All-Time Draft #11 Line-Up Assassination Thread
- Thread starter God Bless Canada
- Start date
New Westminster Bruins roster...
NEW WESTMINSTER BRUINS
1977 and 1978 Memorial Cup Champions
Co-GMs: raleh and God Bless Canada
Coach: Hector "Toe" Blake
Captain: Aubrey "Dit" Clapper
Alternate Captain: Maurice "Rocket" Richard
Alternate Captain: Carl Brewer
Alternate Captain: Terry O'Reilly
1977 and 1978 Memorial Cup Champions
Co-GMs: raleh and God Bless Canada
Coach: Hector "Toe" Blake
Captain: Aubrey "Dit" Clapper
Alternate Captain: Maurice "Rocket" Richard
Alternate Captain: Carl Brewer
Alternate Captain: Terry O'Reilly
Fred "Bun" Cook-Frank Boucher-Maurice "Rocket" Richard
Kevin Stevens-Pat Lafontaine-Theoren Fleury
Ross Lonsberry-Butch Goring-Trevor Linden
Vic Stasiuk-Bob Bourne-Terry O'Reilly
Bill Hay
Kevin Stevens-Pat Lafontaine-Theoren Fleury
Ross Lonsberry-Butch Goring-Trevor Linden
Vic Stasiuk-Bob Bourne-Terry O'Reilly
Bill Hay
Aubrey "Dit" Clapper-Carl Brewer
Doug "Diesel" Mohns-Dollard St. Laurent
Ron Greschner-Steve Smith
George Owen
Pekka Rautakallio
Doug "Diesel" Mohns-Dollard St. Laurent
Ron Greschner-Steve Smith
George Owen
Pekka Rautakallio
Charlie Gardiner
Glenn "Chico" Resch
Glenn "Chico" Resch
Power play units:
Stevens-Boucher-Richard-Clapper-Mohns
Cook-Lafontaine-Fleury-Brewer-Greschner
Penalty killing units:
Lonsberry-Goring-Clapper-Brewer
Stasiuk-Bourne-Mohns-St. Laurent
Cook-Boucher-Greschner-Smith
Fleury-Linden-Clapper-Brewer
Stevens-Boucher-Richard-Clapper-Mohns
Cook-Lafontaine-Fleury-Brewer-Greschner
Penalty killing units:
Lonsberry-Goring-Clapper-Brewer
Stasiuk-Bourne-Mohns-St. Laurent
Cook-Boucher-Greschner-Smith
Fleury-Linden-Clapper-Brewer
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
New Westminster Bruins self-review/pre-emptive strike
*This is the type of team you’d come to expect from GBC and raleh. It’s a fast-skating, hard-charging, aggressive team loaded with character, leadership and guys who hate to lose. It might be the toughest team to play against in the draft. A quick, unabridged look through our team:
First line: We were shocked to get Richard in the first round. I’ve never had Richard; raleh traded up to get him in ATD 7. His goal-scoring ability, explosiveness, competitiveness and leadership make him a no-brainer at 10. We wanted to get him a talented, two-way playmaking centre. Three names stood out among possible options: Frank Boucher, Peter Forsberg and Elmer Lach. Forsberg was gone, so with went with the supremely skilled Boucher. Bun Cook was Boucher’s linemate on the famed Bread Line, so that gave him a leg up on other options for the complimentary line role. He had several top 10 finishes in goals and assists. He works hard. He competes hard. He’s an effective two-way player. It’s a skilled, smart, aggressive top line, and with Bun and Boucher, we feel we can play them against an opponent’s top line.
Second line: When we waited until the sixth round to start getting our second line assembled, we knew we wouldn’t get a Busher Jackson or a Joe Primeau. But we’ll take Pat Lafontaine, a wonderfully skilled player who can be a difference-maker with his playmaking or goal-scoring abilities. Lafontaine and Fleury are magnificent skaters who are excellent on the give-and-go. Fleury’s an awesome playoff performer, too. Rounding out the line is burly Kevin Stevens, who will be called on to do the dirty work: control the front of the net, dominate along the boards and set the tone with physical play.
Third line: Butch Goring is a fine two-way centre with very good skill, excellent hockey sense and an ability to deliver in the clutch. He’s teamed with Ross Lonsberry and Trevor Linden. Linden’s my all-time favourite player. He has very good mobility for a big man, and his clutch scoring was his calling card throughout his career. Lonsberry isn’t as strong offensively as what we’re used to from our two-way line, but he topped 30 goals once, 50 points several times, and he brings a physical presence to the line. It’s a mobile, hard-working, intelligent line that’s tough to play against.
Fourth line: Getting O’Reilly was big. He’s the best fourth line RW in the draft, maybe the best fourth line winger in the draft. We originally selected Bourne for our third line LW spot, but we decided his speed, size and hockey sense would be better served as our fourth line centre. Stasiuk gives us everything we’d ever want as a fourth line winger: skill, smarts and aggressiveness. We feel this line can play against an opponent’s best line.
First defence pairing: This is probably my favourite pairing of any ATD I’ve been a part of. Clapper and Carl Brewer. Clapper’s a thoroughbred. He can play on any line, any defence pairing, any role. He does it all, and he excels at every role. And he’s our captain. Brewer’s a tenacious competitors with tremendous skill and character. This is a tandem that we can lean on for big minutes in all situations. They can contribute offensively, they’re tough as nails physically, they can log big minutes against the opponent’s top line.
Second defence pairing: We admit that we waited a while to finish this pairing off. We’re thrilled to get Diesel Mohns in the eighth round, due to what he brings to the table. We then waiting until the 15th round to get Dollard St. Laurent. Maybe not our best move, but St. Laurent’s by no means a liability out there. He’s smart, he’s steady, he’s reliable. He's an okay No. 4. Not a great No. 4. Mohns is a great No. 3.
Third defence pairing: I wanted at least one former New West Bruin on my team. We got it in Ron Greschner, a solid anchor for a third pairing. He’ll line up alongside rough-and-tumble Steve Smith, who has an underrated offensive side. Both guys have excellent size and toughness. Smith’s an effective puck-mover; Greschner’s a very, very good offensive blue-liner. They’ll give us around 18 minutes a night each of consistent effort.
Goaltending: We went a little later with our No. 1 than normal. Normally I’d wait until Round 7 or 8 to get a goalie. But when guys like Smith, Fuhr and Gardiner started dropping to the fourth round – later than when the top goalies are often taken – we felt we could take a chance. Smith was gone, so we went with Gardiner. I think Gardiner’s the better goalie, but we’re big Billy Smith fans. Gardiner’s a workhorse and a three-time first-team all-star. Glenn “Chico†Resch is a perfect back-up, IMO. Great guy. Great team guy. Two-time second-team all-star. Stanley Cup champion back-up. We'll take that.
Coaching: We usually go early with our coach. This draft was no exception. We were prepared to pick a bench boss in 13. Didn’t think we’d get Toe Blake. raleh thinks Toe is the best ever. Some might argue Bowman, but Blake knew how to handle the Rocket and the other egos in the late 50 Habs’ locker room. Much like Al Arbour, he was tough and demanding, but he treated his players like men. He treated them with respect. I think Blake’s the perfect coach for someone like Carl Brewer. Brewer was a stubborn, free-thinking type A personality, but he also had great character, leadership and intelligence. Blake also won eight Cups.
Spare parts: Bill Hay’s a terrific 13th forward. We wanted another big, skilled centre for our 13th forward. Size up the middle was a bit of a concern. So we got a big, playmaking pivot with excellent leadership skills. George Owen is a great addition as a No. 7 defenceman. He gives us a real boost in terms of offensive skill. In the discussion for the final pick, we decided to go with a No. 8 defenceman over a No. 14 forward. With Clapper and Mohns, we have two players who can move up to forward if we’re beset with injuries, or if we need a very short-term shake-up. And they’re both better at forward than any forward out there. So another defenceman was a greater need than a forward. We don’t plan on using Clapper and/or Mohns up front this year, but we have the option if we need to, so we felt a No. 8 defenceman was a greater need. Pekka Rautakallio gives us another skilled puck-mover we can insert into the line-up.
Other notables:
*Our leadership is outstanding. Rocket Richard captained four Stanley Cup champions. But he’s not our captain. Dit Clapper, one of the greatest leaders ever, is our captain. Carl Brewer’s an outstanding leader, too. With guys like O’Reilly, Linden, Boucher and Hay – all capable of wearing letters - there are a lot of gifted leaders on our team.
*Our forecheck should be fierce. With the speed and aggressiveness of our wingers, it’s going to mean a lot of long nights for opposing defencemen. And in a best-of-seven series, that could be the difference.
*Two things I judge my teams by. First is: How many of these guys have I had before? Since raleh and I started working together, the answer, for the ATD, is one: Doug Mohns. The other is how many guys did I get that I’ve always wanted. The answer is: Richard, Clapper, Boucher, Gardiner, O’Reilly, Lonsberry, Goring, Bourne, Hay and Toe Blake as a coach.
*This is the type of team you’d come to expect from GBC and raleh. It’s a fast-skating, hard-charging, aggressive team loaded with character, leadership and guys who hate to lose. It might be the toughest team to play against in the draft. A quick, unabridged look through our team:
First line: We were shocked to get Richard in the first round. I’ve never had Richard; raleh traded up to get him in ATD 7. His goal-scoring ability, explosiveness, competitiveness and leadership make him a no-brainer at 10. We wanted to get him a talented, two-way playmaking centre. Three names stood out among possible options: Frank Boucher, Peter Forsberg and Elmer Lach. Forsberg was gone, so with went with the supremely skilled Boucher. Bun Cook was Boucher’s linemate on the famed Bread Line, so that gave him a leg up on other options for the complimentary line role. He had several top 10 finishes in goals and assists. He works hard. He competes hard. He’s an effective two-way player. It’s a skilled, smart, aggressive top line, and with Bun and Boucher, we feel we can play them against an opponent’s top line.
Second line: When we waited until the sixth round to start getting our second line assembled, we knew we wouldn’t get a Busher Jackson or a Joe Primeau. But we’ll take Pat Lafontaine, a wonderfully skilled player who can be a difference-maker with his playmaking or goal-scoring abilities. Lafontaine and Fleury are magnificent skaters who are excellent on the give-and-go. Fleury’s an awesome playoff performer, too. Rounding out the line is burly Kevin Stevens, who will be called on to do the dirty work: control the front of the net, dominate along the boards and set the tone with physical play.
Third line: Butch Goring is a fine two-way centre with very good skill, excellent hockey sense and an ability to deliver in the clutch. He’s teamed with Ross Lonsberry and Trevor Linden. Linden’s my all-time favourite player. He has very good mobility for a big man, and his clutch scoring was his calling card throughout his career. Lonsberry isn’t as strong offensively as what we’re used to from our two-way line, but he topped 30 goals once, 50 points several times, and he brings a physical presence to the line. It’s a mobile, hard-working, intelligent line that’s tough to play against.
Fourth line: Getting O’Reilly was big. He’s the best fourth line RW in the draft, maybe the best fourth line winger in the draft. We originally selected Bourne for our third line LW spot, but we decided his speed, size and hockey sense would be better served as our fourth line centre. Stasiuk gives us everything we’d ever want as a fourth line winger: skill, smarts and aggressiveness. We feel this line can play against an opponent’s best line.
First defence pairing: This is probably my favourite pairing of any ATD I’ve been a part of. Clapper and Carl Brewer. Clapper’s a thoroughbred. He can play on any line, any defence pairing, any role. He does it all, and he excels at every role. And he’s our captain. Brewer’s a tenacious competitors with tremendous skill and character. This is a tandem that we can lean on for big minutes in all situations. They can contribute offensively, they’re tough as nails physically, they can log big minutes against the opponent’s top line.
Second defence pairing: We admit that we waited a while to finish this pairing off. We’re thrilled to get Diesel Mohns in the eighth round, due to what he brings to the table. We then waiting until the 15th round to get Dollard St. Laurent. Maybe not our best move, but St. Laurent’s by no means a liability out there. He’s smart, he’s steady, he’s reliable. He's an okay No. 4. Not a great No. 4. Mohns is a great No. 3.
Third defence pairing: I wanted at least one former New West Bruin on my team. We got it in Ron Greschner, a solid anchor for a third pairing. He’ll line up alongside rough-and-tumble Steve Smith, who has an underrated offensive side. Both guys have excellent size and toughness. Smith’s an effective puck-mover; Greschner’s a very, very good offensive blue-liner. They’ll give us around 18 minutes a night each of consistent effort.
Goaltending: We went a little later with our No. 1 than normal. Normally I’d wait until Round 7 or 8 to get a goalie. But when guys like Smith, Fuhr and Gardiner started dropping to the fourth round – later than when the top goalies are often taken – we felt we could take a chance. Smith was gone, so we went with Gardiner. I think Gardiner’s the better goalie, but we’re big Billy Smith fans. Gardiner’s a workhorse and a three-time first-team all-star. Glenn “Chico†Resch is a perfect back-up, IMO. Great guy. Great team guy. Two-time second-team all-star. Stanley Cup champion back-up. We'll take that.
Coaching: We usually go early with our coach. This draft was no exception. We were prepared to pick a bench boss in 13. Didn’t think we’d get Toe Blake. raleh thinks Toe is the best ever. Some might argue Bowman, but Blake knew how to handle the Rocket and the other egos in the late 50 Habs’ locker room. Much like Al Arbour, he was tough and demanding, but he treated his players like men. He treated them with respect. I think Blake’s the perfect coach for someone like Carl Brewer. Brewer was a stubborn, free-thinking type A personality, but he also had great character, leadership and intelligence. Blake also won eight Cups.
Spare parts: Bill Hay’s a terrific 13th forward. We wanted another big, skilled centre for our 13th forward. Size up the middle was a bit of a concern. So we got a big, playmaking pivot with excellent leadership skills. George Owen is a great addition as a No. 7 defenceman. He gives us a real boost in terms of offensive skill. In the discussion for the final pick, we decided to go with a No. 8 defenceman over a No. 14 forward. With Clapper and Mohns, we have two players who can move up to forward if we’re beset with injuries, or if we need a very short-term shake-up. And they’re both better at forward than any forward out there. So another defenceman was a greater need than a forward. We don’t plan on using Clapper and/or Mohns up front this year, but we have the option if we need to, so we felt a No. 8 defenceman was a greater need. Pekka Rautakallio gives us another skilled puck-mover we can insert into the line-up.
Other notables:
*Our leadership is outstanding. Rocket Richard captained four Stanley Cup champions. But he’s not our captain. Dit Clapper, one of the greatest leaders ever, is our captain. Carl Brewer’s an outstanding leader, too. With guys like O’Reilly, Linden, Boucher and Hay – all capable of wearing letters - there are a lot of gifted leaders on our team.
*Our forecheck should be fierce. With the speed and aggressiveness of our wingers, it’s going to mean a lot of long nights for opposing defencemen. And in a best-of-seven series, that could be the difference.
*Two things I judge my teams by. First is: How many of these guys have I had before? Since raleh and I started working together, the answer, for the ATD, is one: Doug Mohns. The other is how many guys did I get that I’ve always wanted. The answer is: Richard, Clapper, Boucher, Gardiner, O’Reilly, Lonsberry, Goring, Bourne, Hay and Toe Blake as a coach.
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
Just a quick review of the NWMB while I have a moment:
- Boucher and Richard are a lethal combination. Boucher will help to compensate for Richard's lack of backchecking. Cook is a good move here due to chemistry - normally you'd probably want him to be a 2nd liner. This line will have no problems scoring.
- The second line really concerns me. Every player there was considerably better at scoring goals than setting them up. I don't think Lafontaine can be counted on to be the line's playmaker. He's a dazzling skater and goalscorer but aside from the season he was 2nd in assists, he was never top-20 again. (top-20 in goals 8 times, though) Stevens needs no explanation. Fleury, I think, is the line's best playmaker as he has a much better established track record when it comes to putting up assists. Overall though, this is a line that will have to make plays by committee.
- It's a good mix on both of the bottom two lines. I think Stasiuk is the best all-around player you have there. He provides a little of everything. Most of those guys didn't score a lot, BUT Bourne and Linden, and to a lesser extent, Goring, have a history of huge goals and big playoff numbers so these are lines that could still get the job done offensively when you really need it.
- No complaints whatsoever about the defense corps. Everyone is good for the role they have and their spot in the lineup. Love the Clapper/Brewer pairing. But, one thing caught my eye. You plan to have Greschner and Smith log 18 minutes a game? That's not third pairing minutes. Just yesterday you said weaknesses and limitations of a player are relative to the context, and in this draft they're third pairing defensemen. There's no way they should play that many minutes. Besides the fact that they can't handle it (and there's nothing wrong with that) it would be taking away minutes from better players who CAN handle it, like Brewer and Clapper. I would aim for a 25-20-15 split if I were you.
- Blake is obviously an awesome coach. You're right that he's good for Richard's ego, and that's important. Gardiner is an excellent goalie, in this context about an average starter. So goaltending should not lose you any series. If there are any topics I didn't cover it's because they didn't need to be. It's a great, solid team with fewer than its share of question marks.
- Boucher and Richard are a lethal combination. Boucher will help to compensate for Richard's lack of backchecking. Cook is a good move here due to chemistry - normally you'd probably want him to be a 2nd liner. This line will have no problems scoring.
- The second line really concerns me. Every player there was considerably better at scoring goals than setting them up. I don't think Lafontaine can be counted on to be the line's playmaker. He's a dazzling skater and goalscorer but aside from the season he was 2nd in assists, he was never top-20 again. (top-20 in goals 8 times, though) Stevens needs no explanation. Fleury, I think, is the line's best playmaker as he has a much better established track record when it comes to putting up assists. Overall though, this is a line that will have to make plays by committee.
- It's a good mix on both of the bottom two lines. I think Stasiuk is the best all-around player you have there. He provides a little of everything. Most of those guys didn't score a lot, BUT Bourne and Linden, and to a lesser extent, Goring, have a history of huge goals and big playoff numbers so these are lines that could still get the job done offensively when you really need it.
- No complaints whatsoever about the defense corps. Everyone is good for the role they have and their spot in the lineup. Love the Clapper/Brewer pairing. But, one thing caught my eye. You plan to have Greschner and Smith log 18 minutes a game? That's not third pairing minutes. Just yesterday you said weaknesses and limitations of a player are relative to the context, and in this draft they're third pairing defensemen. There's no way they should play that many minutes. Besides the fact that they can't handle it (and there's nothing wrong with that) it would be taking away minutes from better players who CAN handle it, like Brewer and Clapper. I would aim for a 25-20-15 split if I were you.
- Blake is obviously an awesome coach. You're right that he's good for Richard's ego, and that's important. Gardiner is an excellent goalie, in this context about an average starter. So goaltending should not lose you any series. If there are any topics I didn't cover it's because they didn't need to be. It's a great, solid team with fewer than its share of question marks.
Here's the thing about Lafontaine: he had junk for supporting cast a lot of years. From 87-88 to 95-96, he topped 40 goals seven times. He was hurt one year (1993-94) and he played half the lockout year. But look at the supporting cast.
I don't know why he didn't put up more assists in 1991-92, but you have to be a tremendous playmaker to get 95 assists in the show. From 87-88 to 90-91, he had weak wingers in Long Island. Yes, Trottier was still pretty good in 87-88, but in terms of wingers, the Islanders had nothing. Lafontaine was making passes to Mikko Makela, Alan Kerr, Greg Gilbert, Randy "Hands of" Wood, David Volek, early in his career Derek King, Pat Flatley and past-his-prime Don Maloney. Of course he's not going to be top 20 in assists with that crew. Maloney's the only one who gets picked in the ATD, and at that point, he was past his prime. Flatley's an MLD two-way player. None of those other guys are even going to get consideration. They had Sutter, but Sutter's a centre. And they had some defencemen with decent, but not stellar, offensive abilities. For four years, Lafontaine was a one-man offensive show on Long Island. He should have been a Hart finalist in 1990.
And once he finally recovered from the knee injury in 1995, he was back to being a one-man show in Buffalo. Mogilny was gone. Andreychuk was long gone. Hawerchuk had a bad hip and was on his way out. But Lafontaine still managed 40 goals and 51 assists on a team with Randy Burridge as its second leading scorer.
Like I said before, I don't know why Lafontaine's goal and assist totals were nearly identical in 1991-92, when he could pass to Mogilny and Andreychuk, and feed the puck to Hawerchuk on the PP. But he showed what he could do as a playmaker in 1992-93. That year was skewered from a statistical perspective, but I look at the talent in the league for playmakers that year, Lafontaine was second in assists. He's the only linemate to ever get a consistent effort out of Alex Mogilny from Game 1 to Game 80-something. (Or in Mog's case that year, Game 77).
I watched Fleury. I watched Lafontaine. Lafontaine's a significantly better playmaker. They're great for the give and go. But if Lafontaine had anywhere near the talent around him that Fleury had from 1989-90 to 1995, Lafontaine's assist totals would have soared. It's amazing that Lafontaine was able to do the things he did with the talent he had around him on the Island.
Lafontaine isn't feeding passes to Derek King or Pat Flatley or Mikko Makela or Hands of Wood or David Volek. He's passing the puck to Theo Fleury and Kevin Stevens. He'll be a dynamite playmaker.
I don't know why he didn't put up more assists in 1991-92, but you have to be a tremendous playmaker to get 95 assists in the show. From 87-88 to 90-91, he had weak wingers in Long Island. Yes, Trottier was still pretty good in 87-88, but in terms of wingers, the Islanders had nothing. Lafontaine was making passes to Mikko Makela, Alan Kerr, Greg Gilbert, Randy "Hands of" Wood, David Volek, early in his career Derek King, Pat Flatley and past-his-prime Don Maloney. Of course he's not going to be top 20 in assists with that crew. Maloney's the only one who gets picked in the ATD, and at that point, he was past his prime. Flatley's an MLD two-way player. None of those other guys are even going to get consideration. They had Sutter, but Sutter's a centre. And they had some defencemen with decent, but not stellar, offensive abilities. For four years, Lafontaine was a one-man offensive show on Long Island. He should have been a Hart finalist in 1990.
And once he finally recovered from the knee injury in 1995, he was back to being a one-man show in Buffalo. Mogilny was gone. Andreychuk was long gone. Hawerchuk had a bad hip and was on his way out. But Lafontaine still managed 40 goals and 51 assists on a team with Randy Burridge as its second leading scorer.
Like I said before, I don't know why Lafontaine's goal and assist totals were nearly identical in 1991-92, when he could pass to Mogilny and Andreychuk, and feed the puck to Hawerchuk on the PP. But he showed what he could do as a playmaker in 1992-93. That year was skewered from a statistical perspective, but I look at the talent in the league for playmakers that year, Lafontaine was second in assists. He's the only linemate to ever get a consistent effort out of Alex Mogilny from Game 1 to Game 80-something. (Or in Mog's case that year, Game 77).
I watched Fleury. I watched Lafontaine. Lafontaine's a significantly better playmaker. They're great for the give and go. But if Lafontaine had anywhere near the talent around him that Fleury had from 1989-90 to 1995, Lafontaine's assist totals would have soared. It's amazing that Lafontaine was able to do the things he did with the talent he had around him on the Island.
Lafontaine isn't feeding passes to Derek King or Pat Flatley or Mikko Makela or Hands of Wood or David Volek. He's passing the puck to Theo Fleury and Kevin Stevens. He'll be a dynamite playmaker.
Last edited:
Sturminator
Love is a duel
If it's truly a German name, then the correct German pronunciation is "rhy-zuh". Two syllables, ending with a hard "uh" sound that is always the sound Germans make when words end with an "e". By the way, "reise" means trip or voyage in German. Kind of a funny name, among the millions of American athlete names that come out funny when translated into German.
LL's defense is definitely the best in this thing, and pit's deserves mention, as well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
seventies, you are grossly overvaluing the 1911 NHA results. Full stop. The level of competition in the NHA was weak in 1911. Even Lalonde was not at his true peak, having just broken out the year before and apparently experiencing a sophomore slump. Am I judging hockey as a whole as relatively weak at that point because the whole generation of great stars to come (Nighbor, Taylor, Malone, MacKay, Foyston, hell even Lalonde) hadn't hit their strides yet? Yes, that is exactly what I am doing.
I'm sorry, but placing 5th in a league in which the top-4 scorers are ******, ******, ****** and ****** is not even remotely similar to placing 5th in a league in which the top-4 are (using another example from Cleghorn's own career - 1921-22) Broadbent, Dye, Denneny and Malone. Simply because the NHA was the "top" pro league in 1911 does not make it comparable to the modern game. The NHA at that point was hardly recognizable as better than the precursor leagues. You are trying to take the "NHA" name recognition and sell the 1911 league as something it was not. Although I greatly appreciate your research into old-time hockey, you are too smart to not understand what you are doing. You are pushing the envelope, at times, to the point of absurdity.
I have a hard time knowing how, exactly, to credit Cleghorn's 1911 results, but a top-5 modern equivalent it most certainly is not. I mean, do you really expect us to compare, apples-to-apples, Cleghorn's 1911 5th place goals finish to Hull's 5th place in 1960-61, when Geoffrion, Mahovlich, Moore and Beliveau were 1-4 ahead of him? Or how about Dionne's 5th place finish in 1982-83 when it was Gretzky, McDonald, Bossy and Goulet 1-4? Really man, it is an insult to reason. Systems are great and all, but when attempting to make modern equivalents for old-time hockey, the further back we go, the more granularity is needed. Painting with a broad brush works fine in the 80's. In the 10's, it is folly.
Sturminator
Love is a duel
Brad Dalgarno for the mother****ing win.
Although I have to add that Lafontaine's wingers were hardly worse than Stastny's, especially after Franz Stastny on the RW got old and sucked. You have to admit that playmaking wasn't really Pat's bread and butter.
I think Lafontaine would have been a perennial top five or top 10 guy in assists with a credible first line winger, or even a strong second line winger. The closest thing he had was probably Makela.
Anton Stastny was far better than anything that Lafontaine had to work with those last three years on Long Island, or that last year in Buffalo. And Stastny at least was able to feed Michel Goulet on the power play or in the last minute when down by a goal.
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
Jeez, all this over the 1911 NHA? That's great though. Discussion is what this is all about.
It was a weaker time in history. But, it was still the top league. The PCHA didn't exist yet so no other league was even close. My issue isn't about this. because it was clearly a bit weaker, it's that this 5th place finish in the only top league in existence, suddenly becomes merely a top-20-type season. I called it a top-5 because, who else would have topped him? I would meet you halfway and call it a top-10 season but "just" top-20 is absurd. That's overdoing it.
As for Cleghorn, he beat Lalonde. That's a good thing. Lalonde was already 23, established as a star the year before, plus in the OPHL and IHL before that. Cleghorn was 19 when that season started. Don't just blame Lalonde, already in his prime, for allowing Cleghorn to slip into the top-5. He earned it.
No, it's not, but I should point out that the reason three of those names are still written "******" (one of them is Walsh) is our own shortcomings. All of them were great players who had productive careers.
Well thanks for the compliment but I'm not trying to put one over on you.
It is not comparable to the modern game. It is, however, comparable to 1912-1926, just one of the weaker seasons from that period. The results get skewed a bit in favour of older players when you analyze things the way I did - remember the conversation two Fridays ago with Pit - so when I listed those top-20 season totals, I was careful to only compare Cleghorn to other players from the same era.
No, of course it's not the same. As I said above, I don't intend to portray it as such. But it was still a 5th place finish in the top league at the time. It is still worthy of comparison to the 1912-1926 seasons, it's just a weaker year. Cleghorn did beat out Lalonde, Pitre, Russell, Hyland, Dunderdale, and Taylor (who was a defenseman at the time but whom absolutely had hit his stride by then)
So even if you drop 1911 to a top-10 status instead of top-5, that's still 1 top-5, six top-10s, and nine top-20s. Comparison and relation to modern players is a whole other story. Compared to his own peers, he does very, very well. Cleghorn is a worthy second liner. (not that you said he wasn't)
It was a weaker time in history. But, it was still the top league. The PCHA didn't exist yet so no other league was even close. My issue isn't about this. because it was clearly a bit weaker, it's that this 5th place finish in the only top league in existence, suddenly becomes merely a top-20-type season. I called it a top-5 because, who else would have topped him? I would meet you halfway and call it a top-10 season but "just" top-20 is absurd. That's overdoing it.
As for Cleghorn, he beat Lalonde. That's a good thing. Lalonde was already 23, established as a star the year before, plus in the OPHL and IHL before that. Cleghorn was 19 when that season started. Don't just blame Lalonde, already in his prime, for allowing Cleghorn to slip into the top-5. He earned it.
No, it's not, but I should point out that the reason three of those names are still written "******" (one of them is Walsh) is our own shortcomings. All of them were great players who had productive careers.
Well thanks for the compliment but I'm not trying to put one over on you.
It is not comparable to the modern game. It is, however, comparable to 1912-1926, just one of the weaker seasons from that period. The results get skewed a bit in favour of older players when you analyze things the way I did - remember the conversation two Fridays ago with Pit - so when I listed those top-20 season totals, I was careful to only compare Cleghorn to other players from the same era.
No, of course it's not the same. As I said above, I don't intend to portray it as such. But it was still a 5th place finish in the top league at the time. It is still worthy of comparison to the 1912-1926 seasons, it's just a weaker year. Cleghorn did beat out Lalonde, Pitre, Russell, Hyland, Dunderdale, and Taylor (who was a defenseman at the time but whom absolutely had hit his stride by then)
So even if you drop 1911 to a top-10 status instead of top-5, that's still 1 top-5, six top-10s, and nine top-20s. Comparison and relation to modern players is a whole other story. Compared to his own peers, he does very, very well. Cleghorn is a worthy second liner. (not that you said he wasn't)
EagleBelfour
Registered User
Hey 70's, why are you so high on Leo Reise Jr?. I'm a big fan of his, always thought he was the perfect #5 defenseman, but I'm puzzled as of why you think he was a better defenseman than Bobby Baun and Gus Mortson. I just cannot justify such a comment.
---------------------
Pitseleh, You're absolutely right. Gadsby-MacInnis-Stapleton (who I think was better than White but always taken later) - White is an amazing Top-4. My dad would be proud of you for reuniting his favourite defense pairing of All-Time
Actually, 6-7 teams could claim of having the best Top-4 in the draft. If I go by the Division Rivalry thread:
Pitseleh
Bill Gadsby-Al MacInnis
Bill White-Pat Stapleton
70's
Sprague Cleghorn - Red Horner
Lionel Conacher - Art Coulter (C)
Leopold Stotch
#19 Larry Robinson-#2 Babe Pratt
#5 Guy Lapointe-#3 Jean-Guy Talbot
CanadiensFan
Bobby Orr-J.C. Tremblay
Tom Johnson-Ted Harris
Leaf Lander
Tim Horton-Jacques Laperriere
Allan Stanley-Bobby Baun
EagleBelfour
Raymond Bourque-Alexander Ragulin
Jimmy Thomson-Gus Mortson
TC
Denis Potvin-Marcel Pronovost
Babe Siebert-William 'Flash' Hollett
Arrbez
Slava Fetisov - Eric Desjardins
Chris Chelios - Jimmy Watson
That's 8, and I didn't included excellent defensive corp like Kyle ( Hitchman, Shore, Johnson, Patrick), Mr.Bugg (Park-Bouchard
Leetch-Huddy) and nik.jr (Seibert-Gerard-Kasatonov-Crawford)
--------------------------
---------------------
Pitseleh, You're absolutely right. Gadsby-MacInnis-Stapleton (who I think was better than White but always taken later) - White is an amazing Top-4. My dad would be proud of you for reuniting his favourite defense pairing of All-Time
Actually, 6-7 teams could claim of having the best Top-4 in the draft. If I go by the Division Rivalry thread:
Pitseleh
Bill Gadsby-Al MacInnis
Bill White-Pat Stapleton
70's
Sprague Cleghorn - Red Horner
Lionel Conacher - Art Coulter (C)
Leopold Stotch
#19 Larry Robinson-#2 Babe Pratt
#5 Guy Lapointe-#3 Jean-Guy Talbot
CanadiensFan
Bobby Orr-J.C. Tremblay
Tom Johnson-Ted Harris
Leaf Lander
Tim Horton-Jacques Laperriere
Allan Stanley-Bobby Baun
EagleBelfour
Raymond Bourque-Alexander Ragulin
Jimmy Thomson-Gus Mortson
TC
Denis Potvin-Marcel Pronovost
Babe Siebert-William 'Flash' Hollett
Arrbez
Slava Fetisov - Eric Desjardins
Chris Chelios - Jimmy Watson
That's 8, and I didn't included excellent defensive corp like Kyle ( Hitchman, Shore, Johnson, Patrick), Mr.Bugg (Park-Bouchard
Leetch-Huddy) and nik.jr (Seibert-Gerard-Kasatonov-Crawford)
--------------------------
That's a solid defense. Love the Potvin-Pronovost pairing, it's another one of my old ones.
Лада Тольятти
Jacques Lemaire
Brian Propp - Stan Mikita (A) - Charlie Conacher
Brian Sutter (A) - Jean Ratelle - Cecil Dillon
Gilles Tremblay - Dave Poulin - Jere Lehtinen
Georges Mantha - Garry Unger - Jim Peplinski
Peter McNab
Camille Henry
Eddie Gerard (C) - Earl Seibert
Alexei Kasatonov - Frank Patrick (A)
Jack Crawford - James Patrick
Phil Russell
Ed Belfour
John Vanbiesbrouck
PP1
Propp - Mikita - Conacher
F Patrick - Seibert
PP2
Unger - Ratelle - Dillon
Kasatonov - Gerard
PK1
Mikita - Tremblay
Gerard - Seibert
PK2
Propp - Poulin
Kasatonov - Crawford
PK3
Ratelle - Lehtinen
J Patrick - F Patrick
i made a defensive team. almost all my players are very good defensive players, and many excelled in a defensive environment.
lemaire's teams usually have very strong team D, an excellent PK, and take very few penalties. that should help compensate for average goaltending.
2 teams have used lemaire's defensive system, NJ and minnesota. both took very few penalties. (even when NJ was the highest scoring team.)
NJ rank in times SH (1 is fewest)
'94: 3
'95: 1
'96: 1
'97: 1
'98: 3
'99: 5
'00: 12
'01: 2
'02: 1
'03: 1
'04: 1
minnesota rank in times SH
'01: 13
'02: 23
'03: 2
'04: 3
'06: 4
'07: 4
'08: 6
'09: 1
d-corps has mobility, size and no defensive liabilities. its strength is its defensive ability. other than frank patrick, it does not really have any great offensive d-men, but i do not think moving the puck and scoring will be a problem.
gerard's great strength was his outstanding positional D, but he was also a very good offensive player. he started his career as a forward. he was a very good skater and rusher, and led the NHL in assists in his last season.
i don't know exactly which seasons gerard played at LW and which at D, but he was in the top 10 in assists in the NHL 4 times. just on the point totals, it looks like gerard was a d-man in all those seasons.
i don't know about his scoring in the NHA, but gerard played about 1/2 his career there.
in '22 gerard was chosen instead of sprague cleghorn (who had just led the habs in scoring) to replace the injured harry cameron in the '22 finals.
seibert was often the #1 d-man on his teams, and was a decent scorer. he led the champion '38 blackhawks in playoff goals. i think of seibert as sort of like pronger. both were big physically dominating, 2 way d-men. neither was a great offensive d-man, but both were very capable of filling that role.
my team is also not a team that needs to make many long passes, due to its defensive style.
my 1st 2 lines are based on the C's. i tried to put together lines that fit them. sutter--ratelle--dillon is similar to both the GAG line and to cashman--ratelle--middleton.
i read in some old articles that mikita's scooter line and conacher's kid line used similar passing attacks. mikita and conacher are both right-handed shooters, but i don't think that should be a problem, b/c so were mikita's RW's, wharram and an undrafted player.
3rd line has good offensive ability. all 3 were great defensive players who stopped the opposition's best scorers, but were also able to play on scoring lines.
my spare F's both played multiple positions and were good goal scorers. my 4th LW, mantha, also played D, so he can also be used on the blueline if necessary.
mikita is on the 1st PK b/c of his outstanding faceoff ability. all of my F's except unger and conacher will see PK time, to reduce the burden on the main PKers.
Jacques Lemaire
Brian Propp - Stan Mikita (A) - Charlie Conacher
Brian Sutter (A) - Jean Ratelle - Cecil Dillon
Gilles Tremblay - Dave Poulin - Jere Lehtinen
Georges Mantha - Garry Unger - Jim Peplinski
Peter McNab
Camille Henry
Eddie Gerard (C) - Earl Seibert
Alexei Kasatonov - Frank Patrick (A)
Jack Crawford - James Patrick
Phil Russell
Ed Belfour
John Vanbiesbrouck
PP1
Propp - Mikita - Conacher
F Patrick - Seibert
PP2
Unger - Ratelle - Dillon
Kasatonov - Gerard
PK1
Mikita - Tremblay
Gerard - Seibert
PK2
Propp - Poulin
Kasatonov - Crawford
PK3
Ratelle - Lehtinen
J Patrick - F Patrick
i made a defensive team. almost all my players are very good defensive players, and many excelled in a defensive environment.
lemaire's teams usually have very strong team D, an excellent PK, and take very few penalties. that should help compensate for average goaltending.
2 teams have used lemaire's defensive system, NJ and minnesota. both took very few penalties. (even when NJ was the highest scoring team.)
NJ rank in times SH (1 is fewest)
'94: 3
'95: 1
'96: 1
'97: 1
'98: 3
'99: 5
'00: 12
'01: 2
'02: 1
'03: 1
'04: 1
minnesota rank in times SH
'01: 13
'02: 23
'03: 2
'04: 3
'06: 4
'07: 4
'08: 6
'09: 1
d-corps has mobility, size and no defensive liabilities. its strength is its defensive ability. other than frank patrick, it does not really have any great offensive d-men, but i do not think moving the puck and scoring will be a problem.
gerard's great strength was his outstanding positional D, but he was also a very good offensive player. he started his career as a forward. he was a very good skater and rusher, and led the NHL in assists in his last season.
i don't know exactly which seasons gerard played at LW and which at D, but he was in the top 10 in assists in the NHL 4 times. just on the point totals, it looks like gerard was a d-man in all those seasons.
i don't know about his scoring in the NHA, but gerard played about 1/2 his career there.
in '22 gerard was chosen instead of sprague cleghorn (who had just led the habs in scoring) to replace the injured harry cameron in the '22 finals.
seibert was often the #1 d-man on his teams, and was a decent scorer. he led the champion '38 blackhawks in playoff goals. i think of seibert as sort of like pronger. both were big physically dominating, 2 way d-men. neither was a great offensive d-man, but both were very capable of filling that role.
my team is also not a team that needs to make many long passes, due to its defensive style.
my 1st 2 lines are based on the C's. i tried to put together lines that fit them. sutter--ratelle--dillon is similar to both the GAG line and to cashman--ratelle--middleton.
i read in some old articles that mikita's scooter line and conacher's kid line used similar passing attacks. mikita and conacher are both right-handed shooters, but i don't think that should be a problem, b/c so were mikita's RW's, wharram and an undrafted player.
3rd line has good offensive ability. all 3 were great defensive players who stopped the opposition's best scorers, but were also able to play on scoring lines.
my spare F's both played multiple positions and were good goal scorers. my 4th LW, mantha, also played D, so he can also be used on the blueline if necessary.
mikita is on the 1st PK b/c of his outstanding faceoff ability. all of my F's except unger and conacher will see PK time, to reduce the burden on the main PKers.
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
Trinec Steelers review...
*First of all, the line with Hull is your first line. Period. That’s the line that the opposition is going to key on. You have the undisputed best LW of all-time on your team. That’s the first line.
*And frankly, a line with Hull and Forsberg would be overpowering. Tremendous speed, strength and instincts. We actually wanted Forsberg more than Boucher because of Forsberg’s size and strength advantage, even though we hold Boucher as the better player. But Hull’s goal-scoring ability and Forsberg’s two-way playmaking? You could put Sylvain Turgeon on that line, and it would still be one of the best of the draft.
*And how can you deny the world the chance to watch Ovechkin and Crosby on the same line?
*Nedomansky’s a solid top line RW. If you do stick with those lines, the first line will be one of the biggest first lines of the draft. As it stands, that’s a very big, very strong and very talented first line.
*I’m a huge Larmer fan. His instincts, awareness, shooting ability, work ethic and character make him one of the best second line RWs in the draft.
*Bottom lines need help. A fair amount of help. They look thrown together. Tkachuk-Peca-Roenick doesn’t work. Unless you want them as a forechecking physical line. But a line with Tkachuk and Roenick is capable of more than that. Tkachuk-Roenick-Hossa would be a strong third scoring line.
*I don’t know if Draper has played much RW. I remember he was awesome as a fourth line LW on the DDT line (Draper/Doan/Thornton) in the 04 World Cup. Best line in the tournament. Corson-Peca-Draper would be a really effective fourth line if Draper can adjust to playing out of position.
*You’re going to need one of two things to happen to win games: score a lot of goals, or have Bill Durnan steal games. Because defence is a sore spot. Team defence is iffy. As it stands now, the only line that I’d really feel comfortable with as a line that can log big minutes against the opposition is the fourth line. Either Corson-Draper-Hossa or Corson-Peca-Draper. So you’ll probably need to match gunners versus gunners, and hope you can win 5-4 and 6-5.
*You don’t have a strong No. 1 defenceman. Goodfellow’s a very good No. 2. And then you have lots of guys who would be in that average No. 3-average No. 5 range. Ross is a No. 3. Green’s a rock-solid No. 4. Gonchar’s a No. 4 offensive defenceman. Ludwig’s a rock for a No. 5. Ozolinsh is a No. 5/6, and he’s redundant with Gonchar already there. With Goodfellow, Gonchar, Ross and Ozolinsh, plus Brad Maxwell, the transition game won’t be a problem.
*In other words, a lot of defencemen will be playing roles they shouldn’t be playing in an ATD context.
*Durnan is a terrific goaltender. One of the top 10 guys in the draft. Wouldn’t pick him ahead of Turk Broda, but he’s still a top 10 goaltender. He’s going to need to be top-notch, too, because he will face a lot of rubber.
*Is this the prototypical Scotty Bowman team? No. But Bowman did win a Cup with Pittsburgh in 1992 – a team that didn’t always have the greatest commitment to the defensive zone. Bowman loves guys with speed and skill. But he also expects his players to backcheck. And Ozolinsh will drive him nuts at some point. But he’s the best coach ever, though, and a difference-maker behind the bench.
*This team will score a lot of goals. They might score the most goals in the draft. They’ll allow the most shots in the draft. And they’ll be the most offensively entertaining team in the draft. You say they'll play defence-first. Don't tie that parachute to this team. Turn 'em loose.
*First of all, the line with Hull is your first line. Period. That’s the line that the opposition is going to key on. You have the undisputed best LW of all-time on your team. That’s the first line.
*And frankly, a line with Hull and Forsberg would be overpowering. Tremendous speed, strength and instincts. We actually wanted Forsberg more than Boucher because of Forsberg’s size and strength advantage, even though we hold Boucher as the better player. But Hull’s goal-scoring ability and Forsberg’s two-way playmaking? You could put Sylvain Turgeon on that line, and it would still be one of the best of the draft.
*And how can you deny the world the chance to watch Ovechkin and Crosby on the same line?
*Nedomansky’s a solid top line RW. If you do stick with those lines, the first line will be one of the biggest first lines of the draft. As it stands, that’s a very big, very strong and very talented first line.
*I’m a huge Larmer fan. His instincts, awareness, shooting ability, work ethic and character make him one of the best second line RWs in the draft.
*Bottom lines need help. A fair amount of help. They look thrown together. Tkachuk-Peca-Roenick doesn’t work. Unless you want them as a forechecking physical line. But a line with Tkachuk and Roenick is capable of more than that. Tkachuk-Roenick-Hossa would be a strong third scoring line.
*I don’t know if Draper has played much RW. I remember he was awesome as a fourth line LW on the DDT line (Draper/Doan/Thornton) in the 04 World Cup. Best line in the tournament. Corson-Peca-Draper would be a really effective fourth line if Draper can adjust to playing out of position.
*You’re going to need one of two things to happen to win games: score a lot of goals, or have Bill Durnan steal games. Because defence is a sore spot. Team defence is iffy. As it stands now, the only line that I’d really feel comfortable with as a line that can log big minutes against the opposition is the fourth line. Either Corson-Draper-Hossa or Corson-Peca-Draper. So you’ll probably need to match gunners versus gunners, and hope you can win 5-4 and 6-5.
*You don’t have a strong No. 1 defenceman. Goodfellow’s a very good No. 2. And then you have lots of guys who would be in that average No. 3-average No. 5 range. Ross is a No. 3. Green’s a rock-solid No. 4. Gonchar’s a No. 4 offensive defenceman. Ludwig’s a rock for a No. 5. Ozolinsh is a No. 5/6, and he’s redundant with Gonchar already there. With Goodfellow, Gonchar, Ross and Ozolinsh, plus Brad Maxwell, the transition game won’t be a problem.
*In other words, a lot of defencemen will be playing roles they shouldn’t be playing in an ATD context.
*Durnan is a terrific goaltender. One of the top 10 guys in the draft. Wouldn’t pick him ahead of Turk Broda, but he’s still a top 10 goaltender. He’s going to need to be top-notch, too, because he will face a lot of rubber.
*Is this the prototypical Scotty Bowman team? No. But Bowman did win a Cup with Pittsburgh in 1992 – a team that didn’t always have the greatest commitment to the defensive zone. Bowman loves guys with speed and skill. But he also expects his players to backcheck. And Ozolinsh will drive him nuts at some point. But he’s the best coach ever, though, and a difference-maker behind the bench.
*This team will score a lot of goals. They might score the most goals in the draft. They’ll allow the most shots in the draft. And they’ll be the most offensively entertaining team in the draft. You say they'll play defence-first. Don't tie that parachute to this team. Turn 'em loose.
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
- May 10, 2006
- 13,301
- 4,355
GBC, your top-line combo of Richard and Boucher is just terrifying. Both are probably in the top five all-time in goalscoring and playmaking abilities respectively. And both were the dominant playoff performers of their generation. If you were in fact debating between Boucher, Lach, and Forsberg, you made an excellent choice going with the Ranger. Probably the only moment of the draft where I said "how'd we let him do that!" was when you managed to get both of those guys on the same line.
draper has played RW before. in '04, he spent a couple of months on datsyuk's RW, b/c of many injuries.
i would not put forsberg and hull together. when reading about mikita, i read that he and hull did not play well together, b/c both liked to control the puck.
crosby is a very similar player to forsberg, but i think he would fit better with hull than forsberg.
OK, thanks.
so as a d-man, gerard was top 10 in assists 4 times, top 10 in goals once and top 10 in points once.
NHL assists, '18-'23
nighbor: 59
noble: 54
cameron: 51
gerard: 48
denneny: 48
i am not worried at all about gerard's offensive ability.
i would not put forsberg and hull together. when reading about mikita, i read that he and hull did not play well together, b/c both liked to control the puck.
crosby is a very similar player to forsberg, but i think he would fit better with hull than forsberg.
OK, thanks.
so as a d-man, gerard was top 10 in assists 4 times, top 10 in goals once and top 10 in points once.
NHL assists, '18-'23
nighbor: 59
noble: 54
cameron: 51
gerard: 48
denneny: 48
i am not worried at all about gerard's offensive ability.
Hampton Road Admirals review...
*The classic ATD first line: a deft, skilled, game-breaker for a centre, the smart two-way forward on one wing, and the dominant power forward at right wing. You guys know that I'm a big Neely fan. He's a force. This is going to be a line to reckon with. And I think you can play them against the opposition's best line.
*I think Nystrom's out of place on the second line. Love the guy as an elite third liner. But he's a post-expansion guy with zero point-per-game seasons, and zero finishes in goals, assists and points. He's out of place.
*As for Kovalchuk: he's surly, he's moody. There are some issues there. And his performances when the season is on the line haven't been impressive. (Late in the season in 2005-06 when Atlanta had a shot at the playoffs, and in the 2007 playoffs). I think you picked him too soon, but I think he warrants selection as a second line LW. Kovalchuk-Gilmour combo has the potential to do a lot of damage.
*Solid two-way line. It would look even better with Nystrom there.
*Linseman's probably one of the most offensively dangerous fourth line players in the draft. What bugs me about him is he doesn't finish what he started. And it annoyed his teammates. He was an effective agitator, but eventually his 'mates got sick of cleaning up his battles.
*Applause on reuniting Hitchman-Shore. As I said before, I believe it's better to reunite defence pairings than forward lines. That's going to be a very tough pairing to play against. It might be my favourite pairing in the draft.
*Lester Patrick's a good player to have out there with Ching Johnson. Johnson's a rock, in more ways than one. Mobility is an issue for him. He finds a way to get there, he's smart, but some of the more explosive, intelligent players could cause problems for big Ching. That's why Patrick's a good fit.
*Joe Watson is the perfect No. 7 d-man. He doesn't excel at anything, which is what keeps him from being a top six. But he's good at just about everything, and he has a lot of character.
*I have concerns with your goaltending. Roy Worters is, for my money, the worst No. 1 in the draft. Several back-ups (Rayner, Lehman, Chabot, Vachon) were ahead of Worters on my list. I like Worters as a solid back-up, and you have to be a good guy to not have a mental breakdown playing behind the team he was on, but is he good enough to be an ATD No. 1?
*Roach is a good solid back-up. He's going to be called on to play about 30 games per year.
*I'm a big Jack Adams fan. Had him as a coach in an MLD. He's a tough, demanding tactician. There could issues between Adams and Kovalchuk, but he's going to love guys like Neely, Shore, Hitchman, Lalonde, Howe, Nystrom, Ching and Gilmour.
*The classic ATD first line: a deft, skilled, game-breaker for a centre, the smart two-way forward on one wing, and the dominant power forward at right wing. You guys know that I'm a big Neely fan. He's a force. This is going to be a line to reckon with. And I think you can play them against the opposition's best line.
*I think Nystrom's out of place on the second line. Love the guy as an elite third liner. But he's a post-expansion guy with zero point-per-game seasons, and zero finishes in goals, assists and points. He's out of place.
*As for Kovalchuk: he's surly, he's moody. There are some issues there. And his performances when the season is on the line haven't been impressive. (Late in the season in 2005-06 when Atlanta had a shot at the playoffs, and in the 2007 playoffs). I think you picked him too soon, but I think he warrants selection as a second line LW. Kovalchuk-Gilmour combo has the potential to do a lot of damage.
*Solid two-way line. It would look even better with Nystrom there.
*Linseman's probably one of the most offensively dangerous fourth line players in the draft. What bugs me about him is he doesn't finish what he started. And it annoyed his teammates. He was an effective agitator, but eventually his 'mates got sick of cleaning up his battles.
*Applause on reuniting Hitchman-Shore. As I said before, I believe it's better to reunite defence pairings than forward lines. That's going to be a very tough pairing to play against. It might be my favourite pairing in the draft.
*Lester Patrick's a good player to have out there with Ching Johnson. Johnson's a rock, in more ways than one. Mobility is an issue for him. He finds a way to get there, he's smart, but some of the more explosive, intelligent players could cause problems for big Ching. That's why Patrick's a good fit.
*Joe Watson is the perfect No. 7 d-man. He doesn't excel at anything, which is what keeps him from being a top six. But he's good at just about everything, and he has a lot of character.
*I have concerns with your goaltending. Roy Worters is, for my money, the worst No. 1 in the draft. Several back-ups (Rayner, Lehman, Chabot, Vachon) were ahead of Worters on my list. I like Worters as a solid back-up, and you have to be a good guy to not have a mental breakdown playing behind the team he was on, but is he good enough to be an ATD No. 1?
*Roach is a good solid back-up. He's going to be called on to play about 30 games per year.
*I'm a big Jack Adams fan. Had him as a coach in an MLD. He's a tough, demanding tactician. There could issues between Adams and Kovalchuk, but he's going to love guys like Neely, Shore, Hitchman, Lalonde, Howe, Nystrom, Ching and Gilmour.
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
In short - I love Hampton Roads. Gilmour and Howe are two players I'll champion for a spot in the top-100 until I'm dead. I won an ATD at the Leafs boards with Gilmour and Howe on my 2nd line. Between those two you have everything a good hockey player needs... except size. The Weldy Young pick made me go "uh oh" but when I look at the D-corps even with Weldy, it looks great, more than credible. Don't let GBC get you down on your goaltending. Worters definitely is a lower-end starter, and you knew that when you waited that long to get him, but he's not the worst. All those guys he mentioned are top backups, but not Worters' equal. This is a team that overall, Jack Adams is going to love. Aside from Kovalchuk, of course. Could this be the best team from a rookie GM? I can't say for sure as I haven't been here forever like some guys.
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
I don't know. I could be wrong. I probably am. (someone should quote that)
The draft history certainly says I'm wrong in the eyes of most people.
The two all-stars to none tells me he's better than Baun. He was also sent to two all-star games on his own merits in addition to the ones where he was a cup winner. Baun was sent to one ASG on his own merits. Both had similar skill sets, Reise was better offensively, I think, and I see no reason to say one or the other is better defensively or physically. Baun played for seven extra seasons. I don't know, I suppose that makes it close.
As for Mortson, his four earned ASGs indicate that he was always considered one of the best. The quotes about his GAA also are eye-catching. My last statements probably underrated him. I had him just one draft ago and already forgot how good he was
Kimberley Dynamiters review...
*I like reuniting lines in some cases. Not a fan of it in others. I think it's great you reunited the Nitro Line. I'm not sure if this a line that should be reunited in the ATD, at least if they're the top line. I don't buy Cashman and Hodge as top line guys. Cashman as a second line guy? Maybe. I don't think he has the skill to play on a top line. Hodge is a good second line scoring winger. Of course, Espo's the man. Such an awesome goal-scoring centre, and he's an underrated playmaker, too.
*Incidentally, Espo needs a letter. He's one of the best leaders in the draft. Top 10 leaders ever IMO. Top 15 at worst.
*I love two-thirds of the second line. Bucyk's a bonafide first line LW playing on the second line. He's big, strong and tough. Federko's underrated around here. Bottom line with Bernie is he's a top-notch playmaking centre. He scored at a 100-point clip six times. His playoff record is excellent. It's not just reflective of the mediocre Norris Division - those 18-point playoffs came before the Norris really tanked in quality. Top 10 in assists seven times. As a second line playmaker, he's very credible. I don't buy into Toppazzini in that role. His numbers are good for the O6 era. But no top 10 finishes in goals, assists or points. I want my second line guys to have evidence they can contribute offensively. And Rick Middleton would look really, really awesome on that line.
*I can understand why you want Middleton on that line - a really gifted two-way presence to give you a credible third scoring line. But I think it comes at the detriment of the second line. We had MacLeish and Topper on our third line last draft. It worked well. Maloney would fit nicely into that role.
*Scotty Davidson was viewed as the best player in the world prior to the First World War. It's too bad we lost him. And while he got into the HHOF based largely on those two seasons, that lack of longevity hurts him in this draft. I don't know how good he was defensively, but Meagher's a good defensive line player, and Wilson's an excellent player for that role. Do you go Middleton second line, Davidson third and Topper fourth? There's a thought.
*That's an excellent top three. Park's an all-round force, Leetch is supremely skilled and Bouchard's a rock. You have two legit No. 1 defencemen (Park's better than legit) and an excellent No. 2 who rates among the best defensive defencemen in the draft. It's not an overly deep defence corps, but damn, I love that top three.
*Remember what I said about arrbez Chelios-Fetisov connection? How'd you like to be a defensive player knowing that Leetch or Park will be on the ice for the majority of five-on-five shifts.
Vezina's one of those good bottom-tier No. 1 goalies in the class of guys like Belfour, Gump Worsley and Tiny Thompson. He's solid. In our division, he might be the third or fourth-best goalie. (I think we're in the same division.
*Love the Bob Johnson pick as coach. This is a Bob Johnson team. Lots of speed, skill and offensive ability. Outside of Tommy Ivan, he's probably the best players coach in the draft. A solid second-tier coach. One question: is Frank Boucher needed as an assistant coach? I like Boucher. (I'd damn well better. He's our first line centre). But not a fan of assistants in the ATD, unless I feel one is needed. Wouldn't get one if I had Badger Bob behind the bench.
*You'll probably need to play run-and-gun to win. Fine with your coach. I doubt you'll be trying a lot of line-matching. Just go scoring line against scoring line, don't worry about line-matching, and give your fourth liners 10-12 minutes per night.
Head Coach: Bob "Badger" Johnson
Assistant Coach: Frank Boucher
Captain: Butch Bouchard
Alternates: Johnny Bucyk, Brad Park
W. Cashman-P. Esposito-K. Hodge
J. Bucyk-B. Federko-J. Toppazzini
D. Maloney-R. MacLeish-R. Middleton
J. Wilson-R. Meagher-A. Davidson
P. Mondu
B. Park-E. Bouchard
B. Leetch-C. Huddy
M. Grant-D. Barkley
D. Awrey
G. Vezina
A. Rollins
*I like reuniting lines in some cases. Not a fan of it in others. I think it's great you reunited the Nitro Line. I'm not sure if this a line that should be reunited in the ATD, at least if they're the top line. I don't buy Cashman and Hodge as top line guys. Cashman as a second line guy? Maybe. I don't think he has the skill to play on a top line. Hodge is a good second line scoring winger. Of course, Espo's the man. Such an awesome goal-scoring centre, and he's an underrated playmaker, too.
*Incidentally, Espo needs a letter. He's one of the best leaders in the draft. Top 10 leaders ever IMO. Top 15 at worst.
*I love two-thirds of the second line. Bucyk's a bonafide first line LW playing on the second line. He's big, strong and tough. Federko's underrated around here. Bottom line with Bernie is he's a top-notch playmaking centre. He scored at a 100-point clip six times. His playoff record is excellent. It's not just reflective of the mediocre Norris Division - those 18-point playoffs came before the Norris really tanked in quality. Top 10 in assists seven times. As a second line playmaker, he's very credible. I don't buy into Toppazzini in that role. His numbers are good for the O6 era. But no top 10 finishes in goals, assists or points. I want my second line guys to have evidence they can contribute offensively. And Rick Middleton would look really, really awesome on that line.
*I can understand why you want Middleton on that line - a really gifted two-way presence to give you a credible third scoring line. But I think it comes at the detriment of the second line. We had MacLeish and Topper on our third line last draft. It worked well. Maloney would fit nicely into that role.
*Scotty Davidson was viewed as the best player in the world prior to the First World War. It's too bad we lost him. And while he got into the HHOF based largely on those two seasons, that lack of longevity hurts him in this draft. I don't know how good he was defensively, but Meagher's a good defensive line player, and Wilson's an excellent player for that role. Do you go Middleton second line, Davidson third and Topper fourth? There's a thought.
*That's an excellent top three. Park's an all-round force, Leetch is supremely skilled and Bouchard's a rock. You have two legit No. 1 defencemen (Park's better than legit) and an excellent No. 2 who rates among the best defensive defencemen in the draft. It's not an overly deep defence corps, but damn, I love that top three.
*Remember what I said about arrbez Chelios-Fetisov connection? How'd you like to be a defensive player knowing that Leetch or Park will be on the ice for the majority of five-on-five shifts.
Vezina's one of those good bottom-tier No. 1 goalies in the class of guys like Belfour, Gump Worsley and Tiny Thompson. He's solid. In our division, he might be the third or fourth-best goalie. (I think we're in the same division.
*Love the Bob Johnson pick as coach. This is a Bob Johnson team. Lots of speed, skill and offensive ability. Outside of Tommy Ivan, he's probably the best players coach in the draft. A solid second-tier coach. One question: is Frank Boucher needed as an assistant coach? I like Boucher. (I'd damn well better. He's our first line centre). But not a fan of assistants in the ATD, unless I feel one is needed. Wouldn't get one if I had Badger Bob behind the bench.
*You'll probably need to play run-and-gun to win. Fine with your coach. I doubt you'll be trying a lot of line-matching. Just go scoring line against scoring line, don't worry about line-matching, and give your fourth liners 10-12 minutes per night.
Head Coach: Bob "Badger" Johnson
Assistant Coach: Frank Boucher
Captain: Butch Bouchard
Alternates: Johnny Bucyk, Brad Park
W. Cashman-P. Esposito-K. Hodge
J. Bucyk-B. Federko-J. Toppazzini
D. Maloney-R. MacLeish-R. Middleton
J. Wilson-R. Meagher-A. Davidson
P. Mondu
B. Park-E. Bouchard
B. Leetch-C. Huddy
M. Grant-D. Barkley
D. Awrey
G. Vezina
A. Rollins
Killarney Country Bear Jamboree...
Last review of the night...
*First of all, it's great to have Champagne Wishes/doctordark back in the draft.
*Second of all, that's the best 1-2 centre punch in the draft. Morenz is an elite first line centre. No. 4 on my list. Schmidt's No. 10 on my list for centres. And you don't have to worry about line-matching, either. Morenz is very good defensively. Schmidt's as good defensively as any centre in the draft. And he's really, really good offensively, too.
*That first line is probably the best in their own zone of any first line in the draft. It's a big asset to have. I don't quite buy into Datsyuk as a front-line LW. He's had a couple big years and a big playoffs, but that's it. Aurie had two seasons in the top 10 for goals, three seasons for the top 10 in assists, and top in the top 10 for points. That's the resume for a good second line RW. I like Punch Broadbent more, and while Broadbent might not be as skilled as Aurie, he'll muck, grind and hit, and allow Morenz to concentrate on offence.
*If you do keep those lines, I like what you've given for Schmidt. Broadbent's tough and mean. He's small, but a lot of small guys are picked for their grit. He plays big. That's the important thing. Northcott has a pretty good track record for performance. But that line is all about Schmidt - one of the best two-way players, and one of the smartest players, to ever play the game. (He was top 30 in my HOH Top 100 list. I think he's top 20 for pappy).
*It's a scary thought when Guy Carbonneau might be the second-best defensive centre on a team. But he might just be that with Schmidt on your squad.
*raleh and I are big Glen Skov fans. We were prepared to pick him until you snuck him out from under our nose. (Wasn't the first time you did that). That's a very tough fourth line to play against.
*Neal Broten's a fine 13th forward. Good character. Will handle the role well. And he have to love his hockey sense when he gets in the line-up.
*Interesting to see the first and the third pairings. Savard-Cameron and Burrows-Sjoberg are polar opposites. Savard's the supremely steady two-way defenceman. Cameron's an offensive force out there who has one of the most dangerous weapons in the draft: a curved shot. Burrows is the quintessential steady third pairing guy. Sjoberg's a small, ultra-skilled pappy favourite.
*We really wanted Heller to be Doug Mohns partner. Excellent No. 4 who can be a No. 3.
*Don't know if Regehr's good enough for this level, but I love what he brings to the table as a No. 7 in terms of character and a hatred of losing.
*From the start of the draft, the goalie tandem we envisioned was Smith-Lehman. raleh really wanted Smith for the fourth round, and this is the first time he hasn't had Lehman. It's sacrilege. I think Lehman's an outstanding back-up, one of the best in the draft. Smith never had a heavy workload. Give him 50 games, give Lehman 30 games, and then let Battlin' Billy do his thing in the playoffs.
*Pete Green's an excellent coach. Again, a solid, second-tier coach with a history of winning.
Last review of the night...
*First of all, it's great to have Champagne Wishes/doctordark back in the draft.
*Second of all, that's the best 1-2 centre punch in the draft. Morenz is an elite first line centre. No. 4 on my list. Schmidt's No. 10 on my list for centres. And you don't have to worry about line-matching, either. Morenz is very good defensively. Schmidt's as good defensively as any centre in the draft. And he's really, really good offensively, too.
*That first line is probably the best in their own zone of any first line in the draft. It's a big asset to have. I don't quite buy into Datsyuk as a front-line LW. He's had a couple big years and a big playoffs, but that's it. Aurie had two seasons in the top 10 for goals, three seasons for the top 10 in assists, and top in the top 10 for points. That's the resume for a good second line RW. I like Punch Broadbent more, and while Broadbent might not be as skilled as Aurie, he'll muck, grind and hit, and allow Morenz to concentrate on offence.
*If you do keep those lines, I like what you've given for Schmidt. Broadbent's tough and mean. He's small, but a lot of small guys are picked for their grit. He plays big. That's the important thing. Northcott has a pretty good track record for performance. But that line is all about Schmidt - one of the best two-way players, and one of the smartest players, to ever play the game. (He was top 30 in my HOH Top 100 list. I think he's top 20 for pappy).
*It's a scary thought when Guy Carbonneau might be the second-best defensive centre on a team. But he might just be that with Schmidt on your squad.
*raleh and I are big Glen Skov fans. We were prepared to pick him until you snuck him out from under our nose. (Wasn't the first time you did that). That's a very tough fourth line to play against.
*Neal Broten's a fine 13th forward. Good character. Will handle the role well. And he have to love his hockey sense when he gets in the line-up.
*Interesting to see the first and the third pairings. Savard-Cameron and Burrows-Sjoberg are polar opposites. Savard's the supremely steady two-way defenceman. Cameron's an offensive force out there who has one of the most dangerous weapons in the draft: a curved shot. Burrows is the quintessential steady third pairing guy. Sjoberg's a small, ultra-skilled pappy favourite.
*We really wanted Heller to be Doug Mohns partner. Excellent No. 4 who can be a No. 3.
*Don't know if Regehr's good enough for this level, but I love what he brings to the table as a No. 7 in terms of character and a hatred of losing.
*From the start of the draft, the goalie tandem we envisioned was Smith-Lehman. raleh really wanted Smith for the fourth round, and this is the first time he hasn't had Lehman. It's sacrilege. I think Lehman's an outstanding back-up, one of the best in the draft. Smith never had a heavy workload. Give him 50 games, give Lehman 30 games, and then let Battlin' Billy do his thing in the playoffs.
*Pete Green's an excellent coach. Again, a solid, second-tier coach with a history of winning.
That's it for tonight, gents. 12 down, 16 to go. Tomorrow's reviews will be Wisent (assuming he picks before it's time to write reviews), papershoes, Trail and Minnesota.
Last edited:
EagleBelfour
Registered User
Detroit Falcons
(1930-1932)
Coach: Fred Shero
Dickie Moore (A) - Sid Abel (C) - Bill Mosienko
Busher Jackson - Jacques Lemaire - Lanny McDonald (A)
Esa Tikkanen - Fleming Mackell - Claude Lemieux
Gordon Roberts - Tommy Dunderdale - Ken Randall
Buddy O'Connor - Ernie Russell
Raymond Bourque (A) - Alexander Ragulin
Jimmy Thomson - Gus Mortson
THE GOLD DUST TWINS [1946-1952]
Lloyd Cook - Alexander Gusev
Taffy Abel
Frank Brimsek
Riley Hern
Powerplay:
Dickie Moore - Sid Abel - Bill Mosienko
Raymond Bourque - Jimmy Thomson
Busher Jackson - Tommy Dunderdale - Lanny McDonald
Alexander Ragulin - Lloyd Cook
Penalty Kill:
Jacques Lemaire - Claude Lemieux
Raymond Bourque - Alexander Ragulin
Esa Tikkanen - Fleming Mackell
Jimmy Thomson - Gus Mortson
Coach: Fred Shero
Dickie Moore (A) - Sid Abel (C) - Bill Mosienko
Busher Jackson - Jacques Lemaire - Lanny McDonald (A)
Esa Tikkanen - Fleming Mackell - Claude Lemieux
Gordon Roberts - Tommy Dunderdale - Ken Randall
Buddy O'Connor - Ernie Russell
Raymond Bourque (A) - Alexander Ragulin
Jimmy Thomson - Gus Mortson
THE GOLD DUST TWINS [1946-1952]
Lloyd Cook - Alexander Gusev
Taffy Abel
Frank Brimsek
Riley Hern
Powerplay:
Dickie Moore - Sid Abel - Bill Mosienko
Raymond Bourque - Jimmy Thomson
Busher Jackson - Tommy Dunderdale - Lanny McDonald
Alexander Ragulin - Lloyd Cook
Penalty Kill:
Jacques Lemaire - Claude Lemieux
Raymond Bourque - Alexander Ragulin
Esa Tikkanen - Fleming Mackell
Jimmy Thomson - Gus Mortson
