HFBoards

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

ATD 2011 Draft Thread V

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-21-2011, 12:32 AM
  #201
hungryhungryhippy
Registered User
 
hungryhungryhippy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 739
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sturminator View Post
That's sort of a tough question. You're already pretty deep into the draft to be taking a #2 defenseman, though I guess there are still a few guys out there who could hold it down for you alongside Tremblay. Might want to do it sooner rather than later if you're not going to break up the twins.

Not sure I'd call Mortson an "elite" #3 defenseman in this thing, though if you use him as such he will likely be in the top 1/4 of them when all is said and done. Looking around the league at already-drafted "third best" defensemen (ignoring which pairing they're assigned to), I think the true elite are obviously Chara/Flaman (whomever you wish to classify as a #3) and Georges Boucher. After that, you've got I think a second sub-elite tier that consists of Stapleton and Lutchenko (who I really like), and then a pretty big "very good" tier in which Mortson falls with others like Suter, Griffis, McCrimmon, Heller, Pratt, Hitchman, Ragulin, Boivin and Ross.

Honestly, it really depends on who you draft as your next defenseman. There aren't a lot of guys left who I'd trust as a #2 next to Tremblay, and if you don't get one of them, you probably should break up the twins. You can always play them as your first unit PK pairing, at any rate.
Thanks for the insight and input. I've been going through this exact thought process over the last week, and came to the same conclusions you did. I'm in a bit of a jam right now, so I'm exploring some different options. I knew right when I decided to take Mortson, that this was potentially going to be a problem for me - that's why I wanted to trade up immediately and take a partner (Hitchman) for Tremblay right after I drafted Mortson.

I plan on taking a defenseman with my next pick, unless I go through with a trade that involves moving Brimsek for a defenseman who is the ideal partner for tremblay.

hungryhungryhippy is offline  
Old
02-21-2011, 03:22 AM
  #202
jarek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,550
vCash: 500
You know, I was going to say that Cashman was 70s first reach, and a pretty big one. One dimensional guys who only do one thing sort of well (puck winning doesn't really count for me, as puck winning just isn't important enough that a guy can get away with being one dimensional at it) have no business in the top-300. Looking forward to the bio to see if those claims of Cashman being good defensively can be substantiated.

jarek is offline  
Old
02-21-2011, 03:59 AM
  #203
VanIslander
10 Years of ATDing
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 17,875
vCash: 500
The Newest Pirate is George Armstrong.


VanIslander is offline  
Old
02-21-2011, 04:02 AM
  #204
Sturminator
I voted for Kodos
 
Sturminator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: West Egg, New York
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 7,386
vCash: 500
You know, it's funny...I go into every ATD telling myself (and my co-GM) "we can wait on a 2nd line center", and every draft (since I really figured out what I was doing here) I end up starting my second line with a center. The couple of times I tried to wait on a 2nd line center I got burned. Nalyd and I thought we were pretty clever in ATD#8 and were about to take Marty Barry way later than he should ever go, only to get scooped on the pick directly before ours. We had to settle for Federko, who is a fine 2nd line center, but no Barry, and at any rate doesn't look quite as sexy in a 28 team draft as he does in a 40 teamer.

In ATD#9 I again tried to get clever with my second line and ended up with a terribly mediocre unit - strong defensively, but one of the worst offensive scoringlines in the draft. I guess I must have somehow learned from these experiences, because now I probably put more energy into acquiring offensive centerpieces for my second unit than I put into any other aspect of the draft. I guess I like to start with centers because centers are often the best offensive players on the board. It's just strange that I always seem to do the opposite of what I originally intend to do. It seems to get harder and harder with every draft, which is I guess a sign that our valuations in the ATD are getting closer and closer to the players' "true value" respective to one another.

The days when one could draft a Marty Barry late in the 200's are long, long gone. Jeez...Frank Fredrickson used to be taken as a 4th liner somewhere in the 500's and now I'm thrilled to start my second line with him at pick #260. Well, I guess we know a lot more about the community of hockey greats than we used to, especially pre-war guys. Eddie Gerard used to be a third pairing guy...Frank Nighbor a fringe top-100 player who I, myself, criticized as a first line center...before later winning ATD#11 with him as my first line center. Things have really changed, and very much for the better. It's pretty amazing, actually, to see how much our knowledge as a community has grown over the course of the ATD process.

Sturminator is offline  
Old
02-21-2011, 04:06 AM
  #205
DoMakc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 938
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyD View Post
No offense, but I don't see this, and I don't really think it's close either. I see what makes you think it, with Larmer's numbers staying steady and Savard's declining after they were split up, but they were in different scenarios. Larmer goes from being on a line with Savard as his center to************ as his center (not really that much of a dropoff), and then after that he goes to a great Rangers team. Meanwhile, Savard is traded to a very defensive minded Montreal team.


Also, I think there is good chance that the Savard trade coincided with his natural decline. He had played over 800 games (reg season + playoffs), and while I haven't looked for any quotes to support this, growing up in Chicago and being a big Hawks fan during that time I remember Savard having a reputation of not taking the best care of himself (lazy at practice, smoking, bad diet), but still being great because of his phenomenal natural talent.

Finally and maybe most importantly, Larmer being on the same level as Savard does not pass the eye-test for me.

I don't think overpass is trying to say Larmer is as talented as Savard, and eye test is really unfair to Larmer, since not many have a chance to pass eye test against Savard, since he was one of the flashiest player of alltime. i think overpass is saying that Larmer's impact on Savard's numbers and on their team's success is as high as Savard's on Larmer's.

Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
I don't mean to call your memories into question, just curious. I like the younger GMs here (I'm in my 20s myself) but I think the draft is better for having some GMs who saw more of the players play.

Larmer's actually not my guy, DoMakc grabbed him. I wasn't going to take him, having drafted Provost. But if I thought Larmer would fall to 270, I would have gone for that - he would be a perfect RW for Modano. I'm just pimping a player I like. TheDevilMadeMe and 70s are doing a good job defending Modano for me, so I can discuss other guys

Another thing about Larmer - Chicago went from 72 points to 104 points in his rookie season, and dropped from 106 points to 87 points after he left. (Although of course they weren't always that good when he was there.) And the Rangers won the Cup in his first season there. So you could say team success tended to follow him around. His career +204 is very good also.
I really appreciate it, i hope you don't change your opinion on Larmer till playoffs .

DoMakc is offline  
Old
02-21-2011, 04:06 AM
  #206
nik jr
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Congo-Kinshasa
Posts: 10,526
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
I assume Sergei Gonchar is the guy nik jr was talking about when he mentioned a contemporary of Zubov who was clearly worse, but has a better Norris record. And I agree. A minority of Norris voters view the Norris trophy as an Art Ross race for defensemen, and Gonchar always ranked highly for these voters.
i was referring to gonchar. both similar d-men, both russians named sergei, so nationality would not skew the votes.

1 of many examples of misleading award and AS voting.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafs Forever View Post
Sturminator made the fair point that really, we assume a lot of things based on similar amounts of proof as Krutov taking steroids.

But EB makes the good point as to the true degree in which this should damage Krutov's legacy.
imo, not similar amounts of proof.

multiple newspapers published at the time some of the things he mentioned. several members of the ottawa senators organization were willing to appear in court to testify that benedict was drunk before/during games (and it was '24 NHL finals, not stanley cup finals), but the case was settled before that happened. benedict and his lawyer denied that he was a detriment to his team, but not that he was drunk.

multiple newspapers mentioned at the time that drillon was benched in '42 finals. he was also booed while walking around in toronto and angry fans threw rocks at his house. TML said they were looking to trade drillon very soon after the finals, and he was sold to montreal the same year.
4-29-1942 calgary herald said it was a fact that drillon "doesn't backcheck and can't carry a puck through a good defence." but it says the reasons for benching were not made public.

a writer in owen sound said after drillon was sold:
Quote:
The fans in Toronto have long hollered about the lackadaisical type of play of Drillon. Well the leafs have finally got rid of him. We wonder how long it will be before the Leafian fans are hollering for a right-winger who can pop in goals as Drillon used to do it.
i found a may 8, 1942 column in the calgary herald which speculates that drillon may have been "banished" b/c of a fight between drillon and schriner in a practice. banished may mean put up for trade.

i have also read about cameron's drinking in the toronto world during cameron's career.


unless i missed something, sturminator's evidence about krutov is 1 person, who says he cannot prove it.

but i would not be surprised at all if krutov used PEDs. many players have and probably many players are now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boy Wonder View Post
Oh my god. Thank God.

Duke Keats, center. He's probably the perfect center for Denneny at this point. PM'ing BC.
when denneny's skating was being discussed, i cited a column which mentioned 4 players who "couldn't skate fast enough to keep themselves warm."

keats was one of them, dye was another.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Actually, if Krutov really was a product of steroids, there is no reason to believe he'd be better in the corners than Brisebois. Krutov was short and fairly overweight. North Americans were shocked that someone with such a body type could be so fast and strong....

Larionov and Makarov were more finesse players, so even if they took steroids, it wouldn't really help their games much.

Krutov... his entire game was based on power. Without it, he'd be useless... like he was when he tried to play in the NHL.

In fact, Krutov's drop off in the NHL is exactly what you'd expect from a guy who suddenly got taken off the juice.
i don't agree with this.

krutov relied much more on skill than power.

Quote:
Originally Posted by VMBM View Post
My 20 cents on Krutov...

I don't quite understand why he is singled out of all the Soviet greats as having been a likely drug user - even if he is the biggest suspect of the bunch. There has been talk about the Soviet players using illegal substances already since the Seventies (at least). Many old Finnish players have either hinted or have been quite frank about it; not just that the Soviet players - especially some defensemen - were 'inhumanly' strong on the ice, but also the deteriorating health of some old USSR players has been seen as some sort of proof of this.

As far as Krutov's role on the KLM line goes, I remember something of those times (1980s) and me and most of my mates ranked them in this order: Makarov, Krutov, Larionov. It can very well be that we were too young to appreciate Larionov's (supposedly) superior hockey mind and two-way play. But then again, I have seen numerous games from the Eighties in the past few years and I still rank them as so.

During the 1987 Canada Cup finals, the 'color commentator' Ron Reusch talks about Krutov having already surpassed Makarov as the best Soviet forward. I'm not a huge fan of Reusch, and I'm not even sure that Krutov was ever better than Makarov (except for some single tournaments), but that says something about Krutov and his level of play around 1987 anyway. And when someone occasionally replaced Larionov on the top line, like Victor Tyumenev did in the 1985-86 CSKA-NHL series, it did not seem to have any negative effect whatsoever; the line was as devastating as ever. Of course, it was only one short series, but anyway...

Even though he didn't have Makarov's finesse, Krutov was almost as dangerous 1-on-1 and could create his own scoring chances. I do think that he was slightly more inconsistent than his linemates, though.
agree with all

i think larionov only began to be rated above krutov after they joined the NHL.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MadArcand View Post
First, next time I'd appreciate getting a PM when I'm on the clock.

Second, so damn hard deciding on pick. There's a lot great RWs and centers availiable, but I've decided to go with

Ott Heller, D
i thought about picking heller. this may be useful for you:

http://hfboards.com/showpost.php?p=1...&postcount=631

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Heller's a solid pick. I was strongly leaning towards drafting him until I realize Babe Pratt was still available and Hart Trophy winning defensemen don't grow on trees at this point in the draft (even if it was a War Year). Ultimately went with Pratt because

1) Pratt's in the HOF and Heller isn't, and they were contemporaries. And it wasn't the veteran's committee going back and being like "oh Pratt has a Hart. We have to induct him!" He was inducted in 1966 by people who saw him play.

2) Better awards recognition. Heller has the 2nd Team in normal year. Pratt has a 1st and 2nd in war years. On it's own, I think those are quite equal when we are talking about 2 defensemen. But Babe Pratt did win the Hart Trophy, and competition among all players wasn't THAT bad. More on that in his profile.

3) Personally, I think it's quite likely (though far from proven) that Pratt suffered in awards voting due to his playboy lifestyle.

4) While Heller was super-strong, Pratt was a freaking giant for his era. With Eric Lindros in my division, having a mobile giant who wasn't afraid to play rough on my 2nd pairing is incredibly helpful.

Two questions about Pratt before I do his profile:

1) He's listed at #47 in the "best 100 Rangers of all time" book, despite having his two biggest years in Toronto. If anyone has the book (Leaf Lander I'm looking at you), can you PM me or post what it says about Pratt? Thanks.

2) Some sources list him as a defenseman/left wing, but every reference I have seen to his play is as a defenseman. Did he actually play left wing in the NHL? Anyone know what seasons?
i think i read some reports from the '40s which said pratt played LW.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Strictly from a puckwinning perspective... I take Cash over Moore.
how would you make a judgement on that?

nik jr is offline  
Old
02-21-2011, 04:38 AM
  #207
jarek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,550
vCash: 500
nik.. yeah, in my readings on Duke Keats, he was often mentioned as "not the greatest skater", and when I was posting about Denneny, the guy who was mentioned as "not quite as slow as a slug" was Keats. However, he was also often mentioned as the best stick handler of his time, and it was not close. They also mentioned that if he couldn't stick handle past the team, he would just go through them. There are frequent accounts of him going down the length of the ice through the entire opposing team and getting his chances that way.

He seemed to be slightly biased to scoring goals, and early in his career he is also mentioned as being a selfish player that didn't pass enough. I think he greatly improved as a combination style player later into his career, as he is frequently mentioned as playing nice combination plays with his wingers. Fact is, I think I have two great goal scorers on my first line with Denneny and Keats, and the very dangerous thing is that they are both great playmakers too. Should be a very unpredictable line, for sure.

jarek is offline  
Old
02-21-2011, 04:41 AM
  #208
jarek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,550
vCash: 500
Also, George Armstrong is a guy I briefly considered for my first line. I think he's good enough of an even strength player here, especially with his toughness and defensive play to be an effective glue guy at right wing on a scoring line.

jarek is offline  
Old
02-21-2011, 05:27 AM
  #209
Sturminator
I voted for Kodos
 
Sturminator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: West Egg, New York
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 7,386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nik jr View Post
i don't agree with this.

krutov relied much more on skill than power.
Disagree completely with this. The power predicated the skill. Krutov was not a Larionov, able to glide around the ice and dominate because of superior hockey sense, nor was he a Makarov who was just so fast, skilled and shifty that his size didn't really come into play. Krutov was right there in the trenches, and without that unbelievable power of his, he would have been rag-dolled to death by bigger players. As Evil Speaker said back in ATD#11, give Kyle Wellwood superhuman strength and he'd be a hall of famer, too. The history of hockey is littered with small, skilled players who couldn't use their skills because they lacked the physical tools to do so. Take away that superstrength from Krutov, and I think you've got what we saw in Vancouver, which is exactly as I described him: a beer leaguer.

As for the burden of proof, your "one guy who can't prove it" description is rather slanted. That one guy is a respected columnist and author, and his evidence comes directly from Larionov and Canucks trainers. It's not one guy, but rather several people who have fingered Krutov for steroid use. One guy reported it. Or are you suggesting that Ed Willes just made that stuff up? Again with the obfuscation about Krutov. What Willes presented is no less proof than the reporters who speculated on Cameron's drinking during the Cup Finals, unless you think the guys who wrote those articles were actually drinking with him (which is frighteningly possible). It's all second hand news.

Sturminator is offline  
Old
02-21-2011, 06:29 AM
  #210
VMBM
Registered User
 
VMBM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,571
vCash: 500
Wow, can the views really be this different?

IMO Krutov was a very good passer and dangler, had a deadly accurate shot and would not have been "useless" even if he wasn't so strong. Was Krutov already as a 19-year old such a steroid-filled monster that it (his strength) was the only reason the US players feared him the most in the famous Miracle on Ice game (I'm too lazy to find the source but I think I'm right about that) - or did he perhaps have some other great assets as well?


Last edited by VMBM: 02-21-2011 at 06:35 AM.
VMBM is offline  
Old
02-21-2011, 07:04 AM
  #211
Sturminator
I voted for Kodos
 
Sturminator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: West Egg, New York
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 7,386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VMBM View Post
Wow, can the views really be this different?
Yes, they can be.

Quote:
IMO Krutov was a very good passer and dangler, had a deadly accurate shot and would not have been "useless" even if he wasn't so strong.
Useless in an all-time sense...yes, that is very much a possibility. No one here is saying that Krutov took Captain America superserum and couldn't lace up his skates before the Soviet doctors got to him. We're saying that lots of players in hockey history have had Krutov's level of skill and not distinguished themselves in any great way because they didn't have the "toolbox" to use the tools. Yeah...Krutov had a lot of skills. No, without the unbelievable strength, he wouldn't have been able to use them. That wasn't his game.

As far as Krutov using at 19 goes...Larionov claimed that Krutov had been using the whole time he was on the national team, which would be consistent with his already being on the juice in Lake Placid. If the Soviets wanted to juice their athletes, I don't see why they would wait around.

Sturminator is offline  
Old
02-21-2011, 07:26 AM
  #212
EagleBelfour
Registered User
 
EagleBelfour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,218
vCash: 873
I like the back-and-forth discussion on Krutov, as I never saw him play regularly and rely mostly on quotes. I don't mind at all that you bring your point of view Sturm, but could you please refrain from ''absolute'', as your last post make it sound like Krutov without a shadow of doubt took steroids during his entire career. Although it has been said numerous time, I will again knock on this nail by saying that Krutov taking performance enhancing drugs comes from speculative, non-factual stories, almost entirely by an unique source.

EagleBelfour is offline  
Old
02-21-2011, 07:26 AM
  #213
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,511
vCash: 500
Henrik Zetterberg, C/LW

Since the lockout, almost 6 seasons have passed. During that time, Zetterberg is:
9th in regular season points per game, and very close to 5th (1.07)
3rd in regular season plus-minus (+121)
1st in playoff points (86 points in 81 games)
1st in playoff plus-minus (+39 in 81 games)

2008 Conn Smythe Trophy
TSN Player of the Year for 2007-08
Selke voting finishes for best defensive forward: 9th (2006), 7th (2007), 3rd (2008), 4th (2009)

Michael Farber, SI, 2008:
Quote:
Zetterberg can handle himself, thank you, when he is not handling the entire Penguins team. At a pivotal point in Game 4 last Saturday night, a five-on-three advantage for Pittsburgh that lasted 1:26 midway through the third period, Sidney Crosby was on the edge of the crease and ready for a power-play gimme; Zetterberg abandoned his spot at the point and burst to the net, tying up Crosby's stick with his own and knocking the Pittsburgh center off the play. Zetterberg, a finalist for the Selke Trophy as the NHL's best defensive forward, also blocked a point shot during the same sequence and intercepted a pass, enabling him to carry the puck into the Penguins' zone, get off a shot and kill some clock. That might have been the best minute-plus by any athlete since Big Brown won the Preakness. Then with Pittsburgh pressing for a tying goal in the final seconds, Zetterberg stood in front of a Sergei Gonchar shot, helping to preserve a 2--1 win in which (undrafted), a Czech, had scored the winning goal.

Kostya Kennedy, SI, 2008
:
Quote:
That defensive ability along with, of course, the superb offensive skills that tied Zetterberg with Sidney Crosby for the playoff scoring lead (27 points) this spring, is what leads Holland and many in the Detroit organization to call Zetterberg one of the top five forwards in the NHL—or better. "In my mind," says (undrafted Red Wing D-man), "[Zetterberg] is the best player in the world."
Michael Farber, 2009:
Quote:
With the continued absence of Pavel Datsyuk, nursing an injured foot, Detroit was left with just one sublime two-way center—Zetterberg—who could play head-to-head against either Crosby, Pittsburgh's captain, or (undrafted), the NHL's leading scorer and an MVP finalist. They are Sid and XXX to teammates, Hemlock and Arsenic to opponents. With the last line change that came with his home ice advantage in the first two games, Detroit coach Mike Babcock had to decide which of the two Penguins most deserved the privilege of a full-time escort from Zetterberg and the attention of the No. 1 defense pair of Nicklas Lidstrom and (undrafted).

Crosby won—or in this case, lost.

This was less about Zetterberg checking Crosby than stalking him. The fluid Red Wing, strong on his skates, was so near he could have guessed Crosby's toothpaste brand. "That's what he tried to do the last couple of years that I've played against him," Crosby says. "He's always been close. He's a good skater. It always presents a challenge." Of Crosby's 49 shifts through two games, even-strength and power-play, Zetterberg was on the ice for all or part of 46 of them. They shared nearly 34 minutes of Crosby's 42 minutes on ice. Crosby took 35 face-offs; Zetterberg was across the dot in 27 of them. Crosby wallpapered a head-down Zetterberg at center ice in the first period of Game 1 and later delivered a cross-check to the nape of Zetterberg's neck. "I think he went head-hunting right off the hop," Babcock said, not disapprovingly. "[Crosby's] ability to respond was good. I think that's a game within the game. If you're a hockey purist, and you like superstars who bring it, that's a nice matchup."
Before 2005-06
Zetterberg has put his mark on hockey history with his regular season and playoff heroics in the last few seasons. But if you like to see a longer career than 6 seasons, Zetterberg was playing at a high level before the lockout also.

2000-01: 4th in points in Swedish Elite League
2001-02: Won the Golden Puck as hockey player of the year in Sweden
2002-03: Sporting News rookie of the year (voted on by players), playing very well in a depth role for a very deep Detroit team.
2003-04: 43 points in 61 games for a deep Detroit team.
2004-05: Led Swedish Elite League in scoring during the lockout season, ahead of many other NHL players.

overpass is offline  
Old
02-21-2011, 07:30 AM
  #214
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,511
vCash: 500
That completes my first line.

Doug Bentley - Henrik Zetterberg - Jaromir Jagr

I must be one of the last to take my first line centre, if not the last.

overpass is offline  
Old
02-21-2011, 07:34 AM
  #215
EagleBelfour
Registered User
 
EagleBelfour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,218
vCash: 873
Although Pavel Datsyuk might have flashier results, my own two-eyes tells me that Henrik Zetterberg and Datsyuk are virtually as good (although I don't have the chance to watch them as regularly as others around here). I thought Datsyuk was a valid selection in the early 200's, so for me, that makes Zetterberg an excellent selection here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
That completes my first line.

Doug Bentley - Henrik Zetterberg - Jaromir Jagr

I must be one of the last to take my first line centre, if not the last.
Perhaps, but it's definitely a very good one. One of the most exciting line so far in the draft.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jkrx View Post
It would a long time of daily abuse for it to have reverse effects on you. Amphetamines would ofcourse be more beneficial or other stimulants but a stimulant is still a stimulant.
I was also thinking that, but I was pointed wrong on an effect of Steroids, so I didn't wanted to venture and saying a false statement again.

EagleBelfour is offline  
Old
02-21-2011, 07:34 AM
  #216
jkrx
Registered User
 
jkrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,155
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
How did cocaine make them better players? Okay, I can see it making Bob Probert an angrier and scarier fighter. But a better player?
Quote:
Cocaine increases alertness, feelings of well-being and euphoria, energy and motor activity, feelings of competence and sexuality. Athletic performance may be enhanced in sports where sustained attention and endurance is required.
It would a long time of daily abuse for it to have reverse effects on you. Amphetamines would ofcourse be more beneficial or other stimulants but a stimulant is still a stimulant.

jkrx is online now  
Old
02-21-2011, 07:38 AM
  #217
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,511
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EagleBelfour View Post
Although Pavel Datsyuk might have flashier results, my own two-eyes tells me that Henrik Zetterberg and Datsyuk are virtually as good (although I don't have the chance to watch them as regularly as others around here). I thought Datsyuk was a valid selection in the early 200's, so for me, that makes Zetterberg an excellent selection here.
Thanks! Zetterberg took a bit of a jump from last draft, both in position and in role. But I think his proven ability to play head to head with the best will be very useful. There aren't many players left with his two-way game.

overpass is offline  
Old
02-21-2011, 07:42 AM
  #218
jarek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 4,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
Thanks! Zetterberg took a bit of a jump from last draft, both in position and in role. But I think his proven ability to play head to head with the best will be very useful. There aren't many players left with his two-way game.
I'm not sure if Bentley and Zetterberg are good enough offensively to really take advantage of Jagr's great playmaking skills, but as far as the line chemistry, it looks great. You might have issues against big defensemen, though.

jarek is offline  
Old
02-21-2011, 07:49 AM
  #219
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hungryhungryhippy View Post
Thoughts on splitting up the gold dust twins? It hurts to not see them together but it makes a lot more sense to have Thomson playing with Tremblay. Then Mortson can anchor the second pairing, he's an elite #3.
Ideally, you would keep them together as a shut down pair and play Tremblay exclusively with your scoring lines. But to do that, you need a partner for Tremblay who can handle hte minutes you want to give him. If you don't get a high-end partner for Tremblay, you probably are better off putting your two best defensemen together.

Quote:
Originally Posted by matsblue13 View Post
Never saw him play. Read that he was underrated and quite possibly the greatest American player ever.
As others have said, he's definitely been past by a few names as the best American ever, but he's definitely top 10, arguably top 5.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline  
Old
02-21-2011, 07:59 AM
  #220
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
Henrik Zetterberg, C/LW
Feel free to add,

"Best shadow of 2000-09, awarded by NJ Swamp Devils GM TheDevilMadeMe"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boy Wonder View Post
I'm not sure if Bentley and Zetterberg are good enough offensively to really take advantage of Jagr's great playmaking skills, but as far as the line chemistry, it looks great. You might have issues against big defensemen, though.
Agreed. On the other hand, Jagr is used to playing with guys significantly worse than him offensively and raising their scoring levels.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline  
Old
02-21-2011, 08:05 AM
  #221
DoMakc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 938
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
Henrik Zetterberg, C/LW
You have two very defencively potent centers. Despite Datsyuk's Selkes, IMO Zetterberg is the best defencive forward in the league since lockout. i think he'll work well with Jagr.

DoMakc is offline  
Old
02-21-2011, 08:05 AM
  #222
Reds4Life
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Reds4Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Czech Republic
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 3,516
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
Henrik Zetterberg, C/LW

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

I really like that Jagr line though.

For my money, Zetterberg is better than the last 8 centres taken before him.


Last edited by Reds4Life: 02-21-2011 at 08:19 AM.
Reds4Life is offline  
Old
02-21-2011, 08:11 AM
  #223
Sturminator
I voted for Kodos
 
Sturminator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: West Egg, New York
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 7,386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EagleBelfour View Post
I like the back-and-forth discussion on Krutov, as I never saw him play regularly and rely mostly on quotes. I don't mind at all that you bring your point of view Sturm, but could you please refrain from ''absolute'', as your last post make it sound like Krutov without a shadow of doubt took steroids during his entire career. Although it has been said numerous time, I will again knock on this nail by saying that Krutov taking performance enhancing drugs comes from speculative, non-factual stories, almost entirely by an unique source.
Ok. As I said, I don't think the evidence we have constitutes an open-and-shut case against Krutov, but I do think that the evidence makes a lot of sense within the context of Krutov's career (as in: more likely than not) and is substantial enough that it should be factored into how we weigh his legacy as a hockey player. My judgment on the good vs. bad in Krutov's career is only my own. Some people agree with me; some do not. Krutov is just a polarizing figure.

And by the way, my issues with Krutov are only "moral" in the sense that I think an important part of honoring the greatest players in hockey history involves seperating the wheat from the chaff, which means acknowledging the bad as well as the good. By not punishing weaker players (or cheaters) for their faults, we indirectly punish better players by putting the unworthy on their level. My objection to Krutov is not moral in the sense that I care about who he was as a person. I do not. I only care about the potential cheating in this case in the context of how it may have affected his on-ice performance, and thus his legacy as a hockey player. There is a moral aspect to my critique of Krutov, yes, but it is the morality of a conscientious historian, not the puritanical nonsense you seem to take it for.

Sturminator is offline  
Old
02-21-2011, 08:26 AM
  #224
jkrx
Registered User
 
jkrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,155
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sturminator View Post
Ok. As I said, I don't think the evidence we have constitutes an open-and-shut case against Krutov, but I do think that the evidence makes a lot of sense within the context of Krutov's career (as in: more likely than not) and is substantial enough that it should be factored into how we weigh his legacy as a hockey player. My judgment on the good vs. bad in Krutov's career is only my own. Some people agree with me; some do not. Krutov is just a polarizing figure.

And by the way, my issues with Krutov are only "moral" in the sense that I think an important part of honoring the greatest players in hockey history involves seperating the wheat from the chaff, which means acknowledging the bad as well as the good. By not punishing weaker players (or cheaters) for their faults, we indirectly punish better players by putting the unworthy on their level. My objection to Krutov is not moral in the sense that I care about who he was as a person. I do not. I only care about the potential cheating in this case in the context of how it may have affected his on-ice performance, and thus his legacy as a hockey player. There is a moral aspect to my critique of Krutov, yes, but it is the morality of a conscientious historian, not the puritanical nonsense you seem to take it for.
Well, then you should be highly suspicious of alot of NHL players specially those who added a significant amount of body mass during summers. 5lb/month is a very very high rate for example and I know of some players that added that or even more during off-seasons, some which are drafted here in the ATD. But I would also punish players based on your type of moral ground so I won't object to that, it's more about the lack of evidence.

jkrx is online now  
Old
02-21-2011, 08:27 AM
  #225
VMBM
Registered User
 
VMBM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,571
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sturminator View Post
Yes, they can be.
Yes, they can, can't they!

I'm just beginning to doubt my eyes/ability to judge/hockey knowledge...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sturminator View Post
Useless in an all-time sense...yes, that is very much a possibility. No one here is saying that Krutov took Captain America superserum and couldn't lace up his skates before the Soviet doctors got to him. We're saying that lots of players in hockey history have had Krutov's level of skill and not distinguished themselves in any great way because they didn't have the "toolbox" to use the tools. Yeah...Krutov had a lot of skills. No, without the unbelievable strength, he wouldn't have been able to use them. That wasn't his game.

As far as Krutov using at 19 goes...Larionov claimed that Krutov had been using the whole time he was on the national team, which would be consistent with his already being on the juice in Lake Placid. If the Soviets wanted to juice their athletes, I don't see why they would wait around.
Well, IMO, with his goal-scoring and passing skills, he would have made something happen anyway. And even if he hadn't had "unbelievable strength", it doesn't mean he would've been a pushover. I don't think that some of you take fully into consideration the difference between the Soviet game and the NHL in the late '80s. His downfall was dramatic, but if a player nearing 30 is totally unable to adjust to a different game, is there really no other explanation than that he was a cheater whose game was totally dependent on illegal methods?

But if this is the way Krutov is going to be viewed in this ATD Draft, I'm beginning to feel sorry for the person who picked him. All I can say is that the 1980-88 Krutov is a great pick!


Last edited by VMBM: 02-21-2011 at 09:05 AM.
VMBM 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 08:05 AM.

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.