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.

Red Fisher Conference Final: (1) Tidewater Sharks vs. (2) New Jersey Swamp Devils

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-08-2009, 03:40 PM
  #26
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
I'm only counting Russian players who played their primes in the Soviet league. Fedorov, Mogilny, Bure, etc. played enough in NA that we can compare them to NA players pretty easily.

Kharlamov, Firsov, Maltsev, and Mikhailov are easily the top-4.... but my order changes all the time.

I have Yakushev in 5th.

Maltsev, Patrov, Krutov, Petrov, and Larionov are the rest of the top-10... but I can't figure out the order.
So Makarov ain't even top 10? Or is the first Maltsev Makarov?

MadArcand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-08-2009, 04:19 PM
  #27
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
So Makarov ain't even top 10? Or is the first Maltsev Makarov?
A-ha! Good catch.

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 01:56 AM
  #28
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,996
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
Soviet club teams also had good results against NHL teams in the late 70s and early 80s.
The CSKA team was basically their national team, and it had a very significant number of the top Soviet players. It was basically the best of the best, and them playing against the Philidelphia Flyers is hardly a fair representation from each league.

The Soviet advantage was that the majority of their top players played together on a club team.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Yes, and it's called a Tarasov. Russia surpassed the levels of other nations that were playing hockey well before them, mostly thanks to him. Their advantage was that they were better, and he was a large part of that, but you can't hold that against the players, or against Russian hockey in general, when the discussion is regarding what level Russian hockey was at.
Tarasov played a role, but the biggest factor in Soviet international success was their "military" style club team. With all the top players playing together, under the same system, they were much better prepared for international competitions, and as a result, their success in said events are unpreportionate to the league's strength.

Doesn't the Czechs' emergence as international powerhouses coincide with their adoption of a similar military system?

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 01:58 AM
  #29
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,996
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
So Makarov ain't even top 10? Or is the first Maltsev Makarov?
Yeah. First one is Makarov.

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 01:59 AM
  #30
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
The CSKA team was basically their national team, and it had a very significant number of the top Soviet players. It was basically the best of the best, and them playing against the Philidelphia Flyers is hardly a fair representation from each league.

The Soviet advantage was that the majority of their top players played together on a club team.



Tarasov played a role, but the biggest factor in Soviet international success was their "military" style club team. With all the top players playing together, under the same system, they were much better prepared for international competitions, and as a result, their success in said events are unpreportionate to the league's strength.

Doesn't the Czechs' emergence as international powerhouses coincide with their adoption of a similar military system?
I'm not sure what the countries other than Russia did. But I would guess it was a similar system. A quick check of the sihr database for some swedes and czechs would help tell the story.

the Russian players didn't play together ALL season, though. there were some greats who spent their careers on lesser teams like perrennial second fiddle Soviet Wings but were still national team staples.

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 02:16 AM
  #31
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,625
vCash: 500
I wouldn't even compare the system that was here with the USSR one, let alone call it military.

MadArcand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 02:21 AM
  #32
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 41,073
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
I'm only counting Russian players who played their primes in the Soviet league. Fedorov, Mogilny, Bure, etc. played enough in NA that we can compare them to NA players pretty easily.

Kharlamov, Firsov, Maltsev, and Mikhailov are easily the top-4.... but my order changes all the time.

I have Yakushev in 5th.

Maltsev, Patrov, Krutov, Petrov, and Larionov are the rest of the top-10... but I can't figure out the order.
I honestly can't see any justification for Yakushev over Maltsev. Sure, he was great in the Summit Series, but that's just one tournament. Maltsev has a far better record in the Soviet League, and a better record in other international Tournaments.

Compare their resumes in this thread:
http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=565254

Boldface added to what I think are the major differences.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sturminator
Aleksandr Maltsev:

Born April 20th, 1949 in Kirovo-Chepetsk, USSR.
Club team: Dynamo



Soviet League top-5 scoring finishes:

1st (70-71), 2nd (73-74), 3rd (75-76), 3rd (76-77)


Soviet League MVP voting finishes:

1st (71-72), 2nd (69-70), 2nd (80-81), 3rd (70-71), 4th (73-74), 4th (75-76), 4th (77-78), 4th (79-80), 6th (76-77), 8th (72-73), 8th (74-75)


*note* - beyond Mikhailov's win, no Soviet League MVP voting data is available for the 78-79 season. Maltsev was injured this season, and certainly didn't factor into the voting.

*note* - Maltsev tied Kharlamov at 130 in total MVP voting points in the 71-72 season, but got two more 1st place votes, and was thus the winner. Their respective vote totals were: Kharlamov [25-25-5] / Maltsev [27-22-5].

Soviet League all-star:

(69-70) - (70-71) - (71-72) - (73-74) - (77-78) - (79-80) - (80-81)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

IIHF Best Forward:

1970 - 1972 - 1981


IIHF all-star:

1970 - 1971 - 1972 - 1978 - 1981

World Championships top-5 scoring:

1st (1970), 1st (1972), 3rd (1971), 3rd (1978), 3rd (1981)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Olympics top-5 scoring:

1st (1976), 5th (1972)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Other:

Canada Cup 1976: allstar

All-time Soviet international goal leader: 213
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sturminator View Post
Aleksandr Yakushev:

Born January 2nd, 1947 in Moscow, USSR.
Club team: Spartak

Soviet League top-5 scoring finishes:

1st (68-69), 2nd (75-76), 3rd (73-74), 4th (66-67), 5th (69-70)


Soviet League MVP voting finishes:

3rd (74-75), 4th (71-72), 5th (75-76), 6th (73-74), 9th (79-80)


*note* - beyond Mikhailov's win, no Soviet League MVP voting data is available for the 78-79 season. Yakushev may have factored into the MVP voting for that season, but I don't have the raw data at this point.

Soviet League all-star:

(75-76)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

IIHF Best Forward:

1975


IIHF all-star:

1974 - 1975

World Championships top-5 scoring:

3rd (1972), 3rd (1974), 4th (1975), 5th (1973)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Olympics top-5 scoring:

n/a

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Other:

1972 Summit Series: 2nd points (1st on Soviet team)


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 12-09-2009 at 02:41 AM.
TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 02:37 AM
  #33
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 41,073
vCash: 500
If we look at MVP shares (a concept originally created by Hockey Outsider for Hart Voting, but one Triffy later applied to the Soviet MVP voting), we see that Maltsev's MVP record is a tiny bit below Mikhailov. Yakushev doesn't even place. "The idea is to compare player's MVP voting points to the total amount of points which were given that year (for the players in the top 5)." (Explained in more detail in the link).


This are the Soviet players with the most MVP shares:

Tretiak 3.13
Makarov 2.56
Fetisov 2.01
Kharlamov 1.87
Mikhailov 1.66
Maltsev 1.63
Krutov 1.48
Firsov 1.12*
Petrov 0.78
Starshinov 0.72*
Larionov 0.45

*MVP award didn't exist for the majority of his career.

http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=672152

Now, it isn't fair to compare the players of the 70s to Makarov, Fetisov, and Tretiak, who dominated voting in the 80s. But it is fair to compare them to each other, and it's definitely noteworthy that Maltsev is so close to Mikhailov.


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 12-09-2009 at 02:46 AM.
TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 02:44 AM
  #34
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,996
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
I'm not sure what the countries other than Russia did. But I would guess it was a similar system. A quick check of the sihr database for some swedes and czechs would help tell the story.

the Russian players didn't play together ALL season, though. there were some greats who spent their careers on lesser teams like perrennial second fiddle Soviet Wings but were still national team staples.
They didin't ALL play together, but a very large number of them played for the CSKA team, and most of the key players. The number of players increased through the 70s, and by the 80s, nearly every top player was on CSKA.

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 02:48 AM
  #35
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,996
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
If we look at MVP shares (a concept originally created by Hockey Outsider for Hart Voting, but one Triffy later applied to the Soviet MVP voting), we see that Maltsev's MVP record is a tiny bit below Mikhailov. Yakushev doesn't even place. "The idea is to compare player's MVP voting points to the total amount of points which were given that year (for the players in the top 5)." (Explained in more detail in the link).


This are the Soviet players with the most MVP shares:

Tretiak 3.13
Makarov 2.56
Fetisov 2.01
Kharlamov 1.87
Mikhailov 1.66
Maltsev 1.63
Krutov 1.48
Firsov 1.12*
Petrov 0.78
Starshinov 0.72*
Larionov 0.45

*MVP award didn't exist for the majority of his career.

http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=672152

Now, it isn't fair to compare the players of the 70s to Makarov, Fetisov, and Tretiak, who dominated voting in the 80s. But it is fair to compare them to each other, and it's definitely noteworthy that Maltsev is so close to Mikhailov.
Here’s a comparison of Russian scorers when they played against Canada. These are the 10 who scored the most goals against Canada.

Boris Mikhailov
30 goals in 46 games
0.65 goals per game

Alexander Yakushev
28 goals in 37 games
0.76 goals per game


Vyacheslav Starshinov
27 goals in 43 games
0.63 goals per game

Sergey Makarov
27 goals in 54 games
0.50 goals per game

Anatoly Firsov
26 goals in 35 games
0.74 goals per game

Valery Kharlamov
25 goals in 46 games
0.54 goals per game

Vladimir Petrov
25 goals in 48 games
0.53 goals per game

Vladimir Krutov
24 goals in 40 games
0.60 goals per game

Alexander Maltsev
20 goals in 48 games
0.42 goals per game


Igor Larionov
16 goals in 34 games
0.47 goals per game

Here are their goals per game rankings:
Alexander Yakushev – 0.76
Anatoly Firsov – 0.75
Boris Mikhailov – 0.65
Vyacheslav Starshinov – 0.63
Vladimir Krutov – 0.60
Valery Kharlamov – 0.54
Vladimir Petrov – 0.53
Sergey Makarov – 0.50
Igor Larionov – 0.47
Aleksander Maltsev – 0.42

Dreakmur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 02:50 AM
  #36
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 41,073
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
Here’s a comparison of Russian scorers when they played against Canada. These are the 10 who scored the most goals against Canada.

Boris Mikhailov
30 goals in 46 games
0.65 goals per game

Alexander Yakushev
28 goals in 37 games
0.76 goals per game


Vyacheslav Starshinov
27 goals in 43 games
0.63 goals per game

Sergey Makarov
27 goals in 54 games
0.50 goals per game

Anatoly Firsov
26 goals in 35 games
0.74 goals per game

Valery Kharlamov
25 goals in 46 games
0.54 goals per game

Vladimir Petrov
25 goals in 48 games
0.53 goals per game

Vladimir Krutov
24 goals in 40 games
0.60 goals per game

Alexander Maltsev
20 goals in 48 games
0.42 goals per game


Igor Larionov
16 goals in 34 games
0.47 goals per game

Here are their goals per game rankings:
Alexander Yakushev – 0.76
Anatoly Firsov – 0.75
Boris Mikhailov – 0.65
Vyacheslav Starshinov – 0.63
Vladimir Krutov – 0.60
Valery Kharlamov – 0.54
Vladimir Petrov – 0.53
Sergey Makarov – 0.50
Igor Larionov – 0.47
Aleksander Maltsev – 0.42
I've seen that thread, and all it tells me is that Yakushev, who was primarily a goal scorer and who for whatever reason had Canada's number, scored more goals against Canada than Maltsev, who was primarily a playmaker.

I wish there were a way to include assist totals. That would be more useful in determining who played well against Canada, at least.

Maltsev was the only Soviet All-Star in the 76 Canada Cup for what that's worth.

Edit: To me, the stat is the international equivalent of showing who scored the most playoff goals against the Montreal Canadiens dynasty of the 50s (or 70s, or choose your dynasty that was the NHL's best team by a good margin for a number of years). It shows something, but it's a very minor and selective data point in showing who was a better player overall.


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 12-09-2009 at 02:57 AM.
TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 05:12 AM
  #37
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,618
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
The CSKA team was basically their national team, and it had a very significant number of the top Soviet players. It was basically the best of the best, and them playing against the Philidelphia Flyers is hardly a fair representation from each league.

The Soviet advantage was that the majority of their top players played together on a club team.
I realize that, but CSKA wasn't the only team that had success against NHL teams. To take one example, Dynamo Moscow, Spartak Moscow, and the Soviet Wings played 17 games against NHL teams in the Super Series from 1976 to 1980, with a record of 10-5-2. CSKA had a 5-3-1 record over that time against NHL competition.

overpass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 09:31 AM
  #38
JFA87-66-99
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 2,312
vCash: 500
Talk about good matchups. This series is so close that it goes to overtime game 7. My hats go off to both teams.

JFA87-66-99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 11:01 AM
  #39
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
I wouldn't even compare the system that was here with the USSR one, let alone call it military.
No, not at all. Canada is the exception. They were the only country that was sending what was, by their standards, a class B or C team. When I say other countries may have gone by a similar system, I mean the czechs or swedes in particular.

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 11:20 AM
  #40
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
No, not at all. Canada is the exception. They were the only country that was sending what was, by their standards, a class B or C team. When I say other countries may have gone by a similar system, I mean the czechs or swedes in particular.
I really don't know how they were similar. The Czechoslovak teams weren't based on a single club team like CSKA. Club teams and training methods weren't military based either (while Jihlava and Trencin were 'army' teams, all that meant was that players who were in age to do military service had to play for one of them for that short period - don't think that's comparable with CSKA, which was a fulltime commitment).

Yes, most countries other than Canada were sending their strongest teams availiable. I thought it was more about extending the common 'but the Soviets used teams which had chemistry' excuse to CS/Swedish teams.

MadArcand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 11:52 AM
  #41
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
I really don't know how they were similar. The Czechoslovak teams weren't based on a single club team like CSKA. Club teams and training methods weren't military based either (while Jihlava and Trencin were 'army' teams, all that meant was that players who were in age to do military service had to play for one of them for that short period - don't think that's comparable with CSKA, which was a fulltime commitment).

Yes, most countries other than Canada were sending their strongest teams availiable. I thought it was more about extending the common 'but the Soviets used teams which had chemistry' excuse to CS/Swedish teams.
Yeah, pretty much it was about that. But like I said, I don't know for sure. I'm not an expert on exactly which club teams all the European stars played for, and I doubt any of us are either, except perhaps dreakmur, jarek, and VI in regards to Russians in particular. I would have to look into it more, but I've got a feeling a good number of czechs would have spent the season on the same club team.

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 12:03 PM
  #42
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,625
vCash: 500
I'm pretty sure that's rather wrong. I'll look into it when I have more time, busy time right ATM here at work.

MadArcand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 03:01 PM
  #43
Reds4Life
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Reds4Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Czech Republic
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 3,518
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Yeah, pretty much it was about that. But like I said, I don't know for sure. I'm not an expert on exactly which club teams all the European stars played for, and I doubt any of us are either, except perhaps dreakmur, jarek, and VI in regards to Russians in particular. I would have to look into it more, but I've got a feeling a good number of czechs would have spent the season on the same club team.
Not really.

Reds4Life is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 08:02 PM
  #44
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 41,073
vCash: 500
Comparing defenses

First Defense Pair = Advantage NJ.

Tidewater has one of my favorite top pairs of the draft. I really think Chelios and Pronovost complement each other very well. But neither is as good as his counterpart on NJ.

Second Defense Pair = Slight advantage NJ overall. (Offensive edge to NJ, Defensive edge to Tidewater).

---Art Ross/Herb Gardiner is a tough call. Art Ross gets the offensive edge, Herb Gardiner gets the defensive edge.

Gardiner's Hart year gives him the better peak, but his peak is so short, since he got started so late. Only 3 years in the NHL. I think they are pretty close overall.

Here's a post I found from a past ATD on Ross's offense:

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Here, I did some quick Art Ross research while siting in my car in my laptop, leeching off someone's wireless network while waiting for my dog to get groomed.

I think if you're only going as deep as 5th, it's only fair that with Ross we concern ourselves with the times he was in the top-3 in his league among defensemen, since it was essentially a half league. I will do my best to account for other star players' stints at defense and forward where possible. I will also only include the 1907 season and onwards, because that was when he began playing in a "top" league.

1907 - Ross was in a 3-way tie for 2nd behind Hugh Ross, with Si Griffis and Paddy Chambers. Joe Hall had many more points but I know Hall was a forward at this time.

1908 - It appears Ross was in a tie for 2nd, again, with Frank Patrick. Moose Johnson topped them by one goal. Was Johnson a forward at the time? I forget. Hall topped them but he was still a forward.

1911 - Ross' 6 points were actually tied for the most in the NHA by a defenseman that season, and he did it in fewer games. Taylor outscored him but as a rover - not sure if you count that.

1912 - Ross topped the NHA. Hall and Cleghorn were 2nd and 3rd. This was Ross' peak.

1913 - Ross again topped the NHA, with Cleghorn, McNamara, Cameron and Hall within 4 points of him.

1916 - Ross finished 2nd, a point behind McNamara and three ahead of Foghorn.

I think it's fair to say that if you're top-3 in the NHA at this time, you're top 5 in all of hockey. If I was to speculate what this translates out to in a consolidated league, I'd say:

1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Gonchar territory, or a little better.

Not campaigning for anyone here, I just like to research and post what I find
Without an in depth analysis, I think it's fair to say that's better than Gardiner, who had 6 goals and 12 points in his Hart winning year, and then 7 points combined in his other 2 years in the NHL. Yes, he did have some good numbers in the WCHL early in his career, for what we want to make of that.

As for defense, Ross "brought savvy to the defensive zone," but Gardiner "was a rock on the defense corps of every team he played on," and is well known for his play in his own zone. So Gardiner has the advantage. But the advantage is lessened by the fact that he only had the 3 years in the NHL.

---Harper = Goldham defensively. Goldham > Harper at puck moving, so Goldham is a bit better overall.

Terry Harper and Bob Goldham were both among the best defensive defensemen of their eras, and either would probably be in the HOF if he brought more offense. Both were key complimentary players on dynasties. I'll say they are even defensively. But Goldham is better at moving the puck, and this is why I think my 2nd pair has the slight edge overall. To illustrate, Goldham was 7th in assists by defensemen over the course of his career (41-55). Harper, on the other hand, is one of the biggest black holes on offense in the entire ATD (see http://hfboards.com/showpost.php?p=2...5&postcount=10 for a "junk stat" that sort of illustrates this).

Third Defense Pair = Close. Offensive Advantage for Tidewater. Defensive advantage for NJ.

---Kuzkin vs. Drinkwater is very close. Both are solid 2way guys from completely different leagues. Drinkwater is a secondary star from the 1890s (probably the 2nd best dman in the league at the time after Grant). Kuzkin is a secondary star from the USSR in the 60s/early 70s - and is probably a Top 2-3 defenseman of the time, after Vasiliev. I think Kuzkin is better because I think he faced better competition, but it's a close call. Kuzkin is more of a standard puck mover, whereas Drinkwater is more of a puck rusher (as was the style of play in his era).

---Moose Goheen and George McNamara are both pre-consolidation HOFers. Goheen has great stats, but he also has the "early American who never played in the NHL" problem. It's hard to compare. But what we do know is Goheen was better offensively, and McNamara was better defensively and a better hitter. This is probably the biggest difference between the pairs.

---I wonder who Tidewater's pair of early puck rushers will have their game translate into the ATD. I'd rather have a more stay at home guy with an early puck rusher. Though admittedly, Drinkwater is very solid in his own end, and in this fantasy world, I suppose that one or both would adapt.


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 12-09-2009 at 10:02 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 08:36 PM
  #45
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 41,073
vCash: 500
Goaltending

I think Esposito = Belfour in the regular season.

Esposito has 3 first team, 2 second team All Stars. Belfour has 2 and 1. But Belfour faced much better competition - without Hasek and Roy, Belfour would also have 3 and 2. Without Hasek, Roy, or Brodeur, Belfour would have 4 and 2. Additionally, there were far more one-year wonders in Belfour's time.

In the playoffs, Belfour > Esposito, which is why I rate Belfour higher overall. Esposito's really bad playoff goals are known to all, so I don't need to go into them in detail.

But look at GAA:

Belfour's GAA goes down from 2.50 in the regular season, to 2.17 in the playoffs. Esposito's GAA rises from 2.92 to 3.07 in the playoffs. Yes, it was a higher scoring era, but fewer goals are usually scored in the playoffs than the regular season. So a goalie's GA rising in the playoffs is a bit of a flag.

Belfour's win-loss record is 88-68 in the playoffs, and Tony Esposito's is 45-53.

Official save % wasn't recorded in the playoffs in Esposito's time (is it in the HSP?), but Belfour's playoff save % is .920, tied with Martin Brodeur and behind only Dominik Hasek among goalies with more than 60 career playoff games. Yes, it is inflated by the fact that he had a couple of really long playoff runs at the height of the dead puck era, but that's some elite company.


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 12-09-2009 at 09:22 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 09:15 PM
  #46
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 41,073
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
I don't know anything in particular about the ice time that Lepine received, but it's likely that he didn't get a lot of power play time either playing behind Morenz, right?

Also, Mosdell's linemates were considerably better than Lepine's during his two big scoring years. I believe he was centering Maurice Richard.
You're correct. The even strength points thing probably isn't an advantage for either. Still, I think Mosdell has a small, but clear, offensive edge.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-09-2009, 09:47 PM
  #47
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 41,073
vCash: 500
In sum

Why NJ should win:

1. Better group of defensemen

a) the biggest difference is the top pair

b) but NJ's second pair is slightly better too, because their offensive edge is greater than Tidewater's defensive edge.

c) the third pairs are pretty close - NJ's is better defensively, Tidewater's is better offensively. I personally think Kuzkin > Drinkwater, but it's close enough and a hard enough comparison, that I'll call the pairs even.

2. Better secondary scoring.

a) Maltsev is the best player on either team's second line, and makes NJ's second line better than Tidewaters's. Second line wingers are close.

b) NJ's 3rd line provides more offense on the counterattack than Tidewater's does.

c) Clint Smith and John McKenzie are probably better offensive players than anyone on Tidewater's 4th line.

3. Better playoff goaltending.

-I have Belfour a few spots ahead of Esposito on my all-time list, because of his better playoff record. I think their regular season records are very comparable.

Why Tidewater could win:

1. Better first line.

-In short, Jagr > Malone > Delvecchio > Iginla > (Goulet = Kariya).

Counter-point: NJ's top line will play primarily with Bobby Orr, which should raise their goal totals.

2. Better defensive play from the forwards.

a) NJ has a great checking line, but Tidewater's is even better defensively

b) Tidewater's Top 2 lines both have defensive consciences on them - Delvecchio and Datsyuk. (I think this is countered by NJ's superior defensive corps, but it is still still here).

c) A 4th line that is probably better defensively (Though Ryan Walter is a fine defensive player).


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 12-09-2009 at 10:07 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2009, 12:48 AM
  #48
Hedberg
MLD Glue Guy
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BC, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,237
vCash: 500
I think Tidewater can win this series with it's forward advantage. Tidewater's top line is better than New Jersey's while their second line is slightly weaker offensively, but probably stronger defensively. In a head to head matchup, I think Tidewater would actually outscore New Jersey due to their better defensive play. New Jersey has a good third line that will provide more offence, but I don't think is as strong as a shutdown unit. My third line should limit the opportunities of New Jersey's top line (and Orr) more than New Jersey's third unit will limit Tidewater's top line, which further increases the gap in the top units. As for the fourth line:

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
c) Clint Smith and John McKenzie are probably better offensive players than anyone on Tidewater's 4th line.
Venjamin Alexander might be on the same level as those two, but it's pretty difficult to compare his numbers with NHL players. Personally I think the chemistry of the line would make it more offensively dangerous than New Jersey's fourth line, but that really depends on how one views 1960's Soviet hockey. It's cohesiveness will also make it strong defensively.

Ideally the line matchups are T3 vs. NJ1 and T2 vs. NJ2

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
---I wonder who Tidewater's pair of early puck rushers will have their game translate into the ATD. I'd rather have a more stay at home guy with an early puck rusher. Though admittedly, Drinkwater is very solid in his own end, and in this fantasy world, I suppose that one or both would adapt.
I'm thinking Drinkwater could provide the all-around defence. My top four is pretty defense oriented, so I liked the idea of having a third pairing that could be dangerous offensively.

This series is definitely going to be a close one. Good luck


Last edited by Hedberg: 12-10-2009 at 01:13 AM.
Hedberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-10-2009, 04:50 PM
  #49
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,792
vCash: 500
The Tidewater Sharks defeat the New Jersey Swamp Devils in seven games.

Three stars:
1. Bobby Orr
2. Chris Chelios
3. Jaromir Jagr

God Bless Canada 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 11:52 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.