Self assassination
First line: Lalonde and Cook are a proven duo as both played together in Saskatoon. They both spent two seasons together, and in those two seasons, both finished top-10 in scoring every year, including a WCHL scoring title (which could very possibly be upgraded to a consolidated scoring title) for Cook. This is particularly impressive as Lalonde was an old man by then, and Cook was new on the scene. If both players were able to accomplish this when one was past his prime and one was only entering it, then consider how much more awesome they would have been together if they were both in their primes. Hay is on this line as the glue guy. Hay was good defensively, and he was noted as an easy player to coach by perhaps the most difficult coach to play for, Jack Adams. This means that Hay will be doing the little things to keep the Lalonde-Cook engine running smoothly. Also, Hay will not be a complete black hole offensively as I strongly believe he is at least top-110 offensively. Cook is firmly a top-5 RW of all-time, cementing him as an elite 1st line RW. Lalonde is somewhere in the 10-15 range on a C list, making him average. The biggest weakness on this line is Hay, who should be 25-30th on a LW list, which obviously makes him a very weak 1st liner. Despite the lack of talent from Hay, he's a good fit from a chemistry standpoint for the reasons I stated above. Overall, the talent level of this line is slightly below average but with great chemistry.
Second line: I'm going to go ahead and say it. I firmly believe I have the best 2nd line in the draft, at least from a talent perspective. In a draft this size, Kennedy is a passable 1st line C. But I have Kennedy on my 2nd line, and since he's usually ranked in the late teens or early 20s on top centres list, Kennedy could be classified as a super elite 2nd line center. Krutov was the 23rd highest ranked LW on the HOH project. Like Kennedy, Krutov could easily pass as a weak 1st line LW, but in a 2nd line LW role, he too is super elite. Maltsev is tougher to gauge since he was ranked as a C on the HOH project, and not as a W. However, if we were to transpose his ranking to a W list, and more specifically a RW list, Maltsev should be ranked in the late teens on a RW list. Maltsev was drafted right in between Bure and Martinec, whom according to the HOH project were the 16th and 17th ranked RWs. Another way you could look at it is that Maltsev is in the same range as Gilmour or Francis. On an all inclusive list, both players would probably be ranked in the same range as Martinec and Bure. Now, since Maltsev should be ranked in the late teens on a top RW list, this would make him a below average 1st line RW, and you guessed it, in a 2nd line role, he is massively overqualified. So, basically I have three guys that could form a passable 1st line playing as a 2nd line. Chemistry wise, these guys should also be an excellent fit. I believe I have kind of re-created the Green Unit with these three players. Krutov is obviously Krutov. Kennedy is smart, has amazing passing abilities and was great defensively, all of which were attributes that Larionov was known for, except with Kennedy these attributes have been upgraded. Maltsev is not as explosive as Makarov, but he has speed, and was pretty balanced offensively, and according to Theokritos, Maltsev worked best when paired with a defensive minded C, whom I have in Kennedy. Overall, this line is not only one of the best 2nd lines in the draft, but it is possibly THE best, and the chemistry should be great to watch.
Third line: I went with a more offensively oriented third line. I think this is the line that I will have to prove to other GMs the most, so here goes. Colville is pretty good defensively and for a third liner, his offense is pretty good too, particularly his playmaking. Colville will be the "general" of his line. Nash is there as a physical presence, and he will be amazing as the guy doing the little things. Nash was repeatedly selected to play for Canada at the highest level, and the main reason surely was not because he brought offense. If you watched Nash during the Olympics (or any game really), if he's not scoring, he'll at least be a fore checking beast and/or being good defensively. To me, he looks like an ideal glue guy. And on top of that, his offense is actually not that bad too. According to seventies EVS VsX data for bottom sixers, Nash slotted in the top half of the chart, so he should be at least above average offensively in his role. Nash's shot combined with Colville's playmaking could do a lot of damage. Oliver is probably the most controversial player in my starting lineup since I bumped him up quite a bit on the draft list. Hopefully, my updated bio on Oliver has improved his image in the eyes of some GMs. But, in terms of chemistry Oliver should also fit like a glove with Nash and Colville. When I was researching Oliver, in addition to his speed being mentioned (which is nothing new), was his ability to work in what the papers called "combination plays". Oliver's playstyle was not similar to that of Bure's where he would use his speed to blaze through the zone, and forget he also had four other guys on the ice with him. Also, Oliver did not seem to be simply a perimeter player as there were numerous mentions of him going into what could be classified as the "dirty" areas of the ice. And on top of that, I also believe that Oliver should be classified as average to good defensively due to the research I did on him, so he's not going to be a defensive black hole. To me this line kind of looks like the Bread Line 2.0 version with the Colville brothers and Shibicky. Colville is Colville, Nash is the glue guy like Mac, and Oliver is a vastly upgraded version of Shibicky. Talent wise, Colville is a slightly above average 3rd line C, Nash is an average 3rd line LW, and Oliver I'd personally say would be super elite, and I'm not just saying that because I'm the GM that picked him. If you're looking for a 2nd line scoring option, there's probably no reason that Oliver should be going 200+ spots after guys like Mosienko, Mogilny, Gartner, Bauer etc. I know Sturminator will not be pleased with this, but seventieslord calculated Oliver's total VsX score to be around 75, which is either on par or better than the above guys.
Fourth line: Your standard checking line. There's not much offense that is to be coming out from these guys, but they should do an excellent job of shutting things down if required. All three guys were known as excellent defensive players during their playing careers. Kasper has a Selke, Finnigan was a top-5 defensive forward of the 1930s and possibly THE number one, and Leswick was awarded a Retro Selke, and was known to do a good job of throwing Howe off his game. Judging these guys from a talent perspective is a little bit tougher for me. Going off the draft list, I traded Rousseau for Leswick. Usually these guys are picked pretty closely together, so their value must almost be equal. I think Rousseau is an above average 3rd line RW, which would either mean Leswick is also an above average 3rd line RW, or slightly worse. Kasper is probably a good 4th line C. As for Finnigan, if I were to go off the draft list, he was picked around the same time as Amonte, C. Lemieux, and Doan, and if I were to guess, those guys are average to below average 3rd line RWs.
1st Defense: I'll switch things around and start with talent first. Horton is a slightly below average #1 D, while Stuart is an average #2 D. The sum is a slightly below average #1 pairing. Although Horton is a slightly below average #1 D, if we were to judge Ds only by their defense, Horton could very well be top-10 all time in that department. With Stuart, Horton's main job will be to play defense, and he will not have to worry as much as to also be the offensive catalyst on the back end, which will kind of negate his biggest weakness in an all-time sense. Now, both guys are huge, and Horton was particularly noted for his strength. Opposing FWs will not be able to easily outmuscle my 1st pairing, whether it be along the boards, in the corners or in front of the net. Even though both guys were big, they were not simply coke machines. Both Stuart and Horton were known as good skaters, even more so for Stuart, who could be classified as elite in that department. Stuart's skating ability will help combat strong fore checking units and be a great strength in transitioning the offense. However, if Stuart does get bogged down, Horton can also fill that role semi-decently.
Second pairing: This is the weakest point of my team. Neilson is an average #4, while Horner is an above average #4. With no true #3, this pairing is not where it could be from a talent perspective. But, chemistry wise there shouldn't be much of a problem. I feel Neilson is the perfect guy to pair with a loose cannon like Horner. This is a prototypical offensive defenceman paired with a defensive defenceman pairing. Both guys could skate so the "ring it around the boards and pray it goes out" play should be limited with these two. Both were also very strong so they shouldn't get out muscled too much.
Third pairing: Another prototypical offensive defenceman paired with a defensive defenceman pairing. Seiling and Egan are probably both average #5s, so I think I did good here. Seiling was noted as being one of the more outstanding defenceman defensively in his era. However, one criticism that Seiling received was his perceived lack of physical play. This is remedied by pairing him with the ultra tough Egan. Egan was known for his hard checks and unforgiving physical play. Both guys could also skate, and Seiling had a pretty amazing first pass, so getting out of our defensive zone shouldn't be a significant problem with these two on the ice.
Goalies: Not much to say except that Gardiner is an average starter with Kerr being below average.
Powerplay: If we were to assign the top-75 offensive players as the standard for FWs, Cook would be elite, Lalonde and Maltsev would be above average. With the same principle applied for D, Stuart is below average for a #1 D PP option, and according to seventies, Egan's VsXD is good enough to be an average #2 D PP option. So, again basically an average PP unit. The net presence role can either be filled by Lalonde or Cook. Maltsev is the playmaker. The sniper's role can again be either Lalonde or Cook. On the point, Egan has a massive shot.
As for the 2nd unit, Kennedy would be average, Krutov either slightly above average or average, and Oliver would be above average. According to VsXD, Horton is a good #2 PP option, and I have him in a #3's role so he's more than qualified here. Horner is good in a #4 role.
Penalty Kill: I believe this one of the other strengths of my team. On my first unit, I have Finnigan who was listed as the best PKer of the 1930s by Ultimate Hockey. Even if you don't agree with him being #1, you have to at least agree to him being top-5. Kasper killed 49% of his team's penalties, and his teams were on average 8% better than others. Horton is arguably a top-10 on a list that only includes defensive play from defenceman. Neilson killed 43% of his team's penalties post expansion and he's probably average as a #2 PK D.
On the second unit I have Colville, Leswick, Seiling and Stuart. Colville was noted for his PKing during his time. In particular, he was noted for utilizing a PK strategy called offensive PKing, which was highly effective back then. I have Leswick on my 2nd PK unit, and he could easily be a great #1 PK option. With Leswick's speed, Colville could put into practice his offensive PK strategy. Stuart is probably fine as a #3 PK D. Seiling could also be a #3 PK D. He killed 49% of his team's penalties, and his team's PK was 6% better than average.
Coaching: Tarasov is a top-10 coach of all-time. I believe the crew that I have assembled will be able to fit into Tarasov's system quite nicely. All of them can skate (with the exception of Kennedy), and can play an east-west game. If Tarasov decides to implement his 2-2-1 system, he will be able to do so in an efficient manner since every unit has the required components (two attackers, two midfielders, and a stay at home guy). However, Tarasov can be a bit demanding and I have brought along Reay to act as an intermediate. Reay worked with Tarasov on Rob Scuderi's 2015 championship team, so no problems here right?
