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.

The 2010 AAA Draft (rosters, picks, discussion, etc.)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-13-2010, 08:42 AM
  #151
VanIslander
Hope for better 2015
 
VanIslander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 19,693
vCash: 500
Congratulations Winnipeg Victorias! Qualifying after just six days is a new record!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneberg View Post
1939 or earlier - Mud Bruneteau
1940-1965 - Dave Creighton
1966-1979 - Robert Picard
1980-1993 - Glen Murray
1994-2010 - Andrew Brunette

VanIslander is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2010, 08:43 AM
  #152
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,772
vCash: 500
John Cullen, C



- 1998-99 NHL Bill Masterton Memorial Trophy winner
- played in 1991 & 1992 All-star game
- finished 5th in points and 7th in assists in '90-'91
- finished 17th in assists and 20th in points in '89-'90
- maintained quality production in the postseason


Last edited by MadArcand: 10-13-2010 at 08:56 AM.
MadArcand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2010, 09:11 AM
  #153
VanIslander
Hope for better 2015
 
VanIslander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 19,693
vCash: 500
The Tigers draft Doug Lidster.



Quote:
Doug Lidster was a superior offensive defenceman who played nearly 900 games for three different clubs. He was an excellent quarterback on the power play and constantly helped his team's transition game with his ability to carry the puck out of his own zone.

He was a two-time selection to the WCHA first all-star team and was placed on the NCAA first all-American team once. After graduating, Lidster joined the Canadian National Team for the 1983-84 season. He scored 26 points in 59 exhibition matches then represented his country at the Sarajevo Olympics.

Lidster joined Vancouver for the last part of the regular season and first round of the playoffs. He enjoyed a solid rookie year in 1984-85 with 30 points and was named to Team Canada at the World Championships. Lidster was a key playmaker and point man on the power play for Vancouver through the 1992-93 season. He also participated in the World Championships in 1990 and 1991.

In June 1993, the veteran blueliner was traded to the New York Rangers. Ironically, the 1993-94 season culminated in a Stanley Cup finals between Lidster's current and former team. He scored two goals in the playoffs to help the Blueshirts win their first Stanley Cup since 1940. Lidster played the 1994-95 season with the St. Louis Blues then rejoined the Rangers for three seasons. The veteran added some useful experience to the Dallas Stars when they won their first Stanley Cup in 1998-99.

VanIslander is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2010, 09:13 AM
  #154
Stoneberg
Bored
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,709
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanIslander View Post
Congratulations Winnipeg Victorias! Qualifying after just six days is a new record!
Oddly enough, I hadn't even considered eras when deciding on picks. It just so happened that we met the requirements quickly with the guys we wanted.

Stoneberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2010, 09:58 AM
  #155
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,150
vCash: 500
Murray Craven, LW

Craven is actually the leader in 54+ point seasons among available players, with a total of 8, just going off the report I ran for the Arnott selection in the MLD.

Craven is exactly what my 2nd line needs - a big, playmaking LW with some defensive skill.

Craven was 6'3 and was a big and strong player, though not necessarily physical or tough. He was a good defensive player at even strength with a career adjusted +94, and a very prolific penalty killer, killing 31% of his team's penalties in his career. As a bonus, Craven is the all-time leader in assists and APG by a LW among remaining players. Surely the era (1984-2000) helped with that, but the only other players close in either category are others from the 1980s and with shorter careers.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2010, 10:13 AM
  #156
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,150
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanIslander View Post
Absolute bunk. The adjusted +/- has its place but NOT in assessing the value of a defensive forward on a bad team. A great defensive forward thrown out on the ice against the opposition's best of course will have a worse +/- than those teammates who don't play against the top lines. And if the other four skaters on the ice for his team are not up to the task of playing against the best (as happens on awful teams) then a star defensive forward's goals for/against suffers based on linemate incompetence. The situation is compunded when that great defensive forward is not playing on the top line, so the team's coach engineers the most favorable match-ups at home for the scoring lines and the least favorable situations goes to the star defensive forward. Libett of the '70s red Wings is such a player. It makes no sense whatsoever to judge his effectiveness checking the best players in the league by looking at that stat.
It's not absolute bunk. I realize the disadvantageous situation it can put a player in. But a great defensive player won't "of course" have worse numbers than teammates who don't play against top lines. there are many players who did just that and kept their numbers solid, comparing apples to apples. It's definitely a concern when comparing two players who are similarly revered for their defensive abilities.

For the record, it looks like Libett was one of the Wings' top-5 forwards in ice time six times based on GF/GA figures, so he likely did get some time on the top line, or he was at least always on the second line. he had offensive situations to help his GF/GA figures and he had the offensive ability, too. (Duchesne, on the other hand, played much more "specialized" minutes, less offensive and more defensive, peaking at 5th, once, in forward ice time on a terrible Quebec team, and still came out positive in the end)

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2010, 10:31 AM
  #157
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,150
vCash: 500
Today's picks:

Cory Stillman. Was not in my plans, but his name has been on my radar a long time. Offensive numbers were getting difficult to ignore. as a playmaking LW, he was extremely close to Craven, but Craven's defensive and PK ability made that one easy.

Tony Gingras. I'd have considered him later on for sure.

Dana Murzyn. He was most often a #4-5 defenseman. Decent length career for sure, but there are better guys out there.

Sergei Shepelev. Decent anecdotes about a handful of games. What about his career? How'd he do in the soviet league?

Cullen: Not a big fan.

Lidster: Was one of the better PP specialists out there and averaged about 21.5 minutes per game in his career. OK, but there are still better guys too. Hope to see them get drafted.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2010, 11:24 AM
  #158
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,772
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Cullen: Not a big fan.
Say, why? Does it stem from his career's low point being in Leaf uniform, or from the oft believed myth, that he needed Mario to produce?

MadArcand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2010, 11:59 AM
  #159
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 43,194
vCash: 500
Thanks for announcing our pick, VI.

Guy Chouinard, C

Goals = 4th
Assists = 9th, 10th, 20th
Points = 6th
Playoff scoring = 4th in 1981 with 17 points in 16 games

-Also finished 3rd and 8th in assists per game and 5th and 20th in points per game in 2 seasons where he missed 16 and 28 games.

-In his best season (50 goals, 57 assists, 107 points in 78-79 for the Atlanta Flames), he was a "3rd Team All-Star" at the center position behind Bryan Trottier and Marcel Dionne

During his 5 year peak (78-79 to 82-83):

-Scored at 1.22 points per game.
-5 straight 46+ assist seasons
-8th in total assists and 13th in total points (in an era of great playmakers)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Pelletier
This clever center racked up some respectable numbers during his 10 year NHL career.

Called "Gramps" by his teammates because of his looks which made him appear a lot older than he was, Guy Chouinard emerged as the Flames offensive leader.

Chouinard was a creative offensive force with a deadly accurate shot and soft hands. For a brief time he was considered to be the third best center in the National Hockey League.
Quote:
Originally Posted by legendsofhockey
Chouinard finally got his chance to play in the NHL on a full-time basis in 1976-77, playing 80 games and scoring 17 goals and 50 points. He improved to 28 goals and 58 points the next year but it was the 1978-79 season when he had the year of his life, scoring 50 goals and 57 assists for 107 points. That excellent year was followed by a pair of 31-goal seasons, the second of which came in Calgary, after the club had re-located there for the 1980-81 season.
Successful coaching career after retirement shows a good mind for the game:

Quote:
Originally Posted by wikipedia
Chouinard has also had a brilliant career (more than 10 years) coaching in the Quebec Major Junior Hockey League, notably for the Victoriaville Tigres, Quebec Remparts, and Prince Edward Island Rocket and was enshrined in the QMJHL Hall of Fame in 2005. He has coached the second most games in the QMJHL (988), most wins as a coach (515) and most championships as a coach (4).
Played the point on the PP in Calgary as a Right-handed shot:

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
He was definitely on the point. I read this in a scouting report just last night. This explains why Paul Reinhart had all those PPGF that one year, and the other defensemen on the team had less than 10 combined. We always knew of that anomaly, but now we know who caused it.
Ranks Top 50 All-Time in Assists per game:

Quote:
33. Doug Gilmour 0.654
34. Jason Spezza 0.652
35. Bernie Nicholls 0.651
36. Eric Lindros 0.649
37. Pavel Datsyuk 0.649
38. Brian Leetch* 0.648
39. Bill Cowley* 0.643
40. Brad Richards 0.641
41. Ken Linseman 0.641
42. Guy Chouinard 0.640
43. Jari Kurri* 0.637
44. Jean Beliveau* 0.633
45. Bobby Smith 0.630
46. Pat LaFontaine* 0.630
47. Marc Savard 0.628
48. Pierre Turgeon 0.627
49. Daniel Alfredsson 0.615
50. Elmer Lach* 0.615
51. Doug Weight 0.614


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 10-13-2010 at 03:51 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2010, 12:11 PM
  #160
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 43,194
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanIslander View Post
Congratulations Winnipeg Victorias! Qualifying after just six days is a new record!
Pfft, the London Bandits could have qualified after 5 days.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2010, 12:24 PM
  #161
Hedberg
MLD Glue Guy
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BC, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,263
vCash: 500
Toledo selects D Al Dewsbury




1950 Stanley Cup Champion
Played in 1951 All-Star Game
6th Defence Scoring 1952
9th Defence Scoring 1953
7th Defence Scoring 1954

Legends of Hockey
Quote:
Al Dewsbury was one of the giants of the game in the 1940s and 1950s. By today's standards, he would be considered just an average-sized player, but back then a 6'2" 202-pound rearguard was a very imposing figure to many of the smaller players in the game.

Dewsbury played for the USHL's Omaha Knights in 1945-46, starting in 41 games and scoring six goals and six assists. The following year his time was split between the AHL's Indianapolis Capitals and the NHL's Detroit Red Wings. In 23 games with the Wings, he had two goals and an assist. One of the main reasons he was so attractive to the Wings was his aggressive style of play. In 34 games with Indianapolis, he had 80 minutes in penalties.

After a couple more seasons with the Indianapolis Capitals, Dewsbury drew a permanent assignment with the Chicago Blackhawks where he would remain for six seasons. In three of the first four years, he played in 69 games and saw action in 67 in the other. From an offensive perspective, his best year was 1951-52 when he scored seven goals and 17 assists for 24 points. Dewsbury and the Hawks never were able to make it to the Stanley Cup finals, which were for the most part dominated at that time by the Detroit Red Wings and the Montreal Canadiens.


Last edited by Hedberg: 10-13-2010 at 12:39 PM.
Hedberg is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2010, 12:41 PM
  #162
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,150
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
Say, why? Does it stem from his career's low point being in Leaf uniform, or from the oft believed myth, that he needed Mario to produce?
Neither, really. I just don't see him as one of the best players available yet.

- He produced 0.53 adj. ES PPG in his short career
- He needed the PP to produce a lot of his points: 0.33 adj. PP PPG.
- very bad adjusted +/-, always a warning sign for such an offensive player
- was not a factor on the PK at all
- had three seasons anyone would consider "good" offensively and then went AWOL offensively.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Thanks for announcing our pick, VI.

Guy Chouinard, C

Goals = 4th
Assists = 9th, 10th, 20th
Points = 6th
Playoff scoring = 4th in 1981 with 17 points in 16 games

-Also finished 3rd and 8th in assists per game and 5th and 20th in points per game in 2 seasons where he missed 16 and 28 games.

-In his best season (50 goals, 57 assists, 107 points in 78-79 for the Atlanta Flames), he was a "3rd Team All-Star" at the center position behind Bryan Trottier and Marcel Dionne

During his 5 year peak (78-79 to 82-83):

-Scored at 1.22 points per game.
-5 straight 46+ assist seasons
-8th in total assists and 13th in total points (in an era of great playmakers)

Successful coaching career after retirement shows a good mind for the game:

Ranks Top 50 All-Time in Assists per game:
I was actually ready to call this guy arguably the best offensive player left, but he was a MAJOR PP specialist.

0.56 adj. PPG at even strength, 0.38 on the PP.

He's still close. but his point totals are deceptive thanks to the over-reliance on the PK.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2010, 01:16 PM
  #163
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 43,194
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Neither, really. I just don't see him as one of the best players available yet.

- He produced 0.53 adj. ES PPG in his short career
- He needed the PP to produce a lot of his points: 0.33 adj. PP PPG.
- very bad adjusted +/-, always a warning sign for such an offensive player
- was not a factor on the PK at all
- had three seasons anyone would consider "good" offensively and then went AWOL offensively.



I was actually ready to call this guy arguably the best offensive player left, but he was a MAJOR PP specialist.

0.56 adj. PPG at even strength, 0.38 on the PP.

He's still close. but his point totals are deceptive thanks to the over-reliance on the PK.
Is reliance on the PP really a bad thing per se? Those goals still count. Plenty of star players scored a high proportion of their points on the PP (Mario Lemieux and Jean Beliveau come to mind). I think over-reliance on the PP can be bad if you are a secondary player on a stacked PP (like Cullen might have been in Pittsburgh), but who was inflating Chouinard's totals on the Atlanta Flames?

Anyway, I had no idea that that Chouinard got so many of his points on the PP, but I think it evens out - helps our PP slightly, hurts ES scoring slightly.

Who do you think a better #1 center at ES is? Chouinard or Bullard? Both have very strong PP credentials and likely will play together on the first PP.

Edit: As for Cullen, the one thing in his favor is that I believe he was actually a very effective 3rd line center late in his career (if I am remembering correctly). And how much of his bad adjusted plus/minus was because he played on a different line from Mario Lemieux at even strength?

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2010, 01:19 PM
  #164
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
 
Nalyd Psycho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: No Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,380
vCash: 500
Randy Carlyle, Coach

__________________
Every post comes with the Nalyd Psycho Seal of Approval.
Nalyd Psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2010, 01:56 PM
  #165
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,642
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Is reliance on the PP really a bad thing per se? Those goals still count. Plenty of star players scored a high proportion of their points on the PP (Mario Lemieux and Jean Beliveau come to mind). I think over-reliance on the PP can be bad if you are a secondary player on a stacked PP (like Cullen might have been in Pittsburgh), but who was inflating Chouinard's totals on the Atlanta Flames?
I think Chouinard was a legitimate PP difference maker, and could be the best power play scorer at this level (without having looked at who else is out there). He usually led his team in PP points, and always played on average to good power plays.

At some point, Kent Nilsson and Paul Reinhart joined him, and at that point Atlanta/Calgary went from having an average power play to a plus power play. But Chouinard was better than Reinhart and right there with Nilsson in power play scoring while they played together.

If you are parsing the stats closely, it's worth noting that his Atlanta teams were terrible at drawing penalties. Fewest power play opportunities for four consecutive years - you don't see that often. Even in Calgary they continued to be among the worse teams in this category. So that hurt his opportunities to score on the power play.

Although you may want to count on your other forwards to draw penalties, not Chouinard.

overpass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2010, 01:59 PM
  #166
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,772
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Neither, really. I just don't see him as one of the best players available yet.

- He produced 0.53 adj. ES PPG in his short career
- He needed the PP to produce a lot of his points: 0.33 adj. PP PPG.
- very bad adjusted +/-, always a warning sign for such an offensive player
- was not a factor on the PK at all
- had three seasons anyone would consider "good" offensively and then went AWOL offensively.
He didn't go AWOL - outside '93-'94, he produced pretty well for a 2nd-3rd line player, scoring 0.66-0.8 PPG. And even in the terrible '93-'94, he scored 0.57 PPG. He was twice PPG in playoffs, and was by far the best player in Tampa's first playoff, leading team in G, A, pts and +/-. He has some defensive shortcomings, but as far as offense goes, he was pretty damn productive.

MadArcand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2010, 02:01 PM
  #167
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,150
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Is reliance on the PP really a bad thing per se? Those goals still count. Plenty of star players scored a high proportion of their points on the PP (Mario Lemieux and Jean Beliveau come to mind). I think over-reliance on the PP can be bad if you are a secondary player on a stacked PP (like Cullen might have been in Pittsburgh), but who was inflating Chouinard's totals on the Atlanta Flames?
His coaches.

Chouinard was on the ice for 79% of his team's PP goals during his career so comparing him to a guy who was out there 45% of the time isn't apples to apples. they may have proven to be equally effective, but the guy with more PP time will score more.

I checked his numbers against a couple of decent retired scoring centers who played 40-50% of their teams' powerplays in their career, just to see if Chouinard was really "in" in a lot more goals, indicating more PP skill, or if he just played a lot more on the PP.

one is Patrik Sundstrom, the other is Bullard, to answer the below question, and the other is undrafted, but may get drafted if Cullen was.

Bullard was on the ice for 49% of his team's PP goals. This is 335 adjusted PPGF. He had 222 adjusted PPP, so he was in on 66% of them.

Chouinard was on the ice for 79%, or 315 adjusted. His 226 adjusted PPP are good for 72%.

Sundstrom was on the ice for 45%, or 276 adjusted. He has 173 adjusted PPP, good for 63%.

The undrafted guy was on the ice for 47%, or 329 adjusted. He has 197 adjusted PPP, good for 60%.

So it looks like Chouinard was particularly skilled on the PP, but he did also benefit from getting a ton of preferential time there.

Quote:
Who do you think a better #1 center at ES is? Chouinard or Bullard? Both have very strong PP credentials and likely will play together on the first PP.
To answer this, I think Chouinard is slightly more prolific at both even strength and on the PP.

Bullard's got PIMs that say he might be tough, but I was scouting him and the reports said he wasn't physical at all. Strange.

Quote:
Edit: As for Cullen, the one thing in his favor is that I believe he was actually a very effective 3rd line center late in his career (if I am remembering correctly). And how much of his bad adjusted plus/minus was because he played on a different line from Mario Lemieux at even strength?
Effective in what way? He wasn't better than average defensively and he was never used on the PK. He was too small to be effective physically, though he was courageous.

Cullen's career adjusted +/- breakdown is as follows:

1989: -20 (could be Lemieux factor)
1990: -3 (no excuse)
1991: +1
1992: -22 (no excuse, he was on hartford and scored 77 points)
1993: -18 (could say Gilmour factor, but was just -4 in TO, had -14 in HFD)
1994: -1
1995: -5
1996: 5
1997: -10 (on TBY as a 55-point player)
1999: -2 (was coming back from Cancer, nothing left in the tank)

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2010, 02:08 PM
  #168
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,150
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
He didn't go AWOL - outside '93-'94, he produced pretty well for a 2nd-3rd line player, scoring 0.66-0.8 PPG. And even in the terrible '93-'94, he scored 0.57 PPG. He was twice PPG in playoffs, and was by far the best player in Tampa's first playoff, leading team in G, A, pts and +/-. He has some defensive shortcomings, but as far as offense goes, he was pretty damn productive.
Cullen was Toronto's 5th-most used forward when they got him in 1993. He was also Pittsburgh's 5th-most used in 1995. Same in 1996 for Tampa Bay, and he was 4th in 1997. He was definitely not just a 3rd liner, he was often getting 2nd line minutes, and let's not confuse cause and effect here. Other undrafted players began to be viewed as better options, this is why he was not ona first line.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2010, 02:25 PM
  #169
MadArcand
We do not sow
 
MadArcand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Pyke
Country: Slovakia
Posts: 4,772
vCash: 500
^ I wanted to write that Gilmour, Francis and X aren't undrafted players, but apparently the third guy really is still undrafted.

MadArcand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2010, 02:27 PM
  #170
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,642
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
His coaches.

Chouinard was on the ice for 79% of his team's PP goals during his career so comparing him to a guy who was out there 45% of the time isn't apples to apples. they may have proven to be equally effective, but the guy with more PP time will score more.
Right, but Chouinard's coaches must have had a reason to put him out there that much. And his teams always had average to good power plays, so this isn't a Kovalchuk situation where he played a lot but the team didn't get good results.

Players who were on the ice for 75%+ of their teams power play goals, and whose teams had above-average power plays (since 1968)

Mario Lemieux
Wayne Gretzky
Phil Esposito
Kent Nilsson
Joe Sakic
Marcel Dionne
Guy Chouinard
Rene Robert
Mike Bossy

If any of these players "benefited" from getting a lot of power play time, I'd say their teams benefited equally.

Of course Chouinard was the least accomplished player of the group above. Kent Nilsson, his teammate, is probably the best comparison as a power play scorer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Who do you think a better #1 center at ES is? Chouinard or Bullard? Both have very strong PP credentials and likely will play together on the first PP.
In their weaker seasons, Chouinard was more of a PP player, and Bullard more of an ES player. (Bullard was probably the best ES forward on Pittsburgh in his first two years there, but they had a near-PP specialist playing centre on the first unit). Hard to say who was better in their best years - Chouinard was probably the better scorer, but Bullard may have done other things better. 70s might know more.

overpass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2010, 02:35 PM
  #171
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
 
Nalyd Psycho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: No Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,380
vCash: 500
Yeah, that's a problem that takes getting used to...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneberg View Post
I'd just like to point out that Winnipeg has already met the playoff requirements.

1939 or earlier - Mud Bruneteau
1940-1965 - Dave Creighton
1966-1979 - Robert Picard
1980-1993 - Glen Murray
1994-2010 - Andrew Brunette
I believe I did too...

1939 or earlier - Jaroslav Drobny
1940 to 1965 - Seth Martin
1966 to 1979 - Morris Lukowich, Jim Dorey
1980 to 1993 - Gaetan Duchesne, Vladimir Ruzicka
1994 to 2010 - Randy Carlyle

Depends if coaches count...


Last edited by Nalyd Psycho: 10-13-2010 at 03:37 PM.
Nalyd Psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2010, 02:43 PM
  #172
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,150
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
Right, but Chouinard's coaches must have had a reason to put him out there that much. And his teams always had average to good power plays, so this isn't a Kovalchuk situation where he played a lot but the team didn't get good results.

Players who were on the ice for 75%+ of their teams power play goals, and whose teams had above-average power plays (since 1968)

Mario Lemieux
Wayne Gretzky
Phil Esposito
Kent Nilsson
Joe Sakic
Marcel Dionne
Guy Chouinard
Rene Robert
Mike Bossy

If any of these players "benefited" from getting a lot of power play time, I'd say their teams benefited equally.

Of course Chouinard was the least accomplished player of the group above. Kent Nilsson, his teammate, is probably the best comparison as a power play scorer.
Are you able to tell us what percentage of their team's PP goals these players were in on? I can do it, but it's a pieced together process from a couple of your spreadsheets.

Quote:
In their weaker seasons, Chouinard was more of a PP player, and Bullard more of an ES player. (Bullard was probably the best ES forward on Pittsburgh in his first two years there, but they had a near-PP specialist playing centre on the first unit). Hard to say who was better in their best years - Chouinard was probably the better scorer, but Bullard may have done other things better. 70s might know more.
I think both guys have pretty mediocre reputations for their play away from the puck.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2010, 02:49 PM
  #173
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,642
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Are you able to tell us what percentage of their team's PP goals these players were in on? I can do it, but it's a pieced together process from a couple of your spreadsheets.
Player PP% TmPP+
Mario Lemieux 95% 1.06
Wayne Gretzky 83% 1.08
Phil Esposito 82% 1.29
Kent Nilsson 80% 1.05
Joe Sakic 78% 1.05
Marcel Dionne 78% 1.02
Guy Chouinard 76% 1.06
Rene Robert 76% 1.04
Mike Bossy 75% 1.19

overpass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2010, 02:54 PM
  #174
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,150
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
Player PP% TmPP+
Mario Lemieux 95% 1.06
Wayne Gretzky 83% 1.08
Phil Esposito 82% 1.29
Kent Nilsson 80% 1.05
Joe Sakic 78% 1.05
Marcel Dionne 78% 1.02
Guy Chouinard 76% 1.06
Rene Robert 76% 1.04
Mike Bossy 75% 1.19
Thanks, but I mean the percentage of goals they got points on.

I'm just wondering if Chouinard was as "responsible" for the success of the PP as those guys were.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2010, 03:07 PM
  #175
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,642
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Thanks, but I mean the percentage of goals they got points on.

I'm just wondering if Chouinard was as "responsible" for the success of the PP as those guys were.
OK, I see what you mean.

Player PPP/PGF
Mario Lemieux 73%
Wayne Gretzky 75%
Phil Esposito 67%
Kent Nilsson 71%
Joe Sakic 66%
Marcel Dionne 65%
Guy Chouinard 64%
Rene Robert 60%
Mike Bossy 70%

From what I've seen, guys who play the point tend to score a little lower on this (Rene Robert). Did Chouinard play the point? Atlanta/Calgary definitely had a forward playing the point, from the breakdown of players on the ice, but I'm not sure I've ever heard who it was.

overpass 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 09:57 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.