ATD 2015 - Draft Thread IV

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Value is key in evaluating teams? I mean on a large scale, really? Whether or not you got Grant Fuhr at a good value to me is irrelevant. He's a low end ATD goalie, especially in leagues with less than 30 teams. Yet he's dominated the ATD.

Shouldn't who you have on your roster, and how it gels, and whether or not it is coheasive be the main factors?

Nobody cares about value when evaluating finished products. Value is important in getting to the finished product.

 

[Sturminator]

Yet he's dominated the ATD.

Correction...his teams have dominated the ATD. Of course, the teams that won with Fuhr could have won with a lot of goalies.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Nobody cares about value when evaluating finished products. Value is important in getting to the finished product.

That doesn't change the fact that players like Grant Fuhr are low end starters. Value is completely subjective as well.

 

[ImporterExporter]

The 20th best center of all-time is drafted by the beginning of the 3rd round at the latest, and often at the end of the 2nd round. The 20th best goalie of all time is drafted in the 6th or 7th round.

And again, how does this change the argument that the 20th ranked C isn't a massive downgrade from the #1 C?

Sure there are more C's drafted. You need 4 of them, i get that. I also get that once you get past the first 2 or 3 tiers of G's you might as well just wait a bunch of rounds because it doesn't really matter who you take at that point.

But you (i don't mean any one person in particular) can't sit here and say well man that's a low end 1st line C (20th ranked) is a weak point, and then say, oh there isn't as big a gap when looking at a position most of agree is more important to team success anyway (G).

 

[jarek]

Shouldn't who you have on your roster, and how it gels, and whether or not it is coheasive be the main factors?

Yep.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

And again, how does this change the argument that the 20th ranked C isn't a massive downgrade from the #1 C?

The 20th ranked C is a large downgrade from the #1 C.

Sure there are more C's drafted. You need 4 of them, i get that. I also get that once you get past the first 2 or 3 tiers of G's you might as well just wait a bunch of rounds because it doesn't really matter who you take at that point.

But you (i don't mean any one person in particular) can't sit here and say well man that's a low end 1st line C (20th ranked) is a weak point, and then say, oh there isn't as big a gap when looking at a position most of agree is more important to team success anyway (G).

First off, the 20th ranked C is far from "low end" in a 32 team draft. Second off, I disagree that most people agree that G is more important than #1C, they are probably similarly important. Third off, nobody has ever claimed that the gap between the #1 and #20 C is larger than the gap between the #1 and #20 G.

 

[Sturminator]

And again, how does this change the argument that the 20th ranked C isn't a massive downgrade from the #1 C?

Sure there are more C's drafted. You need 4 of them, i get that. I also get that once you get past the first 2 or 3 tiers of G's you might as well just wait a bunch of rounds because it doesn't really matter who you take at that point.

But you (i don't mean any one person in particular) can't sit here and say well man that's a low end 1st line C (20th ranked) is a weak point, and then say, oh there isn't as big a gap when looking at a position most of agree is more important to team success anyway (G).

You are arguing with your own shadow. No sensible person actually makes the claims you seem to be trying to refute here.

 

[ResilientBeast]

Day one of playoffs and Sharks and Thistles are already at odds with 3 times the posts of any other matchup

 

[ImporterExporter]

In the postseason what is the single most important position for a hockey club? If a C struggles, there are line mates to pick up the slack. Same thing when looking at D. If a G struggles your team is almost surely going to lose.

It's a hellova lot easier to trace great goal tending on real life Cup winners than it is to see somebody who struggled and had crappy numbers and was bailed out by F's and D.

 

[ResilientBeast]

In the postseason what is the single most important position for a hockey club? If a C struggles, there are line mates to pick up the slack. Same thing when looking at D. If a G struggles your team is almost surely going to lose.

It's a hellova lot easier to trace great goal tending on real life Cup winners than it is to see somebody who struggled and had crappy numbers and was bailed out by F's and D.

Don't worry I agree with you, when you have a top 10 guy in net against someone closer to 30 that should be an advantage that you consider. I think goaltending as a whole gets undervalued, sure every starter will be in the HHOF but there's a reason some are considered the best.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

In the postseason what is the single most important position for a hockey club? If a C struggles, there are line mates to pick up the slack. Same thing when looking at D. If a G struggles your team is almost surely going to lose.

It's a hellova lot easier to trace great goal tending on real life Cup winners than it is to see somebody who struggled and had crappy numbers and was bailed out by F's and D.

I think that historical Cup winners tend to have had their fair share of elite Cs, Ds, and Gs. If anything, I think winning the Cup without an elite #1 D is the rarest, though it sometimes happens.

As far as I know, there hasn't been a study on this. Maybe I'll do one of the history forum.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Don't worry I agree with you, when you have a top 10 guy in net against someone closer to 30 that should be an advantage that you consider. I think goaltending as a whole gets undervalued, sure every starter will be in the HHOF but there's a reason some are considered the best.

You will not find a single GM who disagrees with the bolded.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Gotta run, but when i get back i'd be curious to see who the losing G's were on the ATD Cup winners. Once you're in the finals the 2 teams are going to be neck and neck and i'd be interested to see how much better at F and D those teams that won with Fuhr and Rayner were for example. Or the other teams had just as poor netminding.....

 

[ImporterExporter]

Don't worry I agree with you, when you have a top 10 guy in net against someone closer to 30 that should be an advantage that you consider. I think goaltending as a whole gets undervalued, sure every starter will be in the HHOF but there's a reason some are considered the best.

A top 3-5 G should net you a massive advantage in that scenario. Even a G in the 15-20 range is a major step down in an all time sense. But voting does not mirror that line of thinking IMO. Not saying it should, because we don't judge teams off of 1 player, but it's interesting none the less.

 

[Say Hey Kid]

The voting is very fair this year.

 

[Leaf Lander]

It's funny in my critique I got good marks

I still think voting should be public to show pattern

 

[King Forsberg]

In the postseason what is the single most important position for a hockey club? If a C struggles, there are line mates to pick up the slack. Same thing when looking at D. If a G struggles your team is almost surely going to lose.

It's a hellova lot easier to trace great goal tending on real life Cup winners than it is to see somebody who struggled and had crappy numbers and was bailed out by F's and D.

I think you could look at this the other way as well. If your #1 goalie struggles then you better hope you forwards and defense can make up for that. That's why depth is important. In a vacuum the best goalie will perform at his best in every game but we know that doesn't happen. You need the forwards and defenders to compensate for this. Relying on one player to have to play his best in every game is risky business.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

It's funny in my critique I got good marks

I still think voting should be public to show pattern

I was surprised to see where you finished LL, I had you higher.

 

[seventieslord]

It's funny in my critique I got good marks

I still think voting should be public to show pattern

I think it was a good leaf Lander team. Maybe your best. And it did better than all your other recent entries.

87and71: value is important because if you are getting good value on a grant fuhr, that means you're filling out your roster for a couple rounds when you could have taken fuhr. The finished product is what's important but value drafting will get you the best finished product.

 

[monster_bertuzzi]

It's funny in my critique I got good marks

I still think voting should be public to show pattern

Do you really think people vote against you because they dont like you or something? You always seem to put together a spectacular first line and then suffer when it comes to the depth of the roster.

 

[ResilientBeast]

It's funny in my critique I got good marks

I still think voting should be public to show pattern

I had both you and 87and71 higher than where you two ended up, very strong squads.

You face the Vancouver Millionaires
and 87and71 gets Halifax Citadels

I think those could be some upsets in the first round. It's gonna be close

 

[ImporterExporter]

I think it was a good leaf Lander team. Maybe your best. And it did better than all your other recent entries.

87and71: value is important because if you are getting good value on a grant fuhr, that means you're filling out your roster for a couple rounds when you could have taken fuhr. The finished product is what's important but value drafting will get you the best finished product.

Judging by the ATD summary and those who filled it out, i did quite well. The only pick that some questioned was Tkachuk and i had as many as 5 best picks (VI on page 1) across 25 rounds. So if we're going off value as a strong indicator, it certainly didn't help me at all (6th in division and 13th in conference).

In the Robson, there is nobody with the coaching (Toe Blake and Punch Imlach) i have, or the goaltending (Roy). In fact, outside of MadA and Tanala the goalies are weak (Gardiner and Tretiak). Defensively i'm as good or better than anyone especially in the top 4 (Horton, Hod Stuart, Rod Langway, Teppo Numminen). So basically i look at it as people are going to say my offense is so incredibly weak that it counter balances the clear advantage i have behind the bench, in net and i have a defensive group as good or better than anyone in my division.

Those will be key points of argument for me. If i can win 3 of 4 major phases, have coaches that make sense with my lineup, i feel good about my chances. We'll see i guess.

 

[Leaf Lander]

That doesn't change the fact that players like Grant Fuhr are low end starters. Value is completely subjective as well.

Grant Fuhr back stopped a run n gun team
U have no idea how many one on mine he faced

The man is a winner!

Put him on a defensive squad in the 90s and the ma woukd have 600 wins

 

[ImporterExporter]

Yes, he was a good to great goalie in his day vs his peers. But in an all time sense he's well below average with 32 teams. I'm not even a Grant Fuhr detractor to be honest. He put up some solid numbers on those dynasty teams given the era but they certainly weren't anything spectacular in an all time sense.

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1185967&highlight=

 

[Dwight]

Count me in as someone who had Stockholm at least in the top half of their division. A great rookie effort by Iceman.

Also great team from mark this year. Drafting Nels Stewart always seems like a death sentence in the ATD, but he made it work very well. I didn't have him 1st, but I didn't have him very far away from it either!