Bob Cole semi-final: Trois Rivieres AC vs. Regina Capitals

[VanIslander]

Bob Cole division:


Trois Rivieres

coaches Punch Imlach, Bob Johnson

Sweeney Schriner - Cyclone Taylor - Bernie Morris
Paul Thompson - Russell Bowie - Mikita Kucherov
Tony Leswick - Marty Barry - Bobby Bauer
Bob Bourne - Fleming Mackell - Claude Lemieux
Jack Adams

Doug Harvey - Guy Lapointe
Harvey Pulford - Lester Patrick
Mike Grant - Jack Marshall
Si Griffis

Martin Brodeur
Percy LeSueur



vs.



Regina Capitals

coach Dick Irvin

Tommy Phillips - Stan Mikita - Lanny McDonald (C)
Markus Naslund - Evgeni Malkin - Rick Middleton
Dave Andreychuk (A) - Cooney Weiland - Ace Bailey
Brian Sutter - Butch Goring - Jerry Toppazzini
Rat Westwick, Bob McDougall

Börje Salming (A) - Alexei Kasatonov
Weldy Young- Joe Hall
Vitaly Davydov - Cale Makar
Viktor Kuzkin

Patrick Roy
Jiri Holeček

​

Click to read more...

 

[VanIslander]

Post your special teams, links, photos, comments, etc.

 

[jigglysquishy]

PP1

Tommy Phillips - Stan Mikita - Lanny McDonald
Börje Salming - Alexei Kasatonov

PP2
Dave Andreychuk - Evgeni Malkin - Rick Middleton
Weldy Young - Cale Makar

PK1
Cooney Weiland - Ace Bailey
Börje Salming - Alexei Kasatonov

PK2
Butch Goring - Jerry Toppazzini
Weldy Young- Joe Hall



I gotta say, Trois Riviers AC may have been my favourite club from the regular season. Taylor/Bowie down the middle is crazy. Kucherov as a second line winger is very strong. I've grown to really like Marty Barry. Claude Lemieux as a playoff monster 4th liner is great.

That being said, from an all-time perspective, isn't Mikita>Taylor>Malkin>Bowie the consensus? So as much as the history nerd in me loves Taylor/Bowie, I do think Mikita/Malkin provides more firepower. Wingers are definitely towards TR AC though.

TR AC has a very clear lead on the blue line.

Capitals have a clear lead in net.

All in all, I do believe TR AC has a stronger lineup and was excellently put together.

 

[Johnny Engine]

Here's our special team listing.

PP1:
Slot/Net - Bowie
Right Wall - Kucherov
Left Wall - Taylor
QB - Harvey
Trigger - Lapointe

PP2:

Slot/Net - Barry
Right Wall - Schriner
Left Wall - Morris
QB - Patrick
Trigger - Grant

PK1:

Mackell-Leswick
Pulford-Harvey

PK2:

Bourne-Taylor
Lapointe-Marshall

 

[Johnny Engine]

I gotta say, Trois Riviers AC may have been my favourite club from the regular season. Taylor/Bowie down the middle is crazy. Kucherov as a second line winger is very strong. I've grown to really like Marty Barry. Claude Lemieux as a playoff monster 4th liner is great.

That being said, from an all-time perspective, isn't Mikita>Taylor>Malkin>Bowie the consensus? So as much as the history nerd in me loves Taylor/Bowie, I do think Mikita/Malkin provides more firepower. Wingers are definitely towards TR AC though.

TR AC has a very clear lead on the blue line.

Capitals have a clear lead in net.

All in all, I do believe TR AC has a stronger lineup and was excellently put together.

Really appreciate how complimentary you are about the team ImporterExporter and I put together, like yours a lot too!
I'm hoping IE drops in soon - you're certainly correct about how our respective top 2 centres have been generally valued around here, but I think he's worked on Bowie's case a bit this year, so hopefully he stops in to toss that idea around soon.
Not a huge role on either team, but I think it's fun that we have one each of Goring and Bourne on our PKs.

 

[ImporterExporter]

I'll have my overview of the series posted tonight at some point, probably later. Been very busy the past few weeks but have been typing up some things each of the past few nights.

Thanks everyone!

 

[ImporterExporter]

First of all, thank you @VanIslander for taking the time to get these threads up. It's not glamorous work but appreciated from this person.

Also thank you to @Theokritos for taking the time to tally votes and post results. You've been doing it for as long as I can remember and again, much appreciated.

Thanks to my CO-GM @Johnny Engine for the Newfoundlander perspective (one if my favorite areas I've ever been to) on hockey and life. Couldn't have asked for better conversation and ideas.

And lastly, congrats to our opponent, @jigglysquishy ! Another new face, you've been extremely active in this and the HoH sections which is great to see. While I (and others) have been around these parts less in recent years, you and several others have arrived and helped give the board and draft some life. It's greatly appreciated. You built a fantastic roster and Johnny and I look forward to a good battle!

Now for the series:

Trois Rivieres

Head Coach: George "Punch" Imlach
Assistant Coach/Special Teams Coordinator: Bob "Badger" Johnson

Forwards:
Sweeney Schriner - Cyclone Taylor A - Bernie Morris
Paul Thompson - Russell Bowie - Nikita Kucherov
Tony Leswick - Marty Barry - Bobby Bauer
Bob Bourne - Fleming Mackell - Claude Lemieux

Spare:
Jack Adams - C/LW

Defense:
Doug Harvey - Guy Lapointe
Harvey Pulford A - Lester Patrick C
Mike Grant - Jack Marshall

Spare:
Si Griffis - D/C

Note: Jack Marshall, a right-handed shot, can also play C, will be the person to shift up to the 4C spot, if/when Imlach were to move Taylor back to D. This allows for a seamless transition, even in game if necessary, given both players are very adept at both positions, especially Taylor.

In the event Taylor would be shifted to D, Marshall would simply move up to 4C, and the other 3 C's would each go up a rung. Taylor would skate with Guy Lapointe on the 2nd pair, with Patrick moving up to play with Harvey on the top unit. Pulford-Grant would make for a formidable 3rd duo in this set up.

Goaltenders:
Martin Brodeur
Percy LeSueur

Special Teams:

PP1:
Slot/Net - Bowie
Right Wall - Kucherov
Left Wall - Taylor
QB - Harvey
Trigger - Lapointe

PP2:
Slot/Net - Barry
Right Wall - Schriner
Left Wall - Morris
QB - Patrick
Trigger - Grant

PK1:
Mackell-Leswick
Pulford-Harvey

PK2:
Bourne-Taylor
Patrick-Lapointe


VS


Regina Capitals

coach Dick Irvin

Tommy Phillips - Stan Mikita - Lanny McDonald (C)
Markus Naslund - Evgeni Malkin - Rick Middleton
Dave Andreychuk (A) - Cooney Weiland - Ace Bailey
Brian Sutter - Butch Goring - Jerry Toppazzini
Rat Westwick, Bob McDougall

Börje Salming (A) - Alexei Kasatonov
Weldy Young- Joe Hall
Vitaly Davydov - Cale Makar
Viktor Kuzkin

Patrick Roy
Jiri Holeček



Coaching: Even

I think this is about as letter even as you can get at this level. On one hand you have Irvin, who boasts one of the greater careers in terms of longevity (16 SCF appearances over a 27-year career seems very, very good even in a much smaller league). He, like Imlach won 4 titles.

I think most would agree Imlach takes the cake as far as peaks go. He literally built (he was GM and HC) the Leafs dynasty of the 60's. He took on the Montreal juggernaut and tested/beat them like no one else in the Toe Blake era. It was a shorter period spent at the top, but I've always felt like Imlach overachieved and Irvin underachieved in their respective real-world careers given the 4-12 record in SCF's by the latter coach. Especially when Blake came in directly after Irvin and reeled off 5 consecutive titles.

Bob Johnson is the calm to Imlach's storm. A renowned players coach w/an unwavering positivity, he's capable of massaging the players who need it and brings a more modern look when it comes to special teams.

But again, I think this is a coin-flip historically. No real edge in either direction as far as resume's go.


Forwards:

1st Lines - Even

---Schriner vs Phillips is offense vs defense. The gap is wide between the 2 in those areas of the ice with Schriner tilting O and Phillips the other way. Schriner won 2 Art Ross trophies and during my newspaper research compared his playing style to Frank Mahovlich by multiple astute hockey people. Phillips was regarded as one of the best defensive F's of his era, had big star power and was a money player. I'd give a slight edge to Phillips, more so based on his standing amongst peers, vs actual statistical accomplishments. I'd rank Phillips slightly above Schriner on an all time scale.

---Taylor vs Mikita is a wash IMO, though I'll advocate for why I'd nudge Taylor ahead in a best on best series. One word. Versatility. Taylor is such an adaptable player given his positional flexibility between C and D (he was an all world player at both spots), ability to both finish and create and skating. When you read the many descriptions of Taylor, he becomes one of the few players you could put into the Orr tier of skating. We've seen what that kind of ability did for Orr, and in the current times, McDavid.

Taylor's offensive peak and longevity was the dominant one for his era, and I'd wager every bit as good as Mikita when you side by side their careers and read the 1st person accounts. Taylor consistently led or was near the top of the leaderboards offensively in a robust era for scoring with talented F's like Lalonde, Nighbor, Denneny, etc. There is no denying the superstar status Taylor enjoyed and people knew him well from coast to coast, for a decade plus, which was rare for that time period. Taylor is going to be most peoples best or 2nd best player when it comes to the 1880's through consolidation, a period of time spanning the better part of 4 decades.

Mikita had a reputation as a pretty strong defensive C, I'm just not sure to what level but still willing to look at him as a plus in that area. Taylor played much of the 1st 3rd of his career as a defensemen and was widely regarded as one of the best by most accounts. His speed and reputation as a defender is well documented. We think there is a very strong fit between Taylor and the coach Imlach, considering the latter took a dominant offensive defensemen in real life (Red Kelly) and placed him at C, which is where played for the duration of the Leafs dynasty in the 60's. Taylor can be let loose offensively but be counted on to play a strong backchecking game.

---Morris vs McDonald tilts Morris IMHO. especially after I finished my research and bio on Morris. He's simply a more impressive offensive player in most areas vs Lanny McDonald. But more importantly, the newspapers dive revealed a much more complete player in Morris.

He was lauded for his defensive efforts and back checking numerous times, over numerous years. His physicality was also noted more than expected, though given his size, would classify him as very scrappy vs some sort of massive checker. Basically the newspapers brought to life that Morris had a lot of the same qualities away from the puck that McDonald is noted for, it's just that Morris was quite a bit better as an offensive force and he also comes with the bonus of being able to play C as well as RW.

• Three Rivers enjoys a more robust offensive output between the trios, aided by the gap between wingers. While I do think Regina has a better trio defensively (mostly thanks to Phillips) it will be harder for opposing defenses to key in on one player with Three Rivers top line. All 3 players can hurt you, whereas I see Regina flowing mostly through Mikita.

2nd Lines - Slight Advantage Three Rivers

---Thompson vs Naslund is a tough evaluation due to the different styles and eras, though I would have to chalk this up as a wash. Naslund had a Hart runner up and 2 5th place finishes which is a really solid peak. Naslund's biggest issue is longevity and a reputation for being soft.

With that being said, Thompson was also a 2 time AS and had a runner up in the Hart race so his peak is comparable. Their VsX scores are almost identical (82.9 for Naslund and 82.6 for Thompson). Thompson was also a more well-rounded player and doesn't suffer from the same postseason woes. I think a lot of fans, especially casual would take Naslund based on hoping for that offensive peak, but as far as an all round, glue type guy you want in crunch time? Thompson seems like that type.

---Bowie vs Malkin was probably Malkin by a decent bit before the pre-merger project really amplified Bowie's accomplishments and utter dominance over his peers, for a longer than usual period of time for that era (1900-1910). I'm not going to try and say I have all the answers on how to compare players who played 100+ years apart.

Malkin was among the top 3-4 players in the world when healthy. Bowie was regarded by many to be the best hockey player in the world between 1900 and 1910, though I think we need to remember the talent pool difference. Malkin peaked as a Hart and Ross winner in a league with Crosby and Ovechkin.

Bowie would have almost surely won multiple Hart trophies had the award existed then but his competition in an all time side by side, was significantly weaker. Malkin has a significantly better playoff record though Bowie never really had the same chances given the team and era.

In light of the new discoveries and further evaluation of Bowie's dominance, I would put his career at least near Malkin's. Bowie reads more impressive as a regular season player, whereas Malkin has a big cushion in the playoffs.

---Kucherov vs Middleton is where the analysis really turns towards Three Rivers. Obviously, Johnny and I got a bit fortunate with how the season played out, seeing Kuch win his 2nd Art Ross with a soon to be top 3 Hart finish. It was a historic season for a winger and really stamped Kuch's standing in an all-time light as a bonafide top 100 player ever IMO.

Middleton brings a more rounded game to the equation certainly but he's simply not the dynamic presence that Kucherov is. The Russian's hockey IQ, vision, and put the puck wherever he wants it passing ability should mesh well with a C (Bowie) who was the best, by far, of an era at putting pucks in the net from all over the offensive zone.

• This is a more offensive minded match up. Each line has a clear glue guy (Thompson and Middleton playing the relentless 200 foot metronome game) with a passer/shooter (Bowie/Kucherov vs Malkin/Naslund) leading as primary offensive pieces and I do genuinely feel like both Bowie and Kucherov bring all time great qualities to the able in terms of finishing (Bowie) and passing (Kuch). I just don't see much of a gap between the LW's and C's here. The biggest gap in terms of career accomplishment is the RW comparison and if these lines were to face power on power, in game, Kucherov vs Naslund would seem to me to be the biggest advantage for the Pittsburgh squad.

3rd Lines - Slight Advantage Three Rivers

---Leswick vs Andreychuk comes down to preference/need, though I contend Leswick was the better hockey player. Andreychuk was basically a PP specialist. A really damn good one, but there isn't much to his game beyond that, at this level.

Leswick is an all time great pest, clutch playoff performer, and one of the ultimate match up players defensively as he held his own and shut down/slowed the likes of Rocket Richard (most famously) and Gordie Howe. His ability on the PK is every bit as valuable as Andreychuk's presence is to a PP IMO. He also has the ability to play either wing, which adds value as he can shadow a Gordie Howe as a LW or Bobby Hull as a RW. At even strength, I simply feel like Leswick is a stronger chess piece.

---Barry vs Weiland is a bigger win for Three Rivers IMO. I did some casual newspaper looks into Barry during the draft and he was just a really darn good hockey player and definitely the key piece to the back to back Detroit title teams in the mid 30's. Strong offensively, especially in the goal getting department, he was also a pain in the ass to play against. Very clean penalty record but was by no means soft. And there's a real argument to be made he has the best playoff performance/record of any player from the 1930's. As a 3rd liner in a draft this size, Barry should find some favorable match ups against 3rd pairings.

Weiland is a really nice 2 way player for a 3rd line but outside of 1 crazy season (29-30) when he lead the league in goals/points, was much more of a secondary scorer. His defensive reputation was certainly stronger and should not be discredited here. Barry simply had a more robust career and clutch factor to his game.

---Bauer vs Bailey is another interesting comparison. I think Bailey was probably a better overall hockey player, it's just hard to figure how much of a gap there is. Bailey's career was famously cut short but before it was, he did peak as a Hart runner up, rocket, and Art Ross winner. Now beyond that season, there weren't any that jumped off the page, but if you read up on Bailey he was a highly regarded player, especially defensively.

His career is more or less about peak, but Bauer suffers from of the same lost time due to WWII, which was obviously outside his control. Bauer was a 4 time AS and that's not considering he missed his age 27, 28. 29 seasons due to the war. Considering he was an AS both before and after the war, his statistical standing is a bit misleading (VsX, career totals etc) IMO as is his trophy case in all likelihood (the AS nods, he was also a multi time Byng winner)

• I feel like Barry is the big difference maker here. He brings incredible depth scoring in a draft this size (89.6 VsX). He fits the C Bauer played with in Boston (Schmidt) and was arguably the best playoff performer of the 30's. Leswick was an all world pest who shut down some of the best players of all time. This line can skate, score, are clutch, and should get a lot of looks against Davydov/Makar, which bodes well for Three Rivers getting some production out of their bottom 6.

4th Lines - Slight Advantage Three Rivers

---Bourne vs Sutter. I've gotta go with Bourne here, not only because I think it's the right call but I have a soft spot for him as he was on my inaugural team 10 years ago and one of the first bio's I did. It's kind of unfair to pit Sutter, who played for the rather lowly Blues of the 70's and 80's to a guy who played for the dynasty Islanders of the early 80's, but outside of Potvin, Trottier, Bossy, and Billy Smith, was there a more integral player on that dynasty than Bourne?

Nobody else scored more over those 4 straight Cup years (he posted 74 points in 74 games) outside the big 4. He led the team in short handed goals and was an ace penalty killer. He was also regarded as one of the fastest/best skaters of his day. He can play anywhere on the F line. I think Sutter is probably forgotten a bit due to where he played, but as it stands, I think Bourne is more valuable here because of the proven playoff scoring and adaptability.

---Mackell vs Goring is Goring for a lot of the same reasons as I mentioned above about Bourne rating over Sutter. I think Mackell is every bit the defensive player that Goring was, and probably better, but Goring was also a bit better offensively and was probably the only real competition Bourne has for being 5th best player on the Islander dynasty. Now, I would urge people to look at Mackell's playoff record too. He stepped up considerably there and twice led the playoffs in assists and once in points. Not bad for a 4th line depth player.

---Lemieux vs Toppazzini tilts back to Three Rivers. Lemieux feels like a really strong 4th liner here. Johnny and I decided to split he and Leswick up as it gives Three Rivers an all time great pest on both the 3rd and 4th lines. And don't be fooled into thinking they are just guys who get under the other team's star players skin, and check. They both came up huge offensively on numerous occasions and scored huge goals for their respective teams in postseason play, with Lemieux taking home a Smthye.

• Three Rivers edges out due to wing play where I think Bourne and Lemieux is simply a more dynamic and accomplished pair vs Sutter/Toppazzini. You just can't sleep on a Bourne/Lemieux duo in a playoff series, against anyone.

Defensemen:

Top Pair: Big Advantage Three Rivers

---Harvey-Lapointe vs Salming-Kasatanov is where I think the series really starts to tilt (blue line on the whole) clearly in favor of Three Rivers. Harvey is going to control a hockey game from the blue line like no one else outside of Orr IMHO. His transition game was renowned as elite and Johnny/myself wanted to build a team from the net out, with transition being a key focus. Enter Harvey, being sprung by the soon to be talked about best puck mover ever at G, Marty Brodeur.

The gap from Harvey to Salming is quite wide, no disrespect to the latter, a capable #1 in a draft this size, though of any of the key comparisons, I'd wager this may be the biggest advantage in the series. Harvey was definitely more of a facilitator when it came to producing offense and Lapointe would seem to Johnny and I to be about as good as you could get as far as partners go.

Lapointe was big, a great skater, a heavy checker, and most importantly from an offensive standpoint had a cannon of a shot and strong IQ to get to spots that players such as Harvey will find. It's a bonafide 200-foot pairing, and both players can be major impacts at both ends of the ice. Their track records say they can play any type of game you throw at them.

• The gap from Lapointe to Kasatanov is smaller than Harvey to Salming, but in an overall sense I think this is the largest advantage in the series, in favor of TRAC. I don't think there is an aspect of the game where Regina's top pairing would outpoint Three Rivers.

Second Pair: Slight Advantage Three Rivers

I think this is a cool comparison given all 4 players feature from the Pre-Merger Period for which some great folks put together a solid ranking for that era.

Patrick (20) and Pulford (23) ranked ahead of Young (31) and Hall (41) during the project and I think the consensus would be that Three Rivers has a slightly more dynamic and accomplished 2nd pairing.

Patrick was a brilliant leader first off, and as a hockey player, reads as a complete presence, though I'd say he got more applause for his offensive exploits. We think paring him with a defensive ace in Pulford is a match made in heaven. Patrick's best attributes cover up the few small warts in Pulford's game (skating speed and offensive ceiling). With that being said, Pulford was the best defensive dman ever until at least Eddie Gerard IMO. He was crazy strong, handed out heavy checks and like Patrick was a highly respected player, Pulford being the captain for Ottawa's Silver Seven dyansty.

Patrick could pass for a #2 in a draft this size, and here he's anchoring a 2nd pairing. Pulford could be a #2/3 and shows strong depth as our 4.

3rd Pairing: Even

I absolutely respect the big jump for Makar. He's one of my favorite young players in the game, a budding superstar defenseman not just against today's competition but in an all time setting, who simply needs more time to accumulate bullet points to truly ascend into the highest tiers. Did I expect him to go in round 9? No, but then again you can certainly argue his peak matches or exceeds a lot of the defenders taken around pick 200 or so. In a sheltered #6 type role, I think he's perfectly acceptable by now. If things click he's the best player out of the 4, though I think Grant has enough career value and reputation as a superstar in his own era, to challenge the pup.

Davydov and Marshall seems like a wash to me w/no real discernible difference on an all time scale. Marshall simply fills a more versatile role for us, as he would be the person shifting up to C in the event Cyclone Taylor was moved back to defense.


Goalies: Slight Advantage Regina

---Roy vs Brodeur is an all-time classic. Obviously there is little arguing Brodeur on the same tier as Roy, but I've long beat the drum that Brodeur is one of the more underrated players of all time, even as he's still widely considered a top 5 G and top 30ish player ever.

This largely stems from his role as a puck handler and general from the back end. It's no secret that Brodeur's brilliance in this area led the league to implement rules restricting where goalies can play the puck. We talk about historical achievements. I think that is a major one that goes beyond the box score. And some like to trot out the narrative that the Devils/trap system insulated Broduer. Plenty of folks have dispelled that notion with great studies such as @Hockey Outsider.

IMO Brodeur's ability to play the puck so well was the rock of the system itself. The trap is a defensive/counter attack posture, and your greatest defender is a great/hot goalie. It's an added bonus when your G is more or less an extra D given his calmness with the puck on his stick.

The other major part of the pie when it comes to Brodeur was his stamina and longevity. Marty was essentially Glenn Hall with a much better playoff record if you line their careers up. Consider B played 70 or more games in a single season, 12 times in his career. Roy AND Hasek combined to do that ONCE.

• 4 time Vezina winner with 5 other finalist nods.
• 11 times he was a top 12 Hart vote getter including a 3 time finalist.
• From age 21 to age 37 he was a top 8 every year but 1, including those 5 wins above
• He was superb on all 3 Cup winners in NJ and even pushing 40 years old in a Cup finals run (loss to LA) put up very respectable numbers.

Now, I want to be clear. Roy is worth an automatic win to me in just about any circumstance. And I think Regina has a good enough team in front of him to make that a reality here. Roy's one of the few that can outright steal a game. I would put Brodeur ahead as far as regular season comps go but of course Roy's calling card is playoff brilliance and that's where we are now, though Marty also has a really strong postseason resume as well. Just doesn't have quite the ceiling of Roy.

I've traditionally ranked Roy 1st, and Brodeur 4th overall all time, so in this arena, there is a small advantage for Regina at this position.
As far as back ups go, Holecek is probably the best back up in the draft. He's more likely to need to play a game at some point.


Special Teams:

Power Play: Big Advantage Three Rivers

PP1:

Slot/Net - Bowie
Right Wall - Kucherov
Left Wall - Taylor
QB - Harvey
Trigger - Lapointe

PP2:

Slot/Net - Barry
Right Wall - Schriner
Left Wall - Morris
QB - Patrick
Trigger - Grant

vs

Tommy Phillips - Stan Mikita - Lanny McDonald
Börje Salming - Alexei Kasatonov

PP2
Dave Andreychuk - Evgeni Malkin - Rick Middleton
Weldy Young - Cale Maka


As I suggested in the lineup thread, I think Malkin is a must on the top PP as well as Andreychuk as his biggest value is being on the ice a lot when you have an extra man. Regardless I think the top 3 F's for Three Rivers would best any 3 F combo Regina could put out there (my set up would be Mikita, Malkin, Andreychuk).

Bowie is as deadly as you can get as a slot/net goal scorer. Kucherov is the best player in the world off the right wall, especially at finding tiny lanes to slot guy, and Taylor can kill you any number of ways.

Harvey/Lapointe is a combo I'm personally really fond of, reputations being obvious, but the nuances of each player's game seems to point to a very stable and efficient output as far as puck carriers/QB/triggers go. Both players were used heavily in real life on the PP and both produced extremely strong results in their roles. Getting to play with a trio of F's above should only aid in their impact.

I think Salming/Kasatanov are well behind their counterparts as far as impactful PP personnel go.

With the 2nd units, as they stand, I do think Regina's F's are closer to being on par with Three Rivers. Barry, Schriner, Morris are going to outpoint Andreychuk/Malkin, Middleton in terms of scoring output (VsX) pretty significantly actually, but Malkin has always been lethal with a man advantage and again, Andre's biggest value in this thing is here. Middleton is nothing to write home about on the PP but as a 2nd unit player, he's fine.

As far as the defensemen go, I think Three Rivers is ahead once again here, though the gap is smaller this time. Patrick and Mike Grant are fabulous offensive players from the back end and given their really strong longevity and participation in numerous Cup matches, should be trusted more than Young-Makar at this level IMO.

Penalty Kill: Wash

PK1:
Mackell-Leswick
Pulford-Harvey

PK2:
Bourne-Taylor
Patrick-Lapointe

PK1:
Cooney Weiland - Ace Bailey
Börje Salming - Alexei Kasatonov

PK2:
Butch Goring - Jerry Toppazzini
Weldy Young- Joe Hall

This really boils down to F's vs D.
I'd have to give Regina the edge amongst F's here. I think Mackell and Leswick were every bit the defensive players Weiland and Bailey were, and certainly had outstanding reputations as penalty killers but the latter 2 have a bit more juice in threatening you the other way.

Now, I personally would take a fresh Bourne/Taylor combo because their speed alone will strike fear into any other team on the PP. If they get on the ice with tired defensemen for Regina, watch out. With that being said, in a traditional sense Goring/Toppazzini played more PK, though Bourne was heavily used himself.

Three River's 2nd unit is more about counter attacking with speed against tired 1st unit players.

As far as defenders go, Three Rivers takes this handedly IMO. There might not be a better PK duo than Pulford/Harvey (I do like Salming/Kasa) and Patrick/Lapointe offers a different look, giving TRAC some counter abilities with great outlet guys (Patrick/Lapointe) springing speed demons (Bourne/Taylor) on the break when the crack opens. Young/Hall are both very capable 2nd team PK players, though they're both well behind in talent vs the other 2.


Final Thoughts: Three Rivers Wins Series 4-2
-I'll keep this shorter as I did my long-winded thing above. Regina is a quality hockey team. I think jiggly did very well to build a team as he did taking Roy in round 1. From a meta world, taking that G so early is a tough build. Generally, either F or D suffer, and I think in all honesty, Regina's blue line is the weakest link and where I see the series ultimately turn.

Three Rivers can match the C talent of Regina and come out quite a bit ahead on the flanks.

I think Patrick Roy steals a game here, but Brodeur is plenty good enough for this to not be a series altering chasm.

Coaching is even. Special Teams tilts Three Rivers as their PP is simply better with no real gap showing on the PK.

As always, if I made a hisorical mistake above or stretched too far in any part of my analsysis, please feel free to quote and hold me accountable.

This was a really fun build, a great draft and I look forward to seeing what the other GMs think!