
  #50
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jareklajkosz View Post
But I already knew that.
Some people appreciate Moose Johnson, but most don't. I'm glad you do, but I still have to convince everyone else

Dreakmur 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 11:23 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.