A Roberts -Bowie - Cournoyer line is too soft for my liking and suffers from a serious lack of playmaking. I love the Moore-Stastny-Makarov line, but Bowie and Cournoyer really needs Moore to function.
Edit: HHH's idea might have merit too. Just don't put Roberts, Bowie, and Cournoyer together - it won't work.
I think you pretty much have to put Moore on the line with Stastny to take some of physical pressure off. Stastny was no Wayne Cashman, himself, but he was big and strong, he had jam and was a team player. It might hurt Peter's offense a bit, but I think he could pick up some of the puckwinning responsibilities if he needed to.
It's not ideal. What you've got there reminds me a lot of our ATD#8 team, which had an assload of talent at forward, but was extremely non-physical. Of course we made it to the conference finals with that team, so the comparison is hardly an insult. Although I have learned a new respect for Bowie, I think you sort of checkmated yourself when you drafted him because you locked yourself out of any possibility of getting a true physical presence to play alongside Digging Dickie.
A Roberts -Bowie - Cournoyer line is too soft for my liking and suffers from a serious lack of playmaking. I love the Moore-Stastny-Makarov line, but Bowie and Cournoyer really needs Moore to function.
Yeah...hadn't thought of that, but Moore and Stastny are the only really good playmakers in that top-6. I guess he could go with:
Moore - Stastny - Cournoyer
Roberts - Bowie - Makarov
...and use Makarov as the primary playmaker on the second line. Ehhhh...it's not ideal. Nalyd's team this time around reminds me a lot of the ATD#8 team we built together - overflowing with offensive talent, but not really a cohesive machine. Of course, we made the conference finals with that team, so the comparison here is hardly insulting.
Yeah...hadn't thought of that, but Moore and Stastny are the only really good playmakers in that top-6. I guess he could go with:
Moore - Stastny - Cournoyer
Roberts - Bowie - Makarov
...and use Makarov as the primary playmaker on the second line. Ehhhh...it's not ideal. Nalyd's team this time around reminds me a lot of the ATD#8 team we built together - overflowing with offensive talent, but not really a cohesive machine. Of course, we made the conference finals with that team, so the comparison here is hardly insulting.
That could work too. Makarov was a very good playmaker himself, actually.
There is only one puck to go around, and based on games I have seen, Martinec* is best used as the brain of the PP, which is why I'd split the trio to create 2 dangerous PP units. But that's just my $0.02.
* I am a big fan, I've met him several times in person and even got an autograph
I'm not a big autograph guy nor usually starstruck, but I have to admit I'm a bit jealous.
Luckily I have about 10 games on DVD with him playing. I especially like him in the 2nd final of the 1976 CC; he gets 2 assists, makes a huge defensive play and prevents a sure Team Canada goal (early 2nd period), makes Serge Savard look like a pylon once and twice almost ends the game in the overtime (damn Rogie Vachon). Fun to look at; not maybe as fast nor flashy as some Soviets, but he was as good a stickhandler as anyone.
Could be used either as set-up man or trigger man, I don't know.
So.... does anyone buy Starshinov as a left wing on a second line?
He was the center of one of the great Soviet lines, getting First Team All Star center in the Soviet League 7 straight seasons (63-69). But he appears to have gotten a First Team All Star at left wing (over Firsov and a young Kharlamov) in 1970. I have no idea who his linemates were or anything other than the All Star record to show that he was a left wing (and obviously a very good one) for that one season.
I can't exactly google search for Soviet era newspapers (and even if I could, I couldn't read them).
So.... does anyone buy Starshinov as a left wing on a second line?
I think it's a pretty big stretch. I understand completely why you want to move him to the left wing, but I don't think one source listing him as a left wing in one season is enough to convince me, given how sketchy the information on Soviets from that period is. If you can find multiple sources, I might warm up to the idea.
I think it's a pretty big stretch. I understand completely why you want to move him to the left wing, but I don't think one source listing him as a left wing in one season is enough to convince me, given how sketchy the information on Soviets from that period is. If you can find multiple sources, I might warm up to the idea.
If you believe Bernie Morris can be a center (as far as I know, he only has that one season with the AST to prove that, though there may have been more, I just don't remember), then Starshinov can be a LW.
Is the differance between the 25th goalie and the 40th really that big? is it worth wasting a pick right now , to be honest I'm wondering about the importance of goalie , we're talking about the top 40 of a position , so they are probably all good enough to do the job.
Is the differance between the 25th goalie and the 40th really that big? is it worth wasting a pick right now , to be honest I'm wondering about the importance of goalie , we're talking about the top 40 of a position , so they are probably all good enough to do the job.
That depends entirely on who the goalies are. I'd recommend making a list of who you think the next best 15 goalies are and try to find where the value lies.
__________________
Every post comes with the Nalyd Psycho Seal of Approval.
If you believe Bernie Morris can be a center (as far as I know, he only has that one season with the AST to prove that, though there may have been more, I just don't remember), then Starshinov can be a LW.
As far as you know isn't saying much in this case. Morris played center plenty, and is recorded as a center by multiple sources over multiple seasons. It's quite different than using a single source from a very "dark" area of our hockey knowledge (pre-72 Soviets) to justify a position change.
I'll be kind to you and look up your team in the lineup thread.
Next time, I'm not going to go through the effort, so please post your lineup here.
Anyway, your team doesn't really seem to have a natural captain yet, but a lot of lesser leaders. Olmstead, Sittler, Geoffrion, and Robinson would all be fine assistant captains. Of the guys you have so far, I'd say Olmstead and Robinson are probably the best choices for C.
I'll be kind to you and look up your team in the lineup thread.
Next time, I'm not going to go through the effort, so please post your lineup here.
Anyway, your team doesn't really seem to have a natural captain yet, but a lot of lesser leaders. Olmstead, Sittler, Geoffrion, and Robinson would all be fine assistant captains. Of the guys you have so far, I'd say Olmstead and Robinson are probably the best choices for C.
Sorry about that, got sidetracked at work as soon as I was making the post.
I was looking up previous ATD team and noticed Litzenberger was used as captain a couple times. Not really that important. It was just a question that was on my mind. Thanks for the advice everyone.
Sorry about that, got sidetracked at work as soon as I was making the post.
I was looking up previous ATD team and noticed Litzenberger was used as captain a couple times. Not really that important. It was just a question that was on my mind. Thanks for the advice everyone.
Oh right, Litz was captain of the Blackhawks for a few years, including the 1961 Cup.
If he's strictly LW, then it's news to me. I was told he played both wings, and he's listed as a winger in last year's ATD thread.
The ATD thread positions are far from the bible. Someone last year or the year before could have mistakingly said "Bobrov, W" when posting and it got copied, but he never actually had dual wing elgibility.
