Overall, I've got Clint Benedict 8th on my list and Brimsek 11th. Brimsek was a very good playoff performer. His legacy could of been more impressive like many if he didn't missed 3 prime years due to the war.
Man, every time you make a post I can't help but notice how often we think so alike.
So you agree Regina has the better goalie. Good
The order is right, with Ragulin as the 4th D. I don't see how Lionel Conacher is more of a playoff ''beast'' than a Raymond Bourque or the Gold Dust Twins. All of them were able to elevate their game come playoffs.
I never said Conacher was any more of a beast than Bourque. Come on, it's Bourque, what more can we say about the Gordie Howe of defensemen?
You're selling my 2nd pairing advantage very short. Jimmy Thomson and Gus Mortson edge over Lionel Conacher but especially Joe Simpson is huge.
Hey, all I said was that we have the best and worst 2nd pairing defensemen. As in, Conacher is the best of the four, and Simpson is the worst. I think you agree, you just don't realize it.
No one needs to explain why the Twins work. It's a great real-life pairing. I like Simpson with Conacher because it allows Conacher to focus more on his true strengths - using his great size to lay the body, clear the crease, and block shots. He can move the puck if he has to, but the speedy Simpson will make that his role.
Although Conacher is a fantastic #2 defenseman and ahead of Thomson, Simpson is IMO not someone I would play #4 minutes, but more #5 or #6 minutes.
Because Simpson is not being used on the PK at all, I would expect that when all is said and done he will end up 5th/6th in minutes played among defensemen.
It's undeniable that Coulter is incredible to have as a 3rd pairing defenseman, but I feel both Gusev and Cook are better overall players than Jack Marshall, even though the latest is in the HHOF. Just for the enjoyment, I'll post yet again my rant on them:
''So, I'll have the advocate for my third pairing. If you don't know them, click on the players link. Lloyd is a tremendous offensive defenseman. His offensive instinct brought him 3 Retro Norris in the PCHA. 4 time scoring leader among D, 5 time goalscoring leader among D. He didn't shied away from using his body. I discover Cook last draft when BM reunited the famous Cook-Duncan duo, I feel both of them are extremely underrated and deserve better fate (especially Duncan as a 7th D!). He's an elite 5th defenseman is paired up with a good defensive defenseman. Alexander Gusev is the strong defensive presence. I was watching the summit series not long ago the famous new years eve CCCP-Canadiens games and I focus my attention to #2, and I was extremely impress. He was playing first PP time with Vasiliev, but except his booming shot you don't except a strong offensive game from Gusev. However, Gusev was very big and has a strong reach. he was always well position and was a good skater for his ice. What I was surprise to see is how good of a good passer he was, especially the first pass in the defensive zone. Always on the tape, VERY seldomly does he miss a pass on the transition. He was also a strong leader, wearing a letter most of his career.''
Marshall is absolutely in the same category. Unfortunately there are no NHA all-star teams but he very well could have been on them. He was a defensive presence and he could skate and play physical. And having won the cup six times in an era where your top-6 played almost the whole game, you have to think his play had a lot to do with it and he's got to be a leader, too. His offensive play is underrated but don't forget that in his younger years he was a scoring star who led his league twice in the regular season and then twice in the playoffs. We're getting a little bit of everything out of Marshall and all things considered I don't think you can conclusively say Gusev or Cook is better.
Pretend it's 1920, Marshall has just retired and Cook is just winding down. Hockey pundits sit around a table smking cigars and one says "so fellas, you have to win one game for the cup. Who do you want on your blueline, Marshall or Cook?" How do they all respond?
- Lemaire was an incredible playoff performer who could elevate his game in the playoffs. I saw him play for 15 games, and he was a very good passer from what I've saw, especially taking advantage of his speedy wingers in the neutral zone. Jackson and McDonald should be complemented pretty well.
It's a good thing he has good wingers. He's used to having the best winger in the league. How will he do when he's only got the 20th-best winger in this league? You can say he was a good passer, but where are the results? Surely with Lafleur he could have put up better assist totals than that. I'm not buying his playmaking. No doubt he was a good playoff performer though.
- As much as I like and respect Odie Cleghorn, but especially Tommy Phillips, the edge on my second line is as good as it can get. I've got Busher Jackson who's one of the best left winger of all-time. His speed, crestivity, scoring ability and his tenacity are abilities that few can match. Lanny McDonald was an incredible goalscorer with speed and was not afraid of anyone.
Phillips and Cleghorn were both incredible goalscorers with speed and neither was afraid of anyone.
Although there is an edge on the wings... Ullman vs. Lemaire? Come on... the 2nd lines are a wash.
- With the likes of both Cleghorn and Horner on your lineup, I think my clutch team with a lot of firepower could take advantage on the PP on some of the penalties you'll take.
That's where Ramsay and Luce come in. They killed penalties better than the late 70's Habs. They'll be fine here.
- I talk a lot about clutch scoring, but one of my biggest strenght is that all my players through my lineup elevate their game in the playoffs. I've got some of the best playoff performer on my lineup with Dickie Moore, Esa Tikkanen, Claude Lemieux, Raymond Bourque and awesome supporting cast with Sid Abel, Jacques Lemaire, Fleming Mackell, the Gold Dust Twins. I think it's important to not sell my third line short, who can and will score clutch goals while being grest defensively, shadow their opponent and be pesky and aggressive. It's one of the toughess line to ever play against in the playoffs that I've saw since I am in the ATD.
I'm not disputing that there's some clutch scoring there, because there is. But let's not equate peskiness to defensive play. MacKell and Lemieux aren't defensive stars. Is the line as a whole defensive enough to stop Lafleur/Sittler/Joliat? Or just knock off Joliat's cap a few times?
A couple more things:
One thing that could prove to be the undoing for Detroit, is their lack of right-handed defensemen. You know they say you can never have too many right-shooting defensemen.
Detroit has one in their current lineup - and it's Jim Thomson. And he's on the left side. So two pairings have two left-shooting defensemen, and the other one, a natural pairing, has them swapped from what they naturally prefer. This doesn't bode well for Detroit.
Regina, on the other hand, was careful to pair left shooters with right shooters and align them naturally. The exception is the 3rd pairing where Art Coulter, a right shooter, is over on the left. Regina has five of six defensemen playing their side. Detroit has two.
Lastly, considering we are now the underdog team, if there was ever a time for Tommy Gorman to work his magic and get a superhuman effort from his team, it's now. Look what Alex Connell had to say about his abilities as a coach:
"You know Gorman is like a tonicâ€, he said. “He can make you do things you never thought yourself capable of".
Dave Trottier said:
"Tommy’s the man who developed the harmony. Remember that."
And his captain, Hooley Smith, had this to say:
"boy, he could make you feel like the best player in the league. Then you’d get out there and really play hockey. Gorman knows how to inspire his players"
If Gorman can work his magic for a few games, couple that with a better goalie, better defensive alignments, a stronger checking line, and exploiting Mosienko and Lemaire, who are outmatched, Regina will take this.
