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.

ATD 12 Milt Dunnell Cup Final: Tidewater Sharks vs. Detroit Falcons

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-11-2009, 03:52 PM
  #26
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,615
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalyd Psycho View Post
The problem with your analysis is that you are underrating how important Jagr was to the Penguins. By the end of the decade, the Penguins miss the playoffs without him. The reason he wanted out is the team was so decrepit that he was their only chance at victory night in and night out. The reason they even made the second round in 99 is Jagr, and yet he's a bum for not being able to drag his team further?
A bum? I never said that. He's just obviously not a player that could put a team on his shoulders and lead it far by himself ala Gilmour or Gretzky.

MadArcand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2009, 03:59 PM
  #27
Hedberg
MLD Glue Guy
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BC, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,222
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
Thanks. He had good start to the series but then got shut down and team managed to score just 3 goals in last 3 games (1A for Jagr). Hm.
Not that much of a surprise considering the opponent was Lemaire's Devils.

Hedberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2009, 04:00 PM
  #28
Leafs Forever
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,790
vCash: 500
Quote:
I was more aiming towards leadership, heart and intelligence, though all three were better defensively too, tho that ain't saying much.
Of course Tidewater isn't giving him a C or asking him to provide leadership or heart really, they are asking him to score points; and if he is your best point scorer I do not see the problem. If he is your best leader- that's a problem.

How does one measure intelligence in this context exactly anyway? That doesn't really strike me as an intangible.

Quote:
1993-94 - team continues to be stacked. Lemieux misses a ton of time, Jagr leads team in regular season. Jagr shows up in the playoffs, but the team implodes against average Caps team in 1st round.

1994-95 - the Lemieuxless stacked Pens are once again great in regular season. Jagr has excellent playoffs as far as personal stats go (even if overshadowed by Francis), but the Pens barely put up a fight in 2nd round against the eventual Cup champs. Any place where I could find the boxscores for the series? NHL.com doesn't have them.

1995-96 - Pens field an incredible team, dominate regular season with the best offense the league's seen since Oilers' dynasty. Come playoff time, they lose to the Panthers. The blame isn't exactly on Jagr, with Barrasso allowing a horrid series winner and Francis being out injured, but that's still an incredible dissapointment.

1996-97 - Pens play below their capabilities all season, and thus earn themselves a hard draw in playoffs against Philly. Jagr ain't to blame for their unceremonious exit at all.

1997-98 - Pens are back on top of their division in regular season, and lose to mediocre Habs in 1st round. Jagr scores in playoffs again, but it's becoming a pattern - he gets his points, but his team loses.

1998-99 - Jagr leads a weaking squad to 2nd round exit at hands of mediocre Leafs. Scores his points, watches his team lose, as usual.
I notice a reocurring theme here; Jagr succeeds and does his job.

What do you want him to do? His job is to produce offensively- in that regard, he is excellent. Just like it was Gretzky, Lemieux, and Hull's job to produce offensively. They may have done more than that, but still. And it's not like anyone is saying he is a top-10 player all-time, as those 3 are.

You seem to want to critize players who play excellent on teams that rarely went anywhere. Are Hull, Pilote, Mikita, all terrible playoff producers then?

Quote:
A bum? I never said that. He's just obviously not a player that could put a team on his shoulders and lead it far by himself ala Gilmour or Gretzky.
No one is saying he is Gretzky, and Gilmour never got past the conference finals when he was carrying teams on his shoulders.

Leafs Forever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2009, 04:15 PM
  #29
Leaf Lander
Registered User
 
Leaf Lander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: BWO Headquarters
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,999
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Leaf Lander Send a message via MSN to Leaf Lander
jagr in his prime makes me think


good luck getting the puck from him he was a force in the dead puck era

Leaf Lander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2009, 04:16 PM
  #30
Leaf Lander
Registered User
 
Leaf Lander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: BWO Headquarters
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,999
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Leaf Lander Send a message via MSN to Leaf Lander
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalyd Psycho View Post
The problem with your analysis is that you are underrating how important Jagr was to the Penguins. By the end of the decade, the Penguins miss the playoffs without him. The reason he wanted out is the team was so decrepit that he was their only chance at victory night in and night out. The reason they even made the second round in 99 is Jagr, and yet he's a bum for not being able to drag his team further?
reminds me of sundin and the leafs

well said!

Leaf Lander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2009, 04:23 PM
  #31
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,771
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
Really? To me he's the most overrated player in there. Though I'm not sure if I'd even have him in top 50 (never made a list or attempted to). A heartless, brainless point accumulator who lived on talent alone.
Considering you're a reasonable guy, I would wager that the only reason you say you wouldn't have him in the top-50 is because you haven't tried making a list. Any measure of offensive dominance you can look at, shows Jagr is one of the best players of all-time at the most critical of all skills - generating offense. His adjusted +/- is insanse too, showing that he had a MASSIVE impact on his team's fortunes when he was on the ice, versus when he was off it. You can criticize him for what his team did or didn't do if you like, but when you really think about it, how much impact can he have on what happens when he is not on the ice?

The top-50 is littered with "offense-only" players such as Gretzky, Lemieux, Lafleur, Esposito, Dionne, Richard, Bossy, and Kharlamov. There is clearly room for them. Jagr was more offensively dominant than any of the above except Gretzky, Lemieux, and Richard. (Espo is debatable thanks to the "Orr Effect")

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2009, 04:49 PM
  #32
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,615
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Considering you're a reasonable guy, I would wager that the only reason you say you wouldn't have him in the top-50 is because you haven't tried making a list. Any measure of offensive dominance you can look at, shows Jagr is one of the best players of all-time at the most critical of all skills - generating offense. His adjusted +/- is insanse too, showing that he had a MASSIVE impact on his team's fortunes when he was on the ice, versus when he was off it. You can criticize him for what his team did or didn't do if you like, but when you really think about it, how much impact can he have on what happens when he is not on the ice?

The top-50 is littered with "offense-only" players such as Gretzky, Lemieux, Lafleur, Esposito, Dionne, Richard, Bossy, and Kharlamov. There is clearly room for them. Jagr was more offensively dominant than any of the above except Gretzky, Lemieux, and Richard. (Espo is debatable thanks to the "Orr Effect")
Oh I know he was good. I'm probably just biased and trolling.

Among those you mentioned, I'd definitely rank Bossy, Kharlamov and Lafleur above him, though.

MadArcand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2009, 06:24 PM
  #33
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,771
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
Oh I know he was good. I'm probably just biased and trolling.

Among those you mentioned, I'd definitely rank Bossy, Kharlamov and Lafleur above him, though.
Bossy was only a marginally better goalscorer, and far behind in playmaking. He also never carried an otherwise poor team, and was at his most dominant when the WHA and Europe had a number of the top players who would threaten his status. Jagr didn't.

Kharlamov is a "personal preference" thing, I personally don't see how he dominated the soviet league much more than some other guys but I know that's not a popular opinion.

Lafleur is all peak and precious little career value comparitively. For six seasons he was top-5 in both goals and assists, and other than that, outside of the top-20 in both. You can say he peaked higher and use that to put him above Jagr, but that would be a substantial overvaluing of peak, and besides, Jagr was top-5 in goals two more times and in assists one more time. (top-2s are dead even) - and then there is the "late 70s-early 80s" effect that can't be ignored, like with Bossy. No, Lafleur was not more offensively dominant than Jagr, not from a peak standpoint and certainly not from a career standpoint. The only reason to have Lafleur ahead of Jagr is team-based accomplishments.

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2009, 07:59 PM
  #34
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,615
vCash: 500
You can't mean that about Bossy. 2-1-5-1-2-3-7-3-2-18 - those are Bossy's finishes when it comes to goalscoring during his entire career. He'd likely have even more league leads if he didn't have to face the Gretzky factor.

Jagr's finishes are 47-39-49-43-2-2-6-9-2-4-3-24-12-16-2-40-61. Wildly inconsistent at best.

Jagr was the better offensive player overall, maybe, but comparable goalscorer? Uh-oh.

As for Lafleur, from what I saw Lafleur on his peak was incredible. I saw Jagr's whole career, and he never impressed me in the same way. Personal preference thing, perhaps.

MadArcand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2009, 08:11 PM
  #35
Leafs Forever
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,790
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
You can't mean that about Bossy. 2-1-5-1-2-3-7-3-2-18 - those are Bossy's finishes when it comes to goalscoring during his entire career. He'd likely have even more league leads if he didn't have to face the Gretzky factor.

Jagr's finishes are 47-39-49-43-2-2-6-9-2-4-3-24-12-16-2-40-61. Wildly inconsistent at best.

Jagr was the better offensive player overall, maybe, but comparable goalscorer? Uh-oh.

As for Lafleur, from what I saw Lafleur on his peak was incredible. I saw Jagr's whole career, and he never impressed me in the same way. Personal preference thing, perhaps.
So wait..your marking Jagr down because Bossy didn't have the displeasure of seeing his finishes drop off with age, and because Jagr didn't come out of the gate as well as others did?

2-2-6-9-2-4-3

That stretch- which I assume comprises his prime, is not "widly inconsistent"- it's consistently excellent. I don't see the reason to call Jagr widly inconsistent for not scoring as well in age and in youth as he did in his prime.

Leafs Forever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2009, 08:34 PM
  #36
Hedberg
MLD Glue Guy
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BC, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,222
vCash: 500
Defence is a very hard comparison to make, but I think Tidewater's top pairing is better than Detroit's, but that edge disappears in the bottom four (part of this being Detroit has their 2nd (and probably 3rd) best defender on the 2nd pairing. The Art Duncan/Graham Drinkwater comparison is difficult as Drinkwater is a Hall of Famer while Duncan is not, but Hall of Fame selections pre-NHL are very inconsistent so it’s difficult to really determine the meaning of that. Both are guys who played defence and forward and were early offensive stars on the backend. There’s certainly more info on Duncan than Drinkwater and Drinkwater never received any of the retro awards from Ultimate Hockey, so Duncan appears better. However on the other hand Drinkwater played in a fairly consolidated league while Duncan played in a split league era, but then by Duncan’s time there were more people playing hockey, thus more talent. I think it's pretty close, but that's hard to definitively say.

I do think Tidewater has the edge in defensive forwards. If we include Retro-Selkes, Tidewater has 3 (retro) for Lepine, 5 (1 retro) for Gainey, and 2 for Datsyuk. While Detroit certainly has some great defensive players, none of them have retro Selkes. The defensive advantage Tidewater has should help to cancel out the goaltending advantage. I've been lucky to avoid goaltenders with a big edge on Esposito so far, but I knew his lack of a cup would come up eventually. I think I can win with Esposito if he plays to the level he's capable of (for example he did have a better GAA during the Summit Series than Dryden.)

At forward, Jagr is the most offensively talented one in the series. Detroit's first line has great real life chemistry, but while Schmidt is better than Delvecchio, Jagr is significantly better than Bauer while Goulet is better than Dumart due to his 3 first-team and 2 second team LW positions to Dumart's 3 second team positions.

On the second line, Roy Conacher is a better scorer than Mats Naslund. Duke Keats is kind of like Herb Gardiner in the fact he spent most of his time in the WCHL. At the time I picked I was torn between Keats and Datsyuk, ultimately going with Datsyuk due to his defensive skills, his NHL peak, and he's cleaner than Keats. However EB introduced to me in his bio material I didn't see when researching Keats initially. Overall, Detroit has a better second line.

The third lines are different. Mine is clearly a shutdown line while Detroit's is a two way line. Like most series I've been in, their third line is better offensively while mine is better defensively.

As we went over in the last series, the impression of my fourth line has a lot to do with the perception of 60's Soviet hockey. If you view the high end talent as NHL-calibre, than I think my fourth line is tremendous with its chemistry, defensive responsibility, and scoring ability.

In conclusion, basically I think this is a very close series. Tidewater has better high end defence, Detroit better depth defenders. Tidewater has better defensive forwards, Detroit better goaltender. Tidewater has a better top line, Detroit has a bit better depth scoring. In a series this close, I think home ice is huge in this series. I can match Gainey against the Schmidt's line for four of the games. The home team is 11-3 in game 7s in the Stanley Cup final.

Hedberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2009, 09:23 PM
  #37
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,615
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafs Forever View Post
So wait..your marking Jagr down because Bossy didn't have the displeasure of seeing his finishes drop off with age, and because Jagr didn't come out of the gate as well as others did?

2-2-6-9-2-4-3

That stretch- which I assume comprises his prime, is not "widly inconsistent"- it's consistently excellent. I don't see the reason to call Jagr widly inconsistent for not scoring as well in age and in youth as he did in his prime.
A stretch of 3-24-12-16-2, for example, is exemplary of wild inconsistency. Comparing him to Bossy in goalscoring department just doesn't work for me. Look up who finished ahead of Bossy when he didn't finish first. Now do the same with Jagr.

MadArcand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2009, 10:18 PM
  #38
jarek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by God Bless Canada View Post
The 32 teams is definitely a factor. I gained a real appreciation for Hed's team when writing the review. I think I said "This is a team that works" - the biggest compliment I can hand out.

They have some guys who rate among the best in the draft. Delvecchio's an awesome two-way first line centre. Jagr's skill is undeniable. Datsyuk's not a strong second line C, but Naslund's a good scoring LW, and Tocchet's one of the elite complimentary second line RWs in the draft. Gainey's the best defensive winger ever.

Tidewater's first pairing, from a personnel basis, doesn't scream elite. Not like New Jersey's (Savard-Orr) or Glace Bay's (Lidstrom-Clapper). But it's as well-built as any first pairing in the draft. They're highly skilled, and they're imposing. Tough, aggressive, abrasive, mobile. I thought Tidewater and New Jersey had the best-built first pairings.

My only real concern for Tidewater was Tony O in net. Could a team succeed with a goalie whose only Cup win came when he was a No. 3? And its not like he was the one-man show on the 50s Blackhawks; that Chicago team had the potential to win multiple Cups. In 71, he was the difference. And not in a good way. Would they be the team to beat with Cheevers, Holmes, Thompson, Vezina or Lumley? Maybe. But they might be the team to beat with Tony O.

There aren't many two-way first line centres better than Delvecchio. Schmidt is one of them. Love seeing Milt in the ATD final. Loved seeing him get first star in the last series. I have him in my top 30. An absolutely marvellous two-way, physical centre who can be a game-breaker offensively. If not for the Second World War, Boston probably has a dynasty from 39 to 45, with Schmidt as the cornerstone.

Detroit doesn't have a forward who screams "this guy is the best for his role in the draft." Maybe Roy Conacher for a second line goal-scorer, although it does concern me a little when it took until the last year of the veteran's committee for Conacher to get inducted in the HHOF. (Not saying he doesn't belong, just saying it took longer than you might expect).

The defence is a classic case of the sum being greater than the parts. They don't have a blue-liner who screams "this guy's a legit No. 1 defenceman," even in a 32-team draft. Quackenbush is a top-32 defenceman all-time (to say the least), but, as I said before, I think he's a guy who's better suited to being a No. 2 than a No. 1, because he's not truly exceptional, in any one area, in an ATD context. The only thing that might be exception is his hockey sense and hockey IQ, which are really friggin' important, of course. But you have a guy who is a top 32 in Quackenbush and two perfect No. 2s in Thomson (tough, skilled, two-way guy who was a No. 1 on a dynasty) and Big Train Conacher.

Big edge in goal. Sawchuk: four rings as a No. 1. Esposito: one ring as a No. 3. Granted, Sawchuk was on one of the best two-way teams ever, and Detroit could have possibly won with Tony O in net, no matter how many goals Esposito allowed from centre ice in a deciding game. But the bottom line is goalies want to be judged by wins. There's no player position in the sport in which players are judged by championships more than goal. Bottom line: four Cups for Sawchuk. A No. 3 Cup for Espo.

One thing that is interesting to see is the coaching. When you look at teams that have won it before, the coaches have been: Tommy Ivan, Hap Day, Al Arbour (twice), Dick Irvin and Cecil Hart. Hart's the only one who isn't a gimmie for the top 10. In this draft, we have Arkady Chernyshev, Herb Brooks and Father David Bauer. I believe they have a combined one best-of-seven series win. It's not exactly the coaching match-up we had the first three finals.
If that is the case, then what's the point of drafting him? You wait until later to draft him so you can get a better player earlier.

jarek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2009, 10:22 PM
  #39
Hedberg
MLD Glue Guy
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BC, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,222
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jareklajkosz View Post
If that is the case, then what's the point of drafting him? You wait until later to draft him so you can get a better player earlier.
I think the point was that there were cup-winning netminders I could have picked after Esposito (I did consider other ones, but I felt, based on talent, Esposito was the best one left.)

Hedberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2009, 10:26 PM
  #40
Leafs Forever
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,790
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
A stretch of 3-24-12-16-2, for example, is exemplary of wild inconsistency. Comparing him to Bossy in goalscoring department just doesn't work for me. Look up who finished ahead of Bossy when he didn't finish first. Now do the same with Jagr.
But again, those seasons were towards the end of his career, and the 3 really falls into the end ofh is prime years. The 2nd he got was an oddity monster year he had, but otherwise his goalscoring just dipped as he reached a certain age- you going to blame someone for that?

Leafs Forever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2009, 10:27 PM
  #41
jarek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hedberg View Post
I think the point was that there were cup-winning netminders I could have picked after Esposito (I did consider other ones, but I felt, based on talent, Esposito was the best one left.)
But they would not have been as solid of picks, value-wise.

jarek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-12-2009, 12:16 AM
  #42
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,771
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
You can't mean that about Bossy. 2-1-5-1-2-3-7-3-2-18 - those are Bossy's finishes when it comes to goalscoring during his entire career. He'd likely have even more league leads if he didn't have to face the Gretzky factor.

Jagr's finishes are 47-39-49-43-2-2-6-9-2-4-3-24-12-16-2-40-61. Wildly inconsistent at best.

Jagr was the better offensive player overall, maybe, but comparable goalscorer? Uh-oh.

As for Lafleur, from what I saw Lafleur on his peak was incredible. I saw Jagr's whole career, and he never impressed me in the same way. Personal preference thing, perhaps.
It's not really fair to compare Jagr at 18 and 19 and 31+ to a Bossy who got to play only from 20-30 is it? Sure, Jagr looks "inconsistent" by that measure. It's not a bad thing that he played more years and had some more 30-goal seasons - this is a good thing! And line up their best 10 seasons in goal rankings:

Bossy: 1-1-2-2-2-3-3-5-7-18
Jagr: 2-2-2-2-3-4-6-9-12-16

That's what I mean when I say "marginally better". You can say Bossy had tougher competition (he was 7 behind Lafleur, 28 behind Gretzky, and 7 behind Kurri when he was runner-up, Jagr was 2 behind Bondra, 7 behind Lemieux, 3 behind Selanne, 2 behing Thornchoo) and though I'm not sure that's necessarily true, there were guys like Krutov and Makarov who might have usurped his position in the goals race in a few of those seasons. With Jagr that is not the case.

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-12-2009, 01:57 AM
  #43
EagleBelfour
Registered User
 
EagleBelfour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,234
vCash: 500
Wow, the voting are already Sunday! I have A LOT of things to do this weekend, but I'll try to sneak a couple of words right now; losing some sleep in the process!

First of all, congratulation to Hedberg for reaching the finals. It's a pleasure measuring my team to another great team and a fantastic GM.

First line:
At the start of the thread, most talk about Jagr being the best forward in this series: I disagree. I have been vocal to the fact I consider Milt Schmidt one of the 30 best player of All-Time. Jaromir Jagr was a fantastic offensive weapons and his talent was undeniable, however I feel the defensive conscience, leadership and physically of Milt Schmidt make up the offensive gap Jagr has on Schmidt. At the end, opinion can diverge but the difference between Milt Schmidt and Jaromir Jagr in term of overall ability and effectiveness is very minimal, rather you prefer Schmidt or Jagr.

The Tidewaters first line is a very well built one. Delvechhio is a very good two-way playmaker that play at centre early in his career. Goulet is a very constant goalscorer and Jaromir Jagr is a very dangerous offensive forward. This line work very well.

Again, I will use the infamous ''Krauts'' to control the Tide's first line. Woody Dumart will have the very difficult task to control Jaromir Jagr offensive boost. The Krauts will play a cautious, defensive first style of play and use their speed, strenght and physically to control them. They will again use their great hockey senses and speed to score some goals of the turnovers.

This matchup should be a delight to see.

Second line:
In all honesty, I consider the Tidewaters second line a very non-descript one. Rick Tocchet is a fantastic glue-guy on a second line that can play various role. However, I don't think he should be a line best player. I still have my reserve on Pavel Datsyuk as a second line center in a All-Time Draft. I think he could make a very good third line playmaking forward ... like a Phil Goyette for example! On the left side, Mats Naslund is an ok 2nd line speedster, but he's average offensively in a All-Time draft context. I love the Tidewaters Sharks team, but all in all, it's not a line a like very much and one of the two big question marks on his team.

I've talked alot about my second line, but I'll do a little resume again. Roy Conacher is one of the greatest goalscorer of All-Time, and definitely of the the best 2nd line offensive forward of the draft. He'll have the privilege to receive passes from one of the ''brainiest pivot'' of his time; an incredible playmaker and all-around player in Duke Keats. On the right side, Harry Hyland is another great goalscorer of his generation, a smart and speedy winger who was not a pansy too!

The second line matchup is one of the two matchup the Detroit Falcons will have to take advantage of if I want to win this confrontation.

Third line:
The two teams were able to form two fantastic third lines.

Bob Gainey is on my list the second greatest defensive forward of All-Time (I consider Claude Provost #1). He was a tremendous competitor and leader and it will be far from easy for the Falcons everytime Gainey will be on the ice. Earlier, Hedberg talked about the 8 Selkes the Gainey-Lepine duo have together to compare his third line favourably to the Falcons third line: I'll give it to him, Gainey's Selke were well deserved. When the league create a trophy just for you, you're probably doing something right! But Lepine competition for the trophy was not that strong though! Still, it's a very effective and well construct defensive first line.

I believe the Tidewaters do have the best ''defensive'' third line, although all three of my man, especially Phil Goyette and Bobby Rousseau, are strong defensive players. What my third line as on them though, is the ability to score goals. Watson, Goyette and Rousseau, all three of them, are competent offensively. Goyette was primary a playmaker, while Watson was a big and fiesty goalscorer. Rousseau was in the middle; using his speed to score goals or create chances with his playmaking skills.

4th line:
I'll recognize my limit when it happens: I don't know very well the Russian trio Hedberg drafted for his fourth line. I know who they are, a little about thier playing style, but that's probably it. If you see this Hedberg, I would love to read you about this trio and how you think thye will mesh together and what are their strength/weaknesses and accomplishment.

What I can do though is talk about my own fourth line, the most explosive of the draft. Harry Oliver is a small, but feisty right winger, a very strong offensive player and a great playoff performer. Buddy O'Connor is a former Hart winner and a very adept playmaking forward. The glue guy on this line is Ed Sandford, a 6'1 defensive left winger with a very good playoff resume. In case of injuries during this series *knock on wood*, Oliver and O'Connor are very adept replacement for a top-6 role, a concept sometime difficult to grasp in a All-Time Draft context, but still important.

1st pairing D:
I love the Tidewaters 1st pairing D. Chris Chelios and Marcel Pronovost together makes up for a mean and physically challenging duo. They can also provides offensive from the blueline and are very good defensively. A very well builted first duo of defenseman.

Bill Quackenbush and Jimmy Thomson are in my opinion a very well builted duo too. They are not as good as the infamous Tidewaters duo, but they mesh very well together. Bill Quackenbush is a very talented defenseman who bring everything you want from a defenseman except form physicality. However, his style of play in the defensive zone enable him to be great defensively while taking few few penalties. On the other hand, Jimmy Thomson is a ''hit first, ask second'' kind of defenseman. He has absolutely nothing to be ashame of in term of physical presence, strenght and transition game compared to Chelios and Pronovost.

2nd pairing D:
A Herb Gardiner-Terry Harper duo is a very adept one in a ATD context. Gardiner defensive conscience and time logger with Harper physical presence makes them a very reliable pair that won't bring you a lot offensively, but mostly won't hurt you in thier own zone.

However, a Lionel Conacher-Cy Wentworth is, in my opinion, definitely a better duo. Conacher was one of the premier offensive defenseman of his ERA, while providing a great defensive, a mean and physical edge while being a great shot blocker and a great leader. Wentworth was the best defensive defenseman of his decade, who used his speed to counter the opposition.

3rd pairing:
Graham Drinkwater-Moose Goheen is, again, an adept 3rd pairing, but I feel mine is one of the best 3rd pairing of the draft. Art Duncan was one of the premier offensive defenseman f the Pre-NHL ERA and even won a scoring title as a defenseman. While we know little about how good he was defensively, I paired him with Bucko McDonald, a great defensive defenseman and a fantastic shot-blocker. I read your earlier comment on your questioning as to who between Duncan and Drinkwater was the best; I don't think you're wrong in your assesement. However, it's not because we don't have info on a certain player skills that we can assume he was good or bad: that's why, unfortunately, the best of this ERA cannot be considered as better as 6th-7th D or 4th liners.

Goaltenders:
This is the second big matchup the Falcons will have to take advantage of if they want to win the Milt Dunnell Cup. I think we were harsh on Tony-O in the first few ATD's: you need a great team in front of him, but you do can win a championship with Tony Esposito as your #1G. Lucky for him, Esposito do have a very good team in front of him. However, one thing is certain: his play come playoff time was not as good as his regular season play and the Detroit Falcons as a huge advantage in goal with Terry Sawchuk. In his peak years, ''The Uke'' was sensational in the playoffs and was a threat for every forward trying to score on him.

Coaches:
Again, I know very little on Chernyshev the head coach. He was a very good assistant coach to Anatoli Tarasov, but how was he as a head coach? Again, I would love to hear Hedberg on what he thinks of his coach and how he thinks he will be running his team.

On my part, I think the duo of Herb Brooks and David Bauer will work very well together and will be competent at running the Falcons to a championship. They won't be a difference makers in this series, but they won't be a liability too: they complete each other very well and they are two coaches who works in the same direction.

Intangibles:
If this serie goes in 7 games, the Tidewater will have the home-ice advantage. However, what's interresting is that the Detroit Falcons won 3 of their 4 series on the adversary ice. If it goes to a seven and deciding game, the Falcons will have no qualm taking the Cup away from the Tidewater Sharks on their ice

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

That is all. I probably won't have time to talk talk much more for the following two days, VERY busy weekend. If I cannot make it back in here to talk a little more, I wish good luck to Hedberg and congratulate everyone who participated in the ATD, especially the one still voting!

EagleBelfour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-12-2009, 03:35 AM
  #44
Hedberg
MLD Glue Guy
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BC, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,222
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EagleBelfour View Post
It's a pleasure measuring my team to another great team and a fantastic GM.
The same to you. Your teams are always fantastic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EagleBelfour View Post
4th line:
I'll recognize my limit when it happens: I don't know very well the Russian trio Hedberg drafted for his fourth line. I know who they are, a little about thier playing style, but that's probably it. If you see this Hedberg, I would love to read you about this trio and how you think thye will mesh together and what are their strength/weaknesses and accomplishment.
This is a repost from the division semi-final. I'll try to add more tomorrow (although I'll probably be gone most of the day).

Quote:
They are everything I want in a fourth line; they can score, are good defensively and have some grit, plus they had real life chemistry.

Kings of the Ice:
Quote:
The Loktev-Almetov-Alexandrov trio was probably the first soviet line in which all the players had equal ability and where each supplemented the other. After receiving a pass from a linemate, Loktev would skate a little with the puck and then get it to Almetov, who was already racing up the left flank. Alexandrov, in the center slot, would then switch places with Almetov. The whole play took only a couple of seconds.
Coach Anatoli Tarasov:
On Almetov:
Quote:
"Perhaps sports fans who have seen our national team in action have noticed that whenever we have one man short, Alexander Almetov is sure to appear on the ice. When it comes to individual play, a question of holding on to the puck and beating off a superior force, Almetov is in a class by himself! He is not a solist, he is a star in the good sense of the word."
On Alexandrov:
Quote:
"I think that our Alexandrov, by his style of game, by his ability to keep a level head even in the most explosive situations, looks something like Maurice Richard, the great master of attack"
International Hockey Legends:
Alexandrov (one of only four players to net 50 in the Soviet League and is the 8th all-time leading scorer at the World Championships):
Quote:
Venjamin Alexandrov was considered the greatest Soviet player of his time. Alexandrov drew some incredible comparisons. He was dubbed "Bobrov 2" in Russia, after the first great Soviet star, Vsevolod Bobrov. The great Russian coach Anatoli Tarasov had another comparison though - Montreal Canadiens star Maurice "Rocket" Richard.
Loktev:
Quote:
Loktev, as coach Anatoli Tarasov puts it, was an original hockey player. He raced up his wing with puck well ahead of him. This must have caused the opposing defenseman to smack his lips in anticipation of a big body check or a turnover. However this was part of Loktev's arsenal. He lured in unsuspecting defenders this way, and then miraculously and almost without fail, he'd put on a beautiful deke to leave the bewildered defenseman up ice as he danced in on the lonely goal keeper. Loktev, who trained by himself in spare time, was a rough player as well, despite his tiny fram of 5'7" and 165 pounds. He never shied away from the boards and would fight for the puck until the whistle had blown. He was punished several times for rough play in his younger days by the Russian hockey federation. That punishment seemed to do him a ton of good, as he calmed down some. He remained aggressive but controlled, and became one of the all time greats.
Almetov:
Quote:
Almetov, like most Russians, was a well trained forward when it came to skating, puckhandling and passing, though he was never an elite scoring threat. Part of that was because Almetov was a superior defensive forward. In fact he was a mainstay on the Russian penalty killing units perhaps the best PK man of his generation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EagleBelfour View Post
Coaches:
Again, I know very little on Chernyshev the head coach. He was a very good assistant coach to Anatoli Tarasov, but how was he as a head coach? Again, I would love to hear Hedberg on what he thinks of his coach and how he thinks he will be running his team.

On my part, I think the duo of Herb Brooks and David Bauer will work very well together and will be competent at running the Falcons to a championship. They won't be a difference makers in this series, but they won't be a liability too: they complete each other very well and they are two coaches who works in the same direction.
Chernyshev was never really more than a co-head coach. I was drawn to him because I really liked his calm, analytical approach to the game. His main strength was his ability to dissect the weaknesses of the other teams (for example it was Chernyshev that prepared the scouting report on Canada in 1972) and the way he treated his players. I think being rational, diplomatic, and an excellent communicator would really get through to the star players of an ATD setting.

Chidlovski:
Quote:
Arkady CHERNYSHEV is a legend of Soviet hockey and one of the founders of the Russian hockey school. Most of the time, his name is mentioned in association with the other Russian legend, Anatoly Tarasov. Tarasov and Chernyshev coached the Soviet squad to the 9 consecutive world titles in 1963-1971. In North America, Chernyshev's coaching successes are quiet often overshadowed in favor of his partner of many years, Hall-of-Famer Anatoly Tarasov.

Needless to say, it was Chernyshev who was the "official" head coach of the Soviet national team during the Tarasov-Chernyshev's era. If the gold medal count can become any measurement of coaches' success, Chrenyshev should be called the all-time most successful Soviet coach on the international arena. With 4 gold Olympic medals and 11 world titles, Chernyshev leads the list leaving behind such coaching legends as Tarasov and Tikhonov.

Being two completely different personalities, Chernyshev and Tarasov created one of the most successful and well-ballanced coaching combinations in the history of hockey. Tarasov was emotional and explosive, prone to lose his temper in many situations. On the contrary, Chernyshev impressed people with his diplomatic skills, superb communications and rationalism.

Tarasov was at his best on the ice rink, working face-to-face with the players, guiding the team directly from the bench during the game. Chernyshev very seldom spent time with the national team players on the ice, mostly overseeing the practice or game in the stands. Due to Chernyshev's obvious educational and motivational talent, the Soviet players preferred to have one-on-one conversations with Chernyshev than with Tarasov.
International Ice Hockey Forums:
Quote:
Tarasov and Chernyshev was the perfect coupleŽ. Unlike the impulsive, flamboyant Tarasov, Chernyshev was restrained, rational and diplomatic. With his analytical skills, he would scout the other teams to pinpoint their weaknesses, and with his diplomatic skills he was the perfect balance to Tarasov vis-a-vis the players. Where Tarasov was the bad cop, Chernyshev was the good cop.

Together Tarasov and Chernyshev were unbeatable, and between 1963 and the winter of 1972, USSR won 9 world championships and three olympic golds straight. In this era, USSR seldom lost any important games. In the world championships and olympics between 1963 and 1972, the USSR won 68 games and lost only 6.

Hedberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-12-2009, 04:45 AM
  #45
Reds4Life
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Reds4Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Czech Republic
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 3,518
vCash: 500
Milt Schmidt over Jagr? Yeah, sure

I don't care what "intangibles" Milt Schmidt brings in, Jagr is much better offesnively and at even strength Jagr is as good as Mario Lemieux (look here http://hfboards.com/showpost.php?p=2...&postcount=159), so Schmidt's ability to beat some guys up is kinda pointless. Also, look at Hart trophy voting - Jagr is far ahead.

Reds4Life is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-12-2009, 06:18 AM
  #46
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,615
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafs Forever View Post
But again, those seasons were towards the end of his career, and the 3 really falls into the end ofh is prime years. The 2nd he got was an oddity monster year he had, but otherwise his goalscoring just dipped as he reached a certain age- you going to blame someone for that?
No, but he doesn't exactly compare to Bossy favorably in that regard. Thus it's not some sacrilege to rank Bossy higher overall, is it?

BTW, the reason I decided to go after Jagr isn't that I wouldn't perceive him as elite or fitting on 1st line, but that he was repeatedly voted as star of the series when he's simply not the player that would make a ton of difference by himself. Unless I misunderstood and we're supposed to vote for the best players in series instead...?

MadArcand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-12-2009, 10:19 AM
  #47
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,791
vCash: 500
I think there's some overrating and underrating of Jagr going on here. He's the best offensive forward in this series. Whether he's the best all-round forward in this series, or the most valuable forward in this series, is another debate for another time, because Schmidt, with all that he brings to the table, could be argued for the better player, and Delvecchio, with all that he brings in that first line centre spot, could be a more valuable player.

I have Jagr as the No. 5 RW, behind the gimmies (Howe and Richard), plus Lafleur (incredible peak and a major role on a dynasty) and Bossy (magnificent goal scorer and a major player on a dynasty). Jagr might be the best playmaking RW in the draft. He holds the record for points in a season by an RW (in 1995-96).

He had to carry that Pittsburgh team on his back for a couple years. He had Francis in what was a contract year for Francis in 1997-98, and the duo was magnificent. Then Jagr had to carry Pittsburgh for two seasons. By the end of 1999-2000, there were rumours he wanted out. Those rumours continued into 2000-01, and prior to Mario coming back, Jagr's play and production (44 points in 38 games, or there about) were those of an immensely talented superstar who wanted out. And it showed again in the playoffs (12 points in 16 games).

He's a high-maintenance guy, and when the circumstances aren't right, he sulks and his play goes south. Happened towards the end of his Pittsburgh tenure. Happened in Washington. For whatever reason, he made it work in New York with Tom Renney as his coach. (I think New York was a perfect city for Jagr, and Jagr was a perfect guy for New York City). More than any other top 50 player, he needs to be in the right situation to succeed. I think Tidewater is the right situation, especially with Delvecchio as his centre.

God Bless Canada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-12-2009, 11:00 AM
  #48
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 God Bless Canada View Post
I think there's some overrating and underrating of Jagr going on here. He's the best offensive forward in this series. Whether he's the best all-round forward in this series, or the most valuable forward in this series, is another debate for another time, because Schmidt, with all that he brings to the table, could be argued for the better player, and Delvecchio, with all that he brings in that first line centre spot, could be a more valuable player.

I have Jagr as the No. 5 RW, behind the gimmies (Howe and Richard), plus Lafleur (incredible peak and a major role on a dynasty) and Bossy (magnificent goal scorer and a major player on a dynasty). Jagr might be the best playmaking RW in the draft. He holds the record for points in a season by an RW (in 1995-96).

He had to carry that Pittsburgh team on his back for a couple years. He had Francis in what was a contract year for Francis in 1997-98, and the duo was magnificent. Then Jagr had to carry Pittsburgh for two seasons. By the end of 1999-2000, there were rumours he wanted out. Those rumours continued into 2000-01, and prior to Mario coming back, Jagr's play and production (44 points in 38 games, or there about) were those of an immensely talented superstar who wanted out. And it showed again in the playoffs (12 points in 16 games).

He's a high-maintenance guy, and when the circumstances aren't right, he sulks and his play goes south. Happened towards the end of his Pittsburgh tenure. Happened in Washington. For whatever reason, he made it work in New York with Tom Renney as his coach. (I think New York was a perfect city for Jagr, and Jagr was a perfect guy for New York City). More than any other top 50 player, he needs to be in the right situation to succeed. I think Tidewater is the right situation, especially with Delvecchio as his centre.
It can be easily argued that Jagr is better than Lafleur and Bossy.
I think majority of people have Jagr ahead of Bossy and some ahead of Lafleur.
Also, his supposedly high-maintenance personality is way overblown and people like to remember the bad stuff.
Look at his Hart trophy record, or his numbers. He made NHL players from scrubs like German Titov or Kip Miller for God's sake. No other player in this series could possibly do that and no other player in this series has the gamebreaking ability of Jaromir Jagr.

Look at his adjusted even strength points - you can see he is as good as Super Mario in that regard. Look at Jagr's adjusted plus/minus and you will see how important he was to his team/s. Look at his Hart trophy shares and you will see only a handful of players in history of the game have got more shares. Now put bias aside and try to tell anyone with a straight face that he is not top25 player ever.

Intangibles can only do so much and "leadership" is overrated, you could be the best leader ever but without great team you are not going to lead them anywhere.


Last edited by Reds4Life: 12-12-2009 at 11:08 AM.
Reds4Life is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-12-2009, 11:44 AM
  #49
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,791
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reds4Life View Post
It can be easily argued that Jagr is better than Lafleur and Bossy.
I think majority of people have Jagr ahead of Bossy and some ahead of Lafleur.
Also, his supposedly high-maintenance personality is way overblown and people like to remember the bad stuff.
Look at his Hart trophy record, or his numbers. He made NHL players from scrubs like German Titov or Kip Miller for God's sake. No other player in this series could possibly do that and no other player in this series has the gamebreaking ability of Jaromir Jagr.

Look at his adjusted even strength points - you can see he is as good as Super Mario in that regard. Look at Jagr's adjusted plus/minus and you will see how important he was to his team/s. Look at his Hart trophy shares and you will see only a handful of players in history of the game have got more shares. Now put bias aside and try to tell anyone with a straight face that he is not top25 player ever.

Intangibles can only do so much and "leadership" is overrated, you could be the best leader ever but without great team you are not going to lead them anywhere.
I don't think the high-maintenance personality is overblown. I don't think it can be overblown in sports, or when talking about a player in a team sports setting. When the situation wasn't right for Jagr, he sulked. He underachieved. He didn't give you everything he had. The good news for Tidewater is they've put Jagr in a situation geared towards his success. (A relatively level-headed coach, a terrific two-way playmaking centre, an excellent supporting cast and a teammate [Tocchet] who knows how Jagr should be handled).

Adjusted numbers don't do anything for me. Never have. Never will. And I have some problems with using Hart voting when evaluating players. Great players on junk teams - which Jagr was for several years - will get elevated using that system. Great players on great teams, or dynasty teams - guys who were the second-best or third-best players on dynasty teams, for example, get punished.

Jagr's unquestionably the top offensive player in this series, the offensive gamebreaker in this series. As I said earlier, he might be the best playmaking RW ever. His strength on his skates, and his strength on the puck, are almost unmatched in the history of the game. It makes for a very big problem in any match-up. Much like Mario, he used his size and strength to overwhelm and overpower opposing defences, protect the puck and draw penalties.

He did not, however, make German Titov into an NHL player. Titov had already played 345 games prior to playing in Pittsburgh - well on his way to playing 400 games receiving an NHL pension, a pretty big deal to those in the show. Titov was also a better player in Calgary than he was in Steeltown.

Leadership isn't overrated. In fact, Tidewater has a room loaded with great leaders - Delvecchio, Gainey, Tocchet, Chelios, Pronovost among them.

God Bless Canada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-12-2009, 11:58 AM
  #50
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,615
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reds4Life View Post
He made NHL players from scrubs like German Titov or Kip Miller for God's sake.
Talk about a hyperbole, German Titov was far from a scrub and was a quality top 6 forward before he came to Pittsburgh.

MadArcand 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 07:16 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.