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 2010, Part I

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-10-2010, 09:01 PM
  #76
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 41,012
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velociraptor View Post
Just wondering...

Chigurh is now up, but is not on the clock, correct?
Yes, this is correct.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline  
Old
02-10-2010, 09:05 PM
  #77
markrander87
Registered User
 
markrander87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,606
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=seventieslord;23809571]- I find the implication that if you were to take Howe then you would not be able to build a scoring line, rather funny.


I never once said you couldn't, Im saying Lemieux is a better choice for building a scoring line.....please quote me where I said you cant buil a scoring line around Howe?

You appear to have a large modern player bias. That is fine, I'm not going to be too hard on you because you're new. You're here to learn, and learn you shall. But if you think comparing career points-per-game averages of two players 40 years apart is a good way to evaluate them, you are in for a long draft.


I was thinking the same about several of you guys having a LARGE bias towards older era players, looking back on past drafts players like xxxx and xxxxx get drafted in the 5th round behind guys like xxxxxxx?? haha it's non-sensicle

- Lemieux was never any good defensively. He led the league in +/- in 1992-93 through sheer offensive dominance.

- Howe was just as huge compared to his peers, as Lemieux was.


Once again I didnt say Lemieux was bigger im just stating the obvious that Howe doesnt have a huge physical presence which was part of his point, and you said his shear offensive dominance allowed him to obtain a +55 rating, im not saying he's a Selke winner but he doesnt have a defensive liability?

Orr achieved more in his 9 full seasons, than all players in history ever achieved, with the exceptions of Gretzky and Howe. On a per-game basis, Orr was the greatest player in hockey history. The only thing Gretzky and Howe have on Orr is career value. So he's a consensus top-3 pick, and rightly so.

Im not debating Orr shouldnt be number 1 but you have to include Lemieux into that arguement where he achieved more than Hall of Famers achieve in a 20 year career in half the amount of games


Last edited by markrander87: 02-10-2010 at 09:22 PM.
markrander87 is offline  
Old
02-10-2010, 09:10 PM
  #78
markrander87
Registered User
 
markrander87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,606
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by raleh View Post
You're going to have a tough time in this thing with arguments like this. The best is the best is the best is the way it works around here...there are some exceptions, but just about anything you say you're going to have to back up.
Look at the post above you, I am backing up my choice, just because im a "Rookie" it's being used against me ....What best??? what does that even mean

markrander87 is offline  
Old
02-10-2010, 09:16 PM
  #79
markrander87
Registered User
 
markrander87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,606
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
I noticed the Howe-Lemieux debate going on, and I can't resist chiming in. I don't agree that Lemieux was a poor defensive player. He was on the ice for a lot of goals against, but I think that's because he played a lot of ice time.

My study here looked at the performance of the Penguins with Lemieux and without Lemieux, and found that there was no difference in goals against when he played. (There was, of course, a massive difference in goals for and winning percentage). This suggests that Lemieux was neutral in his overall defensive impact, neither an asset nor a liability when it came to goals against.

I really don't think there's anything like a massive defensive edge between Howe and Lemieux. Also consider that Howe's peak came in a very weak time for star forwards (the early 1950s), meaning that the offensive edge is bigger than some simple comparisons have shown. I think Lemieux at #3 is absolutely a reasonable pick, depending on what you are looking for.
Wow im done with all of my stats, if you have any questions please read this mans work, Im glad to see a realist like this who can grasp the impact Mario had in Pittsburgh..


Last edited by markrander87: 02-10-2010 at 09:24 PM.
markrander87 is offline  
Old
02-10-2010, 09:17 PM
  #80
jarek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,550
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=markrander87;23810525]
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
- I find the implication that if you were to take Howe then you would not be able to build a scoring line, rather funny.
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post


I never once said you couldn't, Im saying Lemieux is a better choice for building a scoring line.....please quote me where I said you cant buil a scoring line around Howe?

You appear to have a large modern player bias. That is fine, I'm not going to be too hard on you because you're new. You're here to learn, and learn you shall. But if you think comparing career points-per-game averages of two players 40 years apart is a good way to evaluate them, you are in for a long draft.


I was thinking the same about several of you guys having a LARGE bias towards older era players, looking back on past drafts players like and get drafted in the 5th round behind guys like ?? haha it's non-sensicle

- Lemieux was never any good defensively. He led the league in +/- in 1992-93 through sheer offensive dominance.

- Howe was just as huge compared to his peers, as Lemieux was.


Once again I didnt say Lemieux was bigger im just stating the obvious that Howe doesnt have a huge physical presence which was part of his point, and you said his shear offensive dominance allowed him to obtain a +55 rating, im not saying he's a Selke winner but he doesnt have a defensive liability?

Orr achieved more in his 9 full seasons, than all players in history ever achieved, with the exceptions of Gretzky and Howe. On a per-game basis, Orr was the greatest player in hockey history. The only thing Gretzky and Howe have on Orr is career value. So he's a consensus top-3 pick, and rightly so.

Im not debating Orr shouldnt be number 1 but you have to include Lemieux into that arguement where he achieved more than Hall of Famers achieve in a 20 year career in half the amount of games
Please edit your post to take out the names of undrafted players.

jarek is offline  
Old
02-10-2010, 09:25 PM
  #81
Leafs Forever
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,792
vCash: 500
As far as the old player bias goes,the "modern guys" (usually defined as 80-onward, or perhaps the past decade), only make up a portion of over 100 years of hockey history that we draft players from. More "older" guys are going to get drafted on this scale, considering it takes up a larger time span.

We also do not value at all what a player may,probably do, or may have or probably have done. The ATD is strictly what a player has done.(which also hurts Lemieux) Some modern players have that going against them as they haven't done enough (yet) to warrant them going higher.


Last edited by Leafs Forever: 02-10-2010 at 09:31 PM.
Leafs Forever is offline  
Old
02-10-2010, 09:43 PM
  #82
markrander87
Registered User
 
markrander87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,606
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafs Forever View Post
As far as the old player bias goes,the "modern guys" (usually defined as 80-onward, or perhaps the past decade), only make up a portion of over 100 years of hockey history that we draft players from. More "older" guys are going to get drafted on this scale, considering it takes up a larger time span.

We also do not value at all what a player may,probably do, or may have or probably have done. The ATD is strictly what a player has done.(which also hurts Lemieux) Some modern players have that going against them as they haven't done enough (yet) to warrant them going higher.

The 12 categories to vote on (rank the top three teams in the division 1st, 2nd, 3rd for each):

EDGE

I. Top scoring line (likely a 1st or 2nd line) MARIO
II. Top two-way line (likely a 2nd or 3rd line) GORDIE
III. Top defensive line (likely a 3rd or 4th line) NONE
IV. Top starting 5 (lw-c-rw-d-d when puck drops to begin game) MARIO
V. Top defensemen duo pairing N/A
VI. Top Top-4 core defense N/A
VII. Top blueline overall (all 7 dmen together) N/A
VIII. Top goaltending tandem (sharing regular season workload) N/A
IX. Top powerplay (two 5-men units, coaching) MARIO
X. Top penalty kill (two 4-men units, goaltending, coaching) N/A
XI. Top team chemistry (consideration of how skaters gell, how coaching "fits" with team style, etc) MARIO- HENCE LAVAL, TYPE OF TEAM
XII. Top call-up squad (the quality and usefulness of the 3 forwards, 2 dmen and 1 goalie on the farm)

markrander87 is offline  
Old
02-10-2010, 09:45 PM
  #83
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,980
vCash: 500
Quote:
I was thinking the same about several of you guys having a LARGE bias towards older era players, looking back on past drafts players like and get drafted in the 5th round behind guys like ?? haha it's non-sensicle
Watch it buddy. You're brand new here, and laughing at some of the best hockey history minds on the board. Humble up.

You are free to change people's opinions but so far you've provided nothing compelling.

Quote:
Originally Posted by markrander87 View Post
Your stat is so misleading, if you actually looked at the amount of full seasons (59) or more games played by Lemieux:

11 seasons
9 times top 5 in scoring 82%
6 time point leader 55%

Howe:
26 seasons
20 times top 5 in scoring 77%
6 time point leader 23%
that's a terrible stat.

So Howe playing longer, being more consistent, and being healthier is a bad thing. Gotcha.

get ready for a long draft.


Quote:
Bear in mind you can talk about Howe playing into his 40's....Mario missed out on 5 prime seasons battling cancer and other injuries, obviously longevity doesnt matter in this draft orr went first overall, how can anybody argue that Howe has better talent, hockey Potential or overall surperior value than Lemieux in this type of format??
I don't think there is a single person here who would take Lemieux first. A few people said it was plausible, that's it.

seventieslord is offline  
Old
02-10-2010, 09:57 PM
  #84
Dwight
The French Tickler
 
Dwight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: West Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,836
vCash: 500
Woops! Sorry fellas. I've been having computer troubles all day and didn't realize I was up so soon. My apologies for holding up the draft, and I assure you that it won't happen again (unless, God forbid, something happens).

I'm quite excited to make this selection as this is a guy I've wanted to have on my team in previous ATD's I've participated in, but I've either drafted too late or too early to get him.

I'll select "The Golden Jet" Bobby Hull (LW)

Dwight is online now  
Old
02-10-2010, 10:07 PM
  #85
markrander87
Registered User
 
markrander87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,606
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Watch it buddy. You're brand new here, and laughing at some of the best hockey history minds on the board. Humble up.

You are free to change people's opinions but so far you've provided nothing compelling.



that's a terrible stat.

So Howe playing longer, being more consistent, and being healthier is a bad thing. Gotcha.

get ready for a long draft.




I don't think there is a single person here who would take Lemieux first. A few people said it was plausible, that's it.


Thats a bold statement, just because you've participated in ATD's like this doesn't mean you have more hockey knowledge than anybody else on this site, you've just spent more time...

The whole basis behind this debate was I was mocked and attacked and i'm standing up for myself and backing up my position on the matter, your so concerned with who everybody else would draft your perception is clouded. There are several people who said they would draft Lemieux ahead of Howe it all depends on what you are looking for at that point in time of the draft.

Please take the 3 minutes and read this article http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=688861.

It's pretty funny that as soon as some "Rookie" comes in and decides to stand up for himself after being provoked that now i'm being offensive...I've made no personal attacks and nor do I intend to.....buddy

Quote:
I know it's a newbie, and I don't want to ride a newbie too hard, but did anyone else do a real life facepalm when Mario was selected before Gordie?
Talk about being humble


Last edited by markrander87: 02-10-2010 at 10:14 PM.
markrander87 is offline  
Old
02-10-2010, 10:15 PM
  #86
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,792
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by markrander87 View Post
If theres only 80 players in the league, than who cares if he's in the top 10 in points? Lemieux faced upwards of 400
But out of those 400-or-so players, how many had a credible shot at the top 10? Not many. Probably only a few more than in the Original 6. There just aren't that many players with the instincts, and the offensive savvy, to finish in the top 10 in scoring.

Randy Cunneyworth finished 86th in goals in 88-89. (Using a player who finished just outside of the top 80 who won't be drafted). I liked Randy. Solid hockey player. Excellent coach. But there's an example of a guy who was a good player who had zero shot of a top 10 finish.

Just a question: is a top 10 in 2003-04 more impressive than a top 10 in 1988-89? There were nine more teams in 2003-04 than 1988-89. But I would argue that a top 10 in 88-89 is more impressive. Look at the top-end competition. The level of play for the average player is better than it's ever been. And we're seeing a return of the top-end talent, thanks to changes in the game and some great drafts. But the top-end guys in 2003-04 weren't as good as 1988-89.

All top 10s are not created equally. But when you take a deeper look, you'll see how impressive it was to be in a top 10 in 1955 or 1960 or 1965.

One little thing to add: the league changed forever with expansion in 67. The result? 39-year-old Gordie Howe finished third in goals in 67-68. The next year, he was fifth in goals. At age 40. And with all the players who joined the league due to expansion - keep in mind, most of these guys were excellent hockey players who, by anyone's standards, were NHL players, but couldn't get a job only because there were six teams - Gordie finished third in points the first two seasons after expansion.

I don't think Gordie's as good offensively as Mario. Mario's the most physically-blessed player to ever play the game. People that big should not have that kind of offensive skill. But Gordie's the better hockey player. I watched Mario play the game. He wasn't very good defensively. And he wasn't a physical player from the standpoint of hitting, finishing his checks, mucking and grinding, battling in the corners, etc. Mario used his size in more of an offensive, puck-protection, force the defenceman to take a hooking call because of Mario's size, speed and puck skills.

Should I be impressed that Mario led the league in plus-minus in 1992-93, on an absolutely incredible Pittsburgh team that dominated offensively and had great goaltending? Does that reflect good defensive play? No. Gretzky led the league in plus-minus several times. Doesn't mean he was anything defensively. (He wasn't).

Howe was strong defensively. He dominated physically, both from a skill perspective - using his size and strength to generate offence - and from a crash-and-bang perspective. He's the greatest power forward of all-time. And his all-round game overcomes the offensive advantage that Mario had.

God Bless Canada is offline  
Old
02-10-2010, 10:24 PM
  #87
VanIslander
17/07/2014 ATD RIP
 
VanIslander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 18,903
vCash: 500
The question of whether Mario was as good as or better than Gretz was an OPEN question for the longest time but when all was said and done, only diehard Lemieux fans refused to admit who the greatest centre of all time was. That said, given the ATD is lenient of players whose careers were hampered a bit by injury, the 66 vs. 99 debate could be said to have two reasonable sides, and picking Lemieux before Gretzky has some weight.

The issue most have here is Gordie Howe going 4th overall after both of them. I actually think him the best player to build a team around given his peak AND career value AND all-around game. He simply brings the most to the table and does so consistently. Orr I personally discount a bit because of injury, though a 10-year career is long enough to have it not matter much.

The upshot of what I'm saying is, is that I could see Gretzky drop to 4th overall if one argues for Mario, but to have Howe on the board and pass him up at 3rd overall is a bit shocking.

Then again: Where is the drop off? After the the top3 or top4? My gut says the latter. But a case of era dominance could put Eddie Shore ahead of Lemieux!

VanIslander is offline  
Old
02-10-2010, 10:28 PM
  #88
markrander87
Registered User
 
markrander87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,606
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by God Bless Canada View Post
But out of those 400-or-so players, how many had a credible shot at the top 10? Not many. Probably only a few more than in the Original 6. There just aren't that many players with the instincts, and the offensive savvy, to finish in the top 10 in scoring.

Randy Cunneyworth finished 86th in goals in 88-89. (Using a player who finished just outside of the top 80 who won't be drafted). I liked Randy. Solid hockey player. Excellent coach. But there's an example of a guy who was a good player who had zero shot of a top 10 finish.

Just a question: is a top 10 in 2003-04 more impressive than a top 10 in 1988-89? There were nine more teams in 2003-04 than 1988-89. But I would argue that a top 10 in 88-89 is more impressive. Look at the top-end competition. The level of play for the average player is better than it's ever been. And we're seeing a return of the top-end talent, thanks to changes in the game and some great drafts. But the top-end guys in 2003-04 weren't as good as 1988-89.

All top 10s are not created equally. But when you take a deeper look, you'll see how impressive it was to be in a top 10 in 1955 or 1960 or 1965.

One little thing to add: the league changed forever with expansion in 67. The result? 39-year-old Gordie Howe finished third in goals in 67-68. The next year, he was fifth in goals. At age 40. And with all the players who joined the league due to expansion - keep in mind, most of these guys were excellent hockey players who, by anyone's standards, were NHL players, but couldn't get a job only because there were six teams - Gordie finished third in points the first two seasons after expansion.

I don't think Gordie's as good offensively as Mario. Mario's the most physically-blessed player to ever play the game. People that big should not have that kind of offensive skill. But Gordie's the better hockey player. I watched Mario play the game. He wasn't very good defensively. And he wasn't a physical player from the standpoint of hitting, finishing his checks, mucking and grinding, battling in the corners, etc. Mario used his size in more of an offensive, puck-protection, force the defenceman to take a hooking call because of Mario's size, speed and puck skills.

Should I be impressed that Mario led the league in plus-minus in 1992-93, on an absolutely incredible Pittsburgh team that dominated offensively and had great goaltending? Does that reflect good defensive play? No. Gretzky led the league in plus-minus several times. Doesn't mean he was anything defensively. (He wasn't).

Howe was strong defensively. He dominated physically, both from a skill perspective - using his size and strength to generate offence - and from a crash-and-bang perspective. He's the greatest power forward of all-time. And his all-round game overcomes the offensive advantage that Mario had.


Name Drop, he hasnt been drafted yet, Who were Howe's Competition during these Scoring races?? who did he play the majority of his career with?? Can someone explain to me why its so easy to point out all of Lemieux's faults due to the fact we were all around to watch him. How old were you in 1952? do you have video footage of Howe's defensive prowless? or are you going by articles written from the 1950's when they needed a hero and Howe fit the mold at the time, where is all of this evidence of a better defensive player...why cant you grasp the fact that you cant put Howe above Lemieux like this its not realistic the game changed so much. There in completely different era's and to automatically say he's the best power forward off all-time is ludacris the average player was like 5'8

In this format when people are judging on the criteria listed Mario Lemieux holds more value than Gordie Howe

markrander87 is offline  
Old
02-10-2010, 10:30 PM
  #89
VanIslander
17/07/2014 ATD RIP
 
VanIslander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 18,903
vCash: 500
The Jim Robson division has Borry Orr vs. Eddie Shore!

The Bob Cole division has Mario Lemieux vs. Bobby Hull. THIS should be a comparison to debate!

Interesting divisional rivalries right from the start.

VanIslander is offline  
Old
02-10-2010, 10:31 PM
  #90
Hockey Outsider
Registered User
 
Hockey Outsider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,388
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by markrander87 View Post
In this format when people are judging on the criteria listed Mario Lemieux holds more value than Gordie Howe
False. People have forgotten how dominant Howe was (possibly due to forgetting that he played in a very low-scoring era relative to Lemieux, or possibly due to Lemieux getting pity points for frequently being injured, or possibly due to modern bias - try finding a Gordie Howe highlight reel on You Tube).

If we look at their primes, relative to their peers, Gordie Howe was a more dominant offensive player than Mario Lemieux. It's not by a large margin, but the advantage nonetheless goes to Howe. Given obvious Howe's advantage in defensive play (he was regarded as one of the best defensive players in the NHL - I will look for the link to the newspaper article from the 1950s on the weekend, or you can search through my post history if you're really eager to find it), one must conclude that Howe had the better prime (and longevity, obviously, but that's not what we're arguing here).

I don't want to post the link directly however (as it's full of references to undrafted players), but you can search Devil's bio of Mr. Hockey, and search for my quote in it. I can send you the raw data directly so you can confirm my calculations. My summary:

"During his best six years, Lemieux outscored the nearest competitor by 34%. Of course, that's not exactly a fair comparison. Gretzky is the greatest scorer ever. Omitting Gretzky, we see that Lemieux outscored the next-best player, XXX, by 39%... After that, there's a big drop. Lemieux outscored the rest of the players on this list by 61% to 81%. All of them except XXX are HOFers. So, Lemieux fares extremely well. Let's see how Howe does...

He didn't just outscore the rest of the league, he obliterated them. Howe finished an incredible 53% ahead of the next-best player (this is by a higher amount than Lemieux's margin of victory over XXX). The next best player was Howe's linemate, XXX. The fact that Howe was able to outscore his full-time linemate, who's one of the top 20 forwards of all time, is a testament to his dominance.

Howe's dominance doesn't end there. Every player on this list is a HOFer. He outscored them by 76% to 142%. Those numbers are matched in history only by Gretzky. When a player can DOUBLE what every other player in the league has scored (except for XXX, XXX and XXX!) over a six year span, they've achieved a historic accomplishment that will never again be achieved.

These numbers conclusively demonstrate that Howe was at least as dominant offensively as Lemieux; in fact, Howe was probably better. When you consider the intangibles (defense, physical play, leadership), it's an easy decision in favor of Howe."

I'll soften my stance a bit - Lemieux probably faced a deeper talent pool than Howe, at least towards the end of his career. However I don't think it offsets Howe's offensive advatange.

In summary: if you compare their best six years Howe was a better scorer than Lemieux (relative to their peers). Factor in Howe's defensive play and he had the better prime than Lemieux.

Quote:
Originally Posted by markrander87 View Post
or are you going by articles written from the 1950's when they needed a hero and Howe fit the mold at the time, where is all of this evidence of a better defensive player...
So Gordie Howe wasn't great defensively, and it was all a conspiracy by sports writers to make somebody a hero??

Quote:
Originally Posted by markrander87 View Post
Who were Howe's Competition during these Scoring races?? who did he play the majority of his career with??
Let's look at Howe's peak, 1951-1954. He won the Art Ross each year. Out of the other top five scorers each year (17 in total due to ties), 14 of them are Hall of Fame players. Eight of those 17 players are (according to the HOH Top 100 list) top fifty players of all time! Thirteen out of seventeen are top 100 players of all time! We can discuss this later once these players have been drafted but I don't see anybody can seriously use competition as a point against Howe.

I will concede Howe generally played with good players, however it's important to note that even after the offensive core of the 1950s dynasty left (XXX and XXX in particular), Howe's scoring dropped only slightly. I would like to elaborate on this point more but it probably breaks our rule of not discussing undrafted players. We can come back to this point later.


Last edited by Hockey Outsider: 02-10-2010 at 10:45 PM.
Hockey Outsider is offline  
Old
02-10-2010, 10:33 PM
  #91
VanIslander
17/07/2014 ATD RIP
 
VanIslander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 18,903
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by markrander87 View Post
There in completely different era's and to automatically say he's the best power forward off all-time is ludacris the average player was like 5'8
yes, and we judge a player relative to his era

in terms of the history of the game, a modern player isn't necessarily greater just because in his era skaters were faster and bigger

VanIslander is offline  
Old
02-10-2010, 10:34 PM
  #92
Leafs Forever
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,792
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by markrander87 View Post
The 12 categories to vote on (rank the top three teams in the division 1st, 2nd, 3rd for each):

EDGE

I. Top scoring line (likely a 1st or 2nd line) MARIO
II. Top two-way line (likely a 2nd or 3rd line) GORDIE
III. Top defensive line (likely a 3rd or 4th line) NONE
IV. Top starting 5 (lw-c-rw-d-d when puck drops to begin game) MARIO
V. Top defensemen duo pairing N/A
VI. Top Top-4 core defense N/A
VII. Top blueline overall (all 7 dmen together) N/A
VIII. Top goaltending tandem (sharing regular season workload) N/A
IX. Top powerplay (two 5-men units, coaching) MARIO
X. Top penalty kill (two 4-men units, goaltending, coaching) N/A
XI. Top team chemistry (consideration of how skaters gell, how coaching "fits" with team style, etc) MARIO- HENCE LAVAL, TYPE OF TEAM
XII. Top call-up squad (the quality and usefulness of the 3 forwards, 2 dmen and 1 goalie on the farm)
1. These categories are for comparing teams, not players

2. These rankings didn't work out well last ATD- not many people bothered to do them. This form didn't actually play a part in how teams were ranked 1-8 in their divisions last ATD; everyone just ranked teams how they felt.

3. It is highly debatable who is better scoring. Howe's longevity considered, I'll go with him.

4. I still think Howe's better defensively, but I suppose I haven't looked into it well..

5. How does top-starting 5 been one by Mario? That's really only who's the better overall player, which you really haven't show in favor of Mario other than stuff that highly favors modern players or with stuff that ignores Howe's longevity and Lemieux's injuries.

6. Power-play is offense, although I'm not sure who the better PP scorer was. Although you haven't brought anything to the table showing Mario better.

7. You having the same team name as Mario's junior team means aboslutely nothing when comparing guys head to head. Team chemistry you have to wait till quite a bit in the draft to see, and even then it's not clear as who knows what you would have done with Howe. It is highly debatable who is the better guy to build around. Personally, I say Howe.


Last edited by Leafs Forever: 02-10-2010 at 10:40 PM.
Leafs Forever is offline  
Old
02-10-2010, 10:36 PM
  #93
VanIslander
17/07/2014 ATD RIP
 
VanIslander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 18,903
vCash: 500
ah.... I'm glad the ATD is back

VanIslander is offline  
Old
02-10-2010, 10:42 PM
  #94
markrander87
Registered User
 
markrander87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,606
vCash: 500
How would the Red wings and every other team Howe played on have faired without him being a part of their franchise?

Now think about where the Pttsburgh Penguins would be without Mario Lemieux? There would be no Pittsburgh Penguins he saved the Franchise

I'm building my team around the best suit possible, my team is based in Laval what a coincidence where Lemieux played his jr. hockey, who would my fans rather have as a franchise player? Who was the best top line center available? Who do I want on the ice with 1:00 left and i'm down by a goal? Who has the better potential impact on a single season which this league is about, there is no mention of contracts or anything along those lines, its one season.


my whole point is to try and explain to you that this is not SUCH A SHOCKING SELECTION as it is being made to be? so if there even? what fun is it going pack to past drafts and just following the cookie-cutter mold of every other draft, have an imagination make different picks, back up your selections, you guys said this ATD's needed a breath of fresh air haha wel im not saying im fresh air lets just say im more along the lines of smelling salts and this was only the 1st round...

markrander87 is offline  
Old
02-10-2010, 10:42 PM
  #95
God Bless Canada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Bentley reunion
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,792
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by markrander87 View Post
Name Drop, he hasnt been drafted yet, Who were Howe's Competition during these Scoring races?? who did he play the majority of his career with?? Can someone explain to me why its so easy to point out all of Lemieux's faults due to the fact we were all around to watch him. How old were you in 1952? do you have video footage of Howe's defensive prowless? or are you going by articles written from the 1950's when they needed a hero and Howe fit the mold at the time, where is all of this evidence of a better defensive player...why cant you grasp the fact that you cant put Howe above Lemieux like this its not realistic the game changed so much. There in completely different era's and to automatically say he's the best power forward off all-time is ludacris the average player was like 5'8

In this format when people are judging on the criteria listed Mario Lemieux holds more value than Gordie Howe
Wow, you actually did nothing to counter my argument.

The press of the 50s had plenty of "heroes" to turn to, if that's what they felt they needed. I didn't see Howe play, but most who watched him play (he does have his detractors, just like Mario and Gretz) rave about his play in every zone, in all aspects of the game.

Go take a look and find out who was finishing in the top five, top 10, in 55, 60 and 65. Especially in the late 50s and early 60s, when the game really started to open up. Very high-end company. Unquestioned Hall of Famers.

God Bless Canada is offline  
Old
02-10-2010, 10:47 PM
  #96
markrander87
Registered User
 
markrander87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,606
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanIslander View Post
yes, and we judge a player relative to his era

in terms of the history of the game, a modern player isn't necessarily greater just because in his era skaters were faster and bigger
So who compares to Lemieux as a power forward in his era??


Last edited by markrander87: 02-10-2010 at 11:30 PM.
markrander87 is offline  
Old
02-10-2010, 10:49 PM
  #97
jarek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanIslander View Post
ah.... I'm glad the ATD is back
You and me both.

jarek is offline  
Old
02-10-2010, 10:49 PM
  #98
Leafs Forever
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,792
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by markrander87 View Post
How would the Red wings and every other team Howe played on have faired without him being a part of their franchise?

Now think about where the Pttsburgh Penguins would be without Mario Lemieux? There would be no Pittsburgh Penguins he saved the Franchise

I'm building my team around the best suit possible, my team is based in Laval what a coincidence where Lemieux played his jr. hockey, who would my fans rather have as a franchise player? Who was the best top line center available? Who do I want on the ice with 1:00 left and i'm down by a goal? Who has the better potential impact on a single season which this league is about, there is no mention of contracts or anything along those lines, its one season.
The Red Wings? Probably not nearly as well. No way they win the # of cups they did without him. Detroit would still have stood as a franchise, but the days are different.

Here's a lesson- team names and locations mean nothing in this beyond seperating teams from eachother easily. There is no "fan" factor involved. It's what the consensus of the other GM's about your players that counts. Lemieux was the best centre, doesn't mean he was the best forward. Howe was better offensively peak wise as I think HO showed, although clutchness I haven't looked into- why don't you actually find some stats showing Lemieux was more clutch while actually giving Howe a fair chance?

This isn't really a league, but an event. Your "potentital impact" insinuates (not saying this is what you mean, just my impression) that the ATD is about peak or a single season. It isn't. The building part of the ATD is about measuring the career values (which does entail peak certainly, but it would not be all or a majority of the equation to most) of players and trying to get the best players you can while building a strong team concept.

Leafs Forever is offline  
Old
02-10-2010, 10:50 PM
  #99
Leafs Forever
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,792
vCash: 500
Please avoid mentioning undrafted guys.

Lemieux wasn't really a power forward. Howe was much more a power forward. it is true power forwards can suffer through injury quite often due to style of play, which hurts their values in this, obviously this isn't the case with Howe, the longevity king.

Leafs Forever is offline  
Old
02-10-2010, 10:51 PM
  #100
markrander87
Registered User
 
markrander87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,606
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by God Bless Canada View Post
Wow, you actually did nothing to counter my argument.

The press of the 50s had plenty of "heroes" to turn to, if that's what they felt they needed. I didn't see Howe play, but most who watched him play (he does have his detractors, just like Mario and Gretz) rave about his play in every zone, in all aspects of the game.

Go take a look and find out who was finishing in the top five, top 10, in 55, 60 and 65. Especially in the late 50s and early 60s, when the game really started to open up. Very high-end company. Unquestioned Hall of Famers.


I'm done with stats we could rebuttle for days pulling out stats which favour either player, the bottomline is that Lemieux over Howe is not a "Facepalm" selection, it may be what wasn't expected but there were numerous reasons lready stated why I selected Lemieux over Howe, The most important stat PPG lEMIEUX 2nd, Howe 30 something haha

markrander87 is offline  
Closed Thread

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 04:02 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.