HFBoards

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

MLD 2011 Assassination Thread

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-09-2011, 05:26 PM
  #151
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,502
vCash: 844
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post

PP1: Warwick-Golonka-Gingras-Sargent-Roberts
PP2: Gracie-Stumpel-Tucker-Sargent-Gibbs
PK1: Erixon-Grier-Armstrong-Gibbs
PK2: Boutette-Harris (70s)-Portland-Roberts
PK3: Harris (60s)-Tucker-Armstrong-Kampman

1916 or earlier: Richardson, Gingras, Nicholson, Tobin
1917-1942: Warwick, Gracie, Portland, Kampman, Cook, Robertson
1943-1965: Golonka, Harris, Armstrong, Mayasich
1966-1979: Roberts, Gibbs, Sargent, Harris, Boutette
1980-1994: Stumpel, Erixon, Weinrich, Todd
1995-2004: Tucker, Grier
in 2011: Grier
Golonka looks like a legit 1st line guy that can bring pretty much everything to the table. He's flanked by a good two-way guy that can pass in Gracie and a guy with some grit and offense in Gingras. All the pieces look to be there.

Warwick is the glue guy on the 2nd line with Richardson being fed passes by Stumpel. Again, this line looks to have all the components you'd want.

Your 3rd line is very good defensively, but isn't going to offer that much offensively. They serve their purpose.

Your 4th line will be annoying to play against and should be pretty good defensively. Won't provide that much offense though.

Two physical guys on your 1st pairing should make for a shutdown pair, Roberts brings some puck moving ability. Another physical pair on your 2nd pair as well. Yet another physical pair on the 3rd pairing. An extremely tough, physical defense that will be hard to play against. You poached a bunch of the guys with the newly uncovered all star voting.

Nicholson is a very good starter, one of the best. Same with your coach Cook.

Gary Sargent on both PPs? Not seeing it there. Your pointmen on the PPs are decent, but aren't all that great. Due to the fact that you picked 6 guys with physicality, you sacrificed some potential offense. PK units on the other hand should be extremely good.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2011, 06:05 PM
  #152
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,320
vCash: 500
- "poached" is a really good word!

- there are only a handful of defensemen who could play both PP units in the MLD, and Sargent is one of them. Here are the MLD defensemen with at least 400 GP, who averaged at least 20 adj.PPP/80 games:

Siltanen 29
Zidlicky 27
Berard 26
Sargent 23
Malakhov 22
Ehrhoff 21
Guevremont 20
Zalapski 20

any of those guys, particularly those on the top-4, could play both units on the PP, provided they are on the 3rd pairing at even strength. Sargent is on my 3rd pairing at even strength. Also, it's not like real-life NHL teams haven't done this before - this is why there are defensemen who were on the ice for 70+% of their team's PP goals (Sargent was at 63%)

In addition, Sargent demonstrated great stamina. He averaged 25.11 minutes a game in his career, and was used extensively in all situations.

Those other defensemen averaged just 21.10, 21.22, 21.25, 22.28, 20.63, 24.56, and 23.05, respectively, so in most cases (Guevremont excepted), their extra PP time had to take away from other situations; this was not the case with Sargent.

I think Sargent's effectiveness might be limited with the extra time, that would be the case with any D-man being double shifted, but like real life I made the decision that he'd still be better than a fresh Armstrong, Portland or Kampman. based on the offensive credentials of the four players, it's tough to disagree.

In terms of PP offense, I might end up with a defense corps that lags behind. I think they're still well ahead of the curve in overall effectiveness though.

Thanks for the review, I still owe you one.

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2011, 06:26 PM
  #153
markrander87
Registered User
 
markrander87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,503
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiLLY_ShOE1721 View Post
I'll offer some quick comments on the teams that haven't received any yet so they at least have something.

First i'd like to thank you for the review. It is very enjoyable to see how people view our teams.



Quote:
Smith looks like a good scorer who will be complimented well by Bodnar's playmaking ability. He has a good amount of top 10s, but did it in a very weak era. Not sure what kind of player Hooper is, is there are defensive presence/gritty player on this line? I don't see it.
Hooper was drafted for the bolded reason. His main function will be the "glue guy" for this line..



"Hooper built an early reputation as a fearless skater, formidable checker, and clever stickhandler.....

In 1905-06, Tom switched positions to Cover Point, putting in four goals over the span of eight games as the Thistles again dominated the M.H.L"
.



- http://hobokin.net/hooper.html


The fact that he is a HHOF and great scorer is an added bonus to his physical play he provides



Quote:
Libett works as a glue guy, Carson is a goal scoring center, and Carveth provides goalscoring and playmaking. Is there enough playmaking between the wings to make Carson as effective as possible? Not sure.

First i'd like to point out that Carson does have an 8th in assists so he will provide some playmaking as well as goal scoring.

Carveth is a very underated player around here. His assist finishes are : 8th,13th,13th,17th,24th. As well as leading the Red Wings in assists and points to the Stanley cup finals in 44-45.

Also Libett will chip in offensively, if Jan erixon will provide some playmaking, Libett is absolutely more then able too.



Quote:
A different kind of 3rd line, should be very strong offensively with Craven feeding Bullard. Not that good defensively compared to other 3rd lines though
.

We couldnt let Bullard keep slipping, so we built around him and feel as though we picked two great wingers to flank him and feed him the puck with Craven and Meeker.

This is the MLD and we didnt see the benfit or creating a pure shut down line. Why rely on 2 lines for all of your offense? We feel the balanced scoring on our team will extremely help us come playoff time.


Thats it for me, im sure Stoneberg will add a few things. thanks for the review, we are looking forward to the playoffs.

markrander87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2011, 06:34 PM
  #154
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,320
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by markrander87 View Post
Also Libett will chip in offensively, if Jan erixon will provide some playmaking, Libett is absolutely more then able too.
well played!

seriously though, nice to see my posts are being read that closely!

anyway, as for their playmaking, while Libett is no doubt the better overall offensive performer (as we've talked about more than enough), he was more of a goal scorer. Erixon was a brutal goalscorer. He actually had 20 adjusted ESA per 80 games compared to Libett's 18. I know that's hard to fathom but those are the numbers.

Keep in mind two things though:

1) this demonstrates how awful a goalscorer Erixon really was
2) Erixon's career average is based on a lot fewer games. If you cherrypick Libett's best 7-season period to get a GP total similar to Erixon's, he averaged 21 adj.ESA/80GP. So he does have the better ES playmaking resume, but it's really miniscule. (better offensive situations and linemates like Dionne helped though)

Now, with all that said, Libett is on a 2nd line and should be judged by 2nd line standards. the same with Erixon being on a 3rd line. (If Libett was on a 3rd line he, too, would be a pretty good 3rd line playmaker and if Erixon was on the 2nd he would not be very good for a 2nd line)

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2011, 06:34 PM
  #155
markrander87
Registered User
 
markrander87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,503
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
- "poached" is a really good word!

- there are only a handful of defensemen who could play both PP units in the MLD, and Sargent is one of them. Here are the MLD defensemen with at least 400 GP, who averaged at least 20 adj.PPP/80 games:


Siltanen 29
Zidlicky 27
Berard 26
Sargent 23
Malakhov 22
Ehrhoff 21
Guevremont 20
Zalapski 20

any of those guys, particularly those on the top-4, could play both units on the PP, provided they are on the 3rd pairing at even strength. Sargent is on my 3rd pairing at even strength. Also, it's not like real-life NHL teams haven't done this before - this is why there are defensemen who were on the ice for 70+% of their team's PP goals (Sargent was at 63%)

In addition, Sargent demonstrated great stamina. He averaged 25.11 minutes a game in his career, and was used extensively in all situations.

Those other defensemen averaged just 21.10, 21.22, 21.25, 22.28, 20.63, 24.56, and 23.05, respectively, so in most cases (Guevremont excepted), their extra PP time had to take away from other situations; this was not the case with Sargent.

I think Sargent's effectiveness might be limited with the extra time, that would be the case with any D-man being double shifted, but like real life I made the decision that he'd still be better than a fresh Armstrong, Portland or Kampman. based on the offensive credentials of the four players, it's tough to disagree.

In terms of PP offense, I might end up with a defense corps that lags behind. I think they're still well ahead of the curve in overall effectiveness though.

Thanks for the review, I still owe you one.

Im trying to find the rule book showing the above as a recognized accepted method.

Either way at least Zidlicky found his way on "The List"

markrander87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2011, 06:39 PM
  #156
markrander87
Registered User
 
markrander87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,503
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
well played!

seriously though, nice to see my posts are being read that closely!

anyway, as for their playmaking, while Libett is no doubt the better overall offensive performer (as we've talked about more than enough), he was more of a goal scorer. Erixon was a brutal goalscorer. He actually had 20 adjusted ESA per 80 games compared to Libett's 18. I know that's hard to fathom but those are the numbers.

Keep in mind two things though:

1) this demonstrates how awful a goalscorer Erixon really was
2) Erixon's career average is based on a lot fewer games. If you cherrypick Libett's best 7-season period he averaged 21 adj.ESA/80GP. So he does have the better ES playmaking resume, but it's really miniscule.

Now, with all that said, Libett is on a 2nd line and should be judged by 2nd line standards. the same with Erixon being on a 3rd line. (If Libett was on a 3rd line he, too, would be a pretty good 3rd line playmaker and if Erixon was on the 2nd he would not be very good for a 2nd line)
Well then I guess it's a good thing we have 3 scoring lines instead of just the two. also im not denying Libett was more of a goal scorer, as I showed above Carveth is more then able to provide some play making and Carson with an 8 is capable as well.

markrander87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2011, 06:42 PM
  #157
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,320
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by markrander87 View Post
Im trying to find the rule book showing the above as a recognized accepted method.

Either way at least Zidlicky found his way on "The List"
There's no rule for anything. But it stands to reason that the players with the most experience getting extensive PP time will be the ones best equipped to do the same in the MLD. If you have an alternate theory, you are free to present it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by markrander87 View Post
Well then I guess it's a good thing we have 3 scoring lines instead of just the two. also im not denying Libett was more of a goal scorer, as I showed above Carveth is more then able to provide some play making and Carson with an 8 is capable as well.
Absolutely.

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2011, 06:50 PM
  #158
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,502
vCash: 844
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
- "poached" is a really good word!

- there are only a handful of defensemen who could play both PP units in the MLD, and Sargent is one of them. Here are the MLD defensemen with at least 400 GP, who averaged at least 20 adj.PPP/80 games:

Siltanen 29
Zidlicky 27
Berard 26
Sargent 23
Malakhov 22
Ehrhoff 21
Guevremont 20
Zalapski 20

any of those guys, particularly those on the top-4, could play both units on the PP, provided they are on the 3rd pairing at even strength. Sargent is on my 3rd pairing at even strength. Also, it's not like real-life NHL teams haven't done this before - this is why there are defensemen who were on the ice for 70+% of their team's PP goals (Sargent was at 63%)

In addition, Sargent demonstrated great stamina. He averaged 25.11 minutes a game in his career, and was used extensively in all situations.

Those other defensemen averaged just 21.10, 21.22, 21.25, 22.28, 20.63, 24.56, and 23.05, respectively, so in most cases (Guevremont excepted), their extra PP time had to take away from other situations; this was not the case with Sargent.

I think Sargent's effectiveness might be limited with the extra time, that would be the case with any D-man being double shifted, but like real life I made the decision that he'd still be better than a fresh Armstrong, Portland or Kampman. based on the offensive credentials of the four players, it's tough to disagree.

In terms of PP offense, I might end up with a defense corps that lags behind. I think they're still well ahead of the curve in overall effectiveness though.

Thanks for the review, I still owe you one.
Looking at those numbers, I'm still not convinced he can play both PP units. Any chance any of your forwards could play the point on the PP?

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2011, 06:56 PM
  #159
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,320
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiLLY_ShOE1721 View Post
Looking at those numbers, I'm still not convinced he can play both PP units. Any chance any of your forwards could play the point on the PP?
Nope. Golonka played defense for years in Germany when his Czech career was over but I don't know how relevant it is here, plus I want him at forward anyway. When Mayasich is in the lineup (which will probably be half the games) he is definitely an option.

With that said, I take it that you don't feel a single MLD defenseman can play both PP units, then?

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2011, 07:02 PM
  #160
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,502
vCash: 844
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Nope. Golonka played defense for years in Germany when his Czech career was over but I don't know how relevant it is here, plus I want him at forward anyway. When Mayasich is in the lineup (which will probably be half the games) he is definitely an option.

With that said, I take it that you don't feel a single MLD defenseman can play both PP units, then?
Not really, unless it was a situation where they played extremely limited ES minutes(almost rolling 5 defensemen) or you dressed 7 defenseman. And that definitely will not be the case with Sargent considering how effective a player he was.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2011, 07:11 PM
  #161
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,320
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiLLY_ShOE1721 View Post
Not really, unless it was a situation where they played extremely limited ES minutes(almost rolling 5 defensemen) or you dressed 7 defenseman. And that definitely will not be the case with Sargent considering how effective a player he was.
Like most of my third units, I only plan on giving them about 10 ES minutes a game, so with that and 7 on the PP, Sargent would be playing 17 minutes, still firmly my #6. Yeah, he'd be a PP specialist even though he was so much more than that in real life, as you alluded to. on a team that didn't poach defensemen with newly discovered norris/AS records he would have a bigger role for sure. That's good - not bad!

Last question, do you play hockey? I do. I'd rather play 2 minutes as the pointman on the PP than a 45-second back and forth ES shift. As far as situation/position goes, I don't think there's an easier place/time to play than pointman on the PP, from a physical exertion standpoint. All positions at ES move a lot more and a lot faster, PK time generally involves a lot of running around for forwards (PKing for defenseman has about the same low amount of skating, but more contact), and forwards on the PP move around a lot.

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2011, 07:24 PM
  #162
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,502
vCash: 844
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Last question, do you play hockey? I do. I'd rather play 2 minutes as the pointman on the PP than a 45-second back and forth ES shift. As far as situation/position goes, I don't think there's an easier place/time to play than pointman on the PP, from a physical exertion standpoint. All positions at ES move a lot more and a lot faster, PK time generally involves a lot of running around for forwards (PKing for defenseman has about the same low amount of skating, but more contact), and forwards on the PP move around a lot.
I do. And as a player that just switched to defense this past year after playing almost my entire career as forward, I do know exactly what you're talking about. In terms of actual exertion, pointmen on the PP don't really do much. They basically give and receive passes, and take the occasional shot/one timer. Meanwhile, the forwards have to move and cycle down low. Of course you'd rather play 2 minutes on the PP, the PP is the best situation to play in. Your best chance to score and least amount of exertion. In terms of how much energy is actually expended during a 45 second ES shift or a 2 minute PP, I'm not sure. It really depends upon the quality of the team you're playing and the tempo of the game. The one thing I do disagree with is that you don't do a lot of skating on the PK. When I'm playing defense on the PK, I'm skating a lot. It's a lot of short bursts of speed, quick changes of direction, and stops in order to follow the puck and remain in position. I'm not actually skating that far, but I'm expending a lot of energy. And then there's the battling in front of the net.

BillyShoe1721 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2011, 07:31 PM
  #163
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,320
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiLLY_ShOE1721 View Post
I do. And as a player that just switched to defense this past year after playing almost my entire career as forward, I do know exactly what you're talking about. In terms of actual exertion, pointmen on the PP don't really do much. They basically give and receive passes, and take the occasional shot/one timer. Meanwhile, the forwards have to move and cycle down low. Of course you'd rather play 2 minutes on the PP, the PP is the best situation to play in. Your best chance to score and least amount of exertion. In terms of how much energy is actually expended during a 45 second ES shift or a 2 minute PP, I'm not sure. It really depends upon the quality of the team you're playing and the tempo of the game. The one thing I do disagree with is that you don't do a lot of skating on the PK. When I'm playing defense on the PK, I'm skating a lot. It's a lot of short bursts of speed, quick changes of direction, and stops in order to follow the puck and remain in position. I'm not actually skating that far, but I'm expending a lot of energy. And then there's the battling in front of the net.
yeah, I'm not speaking from a goal creation standpoint because frankly, I'd rather let the other guys on my team create goals... but to avoid getting overexerted, you just can't beat playing the point on the PP, with covering the net (and occasional forays into the corner) on the PK a close second.

(I play adult safe, it's bush league and I'm not picky, and I play C, L, R, and D in about equal proportions)

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2011, 09:10 PM
  #164
chaosrevolver
Snubbed Again
 
chaosrevolver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,549
vCash: 500
Ehh..

chaosrevolver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2011, 09:16 PM
  #165
chaosrevolver
Snubbed Again
 
chaosrevolver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,549
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiLLY_ShOE1721 View Post
Christian is definitely a plus in the defensive zone, I was just pointing out that his adjusted +/- was rather concerning/scary. I probably underrated Ronan a bit, but as a goalscoring center, he's difficult to build around. You say that passing will be a combined effort, but I'm not buying it. Gardner's playmaking record is underwhelming to say the least. I'm just not seeing it.
Don't forget that I have Crossman who can feed these guys as well.


Quote:
They are good skaters. I don't know if I'd call Barlow the best skater in the draft, that might be a bit much.
No, it's really not. He's one of the best if not the best skaters in the draft.


Quote:
Elite puckmovers with elite vision and good shots don't have their top 4 highest point finishes among defensemen be 16, 10, 26, and 27. I don't care what era. He's a good puck moving defenseman, but elite is a stretch.
Elite for this draft..yes it is.



Quote:
One of the best of his time? I'm not convinced. One quote saying that doesn't validate it. Are there any all star voting records to back up this claim? He also played in an extremely weak era.
He was a defensive defenseman..why would he get all star voting records? All they looked at was offense.

Weak era? Not for forwards sir..and he had to go up against some of the best.

Even for defensemen..Gadsby, Stewart, Bouchard, Reardon, Seibert, Quackenbush..just to name some.



Quote:
May. He finished 2nd and 3rd, does logic not say if Roy didn't exist that Vernon would have won?
Fine..a vezina and a 2nd place.



Quote:
As I said, I underrated Ronan. But, as I said, you still lack a passer that can get him the puck. Gardner isn't that guy, and I don't think Barlow is either.
Barlow isn't on that line.



Quote:
No. That was just my way of saying I'm not overly impressed by either of them.
Imo..one of the best tandems in the draft.

chaosrevolver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2011, 10:49 PM
  #166
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,320
vCash: 500
I was going to mention earlier, Eddolls got 5th in All-star voting in 1945, and 8th in 1948 with two points. Considering one was a war year (no Stewart, no Reardon) and one was just two points, that's not much, but it is something - and more than most MLD defenseman can say.

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2011, 11:31 PM
  #167
chaosrevolver
Snubbed Again
 
chaosrevolver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,549
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
I was going to mention earlier, Eddolls got 5th in All-star voting in 1945, and 8th in 1948 with two points. Considering one was a war year (no Stewart, no Reardon) and one was just two points, that's not much, but it is something - and more than most MLD defenseman can say.
2 points and he is top-10 in all-star voting..says a lot about his defense no?

chaosrevolver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-09-2011, 11:35 PM
  #168
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,320
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chaosrevolver View Post
2 points and he is top-10 in all-star voting..says a lot about his defense no?
sorry for the confusion... two voting points.

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-10-2011, 12:41 AM
  #169
chaosrevolver
Snubbed Again
 
chaosrevolver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,549
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
sorry for the confusion... two voting points.
Gotcha. Nevertheless..if he can frustrate the hell out of Maurice Richard..and got voting for all-star teams in a good era with not a great offense..I think that speaks volume about everything else.

chaosrevolver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-10-2011, 07:57 AM
  #170
markrander87
Registered User
 
markrander87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,503
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post

Last question, do you play hockey? I do. I'd rather play 2 minutes as the pointman on the PP than a 45-second back and forth ES shift. As far as situation/position goes, I don't think there's an easier place/time to play than pointman on the PP, from a physical exertion standpoint. All positions at ES move a lot more and a lot faster, PK time generally involves a lot of running around for forwards (PKing for defenseman has about the same low amount of skating, but more contact), and forwards on the PP move around a lot.
I actually somewhat agree with this, but the main issue is if that defenseman who has played the 2 minute Powerplay ends up getting hemmed in his own zone afterwards. In a perfect world yes he would play the full PP and then completes the change after the PP, but watch out if the opposing team creates some pressure in his end, or even worse springs the guy out of the box and the 2 minute PP guy is caught in a foot race.

markrander87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-10-2011, 08:03 AM
  #171
Dwight
The French Tickler
 
Dwight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: West Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,755
vCash: 500
Question: Teams with 2 GMs only get one vote when it comes to determining seedings, yes?

Dwight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-10-2011, 08:57 AM
  #172
Stoneberg
Bored
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,672
vCash: 500
I don't have as much time to comment as I'd like, but appreciate the review Billy.

I think Hooper brings enough grit to the top line and some defensive responsibility. The line is far from a two way line, of course, it was put together to provide offense...and I think it's one of the better ones in the draft (and likely on the weaker end defensively). Hopefully I can provide more on Hooper when the series' start, as I'm sure he will be questioned again.

I'm not too worried about the playmaking on line 2. Carveth appears to be a better playmaker than goal scorer (although quite balanced), and like Mark said, Carson can also chip in in that department. Libett is there as a glue guy, like you pointed out, and to chip in a few goals.

As for the third line, it's clearly not out there to check. It's one of the best offensive third lines in the draft, maybe even passable as a second line as far as production. Seventies bio on Meeker from last year presents a few quotes about him being willing and able to check. I don't expect him to be a force defensively, but he will work hard up and down his wing at both ends of the ice. If I'm not mistaken, Craven has a pretty good defensive reputation, in addition to being used regularly on the PK. In terms of checking lines, of course, it's weak defensively. I think it's more than adequate defensively for a scoring line though. I also believe this line is built well enough for the sum to be greater than its parts.

I agree that our second PP point ment are weak, we got carried away with the solid all around defensemen (Murdoch, Giles, Hamhuis, etc). Maybe we will give Zidlicky and McKenny extra duty on the second unit. Better yet, they could split it.

...and I started to get carried awat as expected. I could go on and on and reference some things, but I need to get back to work.


Last edited by Stoneberg: 08-10-2011 at 09:06 AM.
Stoneberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-10-2011, 09:01 AM
  #173
Stoneberg
Bored
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,672
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dwight View Post
Question: Teams with 2 GMs only get one vote when it comes to determining seedings, yes?
Yep. You can both vote independantly but each vote is weighted at 50% of a normal vote in the counting.

Stoneberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-10-2011, 10:06 AM
  #174
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,320
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by markrander87 View Post
I actually somewhat agree with this, but the main issue is if that defenseman who has played the 2 minute Powerplay ends up getting hemmed in his own zone afterwards. In a perfect world yes he would play the full PP and then completes the change after the PP, but watch out if the opposing team creates some pressure in his end, or even worse springs the guy out of the box and the 2 minute PP guy is caught in a foot race.
yes, that is a potential risk that exists.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneberg View Post
Yep. You can both vote independantly but each vote is weighted at 50% of a normal vote in the counting.
That's right.

I'd actually have no problem with a team having two votes for two GMs, except for the fact that you get to vote yourself first. Cutting the vote in half is an easy way to give that team that benefit and let them both vote, without being complicated.

There might be a more complex way to give their votes full weight but at the same time only have the same degree of influence on their own standing, but I don't know if it's worth the hassle of devising it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneberg View Post
Seventies bio on Meeker from last year presents a few quotes about him being willing and able to check. I don't expect him to be a force defensively, but he will work hard up and down his wing at both ends of the ice.
Yes, Meeker is definitely a gritty and annoying little *******.

Quote:
If I'm not mistaken, Craven has a pretty good defensive reputation, in addition to being used regularly on the PK.
yep.

Quote:
In terms of checking lines, of course, it's weak defensively. I think it's more than adequate defensively for a scoring line though. I also believe this line is built well enough for the sum to be greater than its parts.
Probably. Although Bullard's defensive reputation seems to be among the worst of his time.

Quote:
I agree that our second PP point ment are weak, we got carried away with the solid all around defensemen (Murdoch, Giles, Hamhuis, etc). Maybe we will give Zidlicky and McKenny extra duty on the second unit. Better yet, they could split it.
I'd do it. Why have PP specialists if they're not going to specialize on the PP, right?

seventieslord is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-10-2011, 11:26 AM
  #175
markrander87
Registered User
 
markrander87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,503
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post


Probably. Although Bullard's defensive reputation seems to be among the worst of his time.
Would it shock you if I found a quote referring to Bullard as one of the best two way forwards during a portion of a season??

Either way I know he is below average defensively, but that is why we flanked him with both Craven and Meeker.

markrander87 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 12:41 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.