ATD11 Regular Season Standings

[VanIslander]

All-Time Draft #11 Regular Season Standings


Jim Coleman Conference


Bob Cole division:


1st Detroit Falcons

coach: Fred Shero

Dickie Moore (A) - Sid Abel (C) - Bill Mosienko
Busher Jackson - Jacques Lemaire - Lanny McDonald (A)
Esa Tikkanen - Fleming Mackell - Claude Lemieux
Gordon Roberts - Tommy Dunderdale - Ken Randall
Buddy O'Connor, Ernie Russell

Raymond Bourque (A) - Alexander Ragulin
Jimmy Thomson - Gus Mortson
Lloyd Cook - Alexander Gusev
Taffy Abel

Frank Brimsek
Riley Hern


2. Regina Pats
3. lada togliatti
4. Trail Smoke Eaters
5. Killarney Country Bear Jamboree
6. Montreal Canadiens
7. Toronto Maple Leafs



René Lecavalier division:


1st Inglewood Jacks

coach: Harry Sinden

Cy Denneny - Joe Malone - Hooley Smith (A)
Dany Heatley - Denis Savard - Sergei Makarov
Nick Metz - Ken Mosdell - Joe Klukay
Al Secord - Bernie Nicholls - Bill Guerin
Mel Bridgman, Shane Doan

Slava Fetisov (C) - Eric Desjardins
Chris Chelios (A) - Jimmy Watson
Leo Reise jr - Glen Harmon
Pat Egan

Harry Lumley
Chuck Rayner


2. Glace Bay Miners
3. New Westminster Bruins
4. Hampton Roads Admirals
5. Kimberley Dynamiters
6. Dauphin Kings
7. Edmonton Oilers​

(EB will post the Red Fisher Conference results later in the day.)

Click to read more...

 

[EagleBelfour]

All-Time Draft #11 Regular Season Standings


Red Fisher Conference Conference


Jim Robston division:


1st Nanaimo Clippers

Coach: Art Ross

Bert Olmstead - Nels Stewart - Gordie Howe
Dean Prentice - Adam Oates - Peter Bondra
Don Marshall - Art Chapman - Tony Leswick
Markus Naslund - Paul Ronty - Andy Hebenton
Billy Reay, Harry Oliver

Bill Gadsby - Al MacInnis
Pat Stapleton - Bill White
Bucko McDonald - Jiri Bubla
Yuri Liapkin

Tony Esposito
Alex Connell


2. Detroit Red Wings
3. Wacken Warriors
4. Kilkenny Bustards
5. Kenora Thistles
6. Victoria Salmon Kings
7. Colorado Avalanches



Foster Hewitt division:


1st Boston Bruins

Coach: Al Arbour

Alex Delvecchio - Frank Nighbor - Bill Cook
John LeClair - Peter Stastny - Vladimir Martinec
J.P. Parise - Don McKenney - Harry Hyland
Ed Sandford - Dick Irvin Sr. - Jim Pappin
Reggie Fleming - Charlie Burns

Doug Harvey - Hap Day
Jim Neilson - Jan Suchý
Graham Drinkwater - Red Dutton
Gilles Marotte

Grant Fuhr
Dave Kerr


2. Thunder Bay Twins
3. Minnesota Fighting Saints
4. Anyang Halla
5. Boston Braves
6. Trinec Steelers
7. Team Soviet Union​

 

[arrbez]

Does #1 get a bye, or is #7 not making the playoffs?

 

[seventieslord]

Does #1 get a bye, or is #7 not making the playoffs?

as usual, everyone makes the playoffs, so #1 gets a bye.

congratulations arrbez, I liked your team a lot and had you #1 in your division. You deserved this.

 

[seventieslord]

Also, congrats to Kyle McMahon for an outstanding entry in his first try at the real thing. (he's been in the MLD and AAA drafts)

To be anything other than bottom-two in your division in your first draft is difficult, if not impossible. Not bad for having the "worst" starter in the draft.

 

[EagleBelfour]

Red Fisher Division conference

I will start the playoff thread tonight.

 

[seventieslord]

Jeez, EB, it's not even my conference, but I really want to see the standings. Can you post the Red Fisher division at least?

 

[EagleBelfour]

Jeez, EB, it's not even my conference, but I really want to see the standings. Can you post the Red Fisher division at least?

If it's a joke because I wrote the ''Red Fisher Division'' instead of the ''Red Fisher Conference', I don't undersand it

If it's a serious question about seeing the detailed results, no one really convince me of showing the results at this point in the season. I have no problem releasing the detailed results at the end of the draft; AFTER the final though. If a good number of GM approve of me realeasing the data, I'll do (I'm also curious, but at this point in the draft in my opinion it's no use of giving them away)

 

[seventieslord]

No, it was my fault. I didn't realize you had edited the above post, which now contains the standings of the other conference (whose name I had wrong) No wonder it didn't make sense to you.

I thought you said "Red fisher division done" meaning the other division was done, but I wanted to see the standings, not just know it was done. I didn't see it up above.

Now you see how I'm scum?

 

[EagleBelfour]

No, it was my fault. I didn't realize you had edited the above post, which now contains the standings of the other conference (whose name I had wrong) No wonder it didn't make sense to you.

I thought you said "Red fisher division done" meaning the other division was done, but I wanted to see the standings, not just know it was done. I didn't see it up above.

Now you see how I'm scum?

Now I understand!

 

[chaosrevolver]

Well that sucks...last place...wow...

 

[arrbez]

I didn't have you last. Keep that in mind when you vote on my series .

 

[pitseleh]

Damn, definitely wasn't expecting first so it's a pleasant surprise.

 

[chaosrevolver]

I didn't have you last. Keep that in mind when you vote on my series .

Meh, for me this draft is based too much on the username, and not as much on the team.

Not that im saying I deserve better. I'm just saying that I think people get respect based on them participating in more of the conversation and debates (GBC, VanI, etc.) Not at all saying those guys don't deserve their positions..but I think sometimes, people base it too much on the reputation of the username. For me, a year ago I thought Marian Gaborik was a top-3 round steal in the MLD. I've obviously become more knowledgable..but I don't feel comfortable getting in debates with some of the more experienced guys. Being that I'm only 17 years old, that will probably change, but I think it puts be at a huge disadvantage in the respect category.

Can't control it, but that's one of the reasons this might be my last ATD.

Anyway, it was a fun team to build and you never know..maybe I can pull the upset (although extremely unlikely).

 

[Spitfire11]

Well that sucks...last place...wow...

Surprised me too, I had your team 3rd. Loved the defense from top to bottom, and centres too. I guess the wingers might have been why some had you ranked lower, and there are also quite a few GMs who aren't fond of Tretiak for one reason or another. That whole division was very tough too, all 7 were great teams.

Looks like I have a Red Wings-Avalanche matchup first, should be fun.

 

[arrbez]

Good point on Tretiak. He's one of the most divisive players in the draft it seems.

 

[seventieslord]

CR - I was shocked to see that too. I had you 2nd. I'd like to just say it was Tretiak, but that alone shouldn't do it. Hampton Roads was 4th with Worters. Besides, tretiak was a top-10 goalie according to the HOH top-100 project, and there is plenty of overlap between that group, and this group of GMs. The perception of him should be fairly high.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

Also, congrats to Kyle McMahon for an outstanding entry in his first try at the real thing. (he's been in the MLD and AAA drafts)

To be anything other than bottom-two in your division in your first draft is difficult, if not impossible. Not bad for having the "worst" starter in the draft.

Thanks dude, I felt your entry was excellent as well, maybe the best in the draft.

 

[Sturminator]

Meh, for me this draft is based too much on the username, and not as much on the team.

While that does go on to a certain extent, remember that pit won the ATD in his second draft.

Not that im saying I deserve better. I'm just saying that I think people get respect based on them participating in more of the conversation and debates (GBC, VanI, etc.) Not at all saying those guys don't deserve their positions..but I think sometimes, people base it too much on the reputation of the username.

Actually, I think you do deserve better. You got stuck in a division with three of the ATD#10 regular season division winners (HO, Nalyd and myself) as well as three conference finalists (HO, Speaker and myself). You built a strong team with no glaring weaknesses. If I had to pick something, I would say that Vlad Konstantinov is clearly out of place as a #2 defenseman and that no one of your units is truly great. I think you achieved a very solid, balanced team, however, and drawing a seven seed is a tough lot. You've definitely got a strong working model.

One more thing: research goes a long way to establishing credibility and has the double function of selling your team in the eyes of the other GMs. You don't need an elephant's memory like GBC to be seen as a sharp GM. Bringing new information and arguments to the table is much more valuable, in my opinion, than having strong feelings on already threadbare topics. Perhaps I am forgetting, but I don't recall seeing much original player research from you in the ATD. Something in depth (eg. new information) about just one or two of your players will really go a long way. In ATD#10, I offered in-depth research on three of my players - Alex Maltsev, Frank Foyston and Don McKenney - and judging by the results, that was all I needed. Don't be intimidated by guys slapping down encyclopaedic quotes from The Trail or other arcane sources, either. Besides Ultimate Hockey (which is a superficial source in many ways), I own none of those books, and I think I do allright. You would likely be shocked by how much of my research is resolved through google.

If you want a more recent example of a successful, young rookie GM, look at Kyle. I had his team second in the division behind Inglewood (and would not be shocked to see Hampton roads in the Conference Finals or beyond), and it was a hard choice between the two. Kyle's not an old guy and doesn't remember every Al Iafrate boner like GBC or what position Doug Mohns played in 1960 like pappy, and yet I have a lot of respect for his opinions because he has demonstrated deep knowledge (on this and the history board) and has a fresh, open-minded perspective. I could just as easily be describing pitseleh circa ATD#6, and his results speak for themselves.

The real question is whether or not you like doing the research necessary to really excell in this thing. I think the GMs who do best are, to a man, as much in love with the process as they are with the results. For my part, I've been telling myself I didn't have enough time for the ATD since my first week of participation back in ATD#8 (seriously, I'm a lawyer and time does become a real ***** sometimes, which is why I always roll with a co-GM), but I enjoy the research, debate and discussion that constitute the ATD so much that, like a crackhead, I keep coming back for just one more fix.

 

[seventieslord]

You said it, man.

research is where it's at.

 

[VanIslander]

The Colorado Avalanche is 7th in the division, worst of all.

I started the team by taking one of the best goaltenders (Patrick Roy) and a bona fide number one defensman (Pierre Pilote), later adding two more very good defensemen in Buck Boucher and Leo Boivin to provide a defensive core in front of Roy, then was pleased to pick up in the 4/5 slots Carlyle and Ramage, Ramage a perfect solid-in-his-own-end conservative-minded third pairing partner for Vadnais, a top-5 scorer in the 70s, a fighter and a good defender. The blueline is great, isn't it?

And the value among forwards!

Robitaille 188th overall?
Sundin 205th overall?
Bauer 317th overall?
Damphousse 412th overall?

All fantastic value relative to other guys getting picked just before and after them. Maybe they dropped because they aren't "popular" with you guys, hence you don't think about their ability and value in assessing teams.

You guys have ranked high in past drafts teams with worse goaltending, worse bluelines and yet with guys like Herbie Lewis on 2nd lines (he's here on Avs 3rd line, the LW so deep), Bobby Holik on 3rd lines (he's on 4th here), Kevin Hatcher and Wilf Paiement in the middle of the line-up (extra skaters here).

To top it off, we went through 20 rounds and no one took Roger Neilson or Jacques Demers, the former helping the young Oilers win their first cup and seen as a premier associate coach in the history of the game, the latter coaching over 1000 consecutive games, the NHL's only back-to-back Jack Adams trophy winner as best coach two years in a row, and took a well-disciplined, well-coached, defensively-responsible, hard-working '93 Habs team to a Stanley Cup championship cup win.

Then my team gets criticized for drafting a "too good" backup when it was the 18th round!!! Should Lorne Chabot fall any further than 485th overall?

I thought I did a wonderful job of drafting. Apparently not according to you guys. I don't understand it. Maybe because I'm seen as just a rookie who didn't join the clique conversations.

The only reasonable explanation I can determine, given all the discussions you guys have done on past draft threads is that you really don't like a 400+ NHL goal scorer and 5-time all-star gamer being drafted 468th overall (Nolan) and voted against the team because he's an alternate captain (he was dominant the entire decade of the nineties, but not this decade, yet in his NHL 18th season he fit into a defensive-oriented team and still led them in scoring, despite playing more than 20 games fewer due to injury, that is remarkable, though beside my point. He led the Nordiques and Sharks in goal scoring too, way back then, but his physical game, finishing checks, open ice hits, dominance along the boards and in front of the net, was something many have forgotten).

Part of me thinks it's just an antiQuebec sentiment at play, as someone pointed out.

I'd bet though it's all about names liked. Some players are really liked out of whack with their value, and some GMs always get ranked well despite having up and down rosters. Take that Hockey Outsider and VanIslander. Is that their best rosters ever? Do they think so? Yet they finish 2nd in their division. And the other administrator, EagleBelfour always finishes first.

I'm just not part of the gang.

I really want to believe my team is the worst in the division but I look at some of the others and just can't understand it. Offense, defense, goaltending, powerplays, penalty kills. Please tell me why most of you voted for this Avs team to be in the basement?

 

[Sturminator]

Zambo - as always, it is not a case of your team being bad or you having drafted poorly. For a first time entry, I'd say your Avalanche are actually quite good, and you probably haven't gotten enough praise for it. But it's all relative, and you're competing against a lot of great teams in a league where the differences between teams get smaller and smaller with every iteration. Eagle consistently wins his division in the regular season because he builds consistently great teams (and is an unparalelled shark in trade negotiations), not because he is "one of the boys". The difference between finishing 1st and 7th in your division can seriously hinge on a single pick, that's how small the margins are. Don't think that because you finished 7th that it means we think your team sucks, because that's not the case.

As for anti-Quebec bias, I do not believe that is the case. I absolutely do not care where my players come from. If anything, I think Quebecois have been somewhat overvalued in the ATD (less so now) because of how they are lionized in the province. This is an effect that I have struggled against not because I have it out for French Canadians, but because I'd like to see justice done and the distorting effects of "folk history" erased as much as possible. If I pick on Newsy Lalonde it is in reaction to the already very strong lobby that would have him placed in the 1st round and elevated above players I believe were superior, not because I cannot pronounce his last name properly.

I haven't had time to do a lot of reviews for this thing, but I'll give you my impression of your team and your picks/draft strategy, in general.

- very high talent level, overall. These Avalanche remind me somewhat of my first ATD entry (with Nalyd) back in ATD#8. On paper, they should absolutely fill the net with pucks.

- very low grit/toughness level. This is another reason why your team reminds me of my first entry, and I recall feeling the exact same frustration when they were eventually eliminated, as I believed my team to have gone down to a less skillful opponent. Who is supposed to do the digging on the 1st line? Don't answer that, because the answer is no one - and that's just the problem. You cannot win in the ATD without the right balance of skill and toughness. A line that looks good by NHL standards will get crushed in the ATD because the physicality standard is considerably higher. I've been burned on exactly this same flame, my friend. Pure skill players often fall farther in the ATD than they "should" on paper for exactly this reason. Guys like Robitaille, Dye, Drillon, etc. look like huge steals in almost every ATD if you just compare their paper accomplishments to those of players drafted around them, but in truth there is a lot more to it. The veteran GMs aren't letting these guys fall through the draft without a good reason.

- 2nd pairing puckmoving is a bit of a problem. Carlyle has talent, but his peak was really two seasons, and Boivin is definitely on the offensive low-end by ATD 2nd pairing standards. I would suggest moving Vadnais (who I think is highly underrated in this thing) up to the 2nd pairing and Carlyle down to the 3rd.

- picks of yours I really like based on value (only my opinion - this doesn't mean other picks were bad values):

Patrick Roy - 20th overall
Carol Vadnais - 429th overall
Lorne Chabot - 485 overall

- picks I don't like so much based on value:

Gilbert Perreault - 76th overall (this in not anti-Quebec sentiment. Perreault is simply not as good as a few forwards drafted after him, most specifically Bathgate and Malone)
Yvon Cournoyer - 93rd overall (again, I simply think there were better players available - maybe not better RWs, but the position had just been decimated with the selections of Makarov, Mikhailov and Hull just before you took the roadrunner)

Honestly, as skillful a unit as it is, I think your 1st line is your biggest problem. You overdrafted 2/3rds of the line and didn't take anyone with the slightest amount of grit to give the unit teeth. Who on this line is going to fight their way into the crease to score a rebound against a 1st pairing like Gadsby - MacInnis? Who wins battles along the boards against the Gordie Howes of the world? The need for this aspect of the game is precisely why guys with these qualities are such valuable commodities and seem to go higher than they should "on paper".

You took Luc Robitaille 14 spots after Bert Olmstead, for example. Was Olmstead really the better player - did he have the better career? Of course not. In a vacuum, Robitaille should always go higher than a guy like Olmstead, but the ATD is not a vacuum. Pit draftd Olmstead with a very specific plan in mind, and for that role on that line, he is better than Robitaille. It is ultimately the chemistry, the blend, that your team seems to be lacking most of all.

If you disagree with me (and I hope that you do)...great. Present a convincing argument that counters what I've just said and maybe you'll be rewarded for it.

 

[arrbez]

The Colorado Avalanche is 7th in the division, worst of all.

I started the team by taking one of the best goaltenders (Patrick Roy) and a bona fide number one defensman (Pierre Pilote), later adding two more very good defensemen in Buck Boucher and Leo Boivin to provide a defensive core in front of Roy, then was pleased to pick up in the 4/5 slots Carlyle and Ramage, Ramage a perfect solid-in-his-own-end conservative-minded third pairing partner for Vadnais, a top-5 scorer in the 70s, a fighter and a good defender. The blueline is great, isn't it?

And the value among forwards!

Robitaille 188th overall?
Sundin 205th overall?
Bauer 317th overall?
Damphousse 412th overall?

All fantastic value relative to other guys getting picked just before and after them. Maybe they dropped because they aren't "popular" with you guys, hence you don't think about their ability and value in assessing teams.

You guys have ranked high in past drafts teams with worse goaltending, worse bluelines and yet with guys like Herbie Lewis on 2nd lines (he's here on Avs 3rd line, the LW so deep), Bobby Holik on 3rd lines (he's on 4th here), Kevin Hatcher and Wilf Paiement in the middle of the line-up (extra skaters here).

To top it off, we went through 20 rounds and no one took Roger Neilson or Jacques Demers, the former helping the young Oilers win their first cup and seen as a premier associate coach in the history of the game, the latter coaching over 1000 consecutive games, the NHL's only back-to-back Jack Adams trophy winner as best coach two years in a row, and took a well-disciplined, well-coached, defensively-responsible, hard-working '93 Habs team to a Stanley Cup championship cup win.

Then my team gets criticized for drafting a "too good" backup when it was the 18th round!!! Should Lorne Chabot fall any further than 485th overall?

I thought I did a wonderful job of drafting. Apparently not according to you guys. I don't understand it. Maybe because I'm seen as just a rookie who didn't join the clique conversations.

The only reasonable explanation I can determine, given all the discussions you guys have done on past draft threads is that you really don't like a 400+ NHL goal scorer and 5-time all-star gamer being drafted 468th overall (Nolan) and voted against the team because he's an alternate captain (he was dominant the entire decade of the nineties, but not this decade, yet in his NHL 18th season he fit into a defensive-oriented team and still led them in scoring, despite playing more than 20 games fewer due to injury, that is remarkable, though beside my point. He led the Nordiques and Sharks in goal scoring too, way back then, but his physical game, finishing checks, open ice hits, dominance along the boards and in front of the net, was something many have forgotten).

Part of me thinks it's just an antiQuebec sentiment at play, as someone pointed out.

I'd bet though it's all about names liked. Some players are really liked out of whack with their value, and some GMs always get ranked well despite having up and down rosters. Take that Hockey Outsider and VanIslander. Is that their best rosters ever? Do they think so? Yet they finish 2nd in their division. And the other administrator, EagleBelfour always finishes first.

I'm just not part of the gang.

I really want to believe my team is the worst in the division but I look at some of the others and just can't understand it. Offense, defense, goaltending, powerplays, penalty kills. Please tell me why most of you voted for this Avs team to be in the basement?

I had you ranked 3rd in your division. It's a solid squad top to bottom. No real weaknesses. But outside of goaltending, there's nothing that really excites either, to be honest. It's a team with lots of depth, but somewhat lacking in high-end talent in terms of scoring forwards, shut-down forwards, 2nd pairing defensemen, etc.

It's not because you have french guys or because you're new. Lots of rookie GM's have done well in this, and plenty of guys have won with french players. There's no racial bias there, and frankly, it's a bit insulting to say there is. In my first ATD I won my first round matchup, and that team had some serious holes in it. In ATD I figured some things out, made an excellent team, and was rated the top regular season squad in the draft, making it to the semi-finals. I wasn't part of "the club".

 

[Canadiens Fan]

The Colorado Avalanche is 7th in the division, worst of all.

I started the team by taking one of the best goaltenders (Patrick Roy) and a bona fide number one defensman (Pierre Pilote), later adding two more very good defensemen in Buck Boucher and Leo Boivin to provide a defensive core in front of Roy, then was pleased to pick up in the 4/5 slots Carlyle and Ramage, Ramage a perfect solid-in-his-own-end conservative-minded third pairing partner for Vadnais, a top-5 scorer in the 70s, a fighter and a good defender. The blueline is great, isn't it?

And the value among forwards!

Robitaille 188th overall?
Sundin 205th overall?
Bauer 317th overall?
Damphousse 412th overall?

All fantastic value relative to other guys getting picked just before and after them. Maybe they dropped because they aren't "popular" with you guys, hence you don't think about their ability and value in assessing teams.

You guys have ranked high in past drafts teams with worse goaltending, worse bluelines and yet with guys like Herbie Lewis on 2nd lines (he's here on Avs 3rd line, the LW so deep), Bobby Holik on 3rd lines (he's on 4th here), Kevin Hatcher and Wilf Paiement in the middle of the line-up (extra skaters here).

To top it off, we went through 20 rounds and no one took Roger Neilson or Jacques Demers, the former helping the young Oilers win their first cup and seen as a premier associate coach in the history of the game, the latter coaching over 1000 consecutive games, the NHL's only back-to-back Jack Adams trophy winner as best coach two years in a row, and took a well-disciplined, well-coached, defensively-responsible, hard-working '93 Habs team to a Stanley Cup championship cup win.

Then my team gets criticized for drafting a "too good" backup when it was the 18th round!!! Should Lorne Chabot fall any further than 485th overall?

I thought I did a wonderful job of drafting. Apparently not according to you guys. I don't understand it. Maybe because I'm seen as just a rookie who didn't join the clique conversations.

The only reasonable explanation I can determine, given all the discussions you guys have done on past draft threads is that you really don't like a 400+ NHL goal scorer and 5-time all-star gamer being drafted 468th overall (Nolan) and voted against the team because he's an alternate captain (he was dominant the entire decade of the nineties, but not this decade, yet in his NHL 18th season he fit into a defensive-oriented team and still led them in scoring, despite playing more than 20 games fewer due to injury, that is remarkable, though beside my point. He led the Nordiques and Sharks in goal scoring too, way back then, but his physical game, finishing checks, open ice hits, dominance along the boards and in front of the net, was something many have forgotten).

Part of me thinks it's just an antiQuebec sentiment at play, as someone pointed out.

I'd bet though it's all about names liked. Some players are really liked out of whack with their value, and some GMs always get ranked well despite having up and down rosters. Take that Hockey Outsider and VanIslander. Is that their best rosters ever? Do they think so? Yet they finish 2nd in their division. And the other administrator, EagleBelfour always finishes first.

I'm just not part of the gang.

I really want to believe my team is the worst in the division but I look at some of the others and just can't understand it. Offense, defense, goaltending, powerplays, penalty kills. Please tell me why most of you voted for this Avs team to be in the basement?

I can empathize with your frustration Zamboni. Like you this is my first crack at this and like you I finished near the bottom in my division, probably only because Leaf Lander didn't finish his team.

My team has the greatest player ever - Bobby Orr.

In his write-up GBC complemented me on my first line, and said my third and fourth line were amongst the league's best. On the board my top 4 defenseman were singled out as one of the better groups, and I was complemented on my goaltending tandem. On the down side I was criticized for my second line; nobody had a problem with Yakushev, some had one with Malkin, and pretty much everybody disowned the Kovalev pick, which was obviously more important than any of my other 23 picks.

Of course, Malkin's leading the playoffs in scoring after leading the league this year in the regular season, but that really doesn't seem to matter. Neither does the fact that my first line left winger has more career goals than the first line left and right winger on the team that finished in first place in my division. Come to think of it my first line right winger also has more goals as well.

I think it would be funny to see what would happen if we put these teams in a simulator, probably a far different result than what we get through voting.

Regardless, it's supposed to be done for fun, so I would just take it all with a grain of salt.

 

[EagleBelfour]

It's my first year as an administrator. In my first draft, with as much experience as you, I finished first in my division.

You finished 7th, because the competition in the draft is tougher than it ever been. With a team like yours in ATD#7 or ATD#8, you would of finished 2nd or 3rd.

Bad mouthing the other GM won't get you anywhere. The Anti-Quebec bias is just a big joke and extremely childish. I'm in a fifth draft, I'm french Canadian, and never does such a thing came out, and neither it should.

It count that all draft long, you selected a player with a single name post, didn't saw you for the next week, came back with your next selection with a single name post and leave again. Not that in the end the discussion of a GM in the draft should count toward the point we give him for his team, but you never revealed your strategy, you never pimped your player. Why is Bobby Holik that good of a 4th liner? What does playing on the left side of Red Sullivan and Paul MacLean will bring to your team? Is your second line of Goulet-Sundin-Bauer that strong? How come? What did you saw in them when you decided to reunite them?

Actually, if you take out the childish and slightly insulting rant from your earlier post, you have the start of a very good discussion about the strength of your team. That post alone could of change the mind of some fella here.