ATD 2018 Lineup Advice Thread

[Johnny Engine]

I don't think Clapper is "not good enough" at RW to play RW at the ATD level. The issue there is that you'd be giving up a top-pairing defenseman and shortchanging your team badly.
A Sundin-type at centre isn't exactly a dime a dozen, but there are similar centres available 1, 2, and 3 rounds after him, maybe more. Strategically, Sundin's probably better as a winger in the ATD, if marginally less effective.

 

[jarek]

Did Kane ever play the point on the PP?

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

He's been playing the point some this year, can't remember if he did it last year at all, but the great majority of his career he's been on the half boards. In other words, I don't think he should be on the point of an ATD PP

 

[overpass]

He's been playing the point some this year, can't remember if he did it last year at all, but the great majority of his career he's been on the half boards. In other words, I don't think he should be on the point of an ATD PP

Yeah, Chicago had another forward playing the point through 2014-15.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I'll go with the safer option, and put Clancy along with Max on PP1. Doug can man the point on PP2.

In regards to Sundin, he never got any recognition for awards at RW, nor did he ever finish top-10 in scoring at RW. In the meantime, you have guys like Malone who led the league in points while playing LW, D. Bentley being a 2nd AST C, Clapper a 2nd AST RW etc and if you were to stick them in the aforementioned positions, they would rightfully be criticized despite showing that they were capable of playing the position at an elite level. Sundin was never even an elite RW, so I would be extremely wary of sticking him at RW.

Doug Bentley was a legit LW/C (and should be listed as such). Played primarily center after Max was traded.

 

[rmartin65]

So... I shouldn't be pondering playing Abel at LW then?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

So... I shouldn't be pondering playing Abel at LW then?

Everyone plays Abel at LW in the ATD. From what I gathered, he spent between 1/4 and 1/3 of his career at LW, and he was an All-Star there.

I think what's important is that his level of play wasn't noticeably worse when he played LW, I don't think.

If you want more details as to Abel's accomplishments at LW, I went through it in detail during one of my playoff series, the year I started with Phil Esposito

 

[rmartin65]

Everyone plays Abel at LW in the ATD. From what I gathered, he spent between 1/4 and 1/3 of his career at LW, and he was an All-Star there.

But his value is greater at C (not counting positional scarcity), right? As that is where he played during his best 3 seasons, if I am not mistaken.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

But his value is greater at C (not counting positional scarcity), right? As that is where he played during his best 3 seasons, if I am not mistaken.

His best 3 seasons or his 3 seasons with Howe and Lindsay helping his numbers?

I mean, he might be marginally better at C, but it is worth it when C has a deeper talent pool? Probably depends.

 

[Johnny Engine]

So... I shouldn't be pondering playing Abel at LW then?

In a vacuum, you're more likely to find a good centre for Abel than a good LW. How that balances with Abel's value at either of those two positions is something you'll have to figure out. But Abel's resume would have to be much, much further tilted towards the wing than Sundin, no?

 

[rmartin65]

His best 3 seasons or his 3 seasons with Howe and Lindsay helping his numbers?

I mean, he might be marginally better at C, but it is worth it when C has a deeper talent pool? Probably depends.

In a vacuum, you're more likely to find a good centre for Abel than a good LW. How that balances with Abel's value at either of those two positions is something you'll have to figure out. But Abel's resume would have to be much, much further tilted towards the wing than Sundin, no?

Thanks for the re-assurances. I was getting worried, I just traded up for a reason, not being able to play Abel at LW would have messed up some plans.

 

[Habsfan18]

Can I get opinions on Al MacInnis playing on an ATD PK? I’ll have to see how my D shapes up of course before making a decision. Just curious what others think of that potential move.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Can I get opinions on Al MacInnis playing on an ATD PK? I’ll have to see how my D shapes up of course before making a decision. Just curious what others think of that potential move.

He definitely shouldn't be 1st unit

Ideally, you wouldn't have him PK at all just for ice time management, but I don't think it would be a disaster having him on the 2nd PK.

 

[Habsfan18]

He definitely shouldn't be 1st unit

Ideally, you wouldn't have him PK at all just for ice time management, but I don't think it would be a disaster having him on the 2nd PK.

Yeah, thinking ice management he probably shouldn’t be on the 1st unit since he’ll be a top pairing D and a 1st unit PPer for obvious reasons. Just couldn’t remember if he killed a lot of penalties in Calgary. I think he did in St. Louis.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Yeah, thinking ice management he probably shouldn’t be on the 1st unit since he’ll be a top pairing D and a 1st unit PPer for obvious reasons. Just couldn’t remember if he killed a lot of penalties in Calgary. I think he did in St. Louis.

I'm almost certain he did in St Louis....put the right partner next to him and he's fine on a 2nd unit.

 

[jarek]

OK.. so my first major canvasing of advice.

PP1: Krutov - x - Kane
PP2: Denneny - Nighbor - x

OR

PP1: Denneny - x - Kane
PP2: Krutov - Nighbor - x

The first PP keeps lines together and creates a more functional PP1 (Krutov being a great front of net guy). The second PP puts the most talented players in their correct spots.

 

[Iceman]

Everyone plays Abel at LW in the ATD. From what I gathered, he spent between 1/4 and 1/3 of his career at LW, and he was an All-Star there.

I think what's important is that his level of play wasn't noticeably worse when he played LW, I don't think.

If you want more details as to Abel's accomplishments at LW, I went through it in detail during one of my playoff series, the year I started with Phil Esposito

I played him at C last year.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

OK.. so my first major canvasing of advice.

PP1: Krutov - x - Kane
PP2: Denneny - Nighbor - x

OR

PP1: Denneny - x - Kane
PP2: Krutov - Nighbor - x

The first PP keeps lines together and creates a more functional PP1 (Krutov being a great front of net guy). The second PP puts the most talented players in their correct spots.

Whatever else you do, you have to have Denneny on the 1st PP, otherwise you are wasting him IMO. I realize we don't know this for sure, but his skillset reads like a player who would be more effective on the PP than at ES.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Yeah, thinking ice management he probably shouldn’t be on the 1st unit since he’ll be a top pairing D and a 1st unit PPer for obvious reasons. Just couldn’t remember if he killed a lot of penalties in Calgary. I think he did in St. Louis.

The tables @overpass made on the subject look like they got destroyed in the migration, but IIRC, he rarely killed penalties in Calgary and was kind of a 1st/2nd unit tweener for most of his time in St. Louis.

 

[TorontoTrades]

X X - Datsyuk - Jagr
Robitaille - Hawerchuk - X X

Coffey - X X
Howell - Blake

Brodeur


Comments/Advice so far?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

X X - Datsyuk - Jagr
Robitaille - Hawerchuk - X X

Coffey - X X
Howell - Blake

Brodeur


Comments/Advice so far?

Coffey's partner is going to face a decent number of 2-on-1s. So draft accordingly.

 

[BenchBrawl]

X X - Datsyuk - Jagr
Robitaille - Hawerchuk - X X

Coffey - X X
Howell - Blake

Brodeur


Comments/Advice so far?

Would try to add toughness to the Top 6

 

[Sprague Cleghorn]

Opinions on not puttinhg one og the bentleys on the point? Im gonna have two Fs on the point and thats gonna take a toll on the number of legitimate F i can actually put up front

 

[Johnny Engine]

Opinions on not puttinhg one og the bentleys on the point? Im gonna have two Fs on the point and thats gonna take a toll on the number of legitimate F i can actually put up front

I'd use them both, on different units, but this should better frame the question for you:
Who will be better on the powerplay: your 3rd most skilled defenseman or your 8th best forward?
How you answer that will depend on what your bottom six looks like, and what kind of specialty role-players you have.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Given that your 1st unit pointmen will play most of the time, maybe you should use one of them up front?