HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Fantasy Hockey Talk > All Time Draft
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
All Time Draft Fantasy league where players of the past and present meet.

MLD 2011 Assassination Thread

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-11-2011, 11:56 AM
  #201
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,953
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Dutch Reibel's best 3 seasons absolutely blow Gracie away, however. Why are you using 5 seasons as the benchmark for Reibel when we all know that he had 3 great seasons and nothing else?
It's not as great as you think, man. You still love Reibel a lot more than he deserves.

best seasons: Reibel's 1955 vs. Gracie's 1937. Reibel 4th with 89% playing with Howe & Lindsay (obviously this year he was far less of a beneficiary than other years). Gracie 6th with 80% playing with Cain & Marker. Advantage Gracie.

2nd-best seasons: Reibel's 1954 vs. Gracie's 1936. Reibel was 7th with 72%. He had 48 points; his linemates had 81 and 62. Gracie was 28th with 63%. He had 25 points (only behind the S line), linemates had 18 and 19. Advantage Gracie.

3rd-best seasons: Reibel's 1956 vs. Gracie's 1938. Reibel was 8th with 71%. He outscored Lindsay but was far behind Howe's 79. Gracie was 24th with 62%. He had 31 points, linemates had 30 and either 26 or 24 (Ward might have replaced Marker, can't say for sure). Advantage Gracie.

Reibel holds a 9% numerical edge in all three of those seasons. Those three seasons, even if you take percentages at face value, don't "absolutely blow Gracie away" and it's debatable whether they are better at all when perceptions are adjusted after linemates are taken into consideration. Of course, after those three seasons, it's massively downhill for Reibel from there. I have no problem at all calling Gracie the better offensive player.

Quote:
Speaking of 3 seasons, I assume Mickowski starts to get closer to Gracie the farther you get past 3 seasons. You, as much as anyone, appreciate a guy like Mickowski who was good, not great, for a long time. Anyway, Gracie definitely has the better short peak than Mick. We all know by now that literally every forward who could hope to deliver a physical presence at this level was taken in the ATD if he had any strong peak offense whatsoever. Mickowski is a physical presence; Gracie is not. So it's not really comparing the same thing. But then, I guess I'm the one who specified "offense only," so technically you're probably right.
Actually, nope, I didn't use 3 seasons as a cutoff for any sneaky reason, just stating that Gracie had 3 seasons better than Mickoski ever did.

Mickoski's best are 58, 53, 52, 49, 49, 42, 39. Gracie's are 80, 63, 62, 50, 45, 42, 39. Mickoksi does have the better 5th-best season

You're right about goal scoring; however, assists were also underrepresented when Gracie plays, and those two factors are more or less a wash. Plus, when Mickoski hit the 58% mark, it was when he went all playmaker on us (10-33-43, his 10th-best goalscoring season and 13 more assists than he ever had)

I'd also take Mickoski first, no question, because he has pretty good glue guy qualities. But like you said, this is about offense. (Gracie is a gritty two-way player too, though, don't underestimate him)

Quote:
Hergy was a very biased goal scorer and Gracie a very biased playmaker, so you can't just use strict points when comparing them. At some point, goals become more valuable than assists, at least when we are talking about guys this extreme. I don't care enough to do a more nuanced comparison.
Hergy can be on the "debatable" pile because he was even more goals-oriented than Mickoski - a lot, actually. His best points percentaged are 83, 64, 55, 51. The goals factor probably does outweigh the low-assist-era factor by a little, giving him an edge in the four-year area, but then Gracie has three decent seasons on top of those, which Hergy doesn't. (he was good, but not dominant in the AHL) - YMMV with these two.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2011, 12:10 PM
  #202
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,953
vCash: 500
oh, and I may as well complete my thought from last night, now that SIHR is back up.

Jack McDonald is a good 1st liner. His best percentages of 78, 66, 52, 52, 50 line up with Gracie pretty well. They are pretty much a coin toss. Don Smith is an average 1st liner. He doesn't have 5 good seasons, only 4, but his 3rd and 4th-best are better: 71, 67, 62, 61. I'd give Gracie/McDonald a offensive edge, but it's small. Plus they do have some intangibles and I don't think Smith does.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2011, 12:10 PM
  #203
DaveG
Mod Supervisor
How's the thesis?
 
DaveG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Durham NC
Country: United States
Posts: 32,236
vCash: 562
Thanks for the review TDMM

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post

Also, who is the grit on your first line?
Milks. He's not an intimidating force but he's definitely not an easy one to get off the puck or afraid to battle for it from the sounds of it. Very good size for his era, everything I've read makes him sound like a Rick Nash type player but it's also all pay-per-view and not enough to make a proper bio off of.
Quote:

Goaltending

Irbe isn't a bad starter, but I can't help but think he's below average. His Vezina record and goalie stats are okay, but definitely below average for starters in this. His playoff run in 2002 was spectacular, but I think it might lead us to overrate him a little bit because it's one of our last memories of him. If it happened in the middle of his career, would it be considered as memorable? I don't know. I do know that Irbe could steal games when on, so that's a good thing for you. Meloche was a good regular season goalie who might see more action than most backups.
Yeah in all honesty I'm planning on Meloche playing more then most backups would in the regular season, which is why I am alright with a tandem of him and Irbe. For Irbe though, it's not just the 02 run, but also his 94 run with San Jose and his international play both with Latvia and the Soviets that make me like him as a starter here in a playoff situation. As you said, when he's on he can steal games, which is perfect for a defense oriented team like what I was trying to build here.

Quote:

Special teams

Who is the net presence on the first PP unit? I'd seriously consider moving Mellanby there - when we were looking for net guys for our first PP unit, I was shocked at how many PP goals Mellanby scored (and what percentage of his goals were actually on the PP!).

Your emphasis on stay at home defensemen does limit the potential of your powerplay.

On the other hand, you have a fantastic group of defensemen for the PK - possibly the best in the draft.

If your first PK unit isn't the best in the draft, it's close. Your second PK forwards aren't that spectacular though; I honestly think Arvedson-Bergeron are better there than Konowalchuk-Cassels.
Very valid point on Mellanby, and honestly I'm surprised that I didn't look farther into him as an option there. Going to make that change. Also, what would your thoughts be on running Niinimaa on both PP units? He typically put up a ton of icetime in his career, but he's definitely a 3rd pairing with this team and that could help keep him fresh enough to run a full 2 minutes unless there were a ton of PPs in a given game.

DaveG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2011, 12:14 PM
  #204
Iain Fyffe
Hockey fact-checker
 
Iain Fyffe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Fredericton, NB
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,795
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
best seasons: Reibel's 1955 vs. Gracie's 1937. Reibel 4th with 89% playing with Howe & Lindsay (obviously this year he was far less of a beneficiary than other years). Gracie 6th with 80% playing with Cain & Marker. Advantage Gracie.

2nd-best seasons: Reibel's 1954 vs. Gracie's 1936. Reibel was 7th with 72%. He had 48 points; his linemates had 81 and 62. Gracie was 28th with 63%. He had 25 points (only behind the S line), linemates had 18 and 19. Advantage Gracie.

3rd-best seasons: Reibel's 1956 vs. Gracie's 1938. Reibel was 8th with 71%. He outscored Lindsay but was far behind Howe's 79. Gracie was 24th with 62%. He had 31 points, linemates had 30 and either 26 or 24 (Ward might have replaced Marker, can't say for sure). Advantage Gracie.
Have you quantified the effect of linemates? Or are your claims of "advantage Gracie" (despite Reibel being ahead based on the numbers provided) just subjective judgments?

I'm not sure how much he beneffited from Lindsay, given that Reibel outscored Lindsay twice in these three years, even on a per-game basis.

Iain Fyffe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2011, 12:25 PM
  #205
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 40,944
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
I didn't realize Hannan had been moved to the starting lineup, I was going by the roster thread. I gave him a vote as a top spare.
Perfect example of how the assassination/team review stage of this thing is too rushed as usual.

(So says the guy who was away from his computer for 6 days).

Edit: Also a good reminder to everyone to UPDATE YOUR ROSTER POSTS FOR VOTING!


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 08-11-2011 at 12:44 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2011, 12:34 PM
  #206
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 40,944
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
It's not as great as you think, man. You still love Reibel a lot more than he deserves.

best seasons: Reibel's 1955 vs. Gracie's 1937. Reibel 4th with 89% playing with Howe & Lindsay (obviously this year he was far less of a beneficiary than other years). Gracie 6th with 80% playing with Cain & Marker. Advantage Gracie.
So Reibel beats Gracie in both rankings and percentages, but advantage Gracies because Reibel played with Howe and Lindsay, even though Reibel actually outscored both Howe and Lindsay?

Quote:
2nd-best seasons: Reibel's 1954 vs. Gracie's 1936. Reibel was 7th with 72%. He had 48 points; his linemates had 81 and 62. Gracie was 28th with 63%. He had 25 points (only behind the S line), linemates had 18 and 19. Advantage Gracie.
This is the one season where you can safely say Reibel benefitted greatly from Howe and Lindsay, though he proved the following year that he could score on his own (and outscored Howe during Howe's worst season in his 20 straight years as a top 5 scorer).

Still, I think you're giving linemates too much credit. The gap between Reibel and Gracie from both a percentage standpoint and ranking standpoint is not small. And, as said, Reibel more or less proved he wasn't a product of Howe and Lindsay the following year, outscoring them both.

Quote:
3rd-best seasons: Reibel's 1956 vs. Gracie's 1938. Reibel was 8th with 71%. He outscored Lindsay but was far behind Howe's 79. Gracie was 24th with 62%. He had 31 points, linemates had 30 and either 26 or 24 (Ward might have replaced Marker, can't say for sure). Advantage Gracie.
Ridiculous. Reibel once again outscores Gracie significantly by both percentages and rankings. And, as you said, for the 2nd year in a row, he outscored Ted lindsay (though I believe injuries were a factor in 1 of the 2 years, it still shows that Dutch didn't need Ted to produce). Basically, you're saying that Reibel couldn't have been that good because he plaeyd with Howe, which I think is quite the exaggeration - or perhaps you discount Ted Lindsay's performances even more than I do?

Quote:
Reibel holds a 9% numerical edge in all three of those seasons. Those three seasons, even if you take percentages at face value, don't "absolutely blow Gracie away" and it's debatable whether they are better at all when perceptions are adjusted after linemates are taken into consideration. Of course, after those three seasons, it's massively downhill for Reibel from there. I have no problem at all calling Gracie the better offensive player.
If you're strictly using percentages, you have to take into account that the quality of the top scorers in the mid 50s was significantly higher than in the mid 30s. Linemates aren't the only external factor here. Reibel has the better 3 year peak between the two, easily, IMO. Of course, as I said before, the criticism of Reibel is that he did nothing outside of that peak.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2011, 12:43 PM
  #207
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 40,944
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveG View Post

Very valid point on Mellanby, and honestly I'm surprised that I didn't look farther into him as an option there. Going to make that change. Also, what would your thoughts be on running Niinimaa on both PP units? He typically put up a ton of icetime in his career, but he's definitely a 3rd pairing with this team and that could help keep him fresh enough to run a full 2 minutes unless there were a ton of PPs in a given game.
Yeah, Mellanby and Dahlen are both guys you wouldn't expect to be big time PP scorers since they were best known for other things, but both accumulated a lot of PP goals over their careers by going to the net. Mellanby slightly more than Dahlen, actually.

As for Niinimaa, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think he's all that special as a PP QB here. Still, he's pretty good and definitely the best defenseman you have for that role. I generally don't like having guys play the full PP unless they are really amazing at it, but he can definitely stay out into the second wave with some other guy getting mop up duty.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2011, 12:47 PM
  #208
DaveG
Mod Supervisor
How's the thesis?
 
DaveG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Durham NC
Country: United States
Posts: 32,236
vCash: 562
I ended up deciding to go with Mellanby on the top unit but kept the defense as is for the PP. So special teams look like this now:

PP1:
Carson Cooper - Herb Carnegie - Scott Mellanby
Patrice Bergeron - Janne Niinimaa

PP 2:
Alexander Skvortsov - Andrew Cassels - Paul Holmgren
Joe Cooper - Sergei Starikov

with Milks as an option to come in and play as needed.

DaveG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2011, 01:02 PM
  #209
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,953
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iain Fyffe View Post
Have you quantified the effect of linemates? Or are your claims of "advantage Gracie" (despite Reibel being ahead based on the numbers provided) just subjective judgments?

I'm not sure how much he beneffited from Lindsay, given that Reibel outscored Lindsay twice in these three years, even on a per-game basis.
Yes, they are subjective judgments based on the effect that (arguably) the greatest player of all-time had on Reibel, affected a lot by how Reibel performed without Howe (not good, barely an NHL-caliber player)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Perfect example of how the assassination/team review stage of this thing is too rushed as usual.
I'm with you man. I'm all for taking it nice and slow. But it always seems we are alone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
So Reibel beats Gracie in both rankings and percentages, but advantage Gracies because Reibel played with Howe and Lindsay, even though Reibel actually outscored both Howe and Lindsay?
Yes. He still put up a lot more points than he would have with average linemates, didn't he?

Quote:
Basically, you're saying that Reibel couldn't have been that good because he plaeyd with Howe, which I think is quite the exaggeration
one only needs to look at his numbers with and without.

Quote:
If you're strictly using percentages, you have to take into account that the quality of the top scorers in the mid 50s was significantly higher than in the mid 30s. Linemates aren't the only external factor here. Reibel has the better 3 year peak between the two, easily, IMO. Of course, as I said before, the criticism of Reibel is that he did nothing outside of that peak.
it's a 13% difference based on percentages, and 27% based on hr adjusted points (which doesn't use a benchmark system, just mainly league scoring, so I think you'd find it more fair) - Does the Howe factor account for that? For the 13%, I'd say yes, absolutely. the 27% may be a stretch, but then there's more to a career than three years so I'd still be more comfortable with Gracie overall.

(I'll say this much - when I read your comment I thought I'd have 5-7 names for you, I ended up basically concluding Gracie is an average 1st liner offensively)

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2011, 01:11 PM
  #210
vecens24
Registered User
 
vecens24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 5,002
vCash: 500
Alright for anyone still listening, the long anticipated, probably totally useless Matt Cooke defense:

As seventies has already stated, Matt Cooke is a more than average PKer here, with 26% of penalties killed with a rate 10% ahead of the league average. Also, Matt Cooke is a very good SH threat, as evidenced by his leading the league in SH points prior to being suspended this season as well as his 2nd in SH goals in 2003.

Matt Cooke is an animal of a forechecker. He has been a key part of what could be quite possibly (and in my biased opinion is) the best forechecking line in the NHL over the last three seasons (although they only played together this season for about 25 games because of the injuries).

Matt Cooke is a plus defensive player, as evidenced by his 9th in Selke voting in 2003.

Matt Cooke is one of the most physical players in the NHL since 2003 (kind of difficult to find good hit statistic before then). He had a higher Hit/Gm rate than the 6th place finisher this year, he finished 5th in 2009, 14th in 2008, 11th in 2007, 12th in 2003 (stat also takes into account defensemen).

Matt Cooke is also a decent offensive player for an annoying defensive 4th liner, scoring double digit goals every season but one since 2001.

Cooke I believe is a more than capable agitator and 4th liner at this level. I believe as TDMM said had he retired ten years earlier, or not nearly decapitated Marc Savard with an elbow he would be a lot more respected as a selection than he is right now.

vecens24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2011, 01:12 PM
  #211
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,775
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
I suspected as much. Fewer games means there's more white noise in his numbers than others. also, the sheer number of international games played is big. Just being on the national team is an important thing, as it demonstrates being one of Russia's best/most valuable players.
Do you mean white noise as in injury issues or something else?

Quote:
nope, meant Zimin. Wasn't Zimin a 50s player?
Nope, that's Uvarov. Zimin played in the Summit Series, in the Soviet League from 64-77 and internationally from 65-72. Uvarov played in the 50s.

Quote:
he did average 6 points above the average in sv% over his career, which isn't bad. There are just better guys out there. The 2nd is good, the 3rd was in the most awful year for goalies in the past 20. Terrible playoff record. As far as starters go, I'd consider him over Johnston, Roloson, Irbe, Lindbergh, and that's it ("consider", not necessarily "select"). What about you?
I think he's in the middle of the pack in terms of starters.

BillyShoe1721 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2011, 01:19 PM
  #212
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,953
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BiLLY_ShOE1721 View Post
Do you mean white noise as in injury issues or something else?
No, more luck-and-chance related variance related to smaller sample sizes is all I mean.

Quote:
Nope, that's Uvarov. Zimin played in the Summit Series, in the Soviet League from 64-77 and internationally from 65-72. Uvarov played in the 50s.
I know all about Uvarov, I profiled him originally. Zimin was really low on my list because I could have sworn he was a 50s Soviet... I was obviously wrong there, my bad.

Quote:
I think he's in the middle of the pack in terms of starters.
I take it you agree on the four I provided, then. Any more you'd throw into that mix?

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2011, 02:01 PM
  #213
vecens24
Registered User
 
vecens24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: United States
Posts: 5,002
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post

I'm with you man. I'm all for taking it nice and slow. But it always seems we are alone.
Even though I haven't been the most active this time around (busy schedule recently so I normally only post from my phone and you can't really assassinate from phones), I totally agree and think the assassinations are always rushed.

vecens24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2011, 02:07 PM
  #214
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 40,944
vCash: 500
Pittsburgh Hornets Review

Coaching

MacNeil has a solid resume as a coach for this level, though I'm not sure about his style.

Forwards

Not the most explosive first line, as Dreak says, but they are solid and do fit together well offensively. Himes is an adequate first line center - solid playmaker and durable. Babych is is physical beast - injury prone, but a strong power forward for this level when he plays. Your Shepelev profile points to Lukowich, so you should probably change that. From what I remember, Shepelev is a very good offensive compliment to any line, but a defensive liability. Does Himes have the defensive chops to cover for him?

We thought briefly about drafting Lukowich as a glue guy for our first line - loved his speed and his sandpaper. But decided against it due to his lack of size (our first line center is quite small). And while Luko was definitely gritty for his size, there is only so much he can do with his small size. Luckily for you, Tim Young is a battler himself. Young is definitely on the weak side as scoring line players go, but he's a battler himself and doesn't necessarily need bigger players to fight his battles (by the way, your Young profile points to Rick Smith now). Shirley Davidson is a solid goal scorer who fits chemistry-wise. Your guess is as good as mine as to how good he was, but he's probably good enough.

I like Art Jackson as the centerpiece of a two-way third line. Not as good defensively as a pure checker, but better offensively. And he's definitely solid in his own end. His offense seems a bit wasted playing next to a pure grinder like Pronovost, though. As pure grinders go, Pronovost is one of the best at this level, though. Love Mike Murphy as captain. Like him as a solid two-way worker.

I'm not sure what makes Sillinger historically memorial other than the number of teams he played on. Dallas Drake is a very strong 4th liner - we considered him over McKay briefly, but went with McKay's better defense and pugilism over Drake's better offense. Still, Drake is very good at this role. Fitzgerald is solid; I'd say more but his profile points to Pronovost.

Defense

Morrison is a pretty good offensive guy; I'm not as high on him as Dreakmur though. Rick Smith is a solid defensive guy, but wasn't he generally a second pairing defenseman in the NHL? I'm not sure. How big was his role in the WHA? Good compliment for Morrison from a skillset standpoint.

I like Trapp as a defensive-minded second pairing guy. Did we ever decide whether his All-Star nods were as a starter or as a reserve? If they were as a starter, he's almost certainly better than Rick Smith. If they were as a reserve, he's not all that impressive as a second pairing guy, though still still solid. Hugh Bolton was a fantastic defenseman... when he played. Honestly, there isn't much difference between Bolton having 3 full seasons and several seasons with a handful of games and Doughty having 3 full seasons and nothing else. If Bolton had a longer career, he'd be one of the top defensemen in this. He's definitely a hard guy to place.

The tags on the profiles of the third pair are wrong now, but I do know White is a physical beast. Not as good an overall player as Paul Martin, but if you need a physical defenseman to kill penalties and lay the hurt, White is a better choice. Fun fact: For anyone who has ever played any of the Twisted Metal games, Colin White has a Sweet Tooth tattoo.

Goaltending

Roloson doesn't impress me really as a starter. Similar to Irbe, he had one fantastic playoff run towards the end of his career that is easy to project back over his whole career. But the rest of his career is definitely weaker than Irbe's. Gilbert is a solid, but unspectacular backup.

Special Teams

Davidson is almost certainly better offensively than Babych, but I like Babych's ability to get dirty goals in front of the net better. Morrison is good on the point; I don't like Bob Trapp there at all.

Second PP is okay, though ultimately your emphasis on two-way forwards does hurt your power play.

Can either Fitzergerald or Murphy take a faceoff for the first PK unit? The defensemen on it are strong.

Neither Pronovost nor Sillinger impresses me as a PKer, but neither is out of place here, either.

Overall

Very solid first entry. Your emphasis on two-way forwards gives you a team without any major weaknesses up front. The most common rookie mistake is lack of grit or defense from the forwards, and you avoided that entirely. Well done.

The flip side to not having any real liabilities up front is that you don't really have the offense to break a game open. I'm also not a huge fan of Roloson as a starter at this level.

Suggestion:

Fix the tags on your profiles, please. You went through the efforts of making them, I'd love to have easy access to them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Selfish Man View Post


Pittsburgh Hornets
GM: Selfish Man
Coach: Al MacNeil
Captain: Mike Murphy
Alternate: Morris Lukowich
Alternate: Stewart Evans

Sergei Shepelev - Normie Himes - Wayne Babych
Morris Lukowich (A) - Tim Young - Shirley Davidson
Andre Pronovost - Art Jackson - Mike Murphy (C)
Dallas Drake - Mike Sillinger - Tom Fitzgerald
Spares: Sergei Brylin, John Cullen

Jim Morrison - Rick Smith
Bob Trapp - Hugh Bolton
Stewart Evans (A) - Colin White
Spares: Rockett Power, John Mariucci

Dwayne Roloson
Gilles Gilbert

PP1:
Shepelev - Himes - Davidson
Trapp - Morrison
PP2:
Lukowich - Jackson - Babych
Evans - Young

PK1:
Fitzgerald - Murphy
Smith - White
PK2:
Sillinger - Pronovost
Bolton - Evans

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2011, 02:54 PM
  #215
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 40,944
vCash: 500
Thunder Bay Twins Review

Coaching

Dave Tippett wasn't on my list of coaches in this, but he should have been. He's definitely put together a MLD-calibre career by now. And he's a great fit for a team that was obviously geared towards playing a defensive game. Floyd Smith seems okay, but like many assistants, I have no idea what his role is supposed to be here.

Forwards

Renberg is a great defensive conscience and cornerman for your top line. McDonald is probably a good scorer at this level. Not particularly impressed by Boldriev - if he has a two-way game I'm unaware of, he's worthy, but his scoring credentials on their own are pretty mediocre for a first liner. (Renberg's scoring credentials are mediocre too, but he brings everything else, so he's good there).

Second line also lacks some offensive oomph, though other GMs might put more stock into Napier's WHA play than I do (he is probably your best second liner though). Gagne has solid two-way credentials, which I like, but his scoring isn't all that impressive to me. I'd like him as a solid two-way second line center if your first line had more oomph, however. At first, I didn't buy Payne as a puck winner, but I think there's enough in your profile to convince me.

Your third line is more offensively inclined than most, but they also take care of their own end. Love Sundstrom, like Maloney, and Scott Young is okay - Young is more of a strong forechecker than defensive player, but it should work.

Fourth line is a weird mix of players Colin Pattersson is a defensive specialist, Hartnell a grinder, Morrison a scoring center who could backcheck. I guess Morrison just looks a little out of place here to me, but it isn't bad.

Defense

I honestly think you should give Mark Streit a bigger role than you are giving him, but then I seem to take his decade of play in Europe more seriously than most (all?) other GMs.

Everyone else on your defense seems pretty average for his role - none are out of place, but none really stand out to me.

Goaltending

Lindbergh is hard for me to judge too. He always went too early for me in the past. Is this the right spot for him? Maybe. Iain and 70s talked about his pluses and minuses in detail, so I won't repeat what they said.

I like Cechmanek as a backup, all things considered. Long gone are the days when I'd troll the old ESPN Flyers board, calling him Chokemanek or Choke Maniac.

Special Teams

Your PP pointmen are strong, and the centers are fairly weak. Wings are fairly good skillwise, though I'm not sure if you have a guy to go to the net on the first unit.

Your PK1 is very good. Morrison/Young seems like a fairly weak PK2 at first glance, though they should be a shorthanded threat.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJudge View Post
Thunder Bay Twins



Coach: Dave Tippett
Asst: Floyd Smith

Jack McDonald - Ivan Boldirev - Mikael Renberg
Steve Payne - Dave Gagner (A) - Mark Napier
Dan Maloney (C) - Patrik Sundstrom - Scott Young
Scott Hartnell - Brendan Morrison - Colin Patterson
Tim Hunter, Jim McFadden

Al Hamilton (A) - Marcus Ragnarsson
Dave Hutchison - Randy Manery
Mark Streit - Ted Graham
Pierre Bouchard

Pelle Lindbergh
Roman Cechmanek

PP1: Jack McDonald - Ivan Boldirev - Mark Napier - Mark Streit - Al Hamilton
PP2: Steve Payne - Dave Gagner - Mikael Renberg - Randy Manery - Scott Young
PK1: Patrik Sundstrom - Colin Patterson - Marcus Ragnarsson - Ted Graham
PK2: Brendan Morrison - Scott Young - Dave Hutchison - Randy Manery

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2011, 03:03 PM
  #216
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,953
vCash: 500
Quote:
Everyone else on your defense seems pretty average for his role - none are out of place, but none really stand out to me.
I think Manery is an above-average 2nd pairing guy, which is good because Hutchison is best-suited as a #6. What helps this pairing more is that they played together a lot.

Also, Ted Graham, with two 7th-place all-star finishes in a career not entirely covered by all-star voting, is grossly overqualified for 3rd pairing MLD duty.

Quote:
I like Cechmanek as a backup, all things considered. Long gone are the days when I'd troll the old ESPN Flyers board, calling him Chokemanek or Choke Maniac.


I think I invented that word, but it was about three years before I ever discussed hockey on the internet.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2011, 03:11 PM
  #217
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 40,944
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post

Also, Ted Graham, with two 7th-place all-star finishes in a career not entirely covered by all-star voting, is grossly overqualified for 3rd pairing MLD duty.
I missed that (trying to get every team done in my division before the afternoon was over). Yeah, Graham looks like he might actually be better than Ragnuson!

Quote:


I think I invented that word, but it was about three years before I ever discussed hockey on the internet.
Er... it was a pretty obvious nickname for him. Just like Curtis Josieve or Cujoke or Cuchoke.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2011, 03:23 PM
  #218
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,953
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Er... it was a pretty obvious nickname for him.
Yeah, I know, it was probably one of those things that thousands of people coined at once.

Quote:
Just like Curtis Josieve or Cujoke or Cuchoke.


not nice.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2011, 03:24 PM
  #219
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,953
vCash: 500
What's a Ragnuson? Is that a swedish Redhead defenseman who fights?

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2011, 03:31 PM
  #220
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
 
BillyShoe1721's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,775
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to BillyShoe1721
Just throwing it out there, the assassination period probably seems rushed because only a select few people do the heavy lifting and actually assassinate other teams. I completely understand that people have work and whatnot, but when only a few people are taking the time to make the process work, it doesn't last that long.

BillyShoe1721 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2011, 03:36 PM
  #221
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,953
vCash: 500
I do agree that the assassination period should be longer. I recommend it in every single draft that we take it slower. But I'm always swimming upstream when I say it. The assassinations basically grinded to a halt with TDMM gone, so that coupled with precedent meant it was probably time to move on.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2011, 03:39 PM
  #222
TheJudge
Registered User
 
TheJudge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 793
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Thunder Bay Twins Review

Coaching

Dave Tippett wasn't on my list of coaches in this, but he should have been. He's definitely put together a MLD-calibre career by now. And he's a great fit for a team that was obviously geared towards playing a defensive game. Floyd Smith seems okay, but like many assistants, I have no idea what his role is supposed to be here.

Forwards

Renberg is a great defensive conscience and cornerman for your top line. McDonald is probably a good scorer at this level. Not particularly impressed by Boldriev - if he has a two-way game I'm unaware of, he's worthy, but his scoring credentials on their own are pretty mediocre for a first liner. (Renberg's scoring credentials are mediocre too, but he brings everything else, so he's good there).

Second line also lacks some offensive oomph, though other GMs might put more stock into Napier's WHA play than I do (he is probably your best second liner though). Gagne has solid two-way credentials, which I like, but his scoring isn't all that impressive to me. I'd like him as a solid two-way second line center if your first line had more oomph, however. At first, I didn't buy Payne as a puck winner, but I think there's enough in your profile to convince me.

Your third line is more offensively inclined than most, but they also take care of their own end. Love Sundstrom, like Maloney, and Scott Young is okay - Young is more of a strong forechecker than defensive player, but it should work.

Fourth line is a weird mix of players Colin Pattersson is a defensive specialist, Hartnell a grinder, Morrison a scoring center who could backcheck. I guess Morrison just looks a little out of place here to me, but it isn't bad.

Defense

I honestly think you should give Mark Streit a bigger role than you are giving him, but then I seem to take his decade of play in Europe more seriously than most (all?) other GMs.

Everyone else on your defense seems pretty average for his role - none are out of place, but none really stand out to me.

Goaltending

Lindbergh is hard for me to judge too. He always went too early for me in the past. Is this the right spot for him? Maybe. Iain and 70s talked about his pluses and minuses in detail, so I won't repeat what they said.

I like Cechmanek as a backup, all things considered. Long gone are the days when I'd troll the old ESPN Flyers board, calling him Chokemanek or Choke Maniac.

Special Teams

Your PP pointmen are strong, and the centers are fairly weak. Wings are fairly good skillwise, though I'm not sure if you have a guy to go to the net on the first unit.

Your PK1 is very good. Morrison/Young seems like a fairly weak PK2 at first glance, though they should be a shorthanded threat.
Thanks for the review!

You're correct about my lack of top end offensive threats (outside of McDonald). I'll need to get scoring by committee, and I think that I have the depth to do so. I actually see my top 3 forward lines, and my 3 defensive pairings, as fairly evenly distributed; although they do boast different strengths. Accordingly I see them being matched where appropriate, but overall ending up fairly close in ice time. My team identity is essentially defense and balance.

On my fourth line, I went with Morrison because of his adaptability. He has shown the ability to not look out of place in any role throughout his career. He should allow Hartnell to put up some points, while helping Patterson out on the defensive side of the puck.


Last edited by TheJudge: 08-11-2011 at 03:46 PM.
TheJudge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2011, 03:51 PM
  #223
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 40,944
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
What's a Ragnuson? Is that a swedish Redhead defenseman who fights?
Heh, sounds like a Norse hero to me.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2011, 07:49 PM
  #224
Iain Fyffe
Hockey fact-checker
 
Iain Fyffe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Fredericton, NB
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,795
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
Yes, they are subjective judgments based on the effect that (arguably) the greatest player of all-time had on Reibel, affected a lot by how Reibel performed without Howe (not good, barely an NHL-caliber player)
So how much of a difference would you say Reibel would need for it to no longer be advantage Gracie?

Iain Fyffe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-11-2011, 07:56 PM
  #225
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,953
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iain Fyffe View Post
So how much of a difference would you say Reibel would need for it to no longer be advantage Gracie?
I sorta speculated on that just a bit further down:

it's a 13% difference based on percentages, and 27% based on hr adjusted points (which doesn't use a benchmark system, just mainly league scoring, so I think you'd find it more fair) - Does the Howe factor account for that? For the 13%, I'd say yes, absolutely. the 27% may be a stretch, but then there's more to a career than three years so I'd still be more comfortable with Gracie overall.

seventieslord 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 03:38 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.