ATD championship retrospective

overpass

Registered User
Jun 7, 2007
5,254
2,736
I dare someone to find a team with more than 3 European skaters in the starting 18 skaters (not goalies, coaches. or reserves) who won their first round match up. Good luck.

My team won two rounds in ATD12 with the following starters

Hasek (1st)
Kharlamov (2nd)
Fedorov (4th)
Kasatonov (5th)
Elias (10th)
Numminen (15th)
Nolan (16th)
Palffy (18th)
 

Sturminator

Love is a duel
Feb 27, 2002
9,894
1,070
West Egg, New York
New members of the various clubs in 2013:

- Busher Jackson joins the three-time winners.

- Jimmy Thomson joins the two-time winners.

- Troy Murray joins the two-time winners. Interestingly, the last time Murray won an ATD was all the way back in ATD#8, when he was the 4th line center of...the Montreal Canadiens.

Not a lot of players from former champions, actually, and none from last year's winner, though it is interesting that in the ATD, as in real life, the Montreal Canadiens are thus far the dominant franchise. Of course, this is largely artificial as ATD franchises are not contiguous entities and the Habs are one of the few teams to be represented by name in pretty much every iteration of the draft. Half of Montreal's scoringline forwards being old Red Army players is also a somewhat remarkable result, though the Habs are tied with Boston, New Jersey and Inglewood for most European starters among the championship teams. I would probably say that the Europeans played a bigger role on this Montreal team than they did on any of the past champions, but only by a narrow margin.
 
Last edited:

TheDevilMadeMe

Registered User
Aug 28, 2006
52,271
6,980
Brooklyn
ATD champion 2013 followed more or less the same formula of ATD champions 11, 2010, and 2011: Use 1 of your top 2 picks a defenseman. Use 3 of your top 4 picks on stacking your top line. There were trades involved for at least my 2010 champion and the 2013 champion, but 4 of the last 6 champions basically followed the same formula.

ATD2012 was the draft of the third wheels on scoring lines, but the champ didn't stray too far from the winning formula - with Gretzky/Kurri on the top line, his top line was stacked even with a weak third wheel.

So this seems to be the formula that has won the last 4 ATDs and 5 of the last 6: Stack your first line as much as possible, but don't forget to draft a defenseman in the first two rounds. Interesting that as much as we talk about the "conservative" nature of the ATD, the top forward line seems to be the most important asset by a wide margin.

The runner up team from ATD2013 did the same thing - drafting Brian Leetch in the 2nd round and drafting his top line with his 1st, 3rd, and 4th picks. Interestingly, the two teams that lost in the semifinals (both on tiebreaks) were much less conventional and would have both broken the mold.
 

Sturminator

Love is a duel
Feb 27, 2002
9,894
1,070
West Egg, New York
I have updated this post on the conference finalists, and expanded the information somewhat. I think the data is pretty interesting. Specifically this part, as of ATD 2013:

1st Round Picks by conference finals appearances:

Four: Bobby Orr

Three: Ray Bourque*, Jaromir Jagr

Two: Gordie Howe**, Doug Harvey*, Maurice Richard, Wayne Gretzky*, Terry Sawchuk*, Red Kelly, Guy Lafleur, Jacques Plante, Stan Mikita*, Bryan Trottier, Eddie Shore

One: Ken Dryden, Denis Potvin*, Mario Lemieux, Glenn Hall*, Dominik Hasek, Nicklas Lidström*, Slava Fetisov, Patrick Roy, Mark Messier*, Phil Esposito, Jean Beliveau, (no pick)

* indicates champion

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

mean draft position of conference finalists: 14.6
median draft position of conference finalists: 12/13

The mean draft position would seem to indicate that the distribution is rather even across 1st round picks, but the median indicates that it is actually somewhat bottom-heavy. In the twelve draft slots between picks 12 and 23, there have been only ten conference finalists in twelve drafts (though three winners), a low rate compared to the thirteen conference finalists that have come from picks 25 through 30. Interestingly, the #28 pick has yielded the highest rate of success thus far, with five conference finalists and two champions having picked at that spot.

The group of 1st rounders who have made it to the conference finals thus far is quite diverse. Of the perennial first rounders, only Bobby Hull, Bobby Clarke, Howie Morenz, Larry Robinson and Ted Lindsay have been shut out. All three of Bobby Orr (four appearances), Ray Bourque (three appearances, one title) and Gordie Howe (two appearances, two titles) have a claim to being the most successful 1st rounder to this point. In terms of positions, the top-4 defensemen (Harvey + the three Bruins) seem to hold the greatest advantage, with eleven conference finals appearances between them, and two championships. This is not really surprising, given the fading value of #1 defensemen taken later on in the draft.
 

Sturminator

Love is a duel
Feb 27, 2002
9,894
1,070
West Egg, New York
Team-building strategies of the ATD winners through six rounds

ATD#6 champion Montreal Canadiens:

Round|Player|Position
1st|Gordie Howe|RW
2nd|Chris Chelios|D
3rd|Brad Park|D
4th|Johnny Bower|G
4th|John Bucyk|LW
6th|Doug Gilmour|C

ATD#7 champion Nanaimo Clippers:

Round|Player|Position
1st|Glenn Hall|G
2nd|Earl Seibert|D
3rd|Newsy Lalonde|C
3rd|Cyclone Taylor|F/D
4th|Doug Bentley|LW
6th|Adam Oates|C

ATD#8 champion Montreal Canadiens:

Round|Player|Position
1st|Denis Potvin|D
2nd|Turk Broda|G
4th|Marcel Pronovost|D
4th|Yvan Cournoyer|RW
6th|Jean Ratelle|C
6th|Harry Howell|D

ATD#9 champion Buffalo Bisons:

Round|Player|Position
1st|Stan Mikita|C
2nd|Pierre Pilote|D
4th|Busher Jackson|LW
4th|Alex Delvecchio|LW/C
5th|Carl Brewer|D
5th|Vaclav Nedomansky|RW
6th|Bill White|D

ATD#10 champion San Francisco Spiders:

Round|Player|Position
1st|Nicklas Lidström|D
2nd|Joe Sakic|C
3rd|Bill Gadsby|D
4th|Johnny Bucyk|LW
5th|Grant Fuhr|G

ATD#11 champion Boston Bruins:

Round|Player|Position
1st|Doug Harvey|D
2nd|Bill Cook|RW
3rd|Frank Nighbor|C
4th|Alex Delvecchio|LW/C
4th|Peter Stastny|C
6th|Grant Fuhr|G

ATD#12 champion Detroit Falcons:

Round|Player|Position
1st|Terry Sawchuk|G
2nd|Milt Schmidt|C
3rd|Bill Quackenbush|D
4th|Lionel Conacher|D
5th|Roy Conacher|LW
6th|Woody Dumart|LW

ATD 2010 champion New Jersey Swamp Devils:

Round|Player|Position
1st|Gordie Howe|RW
2nd|Börje Salming|D
3rd|Sid Abel|C/LW
4th|Busher Jackson|LW
4th|Babe Siebert|D/LW
5th|Charlie Gardiner|G
6th|Rob Blake|D

ATD 2011 champion Regina Pats:

Round|Player|Position
1st|Mark Messier|C
2nd|King Clancy|D
3rd|Johnny Bucyk|LW
4th|Teemu Selanne|RW
5th|Hap Day|D
6th|Tony Esposito|G

ATD 2012 champion Inglewood Jacks:

Round|Player|Position
1st|Wayne Gretzky|C
2nd|Jari Kurri|RW
3rd|Brian Leetch|D
4th|Moose Johnson|D
5th|George Boucher|D
6th|Frank Foyston|F

ATD 2013 champion Montreal Canadiens:

Round|Player|Position
1st|Raymond Bourque|D
2nd|Frank Boucher|C
3rd|Boris Mikhailov|RW
4th|Busher Jackson|LW
5th|Art Coulter|D
6th|Georges Vezina|G
6th|Jimmy Thomson|D

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Comments:

- ATD's #7 - #9 were largely characterized by a wild race to trade down among the leading GMs, with many of the trades being grossly unbalanced in favor of the team moving down. This foolishness peaked in ATD#9. If anyone thinks trades are annoying now, you should have been around for those drafts. This was an era when there was still a lot of "low-hanging fruit" in the ATD, and many of the best GMs knew it, and so would constantly look to move down and reap a bounty of later picks which could be used on players who had slipped. I personally hated this era of drafting, but it eventually came to an end.

- ATD's #10 and #11 featured the first champions which traded up, on net, in the early rounds, with the #10 champ still the only winner to have made fewer than the allotted number of picks in the first six rounds.

- goaltending was quite important in ATD's #6 - 8. This changed dramatically when the ATD#9 winner waited until very late and went all the way with Chuck Rayner. Since that time, every winner with the exception of Detroit has picked a goalie in rounds 5 through 7. At this point in the draft, I think we can say that it has become a trend. Championship goalies since ATD#9: Fuhr (5), Fuhr (6), Sawchuk (1), Gardiner (5), Esposito (6), Thompson (7), Vezina (6).

- from ATD#11 to ATD 2013, four of the six champions have used their top four picks on D, LW, C, RW in some order...essentially securing their #1 defenseman and top line forwards first, and building out from that base. I think this can be called an ATD trend at this point.

- the most similar of all ATD champions in terms of early-round draft philosophy appear to be the 2010 Swamp Devils and the 2013 Canadiens. Each team drafted D, C and RW with the top-3 picks, in differing orders, and then followed those picks up with Busher Jackson (LW), D, G, D, in exactly the same order.

- since ATD#8, securing a #3 defenseman relatively early seems to be a favored strategy, with five of the nine champions over that span having started their second pairings before the end of the 6th round. Out of all twelve ATD champions, only the ATD#11 champion went through six rounds having drafted only a single defenseman.
 

TheDevilMadeMe

Registered User
Aug 28, 2006
52,271
6,980
Brooklyn
Of the perennial first rounders, only Bobby Hull, Bobby Clarke, Howie Morenz, Larry Robinson and Ted Lindsay have been shut out.

Bobby Hull = really hard to build around, and of the guys really hard to build around, he's the one whose draft position is usually unaffected by it (though he did drop in ATD2013 when all the early wingers dropped).

Bobby Clarke = I don't know honestly, though he does always seem to be one of the first centers drafted in his tier, so he's rarely good value. Maybe it is relatively hard to build around him because as great as he is defensively, his offense isn't that great for a first liner, so you want to invest in a second center who is better than average.

Howie Morenz = I guess he's slightly hard to build around as you typically want a fast playmaking winger, though given the number of times he's reunited with Joliat, it really shouldn't be an issue. Probably just bad luck.

Larry Robinson = He's typically one of the worst values among defenseman as IMO, the drop off between Red Kelly and the next guy is pretty high He's also usually the first of the Robinson/Fetisov/Chelios trio to get drafted, so he's never particularly good value if you think (as I do) that those three are close. Though as you showed above, maybe it's just because drafting in the middle of the first round is fairly bad value no matter who you take.

Ted Lindsay = until last draft, he used to go WAY too early, usually in the teens. Going at the very end of the first round is a much more appropriate place for him.
 
Last edited:

BenchBrawl

Registered User
Jul 26, 2010
30,844
13,628
Sturm - Something that might be relevant is the fact that my draft position was originally 3rd instead of 9th.Is having the 3rd position overall something that gives me an advantage when it's time to find a partner to switch drafting position? Possibly.
 

Sturminator

Love is a duel
Feb 27, 2002
9,894
1,070
West Egg, New York
Bobby Hull = really hard to build around, and of the guys really hard to build around, he's the one whose draft position is usually unaffected by it (though he did drop in ATD2013 when all the early wingers dropped).

Bobby Clarke = I don't know honestly, though he does always seem to be one of the first centers drafted in his tier, so he's rarely good value. Maybe it is relatively hard to build around him because as great as he is defensively, his offense isn't that great for a first liner, so you want to invest in a second center who is better than average.

Howie Morenz = I guess he's slightly hard to build around as you typically want a fast playmaking winger, though given the number of times he's reunited with Joliat, it really shouldn't be an issue. Probably just bad luck.

Larry Robinson = He's typically one of the worst values among defenseman as IMO, the drop off between Red Kelly and the next guy is pretty high He's also usually the first of the Robinson/Fetisov/Chelios trio to get drafted, so he's never particularly good value if you think (as I do) that those three are close. Though as you showed above, maybe it's just because drafting in the middle of the first round is fairly bad value no matter who you take.

Ted Lindsay = until last draft, he used to go WAY too early, usually in the teens. Going at the very end of the first round is a much more appropriate place for him.

Hull...agree. He ought to go a bit lower due to the difficulty in building around him. I wouldn't touch him over any of the top-4 defensemen under any circumstances. Evil Speaker was actually dead set on drafting Hull at the #5 pick when we worked together in ATD#11. I had to do a lot of work to talk him out of it before we eventually went with Doug Harvey. Glad that I did.

Clarke...Bobby has been historically a bit overvalued, I think, though no more so than Bryan Trottier, who has gone to two conference finals, so I dunno. Frank Nighbor is slowly creeping up the draft and maybe next year, he'll crack the 1st round. Nighbor and Clarke should really be drafted very close to one another, and until that happens, Bobby will remain overvalued. It is no coincidence, I think, that Clarke has never seen a conference finals, while Nighbor has been in two, and centered the top line of a champion.

Morenz...seems like bad luck to me. Of the five players above, Morenz is the only one who I would strongly consider drafting where he typically goes in the 1st round.

Robinson...I think Robinson is somewhat similar to Clarke, Trottier and Bossy. Dynasty players from the childhoods of the early ATD participants seem to have been consistently overrated, and those early ratings have been pretty persistent. I would never draft Robinson (or any of the 8-10 defensemen) over any of the top-3 goalies, though other GMs often do.

Lindsay...I like Terrible Ted at the end of the 1st round, but yeah, he was one of the worst valued superstar players in the early iterations of the ATD.
 

Sturminator

Love is a duel
Feb 27, 2002
9,894
1,070
West Egg, New York
Sturm - Something that might be relevant is the fact that my draft position was originally 3rd instead of 9th.Is having the 3rd position overall something that gives me an advantage when it's time to find a partner to switch drafting position? Possibly.

I would say so. The holder of the 3rd pick knows he's going to end up with either Gretzky or Howe to start his team, which is an enviable position. I don't know how many suitors you had for that pick when you offered it up, but I'd imagine there was a lot of interest.
 

Sturminator

Love is a duel
Feb 27, 2002
9,894
1,070
West Egg, New York
ATD Diversity Over Time:

A short study of non-Canadian players on ATD conference finalists through the years. Reserves are listed in parentheses ().

ATD #6:

Champion: chelios, persson
Finalist: nedomansky, b. holik, kasatonov, lutchenko
Conf. Finalist: tkachuk, leclair, krutov, larionov, makarov, hlinka, pospisil, chara, samuellson, ozolinsh, (gonchar)
Conf. Finalist: tikkanen

- total non-Canadians: 18
- most non-Canadians: 11
- least non-Canadians: 1
- mean non-Canadians per team: 4.5

ATD #7:

Champion: (hossa)
Finalist: jagr, (steen)
Conf. Finalist: (holmstrom)
Conf. Finalist: zubov, johansson

- total non-Canadians: 6
- most non-Canadians: 2
- least non-Canadians: 1
- mean non-Canadians per team: 1.5

ATD #8:

Champion: n/a
Finalist: k. stevens, (barrasso), (kuzkin), (konovalenko)
Conf. Finalist: petrov
Conf. Finalist: griffis, dillon, holecek, vasiliev, norstrom, jir. holik

- total non-Canadians: 11
- most non-Canadians: 6
- least non-Canadians: 0
- mean non-Canadians per team: 2.75

ATD #9:

Champion: nedomansky
Finalist: brimsek, griffis, davydov, (konolavenko)
Conf. Finalist: selanne, chara, (olausson)
Conf. Finalist: tkachuk, larionov, (zetterberg)

- total non-Canadians: 11
- most non-Canadians: 4
- least non-Canadians: 1
- mean non-Canadians per team: 2.75

ATD #10:

Champion: maltsev, lidström (c), (vikulov)
Finalist: m. howe, bure, tikkanen, gustafsson, vasiliev, davydov, chara, hasek, (ozolinsh)
Conf. Finalist: kharlamov, petrov, mikhailov, ruotsalainen, tregubov
Conf. Finalist: jagr

- total non-Canadians: 18
- most non-Canadians: 9
- least non-Canadians: 1
- mean non-Canadians per team: 4.5

ATD #11:

Champion: leclair, stastny, martinec, suchý
Finalist: guerin, chelios, makarov, fetisov
Conf. Finalist: n/a
Conf. Finalist: hasek, ivanov, (jonsson)

- total non-Canadians: 11
- most non-Canadians: 4
- least non-Canadians: 0
- mean non-Canadians per team: 2.75

ATD #12:

Champion: n/a
Finalist: chelios, jagr, naslund, datsyuk, alexandrov, almetov, loktev, (konovalenko), (guerin)
Conf. Finalist: steen, nilsson, loob
Conf. Finalist: maltsev, naslund, kuzkin, (vikulov)

- total non-Canadians: 16
- most non-Canadians: 9
- least non-Canadians: 0
- mean non-Canadians per team: 4

ATD 2010:

Champion: tkachuk, martinec, jir. holik, salming, (liapkin)
Finalist: bure, holmstrom
Conf. Finalist: konstantinov, bubla, (dzurilla)
Conf. Finalist: stastny, maltsev, mikhailov, h. sedin, chara, (d. sedin)

- total non-Canadians: 16
- most non-Canadians: 6
- least non-Canadians: 2
- mean non-Canadians per team: 4

ATD 2011:

Champion: selanne
Finalist: modano, jagr, zetterberg, gusarov, samuelsson, (rautakillio), (straka), (dzurilla)
Conf. Finalist: starshinov, mayorov, palffy, handzus, bilyaletdinov
Conf. Finalist: chernyshev, tretiak, (richter), (shuvalov)

- total non-Canadians: 18
- most non-Canadians: 8
- least non-Canadians: 1
- mean non-Canadians per team: 4.5

ATD 2012:

Champion: lafontaine, leetch, kurri, mogilny, timonen, (demitra)
Finalist: modano, jagr, palffy, naslund, chara, johansson, svoboda, (zhitnik)
Conf. Finalist: guerin, stastny, zetterberg, naslund, gustafsson, jar. holik, tikal, (t. thomas)
Conf. Finalist: leclair, (a. hedberg)

- total non-Canadians: 24
- most non-Canadians: 8
- least non-Canadians: 2
- mean non-Canadians per team: 6

ATD 2013:

Champion: roenick, amonte, schneider, mikhailov (k), balderis, kapustin, (p. sundstrom), (s. thomas)
Finalist: kasatonov, steen
Conf. Finalist: brimsek, kovalchuk, novy, alfredsson, (dvorak), (kralik)
Conf. Finalist: z. parise, starshinov, jir. holik, ruotsalainen

- total non-Canadians: 20
- most non-Canadians: 8
- least non-Canadians: 2
- mean non-Canadians per team: 5

------------------------------------------------------------------------

One pleasant trend in the draft is the increasing diversity of the successful teams. The old guard which brought the draft into being and produced all of the champions from ATD's #6 - 9 preferred Canadian players, probably at least partially because information was somewhat limited at the time and because Canadian players are disproportionately represented in the THN top-100 and in the Hockey Hall of Fame. Starting in ATD#10, the draft began producing winners not of the first generation, and has gradually become more and more diverse ever since. I'll do a similar study regarding eras in the next couple of weeks, and I'm almost certain we'll find that earlier drafts favored O6/70's/80's players moreso than they do now, at the expense of pre-war (especially very old or PCHA) players, modern players and Europeans.

At any rate, the past two years have been the most diverse in the draft's history, with the current title holders having at once the most Americans, most Europeans, and only non-NHL captain in ATD championship history. As much as we talk about patterns and worry about things getting stale, the ATD continues to grow and diversify parallel to our collective knowledge of the history of the sport.
 
Last edited:

TheDevilMadeMe

Registered User
Aug 28, 2006
52,271
6,980
Brooklyn
ATD Diversity Over Time:

A short study of non-European players on ATD Cup winners through the years. Reserves are listed in parentheses ().

ATD #6 - chelios, persson

ATD #7 - (hossa)

ATD #8 - n/a

ATD #9 - nedomansky

ATD #10 - maltsev, lidström (c), (vikulov)

ATD #11 - leclair, stastny, martinec, suchý

ATD #12 - n/a

ATD 2010 - tkachuk, martinec, holik, salming, (liapkin)

ATD 2011 - selanne

ATD 2012 - lafontaine, leetch, kurri, mogilny, timonen

ATD 2013 - roenick, amonte, schneider, mikhailov (k), balderis, kapustin, (sundstrom), (thomas)

------------------------------------------------------------------------

One pleasant trend in the draft is the increasing diversity of the winning teams. The old guard which brought the draft into being and produced all of the champions from ATD's #6 - 9 preferred Canadian players, probably at least partially because information was somewhat limited at the time and because Canadian players are disproportionately represented in the THN top-100 and in the Hockey Hall of Fame. Starting in ATD#10, the draft began producing winners not of the first generation, and has gradually become more and more diverse ever since. I'll do a similar study regarding eras in the next couple of weeks, and I'm almost certain we'll find that earlier drafts favored O6/70's/80's players moreso than they do now, at the expense of pre-war (especially very old or PCHA) players, modern players and Europeans.

At any rate, the past two champions have been the most diverse in the draft's history, with the current champs having at once the most Americans, most Europeans, and only non-NHL championship captain in ATD history. As much as we talk about patterns and worry about things getting stale, the ATD continues to grow and diversify parallel to our collective knowledge of the history of the sport.

This is really interesting stuff, but if you want to really analyze trends, you really need to look at more than just the winner (but I know, it takes a lot more work!) Especially in the current draft, where tiebreaks were the only things separating the 4 Conference Finalists. As is, you are just comparing samples of 1 team per year.

I also expect to see the older drafts massively favoring NHL players from the Original 6 and 1970s. Perhaps into the early 1980s.
 

Nalyd Psycho

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
24,415
14
No Bandwagon
Visit site
Hull...agree. He ought to go a bit lower due to the difficulty in building around him. I wouldn't touch him over any of the top-4 defensemen under any circumstances. Evil Speaker was actually dead set on drafting Hull at the #5 pick when we worked together in ATD#11. I had to do a lot of work to talk him out of it before we eventually went with Doug Harvey. Glad that I did.

I would. He'd be a fun challenge. Second best player I've never had. But then again. After ATD 2011, I have pledged that the only motivation should be having fun. Banking my enjoyment on trying to win lead to stress and frustration. Ironically enough, prior to that I made the conference finals once, since then I've made it there in back to back years. So now, having fun is my winning strategy.
 

pappyline

Registered User
Jul 3, 2005
4,587
182
Mass/formerly Ont
Hull...agree. He ought to go a bit lower due to the difficulty in building around him. I wouldn't touch him over any of the top-4 defensemen under any circumstances. Evil Speaker was actually dead set on drafting Hull at the #5 pick when we worked together in ATD#11. I had to do a lot of work to talk him out of it before we eventually went with Doug Harvey. Glad that I did.

Wow, I don't understand this at all. Hull to me is one of the easiest players to build around. Can play with almost any type of player so once you have him you can focus on building a great defense and fill out your first line later.

He wasn't just this one dimensional guy that took the big rush finishing off with a slap shot. he was much more than that. He could make the play in close also and was a pretty good passer. Great physical player & back checker also if you want to waste his talents. Of course you want to play to his main strength which is goal scoring. Centres that he was most effective with were Hay, Esposito, and Nilsson. Trouble is that most of you guys don't see Hay& Nilsson as first line centres in an all time draft. Other guys that would be great with Hull are Henri Richard, Lach, Abel & Ratelle. As a Rw, Hedberg is the ideal RW But there are others.

Edit-Add Perreault. They were magic together in the 76 Canada cup.
 
Last edited:

TheDevilMadeMe

Registered User
Aug 28, 2006
52,271
6,980
Brooklyn
Wow, I don't understand this at all. Hull to me is one of the easiest players to build around. Can play with almost any type of player so once you have him you can focus on building a great defense and fill out your first line later.

He wasn't just this one dimensional guy that took the big rush finishing off with a slap shot. he was much more than that. He could make the play in close also and was a pretty good passer. Great physical player & back checker also if you want to waste his talents. Of course you want to play to his main strength which is goal scoring. Centres that he was most effective with were Hay, Esposito, and Nilsson. Trouble is that most of you guys don't see Hay& Nilsson as first line centres in an all time draft. Other guys that would be great with Hull are Henri Richard, Lach, Abel & Ratelle. As a Rw, Hedberg is the ideal RW But there are others.

Edit-Add Perreault. They were magic together in the 76 Canada cup.

I thought the line in the 1976 Canada Cup was Bobby Hull - Phil Esposito - Marcel Dionne?

My "issue" with Hull is that from everything I read, he really preferred to be the dominant puck possession player on his line, but most traditional ATD first line centers are dominant puck possession players. I thought madArcand did really well to get Fedorov to center Hull, even if Fedorov probably isn't a traditional "first line center" under normal circumstances

Why didn't Hull and Mikita work well together at even strength?
 

pappyline

Registered User
Jul 3, 2005
4,587
182
Mass/formerly Ont
I thought the line in the 1976 Canada Cup was Bobby Hull - Phil Esposito - Marcel Dionne?

My "issue" with Hull is that from everything I read, he really preferred to be the dominant puck possession player on his line, but most traditional ATD first line centers are dominant puck possession players. I thought madArcand did really well to get Fedorov to center Hull, even if Fedorov probably isn't a traditional "first line center" under normal circumstances

Why didn't Hull and Mikita work well together at even strength?

Although a left wing hull played a lot like a centre. Jagr & Lafleur were other wingers who played more like centres. Most people forget that he came into the league as a centre and was predominantly a playmaker his first couple of seasons it really wasn't until hid 5th season that it was realized what a goal scoring phenomenon he was. So sure he liked to have the puck a lot. I think most superstars do.

In the 76 Canada cup, Espo started off between Hull & Dionne but was later benched & replaced by Perreault. There is a great clip that I can't find now where Hull backchecks & strips the puck from a Russian and then carries the puck back up & makes a perfect pass to Perreault who scores.

I think Federov is another good centre for Hull.

I always wondered about Hull & Mikita at ES myself. I guess both liked to have the puck themselves. Plus I think Mikita needed skilled complimentary players. Wharram, Mohns, Mcdonald types. Hull it didn't matter. Though watching him with Nilsson & Hedberg was magical. I saw that live & they were incredible.


Chicago had the superstars but didn't have a lot of depth. Made sense to have Hull & mikita on separate lines. Pittsburgh does it today with Malkin & crosby.


I really think you guys are giving Hull a bad rap here.
 

Nalyd Psycho

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
24,415
14
No Bandwagon
Visit site
I thought the line in the 1976 Canada Cup was Bobby Hull - Phil Esposito - Marcel Dionne?

My "issue" with Hull is that from everything I read, he really preferred to be the dominant puck possession player on his line, but most traditional ATD first line centers are dominant puck possession players. I thought madArcand did really well to get Fedorov to center Hull, even if Fedorov probably isn't a traditional "first line center" under normal circumstances

Why didn't Hull and Mikita work well together at even strength?
The reason you stated. One puck. As a general rule, speedy two way centres who don't "need" the puck are best fits, Nighbor, Fedorov, Richard and others being the best examples.

The fact that he showed aptitude for a European style game really intrigues me.
 

Sturminator

Love is a duel
Feb 27, 2002
9,894
1,070
West Egg, New York
This is really interesting stuff, but if you want to really analyze trends, you really need to look at more than just the winner (but I know, it takes a lot more work!) Especially in the current draft, where tiebreaks were the only things separating the 4 Conference Finalists. As is, you are just comparing samples of 1 team per year.

You're right. I have expanded the data somewhat:

ATD Diversity Over Time:

A short study of non-Canadian players on ATD conference finalists through the years. Reserves are listed in parentheses ().

ATD #6:

Champion: chelios, persson
Finalist: nedomansky, b. holik, kasatonov, lutchenko
Conf. Finalist: tkachuk, leclair, krutov, larionov, makarov, hlinka, pospisil, chara, samuellson, ozolinsh, (gonchar)
Conf. Finalist: tikkanen

- total non-Canadians: 18
- most non-Canadians: 11
- least non-Canadians: 1
- mean non-Canadians per team: 4.5

ATD #7:

Champion: (hossa)
Finalist: jagr, (steen)
Conf. Finalist: (holmstrom)
Conf. Finalist: zubov, johansson

- total non-Canadians: 6
- most non-Canadians: 2
- least non-Canadians: 1
- mean non-Canadians per team: 1.5

ATD #8:

Champion: n/a
Finalist: k. stevens, (barrasso), (kuzkin), (konovalenko)
Conf. Finalist: petrov
Conf. Finalist: griffis, dillon, holecek, vasiliev, norstrom, jir. holik

- total non-Canadians: 11
- most non-Canadians: 6
- least non-Canadians: 0
- mean non-Canadians per team: 2.75

ATD #9:

Champion: nedomansky
Finalist: brimsek, griffis, davydov, (konolavenko)
Conf. Finalist: selanne, chara, (olausson)
Conf. Finalist: tkachuk, larionov, (zetterberg)

- total non-Canadians: 11
- most non-Canadians: 4
- least non-Canadians: 1
- mean non-Canadians per team: 2.75

ATD #10:

Champion: maltsev, lidström (c), (vikulov)
Finalist: m. howe, bure, tikkanen, gustafsson, vasiliev, davydov, chara, hasek, (ozolinsh)
Conf. Finalist: kharlamov, petrov, mikhailov, ruotsalainen, tregubov
Conf. Finalist: jagr

- total non-Canadians: 18
- most non-Canadians: 9
- least non-Canadians: 1
- mean non-Canadians per team: 4.5

ATD #11:

Champion: leclair, stastny, martinec, suchý
Finalist: guerin, chelios, makarov, fetisov
Conf. Finalist: n/a
Conf. Finalist: hasek, ivanov, (jonsson)

- total non-Canadians: 11
- most non-Canadians: 4
- least non-Canadians: 0
- mean non-Canadians per team: 2.75

ATD #12:

Champion: n/a
Finalist: chelios, jagr, naslund, datsyuk, alexandrov, almetov, loktev, (konovalenko), (guerin)
Conf. Finalist: steen, nilsson, loob
Conf. Finalist: maltsev, naslund, kuzkin, (vikulov)

- total non-Canadians: 16
- most non-Canadians: 9
- least non-Canadians: 0
- mean non-Canadians per team: 4

ATD 2010:

Champion: tkachuk, martinec, jir. holik, salming, (liapkin)
Finalist: bure, holmstrom
Conf. Finalist: konstantinov, bubla, (dzurilla)
Conf. Finalist: stastny, maltsev, mikhailov, h. sedin, chara, (d. sedin)

- total non-Canadians: 16
- most non-Canadians: 6
- least non-Canadians: 2
- mean non-Canadians per team: 4

ATD 2011:

Champion: selanne
Finalist: modano, jagr, zetterberg, gusarov, samuelsson, (rautakillio), (straka), (dzurilla)
Conf. Finalist: starshinov, mayorov, palffy, handzus, bilyaletdinov
Conf. Finalist: chernyshev, tretiak, (richter), (shuvalov)

- total non-Canadians: 18
- most non-Canadians: 8
- least non-Canadians: 1
- mean non-Canadians per team: 4.5

ATD 2012:

Champion: lafontaine, leetch, kurri, mogilny, timonen, (demitra)
Finalist: modano, jagr, palffy, naslund, chara, johansson, svoboda, (zhitnik)
Conf. Finalist: guerin, stastny, zetterberg, naslund, gustafsson, jar. holik, tikal, (t. thomas)
Conf. Finalist: leclair, (a. hedberg)

- total non-Canadians: 24
- most non-Canadians: 8
- least non-Canadians: 2
- mean non-Canadians per team: 6

ATD 2013:

Champion: roenick, amonte, schneider, mikhailov (k), balderis, kapustin, (p. sundstrom), (s. thomas)
Finalist: kasatonov, steen
Conf. Finalist: brimsek, kovalchuk, novy, alfredsson, (dvorak), (kralik)
Conf. Finalist: z. parise, starshinov, jir. holik, ruotsalainen

- total non-Canadians: 20
- most non-Canadians: 8
- least non-Canadians: 2
- mean non-Canadians per team: 5

- I think the general narrative that ATD#10 was something of a watershed in terms of increasing diversity in the draft still holds, though it should be noted that the most diverse team in that draft was HO's, who is what I would call a 1st generation ATDer. So in this case, the increasing diversity wasn't really being driven so much by a new generation of GMs, and at least half of the winning team that draft (myself) isn't particularly young, anyway.

- in general, I think the ATD can be divided up somewhat into eras.

- ATD's #6, #7, #8 and #9: this era was characterized by a preference for Canadian players, and I strongly suspect O6/70's era players. It was defined largely by 1st generation ATD GMs like Hockey Outsider, pitseleh, pappyline, Transplanted Caper, VanIslander, Evil Speaker, John Flyers Fan, MXD, GBC & raleh, spitfire, BM67, cottonking, etc.

- ATD's #10, #11 and #12: this is sort of the middle era at this point. There was still influence from the 1st generation, but it came to be increasingly defined by 2nd generation ATD GMs like arrbez, EagleBelfour, nik jr., Nalyd Psycho, Hedberg, papershoes, chaosrevolver, vcl, myself, etc. This era saw a rise of greater diversity in terms of non-Canadians, and I believe greater integration of pre-war players (though much of this was building off of the work of BM67, a 1st generation GM).

- ATD's 2010, 2011 and 2012: this is what I would call the third era of the ATD, which was defined largely by 3rd generation GMs like TDMM, overpass, seventieslord, Dreakmur, Leafs Forever, Velociraptor, markrander, jarek, DoMakc, Mr Bugg, MadArcand, JFA, etc. This era saw the advent of extensive Google Archives searching and the creation of player profiles as a standard practice in the draft. Diversity, in terms of geography and era, continued to increase throughout this period, peaking in ATD 2012 (though old hands arrbez and nik jr. squared off for the title that year). Modern players started really coming into their own in this era.

- ATD 2013 - : I would say this year probably marks the beginning of a new era, with the finals being contested by a couple of excellent 4th generation GMs, BBS and Jafar. Hard to say just what this era has in store for us, though this year saw the first time that ATD-native analytic tools were put to widespread use, with the VsX system likely playing a role in the eventual outcome. The relative common use of overpass' spreadsheet data has also changed in large part the way we look at special teams vs. even strength performance in the ATD.​

- somewhat remarkable that the most successful non-Canadian team in draft history actually came out of ATD#6, though this appears to have been a large outlier within the era.

- most successful Europeans: the Holiks have done quite well, as a group. Either Jagr or Martinec is probably the most successful European, overall. Nedomansky, Kasatonov, Chara, Mikhailov, Hasek, Petrov, Tikkanen, Gustafsson, Starshinov, Selanne, Zetterberg, Maltsev, Stastny, Naslund, Bure, Vasiliev, Steen, Holmstrom, Dzurilla, Ozolinsh, Ruotsalainen, Davydov, Konovalenko and the whole KLM line have all been to multiple conference finals.

- Chris Chelios, John Leclair and Keith Tkachuk have all gone to three conference finals, and been on a single champion. Modano, Guerin, Griffis and Brimsek have all been to multiple conference finals.
 
Last edited:

Sturminator

Love is a duel
Feb 27, 2002
9,894
1,070
West Egg, New York
ATD Eras Over Time:

* note: I have divided the players up by eras. It is rough work, but I have tried to keep the eras as balanced as possible. They are:

- Prewar: hockey until 1941-42
- O6: hockey between 1942-43 and 1966-67
- 70-80's: hockey between 1967-68 and 1989-90
- Modern: hockey from 1990-91 to present​

- many players span two eras. I have simply placed them arbitrarily in one era or the other based on my own rough judgment of which era saw the larger part of their peak.

ATD#6:

Result|Prewar|O6|70-80's|Modern
Champion|2|7|7|7
Finalist|6|5|9|3
Conf. Fin.|5|7|5|6
Conf. Fin.|1|1|11|10

Prewar total_: 14 // %: 15.2
O6 total____: 20 // %: 21.7
70-80's total: 32 // %: 34.8
Modern total: 26 // %: 28.3

ATD#7:

Result|Prewar|O6|70-80's|Modern
Champion|10|7|4|2
Finalist|4|2|15|2
Conf. Fin.|1|9|11|2
Conf. Fin.|4|4|12|3

Prewar total_: 19 // %: 20.7
O6 total____: 22 // %: 23.9
70-80's total: 42 // %: 45.7
Modern total_: 8 // %: 8.7

ATD#8:

Result|Prewar|O6|70-80's|Modern
Champion|3|7|12|1
Finalist|10|6|7|0
Conf. Fin.|9|3|6|5
Conf. Fin.|13|3|5|2

Prewar total_: 35 // %: 38.0
O6 total____: 19 // %: 20.7
70-80's total: 30 // %: 32.6
Modern total_: 8 // %: 8.7

ATD#9:

Result|Prewar|O6|70-80's|Modern
Champion|3|17|2|0
Finalist|12|7|4|0
Conf. Fin.|4|8|6|4
Conf. Fin.|4|5|10|4

Prewar total_: 23 // %: 25.6
O6 total____: 37 // %: 41.1
70-80's total: 22 // %: 24.4
Modern total_: 8 // %: 8.9

ATD#10:

Result|Prewar|O6|70-80's|Modern
Champion|7|6|8|2
Finalist|4|3|11|5
Conf. Fin.|2|4|13|4
Conf. Fin.|6|8|9|0

Prewar total_: 19 // %: 20.7
O6 total____: 21 // %: 22.8
70-80's total: 41 // %: 44.6
Modern total: 11 // %: 12.0

ATD#11:

Result|Prewar|O6|70-80's|Modern
Champion|8|8|6|1
Finalist|4|7|7|5
Conf. Fin.|9|8|4|2
Conf. Fin.|12|3|6|2

Prewar total_: 33 // %: 35.9
O6 total____: 26 // %: 28.3
70-80's total: 23 // %: 25.0
Modern total: 10 // %: 10.9

ATD#12:

Result|Prewar|O6|70-80's|Modern
Champion|12|10|1|0
Finalist|5|8|4|6
Conf. Fin.|2|3|14|4
Conf. Fin.|5|3|10|5

Prewar total_: 24 // %: 26.1
O6 total____: 24 // %: 26.1
70-80's total: 29 // %: 31.5
Modern total: 15 // %: 16.3

ATD 2010:

Result|Prewar|O6|70-80's|Modern
Champion|5|5|11|2
Finalist|5|2|10|6
Conf. Fin.|4|8|6|5
Conf. Fin.|4|6|12|1

Prewar total_: 18 // %: 19.6
O6 total____: 21 // %: 22.8
70-80's total: 39 // %: 42.4
Modern total: 14 // %: 15.2

ATD 2011:

Result|Prewar|O6|70-80's|Modern
Champion|4|8|8|4
Finalist|6|5|3|10
Conf. Fin.|8|10|4|2
Conf. Fin.|6|7|5|6

Prewar total_: 24 // %: 25.0
O6 total____: 30 // %: 31.3
70-80's total: 20 // %: 20.8
Modern total: 22 // %: 22.9

ATD 2012:

Result|Prewar|O6|70-80's|Modern
Champion|6|3|5|10
Finalist|2|5|8|9
Conf. Fin.|6|8|6|4
Conf. Fin.|6|5|6|7

Prewar total_: 20 // %: 20.8
O6 total____: 21 // %: 21.9
70-80's total: 25 // %: 26.0
Modern total: 30 // %: 31.3

ATD 2013:

Result|Prewar|O6|70-80's|Modern
Champion|5|4|8|7
Finalist|8|5|7|4
Conf. Fin.|6|7|7|4
Conf. Fin.|5|8|9|2

Prewar total_: 24 // %: 25.0
O6 total____: 24 // %: 25.0
70-80's total: 31 // %: 32.3
Modern total: 17 // %: 17.7
 
Last edited:

Sturminator

Love is a duel
Feb 27, 2002
9,894
1,070
West Egg, New York
It's actually harder than I had expected to find clear trends in terms of era favoritism across ATD history. The rate of O6 players in the conference finals has actually remained quite stable over the years. Other than ATD#9, which was dominated by pappyline's nearly 100% O6 franchise, the older drafts show no particular bias towards this era.

If anything, the older drafts may show a small bias towards 70's-80's era players. There has been a slow increase in the number of modern players present in the conference finals, with the pool peaking in ATD 2012 as the largest single group of players. Of course, this is a somewhat artificial distinction with reference to earlier drafts, as the "modern era" is now seven years longer than it was when the ATD started, so naturally we have more players from that period in recent drafts.
 

TheDevilMadeMe

Registered User
Aug 28, 2006
52,271
6,980
Brooklyn
It's actually harder than I had expected to find clear trends in terms of era favoritism across ATD history. The rate of O6 players in the conference finals has actually remained quite stable over the years. Other than ATD#9, which was dominated by pappyline's nearly 100% O6 franchise, the older drafts show no particular bias towards this era.

If anything, the older drafts may show a small bias towards 70's-80's era players. There has been a slow increase in the number of modern players present in the conference finals, with the pool peaking in ATD 2012 as the largest single group of players. Of course, this is a somewhat artificial distinction with reference to earlier drafts, as the "modern era" is now seven years longer than it was when the ATD started, so naturally we have more players from that period in recent drafts.

I wonder if you would find more of a distinction if you set a cut off at 1980. At least numerically, both the 2008 and 2009 HOH Top 100 lists "under-represent" players who peaked after 1980. I know a few people commented at how "modern" my ATD 2010 championship team was, and in that sense, I think "modern" included 1980s players like Denis Savard.
 

Sturminator

Love is a duel
Feb 27, 2002
9,894
1,070
West Egg, New York
I wonder if you would find more of a distinction if you set a cut off at 1980. At least numerically, both the 2008 and 2009 HOH Top 100 lists "under-represent" players who peaked after 1980. I know a few people commented at how "modern" my ATD 2010 championship team was, and in that sense, I think "modern" included 1980s players like Denis Savard.

That may be. I tried to keep the sizes of the individual eras nearly equal so as to maintain a kind of balance, but it may be more enlightening to break the analysis down into 10-season segments. I'll have to check my notes on how I classified the individual players.

I think the perception of your team as a modern one is partly based in reality - it had the highest proportion of post-expansion players of any champion since ATD#8 - and partly a result of subjective factors. Compared to Eagle's ATD#12 champions...well, just about any team is modern compared to that team...but it was also a matter of the roles that your more modern players were in. Keith Tkachuk was the subject of some discussion during that draft, if I recall correctly, and Rob Blake was widely recognized as having been something of a steal for you. I think your team, in spite of not actually having an abundance of recent players, was seen as fairly modern by virtue of having a spotlight put on the modern players that it did have. The fact that you have persistently and persuasively argued on behalf of modern players probably added to that perception. My own ATD#10 champion was considered fairly modern, as well, not because it actually had a lot of modern players, but because the 80's-to-present players that it did have (Sakic, Lidstrom, Savard and Fuhr, mostly) were in quite prominent roles.

In truth, the ATD#6 champion was more modern than either of our teams. ATD#6 was some kind of strange bird. I wasn't a part of the process at the time, nor did I observe the draft, so I can't really comment on what went on, but it much more resembles recent drafts than anything that came directly after it. Specifically Frightened Inmate's team was some kind of modern, European freakshow in comparison to the rest of what was going around at the time. It's interesting that he got as far as he did with such a team.
 

EagleBelfour

Registered User
Jun 7, 2005
7,467
62
ehsl.proboards32.com
ATD#12:

Result|Prewar|O6|70-80's|Modern
Champion|12|10|1|0
Finalist|5|8|4|6
Conf. Fin.|2|3|14|4
Conf. Fin.|5|3|10|5

I forgot which year I won the draft, but looking at these results I was sure that was my year!

One thing we don't need to forget is that a lot of GM's doesn't take the modern players not because of a bias, but because we did or still have the chance to watch them play. Datsyuk, Malkin, Zetterberg etc ... are fantastic players, and I try to evaluate them properly when I see them lined up in a team, but personally, I don't have much pleasure selecting them. It's an All-Time Draft and I like learning about older players. In 10 drafts, I only selected four active players, including 43-years old, San Jose Sharks Claude Lemieux.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->