2010 MLD Finals

[Hedberg]

While I'd be happy to extend the deadline, the teams have advantages in such different things, I'm not really sure what can be proven in debate. It seems Brooklyn has better coaching, but Florida has home ice. Florida has better offensive forwards, Brooklyn has better defensive forwards. Brooklyn has better goaltending, Florida has a better top pairing. This is a series that should go 7 and could very well be determined be a variable that's impossible to take into account in the analysis of matchups on paper. To further the debate in a way that wouldn't go in circles (unless we could figure out clear ways of analyzing non-NHL leagues), I think we'd need to figure out which categories it's more important to have the edge in, but that's something that is impossible to quantify. As you can see from our team, I think that the ability to put the other team on the defensive as much as possible is the best style while Brooklyn seems to value counter-attacking after weathering the other side's offence. That is basically how I see it. I'm not really sure what I can "attack" as the teams are so different. Personally, I think our offence will be enough to overcome Brooklyn's defence, but it's impossible to prove that in discussion and the weighing of meaning to different faucets of the game will vary from GM to GM.

Good luck!

 

[vancityluongo]

Yeah, I think you pretty much nailed it there Hed. I think all 4 GM's in this series can agree that this should go 7 at the very least, you might even have to throw in a OT or two to emphasize how close both teams are. The biggest issue with trying to figure out who is better as Hedberg outlined though that we see is that neither team has very many weaknesses. There are aspects that both teams are slightly better at, but there's no clear cut stuff, because as VanI pointed out right at the beginning, both teams made it this far because of their all-around strength. It's also tough because the teams weren't built with the same playing style in mind, so we can't just judge who did a better job of building the team to trap or whatever.

We think we have the better offense, and that should ultimately win us the series, but TDMM and jarek have a point when they argue that they have the better starting goalie. They also have a coaching advantage, but how much of that coaching advantage will be negated by us having home ice? We probably have the better overall defense thanks to our top pairing as well, but Brooklyn's to be completely honest is not at all far behind.

Overall, trying to be as unbiased as possible, all things considered I think we have the better team, and should win this series. Hopefully the others feel the same way, as well, and good luck to Brooklyn.

 

[jarek]

Overall, trying to be as unbiased as possible, all things considered I think we have the better team, and should win this series.

I think this is my favorite comment in this entire thread...

 

[vancityluongo]

I think this is my favorite comment in this entire thread...

So...you agree that we should win?

(yeah I kinda worded that weird. Rephrased, let's say if I looked at the series unbiased, I think I'd still vote for our team.)

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I basically think the top 2 lines of each team wash out (though with Florida having more of a defensive presence in Haynes). As do the bottom 2 defense pairs of each team. So we are left with:

1) 3rd and 4th lines = big offense advantage to Florida (their 3rd line is a very good scoring line). big defensive advantage to Brooklyn (our 3rd line is the best shutdown line in the series, their 4th line is 2nd best defensive line, and our 4th line is the 3rd best defensive line in the series).

2) 1st defense pair = advantage to Florida

3) Goaltending = advantage to Brooklyn

4) Coaching = advantage to Brooklyn

I think both teams have good chemistry and are well constructed for the style of play.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Considering the stage, I'd wager that we'd see the good Ranford. Despite his issues at times with consistency, the guy played his best when it counted. With this being the finals, I'd expect nothing less than the Conn Smythe caliber Ranford...I might still give the advantage to Kipper, but I personally think it's pretty close.

He definitely played the best when it counted... twice. Conn Smythe in 1990 and MVP of the 1991 Canada Cup. Ranford is definitely better in the playoffs than the regular season.

But did he do anything else of note? His playoff stats other than 1990 aren't really that spectacular.

And look at his regular seasons... Top 10 in save percentage exactly once in his career. Zero post-season all-star nods. In fact, even just looking at the All-Star Game, Ranford played in just one in his entire career - in 1991.

Did Ranford do anything of note from outside of the 1990-1991 time frame? (Other than finishing 6th in save % in 86-87, the only year he finished top 10 in the stat)

I definitely think goaltending is Brooklyn's biggest advantage in the series.

I know Vezina rankings aren't the be-all, end-all, but these are how the goalies stack up in Vezina voting:

Kiprusoff: 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 8th, 8th
Ranford: 8th, 11th

I really don't need to say who that favors.

Is Brooklyn's clear advantage in goal (combined with better checking from the lower lines) enough to compensate for Florida's deeper offense and better top defensive pair? Maybe.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

While I'd be happy to extend the deadline, the teams have advantages in such different things, I'm not really sure what can be proven in debate. It seems Brooklyn has better coaching, but Florida has home ice. Florida has better offensive forwards, Brooklyn has better defensive forwards. Brooklyn has better goaltending, Florida has a better top pairing. This is a series that should go 7 and could very well be determined be a variable that's impossible to take into account in the analysis of matchups on paper. To further the debate in a way that wouldn't go in circles (unless we could figure out clear ways of analyzing non-NHL leagues), I think we'd need to figure out which categories it's more important to have the edge in, but that's something that is impossible to quantify. As you can see from our team, I think that the ability to put the other team on the defensive as much as possible is the best style while Brooklyn seems to value counter-attacking after weathering the other side's offence. That is basically how I see it. I'm not really sure what I can "attack" as the teams are so different. Personally, I think our offence will be enough to overcome Brooklyn's defence, but it's impossible to prove that in discussion and the weighing of meaning to different faucets of the game will vary from GM to GM.

Good luck!

I guess there isn't that much more that can be proven if you agree that Brooklyn's lower lines are better shutdown lines (while lacking the offensive ability of Florida's 3rd line).

I mainly wanted to talk about just how much more often Kiprusoff was among the best in the world than Ranford, before the voting.

I don't see a need to delay further now if you don't.

Good luck to you too!

 

[seventieslord]

TDMM is definitely right that Ranford's resume really milks 1990 and 1991 for all they're worth. I've had the chance to take him in about 5 MLDs now, and every time I look at him, I'm like "great two years, and then what??" - There are always at least a few other goalies I'd rather take.

 

[Hedberg]

I don't see a need to delay further now if you don't.

I'm ready

TDMM is definitely right that Ranford's resume really milks 1990 and 1991 for all they're worth. I've had the chance to take him in about 5 MLDs now, and every time I look at him, I'm like "great two years, and then what??" - There are always at least a few other goalies I'd rather take.

He's definitely a mid-range MLD guy (there's not enough goalies with good long term resumes for every team to have one in the MLD), but I think VCL is right by guessing that if Ranford has made it this far, he's presumably playing decent and at the very least won't loose the series for us.

But did he do anything else of note? His playoff stats other than 1990 aren't really that spectacular.

He was on the All-Star Team and won the Gold Medal at the 1994 World Championships and was the third string goalie on the 1996 World Cup (although Roy and Belfour decline and because Sather was a homer). His play was probably better than his SV% indicates as being on bad Glen Sather coached teams kills stats. Joe Pelletier wrote on his Legends blog

his numbers would be greatly inflated over that time period, but he was spectacular and easily the best player on a weak Oilers team

Also, he was either still somewhat good or Glen Sather completely fleeced the Bruins by getting Mariusz Czerkawski, Sean Brown (who Boston had picked in the first round in 1995) and a 1996 first round pick for him in January 1996. Based on that, I'm guessing while he obviously peaked in 90-91, he did play better than the numbers indicate up until the time he left Edmonton. Hockey Stars Presents (?) thought he was a top-10 goaltender post 91:

Hockey Stars Presents in their annual goaltending rankings had him:
1993: 9th
1994: 2nd (The Sporting News ranked him 6th that year)
1995: 4th

and in 1996 he was 8th in All-Star Voting and 10th in Vezina voting.

http://www.hockeygoalies.org/bio/ranford.html

All of that added up still isn't overly special, but it looks like his decline from 1991 was more gradual than it appears in his numbers (he went from being a star to an above-average starter). Sorry for posting more stuff in a post stating I'm ready for voting to open, but I don't think any of the above was too controversial.

 

[MadArcand]

and in 1996 he was 8th in All-Star Voting and 10th in Vezina voting.

A single last place vote in both cases which should be disregarded, as he was in no way, shape or form top 10 goalie that season.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

A single last place vote in both cases which should be disregarded, as he was in no way, shape or form top 10 goalie that season.

A single last place vote (3rd or 5th place in reality) by a sportswriter is meaningless to me as a likely homer vote. Or hell, maybe even the vote of someone who doesn't even follow hockey enough to know what positions players play.

But a single 3rd place vote by a GM for the Vezina is meaningful enough to be considered IMO. I always count single votes for the Vezina, while I don't for awards voted on by the writers.

Just so long as people realize that once you get past the Top 4 or 5 in Vezina voting, you are usually just getting guys who received just a handful of 3rd and maybe 2nd place votes.

For example, Kipper's 8th place finish in 2009-10 was just 2 3rd place votes, and his 8th place finish in 2008-09 was a single 2nd place vote. (Though the sportswriters did give him multiple votes in both seasons).

 

[MadArcand]

A GM is as likely to give his goalie 3rd place vote if he feels the goalie was good enough.

Regardless, Ranford was at best below avera in 95-96. The votes he got were sham.

 

[vancityluongo]

So...uh, wasn't the voting period a few days ago? Not to be impatient, but it'd be nice to have an update on where we stand with this series. It'd be nice to have this wrapped up before the end of the weekend, IMO.

 

[Dreakmur]

The Florida Hammerheads defeat the Brooklyn Americans in 7 games.

1st Star – Mikka Kiprusoff
2nd Star – Howard McNamara
3rd Star – Marc Tardif

 

[VanIslander]

Congratulations Hedberg and vancityluongo!

 

[Hedberg]

Thank you voters. I'm very excited to win one of the drafts after being in an ATD and a AAA final before.

Thanks VCL for your help, especially your big role behind the scenes in whittling down short lists and crafting our arguments.

Thank you for the great series Jarek and TDMM (impressive job to follow up an ATD win with being part of a MLD finalist).

Looking forward to the AAA

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Congrats on the win, guys. Like I said, you had my favorite team in the regular season, so I'm not disappointed at all in losing to you in 7.

While I think a lot of the criticism of Zabrodsky in this thing was unfair and getting into the ridiculous groupthink territory (was Czech hockey in the late 1940s really that far behind North American hockey in the 1890s?), your offensive depth and quality of defensemen were too much to ignore.

To compete, the Americans really needed another top pairing defenseman to drop Redmond to the 2nd pair and keep either Smaill or Olausson on the 3rd pair.

It probably wouldn't have taken you 7 games to win if you had a decent goalie.

 

[VanIslander]

was Czech hockey in the late 1940s really that far behind North American hockey in the 1890s?

If we used that reasoning many GMs would draft only modern era players! Picks are to be judged RELATIVE TO THEIR ERA. North American hockey in the 1890s was the best in the world. Czech hockey in the 1940s is a huge question mark relative to the best of that era but likely well behind NHL quality given how successful nonstar Canadians fared against them in international amateur competition before the seventies.

Zabrodsky is a poster boy for the extra skater slot though every team can handle one question mark as long as it isn't in an important position like a top line.

 

[vancityluongo]

Wow. Thanks for the awesome series jarek and TDMM, this definitely could've gone either way, and you guys had my favourite team as well. Also congrats to Hed for winning this thing, as the main architect of this team, he deserves full credit for this win.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

If we used that reasoning many GMs would draft only modern era players! Picks are to be judged RELATIVE TO THEIR ERA. North American hockey in the 1890s was the best in the world. Czech hockey in the 1940s is a huge question mark relative to the best of that era but likely well behind NHL quality given how successful nonstar Canadians fared against them in international amateur competition before the seventies.

Zabrodsky is a poster boy for the extra skater slot though every team can handle one question mark as long as it isn't in an important position like a top line.

I take it this is a new line of thinking for you, certainly since you had Josef Malecek (a bigger question mark than Zabrodsky) centering the top line for your MLD10 winning team.

 

[jarek]

Woot! Great job all, grats to Hed and VCL, and thanks to all who voted for us. TDMM was convinced it wouldn't be this close, so it's kinda cool to see that it went to 7!

 

[VanIslander]

I take it this is a new line of thinking for you, certainly since you had Josef Malecek (a bigger question mark than Zabrodsky) centering the top line for your MLD10 winning team.

No, not at all. My co-GM Nalyd Psycho talked me into that after much PMing. I actually was never completely comfortable with it but in co-GMing one learns to compromise, give and take, especially when each of you want certain guys drafted (I hadda get Loktev and Houle) and need to find a way to agree (nalyd also pushed for Machac). I made sure to get a spare center who could step in in Zhluktov and felt Arnott and Koivu could handle more than bottom-6 minutes if necessary. But no doubt the weakness of that team was its question marks at center (and I didn't expect the team to win it all, though it had a killer blueline and goaltending).

 

[tony d]

Congrats to the Florida Hammerheads on winning this series. The 2 best teams were in the final that's for sure.

Enjoyed doing this a lot. Hoping to take part in the AAA draft as well if someone will go co-gm with me.