ATD #10, René Lecavalier Quarterfinals. Stockholm Subban (6) vs Rocket de Montrea (3)

[MXD]

Junior matchup.

Stockholm Subbans​

GM: chaosrevolver & Booootthh
Coaches: Anatoli Tarasov, Jacques Lemaire

Valeri Kamensky - Sergei Fedorov - Reggie Leach
Patrick Elias - Pat Lafontaine (A) - Mike Gartner
J.P. Parise - Joel Otto - Jean Pronovost
Ross Lonsberry - Mel Bridgman - Jamie Langenbrunner
extras: Rick Meagher

Viacheslav Fetisov (A) - Vladimir Konstantinov
Scott Niedermayer (C) - Bobby Baun
Derian Hatcher - Steve Duchesne
extra: Vasili Pervukhin

Martin Brodeur
Chico Resch

Power play units:
PP1: Valery Kamensky - Sergei Fedorov - Reggie Leach - Slava Fetisov - Steve Duchesne
PP2: Patrik Elias - Pat LaFontaine - Mike Gartner - Scott Niedermayer - Jean Pronovost

Penalty killing units:
PK1: Pronovost - Fedorov - Fetisov - Konstantinov
PK2: Parise - Otto - Niedermayer - Baun


VS

Rocket de Montreal​

GM: God Bless Canada & raleh
Coach: Al Arbour

Alexander Ovechkin - Howie Morenz (A) - Bernie Geoffrion (C)
Busher Jackson - Joe Primeau - Tod Sloan
Dick Duff - Rick MacLeish - Jerry Toppazzini
Keith Tkachuk - Red Sullivan - John McKenzie
extras: Art Chapman, Peter McNab

Serge Savard (A) - Jimmy Thomson
Wally Stanowski - Moose Vasko
Jimmy Watson - Behn Wilson
extra: Joe Watson

Gump Worsley
Hugh Lehman

Power play units:
PP1: Ovechkin - Morenz - Sloan - Geoffrion - Thomson
PP2: Jackson - Primeau - MacLeish - Savard - Vasko

Penalty killing units:
PK1: Duff - MacLeish - Watson - Vasko
PK2: Toppazzini - Primeau - Savard - Stanowski

Click to read more...

 

[God Bless Canada]

Thanks for starting this, MXD.

Good luck to the Subbans.

Here are our full penalty killing units:

PK1: Duff-MacLeish-Watson-Vasko
PK2: Toppazzini-Primeau-Savard-Stanowski
PK3: McKenzie-Morenz-Thomson-Wilson
PK4: Sloan-Sullivan-Watson-Savard

I'll post my thoughts on the series later tonight, but the one thing that stands out is the speed of both teams. We're one of the few teams that can keep up with the Subbans, and vice-versa.

We believe, though, that we have a significant edge behind the bench (not so much in coaching quality, but in terms of coaching that fits), and the advantage in team defence, offensive depth, overall depth and team toughness. Those should counteract the edge that the Subbans have in net, which is an advantage, but not as big as some might think.

 

[chaosrevolver]

God damnit...the last team I wanted to face.

Well first of all, GBC surely you don't actually think you have the better defense. If you could, please explain what you meant by "TEAM DEFENSE." Because, with all due respect, I not only believe I am better in the top-3, but also I believe our team is deep enough that we have the advantage on the backend. Now I will admit that I am not familiar with many of your players not named Savard so maybe you can help me with that. But I don't see any reason why your defense is better than mine.

 

[raleh]

GBC's idea to get Stanowski to play with Vasko on that second pairing turned out to be a genius move. Now which of the Subban's top two lines wants to be their *****?

Also, I headed downstairs into the Rocket locker room last night to see how the team was doing after a somewhat under preforming regular season. While I was there I overheard Behn Wilson taking bets as to how many games it will take before he give Lafontaine his first concussion. Also, Peter McNab was offering Pie Mckenzie and Red Sullivan 20 bucks each if they pull a Sean Avery on Brodeur on the team's first powerplay.

 

[raleh]

God damnit...the last team I wanted to face.

Well first of all, GBC surely you don't actually think you have the better defense. If you could, please explain what you meant by "TEAM DEFENSE." Because, with all due respect, I not only believe I am better in the top-3, but also I believe our team is deep enough that we have the advantage on the backend. Now I will admit that I am not familiar with many of your players not named Savard so maybe you can help me with that. But I don't see any reason why your defense is better than mine.

I'll step in here:

I don't think he meant straight up backline. You have a great top three and I think we'll be grasping at straws to say that Savard-Thomson-Vasko is better than your big three. What he meant by team defense is the team's ability to defend as a whole. In guys like MacLeish, Duff, Topper, and Sloan we think we have the better group of defensive forwards. Well, two way forwards because we're expecting that third line to score as well.

Also, the philosophy behind our defensive pairings. Savard, as you know, is one of the best shut down defensemen of all time. Thomson was one of the key cogs in those Leaf dynasty teams and is our best offensive weapon from the blueline. Our second pairing, Stanowski and Vasko are somewhat similar. They're both very big. They can hit and they can clear the front of the net. But at the same time, they're one of the fastest defensive duos in the draft. They'll look great defending against your Fedorov line, although GBC and I haven't yet agreed on that. Then we got Jimmy Watson, a good all around dman who will basically do what we tell him to, and big Behn who will be a son of a ***** who will likely take some chances in order to lay a big hit.

So when he says team defense he certainly does not mean personnel on the back end. Absolutely nothing wrong with Fetisov et al. It's just our team's ability to play defense together, as a whole, is an advantage for us. Not as much as it would be in a series against a different team. But we still think it's an advantage.

 

[chaosrevolver]

I'll step in here:

I don't think he meant straight up backline. You have a great top three and I think we'll be grasping at straws to say that Savard-Thomson-Vasko is better than your big three. What he meant by team defense is the team's ability to defend as a whole. In guys like MacLeish, Duff, Topper, and Sloan we think we have the better group of defensive forwards. Well, two way forwards because we're expecting that third line to score as well.

Also, the philosophy behind our defensive pairings. Savard, as you know, is one of the best shut down defensemen of all time. Thomson was one of the key cogs in those Leaf dynasty teams and is our best offensive weapon from the blueline. Our second pairing, Stanowski and Vasko are somewhat similar. They're both very big. They can hit and they can clear the front of the net. But at the same time, they're one of the fastest defensive duos in the draft. They'll look great defending against your Fedorov line, although GBC and I haven't yet agreed on that. Then we got Jimmy Watson, a good all around dman who will basically do what we tell him to, and big Behn who will be a son of a ***** who will likely take some chances in order to lay a big hit.

So when he says team defense he certainly does not mean personnel on the back end. Absolutely nothing wrong with Fetisov et al. It's just our team's ability to play defense together, as a whole, is an advantage for us. Not as much as it would be in a series against a different team. But we still think it's an advantage.

I figured that's what he meant. But my defense advantage added to Fedorov-Elias-Parise-Otto-Pronovost-Bridgman-Lonsberry influences me enough that I don't see how your team, as a whole, has better defense. Especially with my goaltending being an advantage.

You definetly have some physicality on your backend, I can't deny that. But I am confident that our puck possession game can beat them. Our speed, imo, can also draw alot of penalties which will lead to obviously, powerplay opportunities. Yes, your team is fast, but I don't think they are as fast as us.

 

[God Bless Canada]

Our blue-line top three probably isn't as good as the Subbans, although I don't think the gap between Vasko and Konstantinov is significant. But I think we have better depth on defence, and I think ours is a better-built defence.

All six of our defencemen are smart and mobile. With the exception of Savard, all of them are physically aggressive. And Savard doesn't have to be physically aggressive. With his size, mobility, reach and anticipation, he'll shut you down with those attributes. (And make no mistake about it, Savard is the best defenceman in his own zone in this series).

I think a guy like Derian Hatcher's in a lot of trouble in this series. He's not mobile. And that plays into our hands. And Hatcher's partner is...Steve Duchesne? Good luck with that one.

In terms of team defence, one of our edges is that all four of our centres can play against the opposition's top line. You can't say that about Lafontaine. We'll try to get the MacLeish line out there against the Fedorov line as much as we can, but if we have the Morenz line out there, or the Primeau line out there, we're okay.

We're going to try to get the Stanowski-Vasko tandem out there as much as possible against the Fedorov line. And that's a difference-maker in the series. You want to talk about speed? Stanowski-Vasko is one of the fastest tandems in the draft. They're outstanding skaters. They're excellent defensively and they can move the puck. Here's the kicker: they're both physical. The Fedorov line is not. They're quick and skilled, but when it comes time to play against the toughies on our second pairing, they'll be in trouble.

The presence of Duff and Toppazzini on our third line gives us more physical play, too. Duff's the best defensive forward from the bottom two lines of either team.

As much as I like Joel Otto, I like MacLeish more. And as much as I like Parise and Pronovost, I think they're better-suited to fourth line grinder roles than defensive guys, especially since they'll be out there against Geoffrion or Jackson - two ultra-skilled players with grit. And as much as I like Otto, I don't think he has the mobility to line up against Morenz.

You have an edge in net with Brodeur, but it's not as big as you think. Gump showed just how good he was once he arrived in Montreal. Four straight seasons with a GAA under 2.00, and a fifth season with a GAA of 2.27. With the exception of the fifth year, his GAA dropped each season. In that fifth year, his GAA was .02 higher in the post-season. He had to be a miracle worker in New York for that team to succeed. No goalie, ever, could have lifted that putrid Rangers organization to series wins in 56 or 57 (against Montreal) or in 62 (against Toronto).

As I said off the top, I think we have a big edge in coaching. We have the best coach in the series, by a fair margin. And I think our coach fits our team more. I just don't know if Tarasov can succeed coaching "modern" players. It's a mismatch. Tarasov's like Imlach: you need the absolutely right team for him to succeed. I'm not sure if this is the right team. And I don't know about the chemistry between Tarasov and Lemaire. I think you need a Pat Quinn type to offset Tarasov. Tarasov and Lemaire are excellent coaches with brilliant minds for the game, but I don't think they're great together.

 

[chaosrevolver]

Our blue-line top three probably isn't as good as the Subbans, although I don't think the gap between Vasko and Konstantinov is significant. But I think we have better depth on defence, and I think ours is a better-built defence.

I think a guy like Derian Hatcher's in a lot of trouble in this series. He's not mobile. And that plays into our hands. And Hatcher's partner is...Steve Duchesne? Good luck with that one.

I don't agree. I think our top-4 is built as well as anyone in this draft. And I think your making Hatcher-Duchesne worse than they really are as a pairing. Hatcher cant have a slow rearguard on defense because it would make an extremely slow defensive pairing. Duchesne was a great skater with good puck moving ability. In my opinion, that is a really nice compliment to Derian Hatcher's in your face defensive and physical presence.

As much as I like Joel Otto, I like MacLeish more. And as much as I like Parise and Pronovost, I think they're better-suited to fourth line grinder roles than defensive guys, especially since they'll be out there against Geoffrion or Jackson - two ultra-skilled players with grit. And as much as I like Otto, I don't think he has the mobility to line up against Morenz.

I don't see why using Pronovost as a 4th-liner would be useful considering his offensive abilities aswell. 774 career points in 998 games. He had 6 seasons of 30+ goals and according to LOH, "he was a pillar of consistency, cruising his lane with speed and determination, defending against foes, digging into corners, making smart passes, and picking up the big goals." Sounds like the perfect two-way player to me and using him on the 4th-line would diminish his offensive capabilities in my opinion. Parise I can see, but once again he had some offensive ability as well. Parise had 7 seasons of 20+ goals and 7 seasons of 50+ points while also picking up 58 points in 86 playoff games. Using him in the 4th-line would once again diminish his scoring abilities. In my opinion, both Parise and Pronovost are being used correctly on our 3rd line and compliment Otto well.

You have an edge in net with Brodeur, but it's not as big as you think.

Don't put words in my mouth. I never once said I think it's a big edge or that I even thought it was. I am well aware of both goaltenders accomplishments.

As I said off the top, I think we have a big edge in coaching. We have the best coach in the series, by a fair margin. And I think our coach fits our team more. I just don't know if Tarasov can succeed coaching "modern" players. It's a mismatch. Tarasov's like Imlach: you need the absolutely right team for him to succeed. I'm not sure if this is the right team. And I don't know about the chemistry between Tarasov and Lemaire. I think you need a Pat Quinn type to offset Tarasov. Tarasov and Lemaire are excellent coaches with brilliant minds for the game, but I don't think they're great together.

This is where ill disagree greatly. I wont argue that Al Arbour is a better coach than both of mine. But to say you have a "big edge." Oh come on, thats overexaggerating. Im pretty sure players like playing for a winner. Tarasov was a winner. I don't care if its "modern" players. Tarasov's a winner and puck possession is his fortay. He was fantastic at coaching that style and thats exactly why he was brought in here. Chemistry might be interesting between my two coaches, but as long as they do their respective duties there shouldn't be a problem. I dont think that just because you have two dictating coaches working together, they just wont work well together.

 

[God Bless Canada]

I don't agree. I think our top-4 is built as well as anyone in this draft. And I think your making Hatcher-Duchesne worse than they really are as a pairing. Hatcher cant have a slow rearguard on defense because it would make an extremely slow defensive pairing. Duchesne was a great skater with good puck moving ability. In my opinion, that is a really nice compliment to Derian Hatcher's in your face defensive and physical presence.

I don't see why using Pronovost as a 4th-liner would be useful considering his offensive abilities aswell. 774 career points in 998 games. He had 6 seasons of 30+ goals and according to LOH, "he was a pillar of consistency, cruising his lane with speed and determination, defending against foes, digging into corners, making smart passes, and picking up the big goals." Sounds like the perfect two-way player to me and using him on the 4th-line would diminish his offensive capabilities in my opinion. Parise I can see, but once again he had some offensive ability as well. Parise had 7 seasons of 20+ goals and 7 seasons of 50+ points while also picking up 58 points in 86 playoff games. Using him in the 4th-line would once again diminish his scoring abilities. In my opinion, both Parise and Pronovost are being used correctly on our 3rd line and compliment Otto well.

Don't put words in my mouth. I never once said I think it's a big edge or that I even thought it was. I am well aware of both goaltenders accomplishments.

This is where ill disagree greatly. I wont argue that Al Arbour is a better coach than both of mine. But to say you have a "big edge." Oh come on, thats overexaggerating. Im pretty sure players like playing for a winner. Tarasov was a winner. I don't care if its "modern" players. Tarasov's a winner and puck possession is his fortay. He was fantastic at coaching that style and thats exactly why he was brought in here. Chemistry might be interesting between my two coaches, but as long as they do their respective duties there shouldn't be a problem. I dont think that just because you have two dictating coaches working together, they just wont work well together.

I don't think Hatcher and Duchesne will work. I watched Steve Duchesne play. I know what he's about. And the reality is the guy could be a frustrating player. He was pretty one-dimensional most of his career. A pretty soft defenceman. He has excellent skill and strong offensive instincts. But I don't think he's what you need to partner with Hatcher against a team with Le Rocket's speed. It was prudent to look for a speedy guy to partner with Hatcher, but Duchesne was not the answer. You needed someone with more defensive reliability. Especially in our division.

I guess I'm looking for someone with a little more defensive reliability than Pronovost to play on the third line. As I said before, I like him as a fourth liner with his grit and ability to provide secondary scoring. (A key for us in selecting third and fourth line guys - an ability to do the job required first of all, but have the skill to chip in some offence now and then). But are Pronovost and Parise good enough defensively to play two-way line roles?

When I made the Brodeur/Gump comment, it was directed to everyone in general. Not specifically at you.

My problem with Tarasov the coach is his coaching systems and approach came from his belief in Communism. There's a great book on the 72 Summit Series (I think it's called Cold War). One chapter looks at Tarasov's Communist beliefs and how they shaped his coaching. That's why I don't think he's a natural fit for an ATD team, unless you go strictly with his type of players. And I don't think he fits with Lemaire. Both are stern. Both are very demanding.

One of the reasons we wanted Arbour so much is his ability to work with all types of teams. Same goes for Tommy Ivan. Arbour can coach the offensive team or the defensive team. He expects the best from players, he expects consistent effort and hard work, he holds them accountable, but he's also reasonable. I think Arbour's one of the best ever, but you can never go wrong with Arbour as a coach.

 

[chaosrevolver]

I guess I'm looking for someone with a little more defensive reliability than Pronovost to play on the third line. As I said before, I like him as a fourth liner with his grit and ability to provide secondary scoring. (A key for us in selecting third and fourth line guys - an ability to do the job required first of all, but have the skill to chip in some offence now and then). But are Pronovost and Parise good enough defensively to play two-way line roles?

I don't see why they wouldn't be good enough defensively. Everything I have found on both of them describes each of them as very good defensively. Elite defensively? No, and I won't try to argue that they are. But good enough for my third line, thats for sure.

My problem with Tarasov the coach is his coaching systems and approach came from his belief in Communism. There's a great book on the 72 Summit Series (I think it's called Cold War). One chapter looks at Tarasov's Communist beliefs and how they shaped his coaching. That's why I don't think he's a natural fit for an ATD team, unless you go strictly with his type of players. And I don't think he fits with Lemaire. Both are stern. Both are very demanding.

One of the reasons we wanted Arbour so much is his ability to work with all types of teams. Same goes for Tommy Ivan. Arbour can coach the offensive team or the defensive team. He expects the best from players, he expects consistent effort and hard work, he holds them accountable, but he's also reasonable. I think Arbour's one of the best ever, but you can never go wrong with Arbour as a coach.

Ill try and check that book out about Tarasov. I still think the chemistry between the two coaches and the modernizing of my team with Tarasov is being overblown but nevertheless, I don't think we will ever agree on that subject.

I am well aware that Arbour is one of the best coaches of all-time

 

[MXD]

Hummm.. I had those two teams 1st and 2nd (not necessarily in that order), so a pretty good team will be gone by the end of the first round.

 

[chaosrevolver]

Hummm.. I had those two teams 1st and 2nd (not necessarily in that order), so a pretty good team will be gone by the end of the first round.

Nice to even be mentioned as a good team in the same breath as GBC and Raleh who are both too fantastic GMs.

Good luck to you two in the series. Hopefully it will be a close and exciting one.

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

Game 1: The Need for Speed

The opening face-off of the series is Sergei Fedorov against Howie Morenz, that match-up is also the story of the night. Five minutes into the first Fedorov gets a breakaway but Morenz catches him, strips him of the puck. Morenz weaves his way through the Subbans, as he`s going one on one with Fetisov, Fedorov strips Morenz of the puck, passes to Kamensky who passes to Leach in the slot scoring the 1st goal of the series. The fast paced play continued to deny both teams chances as the defences were reacting faster than the offences. Late in the second Morenz was able to score a power play goal. Montreal pressed the offence in the 3rd but Brodeur shut the door. With minutes left, Morenz was in the clear but Fedorov was gaining fast, Morenz passed quick and Geoffrion scored on the one timer.

Montreal wins 2-1.

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

Game 2: Tilting at Windmills

Lafontaine gets off to a great start, creating opportunities for himself and his linemates. After a few stunning sales, Arbour makes the call to put Savard and Thomson against Lafontaine. The move pays serious dividends, Lafontaine can`t get the puck into a spot for a good shot. MacLeish and Duff have a series of good shifts putting massive pressure on Brodeur, but with absolutely no luck. After a gruelling defensive affair, it looks like the end was in sight, Howie Morenz is on a breakaway. Fakes left, fakes right, goes left, gets it high, GLOVE SAVE BY BRODEUR! We`re going to overtime. 1st overtime decides nothing. Midway through the 2nd overtime, Hatcher tries to move Sloan from the crease, but clips Brodeur in the process, Duchesne loses sight of Jackson who burries a snapshot.

Montreal wins 1-0 and leads the series 2-0.

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

Game 3: The Best Offence...

The first 10 minutes of the game reflect the last game, a tough defencive game. A bad penalty by Sullivan changes that when Fetisov blasts a point shot in. Being down leads Montreal to open up, hoping for a repeat of game 1. But Scott Neidermeyer has other ideas, gets to the Montreal line, give and go with Elias ends with Nieds setting up a speeding Gartner for the 2-0 goal. Montreal is battling for a comeback but Fetisov and Konstantinov are keeping Brodeur very well protected. Early in the 3rd, Ovechkin powers past Baun, out waits Brodeur and roofs a back hand to give Montreal new life. Montreal is pressing hard, but Brodeur and the Subbans` defence is holding the fort. With minutes to go a brilliant pass from Fetisov springs Fedorov on a breakaway. Fakes a slapshot and undress Worsley to put the nail in the coffin.

Stockholm Subbans win 3-1, Montreal leads the series 2-1.

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

Game 4: It`s the end of the World as we know it, but I feel fine.

Geoffrion scores an early goal to give the game a more wide open feel. But as soon as it opens up, Stockholm steps up. Lafontaine scores on a great individual effort. Fetisov has a great rush, sets up Kamensky for the go a head goal. With that, Montreal tries a different technique and tightens up. This suits Stockholm just fine, they make no mistakes, but have no urgency. With ten minutes left in the 3rd, Montreal tries to pressure, but, it`s too little too late. Brodeur is phenominal and Stockholm wins.

Stockholm wins 2-1 and ties the series 2-2.

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

Game 5: Floodgates

Learning from the previous games mistake, the Rocket de Montreal come out all guns blazing. Bernie Geoffrion scores on the first shift of the game. Five minutes latter, Tod Sloan adds a goal. A goal by Fetisov closes the gap. Early in the 2nd goals by Busher Jackson and Bernie Geoffrion give Montreal a strong lead. Due to a series of strong saves, Brodeur is able to help stop the tide and slow the game down. Stockholm attempts to scratch and claw their way back into the game with a Sergei Fedorov goal. But a quick reply from Howie Morenz dashes their hopes.

Montreal wins 5-2 to take a 3-2 series lead.

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

Game 6: Sinners and Saints

Midway through the first, Howie Morenz scores a power play goal. And with that, the gloves come off. Lonsberry and Tkachuk fight. Konstantinov starts to really get both sides fired up with clean but devastating hits to Morenz and Primeau. This leads to Ovechkin getting the elbow up on Vlad the Impaler. Reggie Leach ties on the ensuing power play. For the rest of even strength the hard hitting defence first play continues, sending the game to overtime. Midway through the overtime period, Morenz heads on Fetisov one on one, Fetisov levels Morenz and passes up to Fedorov. Fedorov gets stripped of the puck by Savard who passes to the recovering Morenz. Morenz on a breakaway. SCORES! Montreal wins.

Montreal wins 2-1 in OT, Montreal wins the series 4 games to 2.


Three Stars:
1st: Howie Morenz
2nd: Martin Brodeur
3rd: Viacheslav Fetisov

 

[God Bless Canada]

Thanks for the series, chaos. We'll see you next draft. Or in MLD 10. Whatevs. But I hope I won't have to face you in the next draft, or the draft after.

Bring on the Devils. Maybe. Or will it be the Maroons?

 

[raleh]

Good series Chaos. It says something about your drafting abilities that you got two of the three stars on your roster! Looking forward to your next entry.

 

[chaosrevolver]

Thanks guys. Great series. Not really surprised by the result..(Figured id get in **** for choosing a modern team but meh..)...it was a really fun team to put together so im happy on that and losing to a team I put #1 in the division..isnt a bad thing.