ATD 2018 Lineup Advice Thread

[Johnny Engine]

I don't understand the point you're trying to make. The olympic teams are putting together teams best built to win a tournament, not to have the best PK. When you're playing against the best your era has to offer, you can't really afford to bring a PK specialist when the majority of the game is spent at even strength.

Why does that apply to the Olympics and not the ATD? Or all hockey, for that matter?
Even a run-of-the-mill NHL team is using the best players available to them, to win a hockey tournament, that is mostly played at even strength.

 

[jarek]

Why does that apply to the Olympics and not the ATD? Or all hockey, for that matter?
Even a run-of-the-mill NHL team is using the best players available to them, to win a hockey tournament, that is mostly played at even strength.

Well then, that means we're doing it wrong. A lot of us draft inferior players in order to fill out our PK units with 35-40%+ usage guys, or similar players from older eras.

 

[jarek]

So my special teams are pretty much set. Does anyone see any obvious deficiencies?

PP1: Denneny - Nedomanský - Kane - Pospíšil - Pilote
PP2: Krutov - Fredrickson - Kapustin - Mackay - Mohns

PP extras: Nighbor

PK1: Nighbor - Nevin - Langway - Pilote
PK2: Mackay - Krutov - Pospíšil - Green

PK extras: Fredrickson, Mohns

Yes, Nighbor is left off the PP on purpose because I feel like he's a much better asset at even strength and on the PK, so I want to maximize his usage there.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Is there any evidence of MacKay playing the point?

 

[jarek]

Is there any evidence of MacKay playing the point?

He played a successful rover for many years. Dreak and Sturm seem to like the idea.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

So my special teams are pretty much set. Does anyone see any obvious deficiencies?

PP1: Denneny - Nedomanský - Kane - Pospíšil - Pilote
PP2: Krutov - Fredrickson - Kapustin - Mackay - Mohns

PP extras: Nighbor

PK1: Nighbor - Nevin - Langway - Pilote
PK2: Mackay - Krutov - Pospíšil - Green

PK extras: Fredrickson, Mohns

Yes, Nighbor is left off the PP on purpose because I feel like he's a much better asset at even strength and on the PK, so I want to maximize his usage there.

I would try to find a way to drop Pilote to the 2nd PK unit. IMO, unless you have one of the truly elite #1 defensemen in this, you probably don't want them playing 1st unit all the way across. And I think the PK is where Pilote is the least useful. In fact, it seems like real life Chicago did do something like that. Pilote's 47% PK usage (post-1960) isn't bad, but it isn't great either. This extended to Pilote's Norris seasons, where his PK usage was better than someone like Coffey, but it was still below the norm for most Norris winners: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/threads/top-10-defensemen-of-all-time.2428889/page-15#post-140271229

With a 38% PK usage since 1960, Ted Green actually looks better than he did when we only had post-1967 stats (when Green barely killed PKs). Still, I wouldn't want him on the first unit. So I guess of these 4 defensemen listed, Pospisil is probably the best option to go with Langway.

 

[jarek]

I would try to find a way to drop Pilote to the 2nd PK unit. IMO, unless you have one of the truly elite #1 defensemen in this, you probably don't want them playing 1st unit all the way across. And I think the PK is where Pilote is the least useful. In fact, it seems like real life Chicago did do something like that. Pilote's 47% PK usage (post-1960) isn't bad, but it isn't great either. This extended to Pilote's Norris seasons, where his PK usage was better than someone like Coffey, but it was still below the norm for most Norris winners: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/threads/top-10-defensemen-of-all-time.2428889/page-15#post-140271229

With a 38% PK usage since 1960, Ted Green actually looks better than he did when we only had post-1967 stats (when Green barely killed PKs). Still, I wouldn't want him on the first unit. So I guess of these 4 defensemen listed, Pospisil is probably the best option to go with Langway.

Pilots should absolutely be able to do 1st unit all the way. I'm surprised at this comment

 

[jarek]

Tdmm so what is your view on pk usage? Useful or Not? Your comments about zetterberg's usage suggest you don't care much for it. But now you're bringing it up for pilote and green.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Tdmm so what is your view on pk usage? Useful or Not? Your comments about zetterberg's usage suggest you don't care much for it. But now you're bringing it up for pilote and green.

Pilote and Green are defensemen. For most of hockey history (until very recently), the penalty kill has generally been prioritized for the best defensemen.

 

[jarek]

Pilote and Green are defensemen.

Ok. Whatever. Actually why does it matter?

Who was used more on the pk on those Chicago teams? Part of the explanation for Pilote's lack of usage should be that he took quite a few penalties himself.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Pilots should absolutely be able to do 1st unit all the way. I'm surprised at this comment

Ice time management. A defenseman who plays 1st unit straight across is basically leading the ATD in minutes played. Personally, I would prefer to only do that with Orr, Harvey, Bourque, Lidstrom, Shore, Potvin, maybe Kelly, maybe Fetisov.

But perhaps others differ.

Either way, I personally feel Pilote is more useful at even strength or on the PP. You have to understand; you aren't even playing Nighbor on the PP

Pretty sure that I didnt even play Kelly 1st unit PK when I had him.

 

[overpass]

Pilote's playoff PK usage was even lower than his regular season usage.

Not sure if you have seen these discussion on the history board recently. The recent NHL data release shows that one major reason for the 60s Blackhawks' playoff failures is power play goals against. They allowed 71 power play goals in 67 playoff games from 1960 to the 1967 playoffs. That's about 1.5 times the rate that Detroit, Montreal, and Toronto allowed power play goals against. While power play opportunities aren't reported, the penalty totals are pretty equal across teams and there is no reason to think the Hawks were shorthanded more. So everyone involved in the 60s Hawks penalty kill should get docked for this.

NHL.com - Stats

Pilote was only on the ice for 23 of those 71 power play goals (32%). You can see the rest of the players at the link below.

NHL.com - Stats

You could argue Pilote shouldn't get much blame for this because he wasn't involved very much. But you also have to ask -- why did the coach not use Pilote in a larger role as the team kept losing games and series because of their penalty kill? You could ask the same about Mikita and Hull -- sure, they were relied on to score, but Detroit was using Gordie Howe and Alex Delvecchio in all situations too and with better PK results in the playoffs.

Edit: I checked the numbers and I was wrong about Delvecchio. Only 7% playoff PK usage. Norm Ullman was at 34%, Howe at 22%, Mikita at 14%, and Hull at 13%. So not a huge difference in the individual numbers, but the key difference is that Chicago's PK unit was consistently bad in the playoffs after their Cup win in 1961. Maybe their big mistake was getting rid of PK specialist Earl Balfour.

 

[rmartin65]

I'm with TDMM on this one; in a 24 team league, I think the straight 1st unit guys are Orr/Harvey/Bourque/Lidstrom/ Shore/Potvin. I wouldn't even think of putting Park straight 1st units in this league. 30-32 team? Probably.

 

[overpass]

Who was used more on the pk on those Chicago teams? Part of the explanation for Pilote's lack of usage should be that he took quite a few penalties himself.

Moose Vasko. Maybe Pat Stapleton. Some undrafted players.

 

[jarek]

Ok well I wish I was made aware of this sooner

 

[jarek]

Pilote's playoff PK usage was even lower than his regular season usage.

Not sure if you have seen these discussion on the history board recently. The recent NHL data release shows that one major reason for the 60s Blackhawks' playoff failures is power play goals against. They allowed 71 power play goals in 67 playoff games from 1960 to the 1967 playoffs. That's about 1.5 times the rate that Detroit, Montreal, and Toronto allowed power play goals against. While power play opportunities aren't reported, the penalty totals are pretty equal across teams and there is no reason to think the Hawks were shorthanded more. So everyone involved in the 60s Hawks penalty kill should get docked for this.

NHL.com - Stats

Pilote was only on the ice for 23 of those 71 power play goals (32%). You can see the rest of the players at the link below.

NHL.com - Stats

You could argue Pilote shouldn't get much blame for this because he wasn't involved very much. But you also have to ask -- why did the coach not use Pilote in a larger role as the team kept losing games and series because of their penalty kill? You could ask the same about Mikita and Hull -- sure, they were relied on to score, but Detroit was using Gordie Howe and Alex Delvecchio in all situations too and with better PK results in the playoffs.

Edit: I checked the numbers and I was wrong about Delvecchio. Only 7% playoff PK usage. Norm Ullman was at 34%, Howe at 22%, Mikita at 14%, and Hull at 13%. So not a huge difference in the individual numbers, but the key difference is that Chicago's PK unit was consistently bad in the playoffs after their Cup win in 1961. Maybe their big mistake was getting rid of PK specialist Earl Balfour.

So regarding this.. after 1961, it would be fair to say that Pierre Pilote was, in theory, the best penalty killer the Hawks had, right? On my team, he would be considered, at best, the 4th most important member of my 1st unit penalty kill, behind Nighbor, Nevin and Langway.. probably even 5th most important, after Dryden. For my PK, I pretty much envisioned a situation where Langway probably plays about 5 minutes of the PK, Green and Pilote 3.5 each, and Pospisil goes for 2 minutes. If there's some major push back to this, I would have no issue with Langway at 5 minutes, and Pilote, Pospisil and Green getting 3 each.

Regardless, whatever you may think of the quality of the 60s Hawks PK, it shouldn't be much of a factor when it comes to my team because Pilote's job should be much easier on my PK.

Thoughts on this?

 

[Dreakmur]

So regarding this.. after 1961, it would be fair to say that Pierre Pilote was, in theory, the best penalty killer the Hawks had, right?

I think Nesterenko was probably Chicago's best PKer.

 

[Habsfan18]

Hmm, makes me wonder about Marcel Pronovost now. He was historically a good PKer so I have him on my first unit with Flaman, and I like the thought of him feeding MacInnis and starting the breakout on my first PP unit. But I also have him on my top even strength pairing. That would be a lot of ice time but I really do like him in those spots..

I suppose I could move Barry Beck up to my top PK pairing and use Pronovost on the 2nd pair.

 

[overpass]

I think Nesterenko was probably Chicago's best PKer.

Moose Vasko would be in the mix too.

 

[jarek]

So regarding this.. after 1961, it would be fair to say that Pierre Pilote was, in theory, the best penalty killer the Hawks had, right? On my team, he would be considered, at best, the 4th most important member of my 1st unit penalty kill, behind Nighbor, Nevin and Langway.. probably even 5th most important, after Dryden. For my PK, I pretty much envisioned a situation where Langway probably plays about 5 minutes of the PK, Green and Pilote 3.5 each, and Pospisil goes for 2 minutes. If there's some major push back to this, I would have no issue with Langway at 5 minutes, and Pilote, Pospisil and Green getting 3 each.

Regardless, whatever you may think of the quality of the 60s Hawks PK, it shouldn't be much of a factor when it comes to my team because Pilote's job should be much easier on my PK.

Thoughts on this?

So I'd really love some feedback on this. It's going to affect my next couple of picks..

 

[ImporterExporter]

So I'd really love some feedback on this. It's going to affect my next couple of picks..

Looking at your roster I would think you have more than enough PK skill to allow Pilotte fewer minutes there. I would personally want him playing more at ES and the PP given his overall talents. Obviously he's more than worthy of PK'ing, but given what you have, I'd probably lessen his minutes there.

 

[jarek]

Looking at your roster I would think you have more than enough PK skill to allow Pilotte fewer minutes there. I would personally want him playing more at ES and the PP given his overall talents. Obviously he's more than worthy of PK'ing, but given what you have, I'd probably lessen his minutes there.

OK, but that doesn't say anything about my specific plan. To highlight:

For my PK, I pretty much envisioned a situation where Langway probably plays about 5 minutes of the PK, Green and Pilote 3.5 each, and Pospisil goes for 2 minutes. If there's some major push back to this, I would have no issue with Langway at 5 minutes, and Pilote, Pospisil and Green getting 3 each.

If you guys do not think this is sufficient, then I will need to arrange for an alternative. If I have to, I can even do something like:

Langway: 5
Pospisil: 4
Green: 3
Pilote: 2

Which I guess would be something along the lines of what TDMM suggested earlier.

 

[ImporterExporter]

OK, but that doesn't say anything about my specific plan. To highlight:



If you guys do not think this is sufficient, then I will need to arrange for an alternative. If I have to, I can even do something like:

Langway: 5
Pospisil: 4
Green: 3
Pilote: 2

Which I guess would be something along the lines of what TDMM suggested earlier.

I don't see anything wrong with having Pilote doing either. I guess that's what I was getting at. He's a strong player who ate a ton of minutes in real life. I would personally have him on a 2nd pairing PK. Give him an extra minute at ES and a slight bump on the PP because that is where his biggest value will come from. IMO.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Pilote's playoff PK usage was even lower than his regular season usage.

Not sure if you have seen these discussion on the history board recently. The recent NHL data release shows that one major reason for the 60s Blackhawks' playoff failures is power play goals against. They allowed 71 power play goals in 67 playoff games from 1960 to the 1967 playoffs. That's about 1.5 times the rate that Detroit, Montreal, and Toronto allowed power play goals against. While power play opportunities aren't reported, the penalty totals are pretty equal across teams and there is no reason to think the Hawks were shorthanded more. So everyone involved in the 60s Hawks penalty kill should get docked for this.

NHL.com - Stats

Pilote was only on the ice for 23 of those 71 power play goals (32%). You can see the rest of the players at the link below.

NHL.com - Stats

You could argue Pilote shouldn't get much blame for this because he wasn't involved very much. But you also have to ask -- why did the coach not use Pilote in a larger role as the team kept losing games and series because of their penalty kill? You could ask the same about Mikita and Hull -- sure, they were relied on to score, but Detroit was using Gordie Howe and Alex Delvecchio in all situations too and with better PK results in the playoffs.

Edit: I checked the numbers and I was wrong about Delvecchio. Only 7% playoff PK usage. Norm Ullman was at 34%, Howe at 22%, Mikita at 14%, and Hull at 13%. So not a huge difference in the individual numbers, but the key difference is that Chicago's PK unit was consistently bad in the playoffs after their Cup win in 1961. Maybe their big mistake was getting rid of PK specialist Earl Balfour.

Earl Balfour was replaced by Bob Turner from the Canadiens, one of their PK specialists from 1955-56 thru 1960-61. Turner could play forward and defence. Balfour was strictly a forward.

The Chicago PK in the sixties had three basic flaws.These would be magnified in the playoffs when teams had up to 7 games these flaws.

Two of their key PK players at forward were Reg Fleming and Stan Mikita. Both were penalty magnets.

Their only reliable puck moving defencemen were small, Pierre Pilote and Pat Stapleton. Playing against big forwards down low they would wear-out against the likes of Gordie Howe, Jean Beliveau, Frank Mahovlich.

Conversely their big defencemen were hopelessly slow. Problem getting to loose pucks towards the perimeter yet covering the front of the net.

See the video from the 1965 finals, game 7, Cournoyer on the PP beats Elmer Vasko:



Hence the results overpass generated.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Bun Cook - Wayne Gretzky (C) - Vladimir Martinec

Nels Stewart - Ryan Getzlaf - RW

Frank Foyston - Ted Kennedy (A) - Jack Walker

Sid Smith - Ken Mosdell - RW

Extras:

Defensemen:

Jacques Lapierriere - Dit Clapper (A)
Jim Schoenfeld - Pat Stapleton
Frank Patrick - RD

Thoughts on how to roll the PP units?

Obviously Gretzky is going to get heavy usage. I'm thinking of using him as a floater so to speak. He's so dynamic offensively that him constantly moving will force 4 man units to constantly be aware of his location and presence. We all know about "Gretzky's office" but specifically on the PP I'm open to hearing thoughts on how you'd place him.

Stewart will go to the net. He's an elite goal scorer and net front presence so he's the easiest guy to place.

Clapper will be the trigger on the point. He had a reputed amazing/hard shot that plays well from the blue line.

The question is who else do you throw on the 1st unit. Hard to ignore Martinec's offensive creativity and brilliance. He plays RW at even strength but I'm thinking him being on his strong side during the PP makes more sense.

Then the last spot either goes to Patrick or another F. I want Stapleton to QB the 2nd unit so he's out.

Thoughts?