HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Fantasy Hockey Talk > All Time Draft
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

All Time Draft Fantasy league where players of the past and present meet.

ATD2011 Milt Dunnell Cup Final: Regina Pats vs. Ottawa Senators

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-28-2011, 12:38 AM
  #76
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,707
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boy Wonder View Post
Also, one of the reasons why Watson may have been that high in ice time is that the Flyers likely took a disproportionate amount of penalties in the playoffs. If Watson was their best PK'er (this definitely works in his favor), that'll boost his ice time over the other defensemen.

However, for me, I prefer to look at even strength TOI to determine who is the "#1", as that really demonstrates who the coach feels is his most reliable defenseman.
You must not have been paying attention. I have always referred to Watson as Philly's top even strength defenseman.

Also, it has nothing to do with the playoffs. All we have is GF/GA for the regular season, and we have no choice but to assume the usage remained pretty constant in the playoffs. So to recap, your contention that "he must have had the most minutes in the playoffs because he killed so many penalties and they must have taken more penalties in the playoffs" is wrong in two ways:

- he was in fact #1 in ES ice time
- i was talking about the regular season

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 12:50 AM
  #77
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,317
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
in 1974, Ashbee was 4th in all-star voting and Van Impe 11th. In 1975, Watson was 14th. It's not much, but it's something. It was definitely "defense by committee", though.
Just as Ashbee got good, he took that puck in the face and was done.

Dreakmur is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 02:03 AM
  #78
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,707
vCash: 500
jarek, you wanted me to quantify what I mean when I say it means a lot that Watson was #1 in ES ice time for the Flyers. What I mean is that he was likely a very good defenseman (his one year of AST recognition, two all-star games and barry ashbee trophy win are enough to demonstrate he was on the fringe of the fringe of the elites already) but here goes:

1975: fewest ESGA:
1. Philly 101.
2. LA 130.
3. NYI 159.

most ES minutes on Philly: Joe Watson.

1974: fewest ESGA:
1. Philly 98.
2. Chicago 104.
3. Boston 171.

most ES minutes on Philly: Joe Watson.

Watson was just part of a team, but was far from a passenger - he was heavily relied on.

Anyway, as for the quantification you're looking for:

Suppose I wanted to make an ad hoc list of the top-30 defensemen in the 1975 NHL season, using the information available to me. I would start by using the hart, all-star and norris voting in tandem, and I'd get results like this:

1. Orr
2. Potvin
3. Lapointe
4. Salming
5. Park
6. Savard
7. White
8. Vadnais
9. Harper
10. Korab
11. Murdoch
12. Schoenfeld
13. Robinson
14. Awrey
15. Jim Watson
16. Stackhouse

from there, I might look at the players who played in that year's All-star game who weren't in the above:

17. Jarrett
18. Pratt

from there, where would I go? I would imagine I could look at the top-scoring defensemen I didn't already mention above, I could also see who were the best in adjusted +/- that season who weren't mentioned above. First, though, I would want to see who played the most minutes. I would look at it as a combination of who played the most, and who made their team good. Mostly the latter, considering who shows up at the top of the minutes list: guys who played some part in Washington, Kansas City, California, Minnesota and Detroit being so bad.

Watson, as the guy with the most minutes on the team that was 1st overall, had the league's best defensive record and won the cup, would be one of the first names I'd look at. Others who might fill out the top-30:

Dick Redmond,
Bob Dailey,
Barry Gibbs,
Gilles Marotte,
Jim McKenny,
Phil Russell,
Ron Greschner,
Terry Harper,
Randy Manery,
Dallas Smith,
Rod Seiling,
Doug Mohns,
Bill Hajt,
Gerry Hart,
Larry Sacharuk,
Bob Hess,
Barry Wilkins,
Jean Potvin,
Andre Dupont,
Jocelyn Guevremont.

Anyway, what this all means is, if you're asking me to quantify what I think it means if a guy wasn't a factor in all-star voting and wasn't in the ASG, but led his team's defense corps en route to 1st overall and a cup... 20th in the league sounds fair. I'm not trying to say he was "amazing" (your words, not mine)... however, his credentials, as far as his personal contributions to team success go, are very strong for a #6 here.

make sense?


Last edited by seventieslord: 05-28-2011 at 02:08 AM.
seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 02:06 AM
  #79
jarek
Registered User
 
jarek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 8,080
vCash: 500
That's essentially what I was looking for, and makes him look better than just saying "being number 1 on a good team means a lot".

Thanks for doing that.. and I agree with it.

jarek is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 02:08 AM
  #80
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanIslander View Post
Number one in ice time is misleading. (Even Zhitnik did that and that means squat in terms of assessing his overall ability, specifically in his own zone.)

Eric Brewer is the back 1 in the 1-3-1 coaching system. He deserves some credit for the Lightning's playoff run AFTER the star forwards, AFTER the secondary scorers, AFTER the goaltending, AFTER the coaching, AFTER the powerplay, and then, then he does, in the context of the role he is assigned and the style they play.

Is the 10+ NHL season veteran going to make his MLD debut after 22 games post trade and one playoff run within which he played a widget role in an innovative coaching style because he led the team in ice time? Gawd, hopefully not.
You're still going on about Zhitnik? It's a shame your Zamboni Mania account was banned. Or else you could have him draft Zhitnik (which he did before), go on about how much ice time he saw on some pretty successful teams, and show quotes from coaches and media people about what a two-way player he was. Then your VanIslander account could rant about how much Zhitnik sucked because he looked like a bonehead in a few Sportscentre highlights you saw.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 02:11 AM
  #81
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,707
vCash: 500
ugh, I want to stop talking about Watson so I can discuss this series.

I have a wedding to go to tomorrow, but I'll fit in some stuff in between the wedding and reception, as well as during the reception... the guy who's getting married is the only guy I know in real life who's ever been interested in how my ATDs are going, so he'll understand... right?

I think it's destiny. The final day of the series is the day of his wedding, and his last name is Petrychyn, which sounds an awful lot like "Patricias", the long form of "Pats"

That, and, as he so kindly pointed out, there is the curse of King Clancy. It can only be destiny that we ended up here with King Clancy on our team and Ottawa as our opponent. The Senators will forever regret trading Clancy... in real life and in fantasy!

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 03:19 AM
  #82
VanIslander
Don't waste my time
 
VanIslander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 24,407
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
You're still going on about Zhitnik? It's a shame your Zamboni Mania account was banned. Or else you could have him draft Zhitnik (which he did before), go on about how much ice time he saw on some pretty successful teams, and show quotes from coaches and media people about what a two-way player he was. Then your VanIslander account could rant about how much Zhitnik sucked because he looked like a bonehead in a few Sportscentre highlights you saw.
1. Zhitnik I only drafted in the AAA (below MLD), where he is/was a decent pick. I never said he was two way. He HITS a lot and he moves the puck up ice. Those are his talents. He is risky in his decision making but Hasek handled odd man rushes against constantly and well.
2. I watched the Sabres regularly, more than any other Eastern conference team, from the moment Michael Peca joined the Sabres to the moment he left (as a Canucks fan I was devastated when Peca was traded away to Buffalo).
3. My opinions weren't contradictory, no sneaky talking out both sides of the mouth.
4. You TDMM drafted Zhitnik in the main ATD this year!! So obviously you value him much more than I do. I think him a marginal MLD pick and decent AAA pick given his offensive abilities relative to alternatives available in the AAA. You think him better than many defensemen who will go in this year's MLD. Why? Because YOU are the one who saw a couple of highlights and read his ice time totals?

VanIslander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 03:40 AM
  #83
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,707
vCash: 500
Initial thoughts, to get some more discussion going

- I'm not a big fan of the "you have Zetterberg as a 1st line center, so that line sucks" way of thinking. The reason this comes about is because the center is generally the catalyst for an ATD top line. Not in this case. Jagr is the catalyst, and he's as good as all except maybe 6-7 guys in that role. Consider Zetterberg the glue guy, and he stands up well to most 1st line glue guys.

- Ottawa's 2nd line is a legitimate two-way shutdown 2nd line. Messier will have his hands full. Modano can skate with him too. He'll have to use the one major advantage he holds - toughness . I do question what Provost will be able to provide offensively, though. Modano isn't likely to make him better like Henri did.

- Hap Day is going to switch to the left side to contain Jagr. Day is our smartest positional defender and if he can take away a passing lane here and there, and cut off a couple of angles, then he's doing about as well as anyone can expect to do against this dynamic offensive machine. Neilson is already on the left. I like his mobility and size against Jagr, even if Reise is the big hitter. There's no use trying to hit Jagr just to bounce off him.

- Our defensive line is not as strong offensively, or defensively as Ottawa's... but then, it's a 3rd line and theirs is a 2nd line. It will see time against Jagr but its plan will really have to be to handle his linemates and make him beat two defensemen and a goalie alone. Bridgman lacks the speed to handle Jagr, and Oliver lacks the size. But they are good enough players to make life difficult for Bentley and Zetterberg.

- There is no particular matchup Shero is seeking, and he's a guy who likes to roll 4 lines. Obviously the 4th line against Jagr is not going to happen, but the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd will all see some time against him. Bucyk's immense size and great physicality will frustrate Jagr, and Adams and Bridgman provide toughness on the left side. Ideally, you want a Ramsay/Gainey/Metz/Tikkanen on Jagr, but not every team can have one.

- I have never been a Dan Bain fan. I know he's an early hockey hero and all that, but how many games of recorded, organized hockey did the guy play? It's been mentioned that Nash generated offense on his own and doesn't need a playmaker, and this is true, but that is in real life and this is a much tougher league. He's not a top-level sniper here, he's just another goalscoring winger. A playmaker would have helped. I don't see him being very useful offensively from the 3rd line here. Henderson appears to be a "decent" ES scorer, but he was not even top-20 in ES scoring once. Nash was 11th this year and 14th two years earlier. This line is probably the weakest part of the Ottawa squad.

- Identifying which of Bill Hay and Cal Gardner is better is total speculation, as Hay played with Bobby Hull for most of his career. What was his actual sans-Hull offensive potential? Who really knows. I can tell you, though, that Gardner will play a much better 4th line game, taking better players off their game, throwing hits, and digging for pucks. Kerr is likely a more well-rounded player than the extremely one-dimensional Henry, but Henry's PP prowess will help. MacAdam is a tad better than Peplinski overall, and has the better offensive peak and the ability to play special teams if needed. I like Regina's 4th line much better - it works as a line, and Ottawa's seems like "specialist mish mash".

- I'll look biased here, but I like Regina's D corps throughout. Clancy is definitely better than Pronger, but the gap shrinks by the year. Gerard is likely just a better version of Day. Small advantage Regina. Bergman is not as good as Neilson. His icetime stats in his prime are sweet, but his wings teams were terrible, so playing that many minutes for them doesn't say much. Neilson was a top defenseman for a very strong team (post-expansion). Bergman seems to be a bit of an offensive specialist too, correct me if I'm wrong. Reise/Simpson is about as poor a comparison as can be made. But I do believe Reise is better. Simpson's offensive potential, as well as his all-star recognition, completely dried up in the NHL. I had him before, and liked him as a #5, but found him overrated and was disappointed in how little I could find. My thoughts on Redden/Watson/Samuelsson/Gusarov are well-documented within this thread already.

- I have a definite goaltending edge, but Espo isn't going to steal the series for me and Joseph isn't going to blow it for Ottawa. I should expect 3-4 more saves by the end but it's impossible to say if that will be a difference maker.

- Shero is above Irvin in my books, but YMMV. I agree with TDMM that Irvin can tend to be overrated by longevity. I know one thing - if there's one thing Irvin can do, it's lose in the finals!

- In case the spares need to be used, I should point out that Aucoin is a lesser McCabe. Rautakallio and Fontinato couldn't be more different, of course. Ottawa's forward spares are more talented, but they are also one-dimensional and less vesatile than ours, who combine to play 5 forward positions.

- Better PP1? You tell me. Bucyk and Selanne are all-time legendary PP performers. So is Henry, at goal scoring at least, and Jagr is Jagr. Messier and Modano are close to a wash. Clancy should outperform Bentley but Simpson's offensive credentials in the west probably top those of Day. Close.

- I don't think there is a lot of firepower up front on Ottawa's 2nd PP unit. Great pointmen though. Ours is the opposite. Pretty close again.

- On the PK, I think we have the four better forwards all-around for the job. Great D-men on Ottawa, though. Gusarov and Samuelsson are here to be specialists, but will they kill penalties much better than Reise and Watson, if at all?

- Don't forget, the curse of King Clancy is still hanging over your head, Ottawa.

- Good luck overpass, hopefully we can get a bit of a conversation going before voting opens.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 10:15 AM
  #84
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,870
vCash: 500
Hey, sorry I haven't posted anything. Been busy the last two days and haven't had the chance.

I'll read through and try to catch up and move the series forward.

overpass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 11:11 AM
  #85
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,870
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
- I have never been a Dan Bain fan. I know he's an early hockey hero and all that, but how many games of recorded, organized hockey did the guy play? It's been mentioned that Nash generated offense on his own and doesn't need a playmaker, and this is true, but that is in real life and this is a much tougher league. He's not a top-level sniper here, he's just another goalscoring winger. A playmaker would have helped. I don't see him being very useful offensively from the 3rd line here. Henderson appears to be a "decent" ES scorer, but he was not even top-20 in ES scoring once. Nash was 11th this year and 14th two years earlier. This line is probably the weakest part of the Ottawa squad.
YMMV on how much credit to give Dan Bain, considering the early era in which he played. I have no idea how many regular season games he played in, and I don't think it matters that much. He starred in Stanley Cup challenges over a seven year period, in the biggest games of the year, when all of Canada was following along.

This is just from his Legends of Hockey profile and reorganized, but here's a chronology of Bain's accomplishments in Stanley Cup play.

1895: He first played top-level hockey with the Victorias of the Manitoba Hockey League in 1895, quickly establishing himself as an outstanding center and valuable team leader.

1896: On February 14, 1896, the team traveled east to try to strip the Montreal Victorias of their Stanley Cup. Bain scored the winning goal in the Westerners' 2-0 upset to claim the hallowed silverware. Months later, the Montreal squad reclaimed Lord Stanley's trophy from Winnipeg by a 6-5 score despite two goals from Bain.

1899: In February 1899, the gifted center led the western Vics to another unsuccessful Stanley Cup challenge against their eastern rivals from Montreal.

1900: A year later, Bain led another Winnipeg expedition eastward to face the Shamrock club of Montreal. This time, Bain's exceptional performance in scoring four goals in three games couldn't lift the Winnipeg team past their eastern opponents, who eked out a victory by 11 goals to 10 in the total-goals series.

1901: Winnipeg launched a successful challenge against the powerful Shamrocks in January 1901, sweeping a two-game series in Montreal. Bain proved to be the overtime hero in the second match. In the process the skillful forward made history by registering the first-ever extra-time Cup-winning goal.

1902: The newest Cup holders withstood a confrontation with the Toronto Wellingtons in January 1902. Two months later, they faced the Montreal Amateur Athletic Association, the winners of the first Stanley Cup in 1893 by virtue of their first-place finish in the Amateur Hockey Association of Canada. In a hard-fought three-game set, Winnipeg won the first game before succumbing in the latter two even though Bain was often the dominant forward on the ice.

I think a player who starred in such a prominent way in top-level hockey, who was among the first players elected to the Hall of Fame, and who was recognized as a great all-around player deserves to be recognized in the ATD.

Rick Nash is an unusual player, in that I think few players of his ability have consistently played with such an ordinary supporting cast.

I never watch Columbus, so what I've seen of him is when he plays for Canada, and he looks really good there. But when he plays for Columbus, who was the best centre he ever had? David Vyborny? Antoine Vermette? RJ Umberger? Who was the best puck-moving defenceman he ever played with? Fedor Tyutin?

This really hurts him on the power play, as Columbus has consistently had an awful power play. Nash has also played against very tough competition in the last 5 years - playing the other teams top lines, in a division with Detroit, Chicago, Nashville, and St. Louis.

IMO his Columbus scoring stats significantly understate his quality.

Also, Nash doesn't need an elite playmaker to give him perfect passes to finish. He's not a one-touch sniper like a Dany Heatley, he's an elite goal scorer with size, speed, and skill. Just getting him the puck in transition or on the cycle will give him his share of opportunities.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
- Identifying which of Bill Hay and Cal Gardner is better is total speculation, as Hay played with Bobby Hull for most of his career. What was his actual sans-Hull offensive potential? Who really knows. I can tell you, though, that Gardner will play a much better 4th line game, taking better players off their game, throwing hits, and digging for pucks. Kerr is likely a more well-rounded player than the extremely one-dimensional Henry, but Henry's PP prowess will help. MacAdam is a tad better than Peplinski overall, and has the better offensive peak and the ability to play special teams if needed. I like Regina's 4th line much better - it works as a line, and Ottawa's seems like "specialist mish mash".
Henry is a specialist. He won't see a single defensive zone draw, and Jagr will take some of his other shifts. I'm comfortable with that, it gives Irvin some freedom to spot his players in places where they can succeed.

Hay and Peplinski are very capable fourth liners. Peplinski's ability to shift around and play any forward position will allow Irvin to use different players in Henry's place.

Hay was far from an offence-only guy. I won't say that Hay's point finishes accurately portray his offence. Obviously he benefited from passing the puck to Hull. But why was Hay on Hull's line? To be a defensive conscience! He got the puck to Hull to let him go to work on on offence, and covered for him defensively.

See this blurb in the Chicago Tribune from Hay's first retirement in 1966:
Quote:
William [Red] Hay, defensive-forward and penalty killer for seven seasons with the Chicago Black Hawks, has retired from hockey.
When Tommy Ivan begged Hay to unretire and come back to Chicago in the 1966-67 season, it was to play on the third line.

Reposting a quote from Hay's bio:
Quote:
Hay Made Hawks "Great" Team

The third line was Reay's biggest problem. This was revealed when consistent Red Hay was lured out of retirement last month...The return of Hay, 31, touched off a record Hawk unbeaten streak.

Reay says that the Hawks were only one player short of having a great hockey team "and then Hay came back and he was the one we needed. Any team that can pick up a centre like him in the middle of the season has to consider itself pretty lucky."

The Hawks' basic success in bidding for their first NHL title in 41 years rests with the incredible Mikita and his Scooter line; the continued sharpshooting of Bobby Hull; the improvement of his brother Dennis, making the third line a scoring threat, the return of Hay; fine penalty killing, especially of Hay and Nesterenko; the outstanding goalie duo; and strengthening the defence corps with the addition of Ed van Impe.
Peplinski was almost an "even strength specialist" in the 80s. He played LW on Calgary's first line or C on a second or third line for most of the decade. A hard worker, leader, and willing fighter, he's the epitome of an ATD fourth liner.

I'll address the D later.

overpass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 12:16 PM
  #86
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,870
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
- I'll look biased here, but I like Regina's D corps throughout. Clancy is definitely better than Pronger, but the gap shrinks by the year. Gerard is likely just a better version of Day. Small advantage Regina.
Pronger - Clancy is close, I think. I actually picked Pronger over Clancy because I wanted the size and toughness that Pronger adds. Clancy has a lot going for him as well, of course. But I think Ottawa is at least equal on the top pairings.

Funny thing is, if you asked King Clancy he would probably tell you that Eddie Gerard was the best defenceman in the series.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Bergman is not as good as Neilson. His icetime stats in his prime are sweet, but his wings teams were terrible, so playing that many minutes for them doesn't say much. Neilson was a top defenseman for a very strong team (post-expansion). Bergman seems to be a bit of an offensive specialist too, correct me if I'm wrong. Reise/Simpson is about as poor a comparison as can be made. But I do believe Reise is better. Simpson's offensive potential, as well as his all-star recognition, completely dried up in the NHL. I had him before, and liked him as a #5, but found him overrated and was disappointed in how little I could find.
Agreed, Bergman is not as good as Neilson, who had better awards voting support. But:

Bergman's teams were not terrible at all. Pre-expansion, they were above average in a 6 team league.

64-65: 0.621
65-66: 0.529
66-67: 0.414
Average: 0.521

In his post-expansion years where we know he played big minutes, they were a bit weaker, but still average:

67-68: 0.446
68-69: 0.513
69-70: 0.625
70-71: 0.353
71-72: 0.487
72-73: 0.551
Average: 0.496

1974 to 1976 were terrible. But I didn't include those years in the minutes I posted in my Bergman bio:

Quote:
Here are the leaders among defenceman in estimated time on ice per game over the six years from 67-68 to 72-73.

1. Bobby Orr, 30.3
2. JC Tremblay, 28.7
3. Pat Stapleton, 28.6
4. Gary Bergman, 28.2
5. Jacques Laperriere, 27.9

The leaders in estimated even strength ice time per game over the same period.

1. Gary Bergman, 22.9
2. Pat Stapleton, 22.8
3. Jacques Laperriere, 22.6
4. Bill White, 22.3
5. Bobby Orr, 22.2
Bergman was not an offensive specialist at all, either. In fact, he played a defensive role on team Canada in 1972. First paragraph of his LOH bio:
Quote:
Gary Bergman was a solid all-around defenseman in his 12-year NHL tenure. A fine skater with a knack for making smart decisions on offense, he also took a physical approach to the game when guarding his end of the ice.
Have you read my Simpson bio? I think I've dug up a lot more on him this draft. He was a bit of a bust in New York, but contemporary observers said he gained 20 pounds when he came East and didn't have his old quickness that allowed him to dominate the West. Also, remember that his NHL seasons were his age 32 through 37 seasons. His prime years were spent in Manitoba senior hockey playing for the Allan Cup, fighting in the war, a year in the Big 4, and four great seasons in the WCHL.

Simpson was probably the best rushing defenceman in the world in his prime. He is the 5th best defenceman in this series and having him on my second pairing is a strength of my team.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Redden led his team in ice time 6 times, and they were well over .500 every time that he did. Overpass can confirm that for some of that time he was going up against the opposition's best, too. This team had playoff struggles and couldn't get over the hump. But with Redden playing big, big minutes, they were a very good/great team. that is the mark of a good defenseman.

Watson was the Flyers' #1 ES D-man in 1973, 1974, and 1975, the latter two being of course Cup years. I think Shero had winning hockey games in mind, and that he turned to Watson the most often says something, wouldn't you? Of course, if you don't like numbers I can also point out that he was voted the team's best defenseman in 1975 when they repeated as champions. Best defenseman on a cup winner? That's something neither Samuelsson nor Gusarov ever came close to doing.

Samuelsson and Gusarov are good specialists at what they do. that's about it.

Samuelsson was a career #2/3/4 defenseman (9 seasons in total spent in those slots). He was a #1 defenseman once... in 1990. And Philly missed the playoffs that year. This is what happens when your #1 defenseman is Kjell Samuelsson.

When he's in a supporting role, though, you're fine. He was a #4 in Philly when they went to the 1987 finals. That's decent. He was also #3 on the 1992 Pens. that's very good. But those are the biggest feathers in his cap. He was also a #2 on the 1988 and 1989 Flyers, both playoff teams.

Gusarov? He was a career #2-4 defenseman as well. Twice he was a #2 - In 1992 and 1994. These are, in fact, the only two times his team ever missed the playoffs. This is what happens when your #2 is Alexei Gusarov. If he's in a supporting role, though, you're fine. He was a #3 when Colorado won the 1996 Stanley Cup. He was a #3 as well, in their excellent 1993, 1997 and 2000 seasons. He was a #4 in their promising but disappointing 1995 and 1998 seasons.

Do you see the difference between the two sets of players? One proved they could be the best defensemen on good teams. The others not only didn't prove that they could, they actually proved that they couldn't.

(I, personally, also quite like the balance that we have. Wade Redden was the best defenseman on a great regular season team that kept choking, and Joe Watson was the #1 ES defenseman on a great clutch team, to offset the Ottawa chokery that taints Redden's legacy)
Yeah, Redden was on the Sens top defensive pairing for a couple of years before Chara arrived. And he played with Chara for much of 2001-02. After that Chara and Phillips were the shutdown defenders.

How many playoff series did Ottawa win from 1999 to 2001, when Redden was their top defensive defenceman? Zero.

Gusarov and Samuelsson are certainly not as good overall as Redden and Watson. But they might be better for their role. They will be used as defensive specialists as much as possible - penalty kill, defensive zone faceoffs, etc.

Both were among the best defensive defencemen in the league in their primes.

Top penalty killing defencemen - 1992 to 1998
Player GP SH% TmPK+
Ray Bourque 502 65% 0.90
Chris Chelios 522 59% 0.87
Brian Leetch 488 58% 0.94
Scott Stevens 521 56% 0.93
Teppo Numminen 483 56% 1.01
Jamie Macoun 510 55% 0.97
Calle Johansson 503 52% 0.81
Eric Desjardins 525 51% 0.96
Alexei Gusarov 432 51% 0.90
Mark Tinordi 409 50% 0.86

Top penalty killing defencemen - 1989 to 1995
Player GP SH% TmPK+
Ray Bourque 488 63% 0.83
Kjell Samuelsson 450 60% 0.94
Chris Chelios 498 60% 0.84
Kevin Hatcher 502 57% 0.86
Craig Ludwig 504 56% 0.97
Scott Stevens 494 53% 0.97
Jamie Macoun 510 51% 0.93
Doug Lidster 429 50% 1.08

Remember that Gusarov also played in Russia and on their national team for several years before he came to the NHL. He played in the top Russian league from the age of 18 and the national team since the age of 20, and didn't make it to the NHL until he was 26. A lot of people thought that Gusarov was older than his listed age, which would explain why his career lasted from age 18-37 at the top level as a defenceman.

Gusarov and Samuelsson don't need to be better overall. They just need to be better defensively.

Edit: To compare these numbers to your guy: from 1968 to 1976 Joe Watson's SH% was 46%, which was around 20th among defencemen over that time. To be fair, Philly had a very good penalty kill over this time. But he wasn't always a top guy on that unit.


Last edited by overpass: 05-28-2011 at 12:26 PM.
overpass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 12:51 PM
  #87
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,870
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
- Better PP1? You tell me. Bucyk and Selanne are all-time legendary PP performers. So is Henry, at goal scoring at least, and Jagr is Jagr. Messier and Modano are close to a wash. Clancy should outperform Bentley but Simpson's offensive credentials in the west probably top those of Day. Close.

- I don't think there is a lot of firepower up front on Ottawa's 2nd PP unit. Great pointmen though. Ours is the opposite. Pretty close again.

- On the PK, I think we have the four better forwards all-around for the job. Great D-men on Ottawa, though. Gusarov and Samuelsson are here to be specialists, but will they kill penalties much better than Reise and Watson, if at all?

- Don't forget, the curse of King Clancy is still hanging over your head, Ottawa.

- Good luck overpass, hopefully we can get a bit of a conversation going before voting opens.
We're loading up our top unit in Ottawa.

Ottawa's PP1: Bentley-Henry-Jagr-Pronger-Simpson
Regina's PP1: Bucyk-Messier-Selanne-Clancy-Day

I know Bucyk scored a ton on the power play as the third best guy with Orr and Espo. But he didn't score that much on the power play before they came along. I think Selanne is your better power play winger.

IMO Jagr and Selanne are pretty close. Bentley is a very good winger on the power play. I'm not sure he wasn't Bucyk's equal. Henry's role is different from Messier's but I think he's the more dangerous weapon in the end. On the point, Clancy > Pronger and Simpson > Day.

I don't agree that your PK forwards are better. Messier-Nevin and Zetterberg-Provost are both excellent duos. Gottselig-Hay is, IMO, better than Bridgman-Nevin. Gottselig's penalty killing ability was widely noted in his day, and he's the best option of the four, IMO. Hay was also a valuable penalty killer.

King Clancy curse - heh. It doesn't help that I passed up drafting Clancy either (although I had Cleghorn higher on my list.) I think Captain Eddie Gerard will neutralize the curse, in any case.

overpass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 12:53 PM
  #88
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,870
vCash: 500
Also, did we ever figure out who has home ice?

If there's no satisfactory way to do so, I propose both teams travel by train to Toronto to play the Cup final on their artificial ice, as it's a little late in the season to play in Ottawa and Regina.

overpass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 06:30 PM
  #89
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,707
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
Also, Nash doesn't need an elite playmaker to give him perfect passes to finish. He's not a one-touch sniper like a Dany Heatley, he's an elite goal scorer with size, speed, and skill. Just getting him the puck in transition or on the cycle will give him his share of opportunities.
You are talking about real life, though. The ATD is going to be more difficult.

Quote:
Hay was far from an offence-only guy. I won't say that Hay's point finishes accurately portray his offence. Obviously he benefited from passing the puck to Hull. But why was Hay on Hull's line? To be a defensive conscience! He got the puck to Hull to let him go to work on on offence, and covered for him defensively.
I know Hay had some defensive skill. I think that overall, with physicality and agitation considered, he's not going to bring as good a "4th line" game as Gardner. But no, he's not incapable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
Pronger - Clancy is close, I think. I actually picked Pronger over Clancy because I wanted the size and toughness that Pronger adds. Clancy has a lot going for him as well, of course. But I think Ottawa is at least equal on the top pairings.

Funny thing is, if you asked King Clancy he would probably tell you that Eddie Gerard was the best defenceman in the series.
... damn Clancy and his modesty!

I had forgotten you actually took Pronger over Clancy. Not the biggest reach in the draft, and you obviously had a specific skill set in mind, but... thanks for letting me have Clancy!

Quote:
Agreed, Bergman is not as good as Neilson, who had better awards voting support. But:

Bergman's teams were not terrible at all. Pre-expansion, they were above average in a 6 team league.

64-65: 0.621
65-66: 0.529
66-67: 0.414
Average: 0.521

In his post-expansion years where we know he played big minutes, they were a bit weaker, but still average:

67-68: 0.446
68-69: 0.513
69-70: 0.625
70-71: 0.353
71-72: 0.487
72-73: 0.551
Average: 0.496

1974 to 1976 were terrible. But I didn't include those years in the minutes I posted in my Bergman bio:
I had read all that about Bergman, but a quick look at his hockey-reference profile showed he only made the playoffs in one of those seasons. I made the mistake of saying that meant the team was "terrible". In the O6 division, missing the playoffs didn't necessarily make you terrible. They were pretty mediocre, still. His high minutes are more impressive than I first thought.

Quote:
Bergman was not an offensive specialist at all, either. In fact, he played a defensive role on team Canada in 1972. First paragraph of his LOH bio:
I also know he played more of a defensive role for Canada. I may be remembering incorrectly, but I thought in the past Bergman had been referred to by other GMs as something along the lines of "an adventure in his own end". It is not worth the time it might take to find, and who knows if I do, if it would be even meaningful at all... forget I said it.

Quote:
Have you read my Simpson bio? I think I've dug up a lot more on him this draft. He was a bit of a bust in New York, but contemporary observers said he gained 20 pounds when he came East and didn't have his old quickness that allowed him to dominate the West. Also, remember that his NHL seasons were his age 32 through 37 seasons. His prime years were spent in Manitoba senior hockey playing for the Allan Cup, fighting in the war, a year in the Big 4, and four great seasons in the WCHL.

Simpson was probably the best rushing defenceman in the world in his prime. He is the 5th best defenceman in this series and having him on my second pairing is a strength of my team.
I did read his bio when you posted it, and I read it again now. I agree that he was an impressive rusher in the WCHL. It is just amazing how preciptous his drop in offense was, once he got to the NHL. It was so drastic, and so fast. He did not have as many points in his first four NHL seasons, as he did in 1925 in the West.

He was the highest scoring defenseman in that period you stated, but the differences between the leagues did not lend themselves to easy comparison between raw numbers, particularly among defensemen.

His four seasons in the West can be broken down like this:

1922: 1st in D scoring, 2nd overall, 1st AST, this was one of three major leagues and for this season it was the weakest of the three

1923: 1st in D scoring, 6th overall, 1st AST, this was again one of three major leagues but had gotten stronger

1924: 1st in D scoring, 13th overall, 2nd AST, one of three leagues, stronger still, perhaps stronger than the PCHA now

1925: 1st in D scoring, 11th overall, 1st AST, one of just two leagues, IMO this league was every bit as good as the 1925 NHL

so when someone has a season to evaluate from years like these, the next question I often ask is, "so if he was Xth in this league, where would that place him overall?" - in this case, there is not much room for that. being the best scoring defenseman in the WCHL when there are three leagues might mean you're anywhere from 1st to 8th overall. Being on the 1st AST means you're among the two best overall defensemen in your league, meaning you could be 1st-12th, realistically, among the three leagues. The 2nd AST? probably a 5th-15th. The best season, IMO, is his 1925 year, where being on the 1st AST (almost certainly behind Shore, though), makes him the 3rd-5th-best overall blueliner in the business.

So much guesswork involved in understanding just how good he was. if we were to split the difference on the upper and lower limits of what he might have done in an imagined consolidated league during his prime, I see him as a sure 2nd AST member (if ASTs existed) and a possibility for a 2nd.

I am surprised that you see him as the best defenseman on either 2nd pairing, 5th in the series. I'm not sure I'm convinced he's better than 8th. Potentially, he could be, but the other three 2nd pairing guys are such known quantities.

Quote:
How many playoff series did Ottawa win from 1999 to 2001, when Redden was their top defensive defenceman? Zero.
And that's fine by me. It's the ugly wart on Redden's resume. If they had a couple conference finals in there, he'd be what? a #3 defenseman all-time? He still was a major part of them being an excellent regular season team. As-is, he's a #5 that should be a #4. Watson's winning history and proven ability to be a top defensive player on a team that wins in the playoffs, is a nice backup for Redden.

Quote:
Gusarov and Samuelsson are certainly not as good overall as Redden and Watson. But they might be better for their role. They will be used as defensive specialists as much as possible - penalty kill, defensive zone faceoffs, etc.

Both were among the best defensive defencemen in the league in their primes.

Top penalty killing defencemen - 1992 to 1998
Player GP SH% TmPK+
Ray Bourque 502 65% 0.90
Chris Chelios 522 59% 0.87
Brian Leetch 488 58% 0.94
Scott Stevens 521 56% 0.93
Teppo Numminen 483 56% 1.01
Jamie Macoun 510 55% 0.97
Calle Johansson 503 52% 0.81
Eric Desjardins 525 51% 0.96
Alexei Gusarov 432 51% 0.90
Mark Tinordi 409 50% 0.86

Top penalty killing defencemen - 1989 to 1995
Player GP SH% TmPK+
Ray Bourque 488 63% 0.83
Kjell Samuelsson 450 60% 0.94
Chris Chelios 498 60% 0.84
Kevin Hatcher 502 57% 0.86
Craig Ludwig 504 56% 0.97
Scott Stevens 494 53% 0.97
Jamie Macoun 510 51% 0.93
Doug Lidster 429 50% 1.08

Remember that Gusarov also played in Russia and on their national team for several years before he came to the NHL. He played in the top Russian league from the age of 18 and the national team since the age of 20, and didn't make it to the NHL until he was 26. A lot of people thought that Gusarov was older than his listed age, which would explain why his career lasted from age 18-37 at the top level as a defenceman.

Gusarov and Samuelsson don't need to be better overall. They just need to be better defensively.

Edit: To compare these numbers to your guy: from 1968 to 1976 Joe Watson's SH% was 46%, which was around 20th among defencemen over that time. To be fair, Philly had a very good penalty kill over this time. But he wasn't always a top guy on that unit.
OK, so they definitely killed penalties frequently. And that's part of the battle, because you get those minutes on merit. But the performance of the PK unit is important, too. I would prefer if you could show a composite metric that takes usage and PK unit performance into consideration at a reasonable weighting. If you could do that, I'd appreciate it. I trust your ability to weight it reasonably. I think it would show that Watson isn't that far off a PKer from Goose and Shell.

Better defensively or more effective overall at even strength, that is another story. Redden and Watson should be considerably more effective. I feel comfortable going into the series that there are a few players in Ottawa, pigeonholed into specialist roles and being less effective in the 75% of the game that isn't played with the man advantage.

Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
IMO Jagr and Selanne are pretty close. Bentley is a very good winger on the power play. I'm not sure he wasn't Bucyk's equal. Henry's role is different from Messier's but I think he's the more dangerous weapon in the end. On the point, Clancy > Pronger and Simpson > Day.
I think you underrate Day's offensive record when you conclude so quickly Simpson is better for the PP. He led all NHL defensemen in points in the consolidated NHL one season, and was 4th four times. Simpson's WCHL record for scoring, as I touched on earlier, may or may not translate to a better record.

Remember as well, that Simpson's offensive worth appears to be primarily due to his rushing ability. The same could be said for a lot of older defensemen but it seems even more extreme with Simpson, with his fast skating and corkscrew rushes being his specialties. In a Paul Coffey or Mark Howe sort of way, these are skills that would serve him better at even strength. He is not a player whose offensive totals I'd be 100% comfortable using to declare him a great ATD PP player.

I never really considered Selanne could be as good as Jagr on the PP, but after another look, you are right.

Quote:
I don't agree that your PK forwards are better. Messier-Nevin and Zetterberg-Provost are both excellent duos. Gottselig-Hay is, IMO, better than Bridgman-Nevin. Gottselig's penalty killing ability was widely noted in his day, and he's the best option of the four, IMO. Hay was also a valuable penalty killer.
You mean Bridgman-Oliver. Gottselig and Hay are both noted penalty killers, so is Oliver. I am not sure I can declare any of them better. However, Bridgman is only "capable" at the ATD level and is a step below those three.

As for first units, Messier and Nevin both have extremely long careers of excellent and frequent penalty killing behind them. Provost, as one of the best defensive forwards of all-time, can be argued to be on their level, even in the absence of supporting numbers. But Zetterberg, halfway into his career, should not yet be considered close

Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
Also, did we ever figure out who has home ice?

If there's no satisfactory way to do so, I propose both teams travel by train to Toronto to play the Cup final on their artificial ice, as it's a little late in the season to play in Ottawa and Regina.
Yeah, let's say no one has home ice. I don't think there is a fair way to do this. (I could say that since I was 1st in my conference and you were 2nd in yours, that home ice is Regina's, but that wouldn't be necessarily true)

Let's meet in Thunder Bay. 1300km from Regina, 1400km from Ottawa.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 06:30 PM
  #90
VanIslander
Don't waste my time
 
VanIslander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 24,407
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass View Post
I propose both teams travel by train to Toronto to play the Cup final on their artificial ice.
I propose hockey history be honored and the finals be played on the first ever indoor hockey rink in Canada, the Victoria Skating Rink in Montreal that was used to play hockey in 1875. Make it a tradition to honor hockey history!


VanIslander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 07:21 PM
  #91
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,317
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
so when someone has a season to evaluate from years like these, the next question I often ask is, "so if he was Xth in this league, where would that place him overall?"
Maybe consolidated scoring would help

1925:
Clancy - 27.048 points
Simpson - 24.663 points
Boucher - 24.472 points

1924:
Simpson was 11th with 13.692
Clancy was 3rd with 20.000

1923:
Simpson was 1st with 29.319
Bocuher - 28.75
Cook - 27.637

1922:
Simpson - 35.574
Cameron - 35.000



1922, Simpson was probably the best defenseman in the world. The only guy close in scoring was no better defensively.

1923, Simpson was probably 2nd best. Boucher was close in scorring, and was better defensively.

1924, Simpson wasn't very good.

1925, Simpson was pprobably the 4th best. Clancy scored more. Boucher and Cleghorn were close behind, and they were better overall.

Dreakmur is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 08:11 PM
  #92
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,870
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
OK, so they definitely killed penalties frequently. And that's part of the battle, because you get those minutes on merit. But the performance of the PK unit is important, too. I would prefer if you could show a composite metric that takes usage and PK unit performance into consideration at a reasonable weighting. If you could do that, I'd appreciate it. I trust your ability to weight it reasonably. I think it would show that Watson isn't that far off a PKer from Goose and Shell.
I could put together a composite metric, but I think that might imply a bit more confidence in the numbers than I have. In practice I think they tend to match up to reputations, but in the end it's putting more value on team performance than I'm comfortable with.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Better defensively or more effective overall at even strength, that is another story. Redden and Watson should be considerably more effective. I feel comfortable going into the series that there are a few players in Ottawa, pigeonholed into specialist roles and being less effective in the 75% of the game that isn't played with the man advantage.
Strictly speaking the numbers only refer to Samuelsson and Gusarov's shorthanded play. But it's also an indicator of the quality of their defensive games.

I'll admit they are at their best in their own end. Those situations include penalty killing, but also defensive zone faceoffs at even strength.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
I never really considered Selanne could be as good as Jagr on the PP, but after another look, you are right.
I should have kept my mouth shut.

On the other hand, Jagr is ahead if you look at career averages, because Selanne had a few down years in the middle of his career. Depends how much you value consistency.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
You mean Bridgman-Oliver. Gottselig and Hay are both noted penalty killers, so is Oliver. I am not sure I can declare any of them better. However, Bridgman is only "capable" at the ATD level and is a step below those three.

As for first units, Messier and Nevin both have extremely long careers of excellent and frequent penalty killing behind them. Provost, as one of the best defensive forwards of all-time, can be argued to be on their level, even in the absence of supporting numbers. But Zetterberg, halfway into his career, should not yet be considered close.
Yeah, Bridgman-Oliver.

On second thought I agree, Zetterberg is probably a clear #4 among the top unit forwards. Although he's better than his regular season numbers - Detroit saves his minutes for other situations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Yeah, let's say no one has home ice. I don't think there is a fair way to do this. (I could say that since I was 1st in my conference and you were 2nd in yours, that home ice is Regina's, but that wouldn't be necessarily true)

Let's meet in Thunder Bay. 1300km from Regina, 1400km from Ottawa.
Sounds good, neutral site it is. Stanley Cup games have been played at neutral sites (back in the early days of hockey), so this fits. Doesn't matter to me where it is, as long as it's clear there's no advantage either way.

overpass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2011, 09:36 PM
  #93
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,707
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
Maybe consolidated scoring would help

1925:
Clancy - 27.048 points
Simpson - 24.663 points
Boucher - 24.472 points

1924:
Simpson was 11th with 13.692
Clancy was 3rd with 20.000

1923:
Simpson was 1st with 29.319
Bocuher - 28.75
Cook - 27.637

1922:
Simpson - 35.574
Cameron - 35.000



1922, Simpson was probably the best defenseman in the world. The only guy close in scoring was no better defensively.

1923, Simpson was probably 2nd best. Boucher was close in scorring, and was better defensively.

1924, Simpson wasn't very good.

1925, Simpson was pprobably the 4th best. Clancy scored more. Boucher and Cleghorn were close behind, and they were better overall.
Thanks for the analysis; however:

- I remember you posting your formula before. It is solid mathematically, but it assumes all the leagues are equal in strength. They weren't, particularly in 1922, when you gave him the lofty title of best defenseman in the world.

- what would also skew your figures is the fact that defensemen didn't participate in the offense to the same degree in the three leagues. It would make sense to account for that.

- also, these numbers are strictly offensive, and a defenseman's offensive placement and his overall ranking are not always the same thing. You are quicker than anyone else I know, in assuming they are. Hart and allstar voting results from the nhl indicate that it was possible to be a very highly regarded blueliner with very few points. Offense means little in the big picture for defensemen.

- doesn't really matter, but cameron was a forward that year.

1925 Was a probable 2nd AST. (Although it would be revisionist to suggest he was as good as shore that year, even at the ages they were at). 1922 and 1923 might or might not have been allstar years, that's why I" split the difference" there.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-29-2011, 06:43 AM
  #94
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,317
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Thanks for the analysis; however:

- I remember you posting your formula before. It is solid mathematically, but it assumes all the leagues are equal in strength. They weren't, particularly in 1922, when you gave him the lofty title of best defenseman in the world.
That's true. Not all the leagues were equal, but they were ralatively close, especially at the top end.

Quote:
- what would also skew your figures is the fact that defensemen didn't participate in the offense to the same degree in the three leagues. It would make sense to account for that.
The leagues were actualy quite similar in terms of roduction from the blueline. Most years had slight advantages for one league or other, but it was always chaging, and the differences were always minor.

Quote:
- also, these numbers are strictly offensive, and a defenseman's offensive placement and his overall ranking are not always the same thing. You are quicker than anyone else I know, in assuming they are. Hart and allstar voting results from the nhl indicate that it was possible to be a very highly regarded blueliner with very few points. Offense means little in the big picture for defensemen.
Maybe I'm biased because because I'm a defense coach, and I teach offensive skills, but offensive skill is just as importat for a defeseman as defensive skill.

There's a reason all the big money defensemen in the NHL are the guys who put up points.

Quote:
- doesn't really matter, but cameron was a forward that year.
That makes it easier to call Simpson the best. The next defenseman was Cleghorn with 26.000 points.

Dreakmur is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-29-2011, 09:19 AM
  #95
jkrx
Registered User
 
jkrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
Maybe I'm biased because because I'm a defense coach, and I teach offensive skills, but offensive skill is just as importat for a defeseman as defensive skill.

There's a reason all the big money defensemen in the NHL are the guys who put up points.
Not necessarily true. Here is the top-25 salaries for defensemen for this season.

http://www.capgeek.com/leaders.php?t...ion=D&limit=25

Most of these defensemen has some offensive prodution, true but they are fore most stay at home D's. Only six of the 25 is a top 30 point producer and only three of them are in the top 10.

jkrx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-29-2011, 10:21 AM
  #96
jarek
Registered User
 
jarek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 8,080
vCash: 500
How the **** did Tom Gilbert manage to score 5.5 million?

jarek is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-29-2011, 10:27 AM
  #97
Dreakmur
Registered User
 
Dreakmur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orillia, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,317
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkrx View Post
Not necessarily true. Here is the top-25 salaries for defensemen for this season.

http://www.capgeek.com/leaders.php?t...ion=D&limit=25

Most of these defensemen has some offensive prodution, true but they are fore most stay at home D's. Only six of the 25 is a top 30 point producer and only three of them are in the top 10.
Almost all of the big money defensemen signed their contracts after proving they could put up points. Very few low scoring defensemen get big money.

All of the low salaried top scorers are on contracts they signed before breaking out. They're all due for big raises.

Dreakmur is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-29-2011, 10:44 AM
  #98
jkrx
Registered User
 
jkrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreakmur View Post
Almost all of the big money defensemen signed their contracts after proving they could put up points. Very few low scoring defensemen get big money.

All of the low salaried top scorers are on contracts they signed before breaking out. They're all due for big raises.
Some of them yes but there is exceptions.

Yes I know a rather large quantity of the players in the top 30 are so called break out players. We'll see what kind of money they get. My point were that most of these are not typical offensive defensemen. I will also not that the list gets somewhat obscured by overpayment like Redden, Souray, Keith, Bouwmeester and Phaneuf. If we expand to top 50 there is a influx of even more stay at home D's.

You have a valid point but seem to forget the exceptions.

jkrx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-29-2011, 10:49 AM
  #99
jarek
Registered User
 
jarek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 8,080
vCash: 500
I think Dreakmur is right. Many of the highest paid defensemen are guys that can put up the points while also being strong in their own end. Comparatively few stay-at-home guys get the same kind of money.

jarek is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-29-2011, 11:34 AM
  #100
jkrx
Registered User
 
jkrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boy Wonder View Post
I think Dreakmur is right. Many of the highest paid defensemen are guys that can put up the points while also being strong in their own end. Comparatively few stay-at-home guys get the same kind of money.
I'm not arguing that it isn't true, I'm arguing for the exceptions.

jkrx 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 09:06 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2017 All Rights Reserved.