Fisher Conference Final: Montreal Canadiens vs Montreal Maroons

[jarek]

Sure, I think Iginla is fine there.But Andreychuk is better, which rebuts your claim that I had no winger better than any in your group, which was my main point.

I disagree.. strongly.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I disagree.. strongly.

Just look at the PP numbers.At best Iginla is equal to Andreychuk as a PP net presence.

 

[jarek]

Just look at the PP numbers.At best Iginla is equal to Andreychuk as a PP net presence.

Right, if you ONLY look at the PP numbers. Nevermind that Iginla is much better than Andreychuk at everything else, more or less. The PP isn't just about parking yourself in front of the net.

 

[jarek]

We were talking about PP.Follow the discussion, even if I know it's a bit of a mess.

Right, and there's more to the PP, even for the "front of net" guy, than standing in front of the net. He has to get there, he has to be strong enough to take on the defensemen there, he has to be quick enough to get to loose pucks, etc.

The offense looks good for Andreychuk, I agree. However, in all these other intangibles things, I really believe Iginla is better than him.

Also, if I actually had an opponent or at least someone contributing to the discussion in my series, I probably wouldn't be posting much here. I'm just bored.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Mainly the one where you questioned RB's 1st unit net presence guy.

Me asking about Modano and Trottier's shutdown ability wasn't because they're on your team, I was asking because I wasn't sure about it. I actually defended you with respect to Modano a little bit..

Anything you're not sure about on the Maroons squad? Now would be a good time to raise it.

 

[ResilientBeast]

The history of this vendetta goes way before this series.I think my case for jarek having a vendetta against me is strong.

Which outlandish claims was that BTW? My main problem with jarek in this series is him coming in and pounding on that Trottier and Modano thing, dragging discussions into irrelevent corners like he does so well so often.Last series it was him dragging me about Fredrickson as a net presence, which was fine, if he didn't use it to pimp Marty Walsh, whose career didn't even overlapped with Fredrickson.But whatever.

I don't think I've made any outlandish claim in this series.

Shocker

I'm still waiting to hear why Frederickson is so great after what I posted

His first 1st place he tied with Harris (who didn't get a Cyclone Taylor size bump)
His second 1st place was impressive but less so than just looking at the PCHA scoring table

His 2nd place in 23-24 is bull**** and his 3rd place was at a time when the PCHA was definitely weaker than the NHL

 

[jarek]

I also said that I don't think Gilbert is better thasn either Elias and Thompson on the PP, which adds to my rebuttal.

Why don't you think this? They are both more well rounded players than Gilbert but I think Gilbert is better offensively. For one, he has a better VsX7 score than both of them, and his VsX7 score underrates him as primarily a goal scorer. Gilbert places higher than both of them in the goals VsX7 too.

I'm not really sure what the best way would be to figure out how they compare in PP points, but I am pretty confident Gilbert is better than both as an offensive player (and thus on the PP as well).

The question is doubly raised for Thompson, who we have no PP scoring results for whatsoever as far as I'm aware, unless someone compiled that info for him from the HSP.

 

[ResilientBeast]

I also said that I don't think Gilbert is better than either Elias and Thompson on the PP, which adds to my rebuttal.

Elias has no seasons in the top 10 of PP goals or points

Thompson we have no idea and to suggest that he is better is garbage. We barely know anything about Thompson truly a forgotten star.

Gilbert 3 times top 10 in PP goals 2nd, 4th, 7th

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Let's get back on track here about debating these two teams and which one would beat the other in a seven game series. I'm deleting the irrelevant he said/she said stuff

 

[BenchBrawl]

Elias has no seasons in the top 10 of PP goals or points

Thompson we have no idea and to suggest that he is better is garbage. We barely know anything about Thompson truly a forgotten star.

Gilbert 3 times top 10 in PP goals 2nd, 4th, 7th

Fair enough for Elias < Gilbert on the PP.But chances are strong Thompson had similar finishes than Gilbert.I guess we can't know for sure..

 

[ResilientBeast]

Fair enough for Elias > Gilbert on the PP.But chances are strong Thompson had similar finishes than Gilbert.I guess we can't know for sure..

You mean Gilbert > Elias

With that same logic, it's possible Bowie could've been as good as Howie Morenz...I guess we can't know for sure..

 

[jarek]

All we know for sure about Thompson is that he has a pretty similar VsX7, but is behind in VsX7 goals (39.1 to 37.7).

He led his team in scoring every single year from 1933-1938, but it is difficult to determine from these numbers how good of a PP player he was. For what it's worth, he was only 2 points behind Barry for the most points of this timeframe, and 5th in points per game for players >= 100 GP.

Honestly, there's a strong chance he was an elite PP player and I have no problem with the argument that he was at least an equal of Gilbert as a PP scorer. It isn't like Gilbert is some PP wizard as far as I know so I think there's a decent case here.

 

[seventieslord]

Just quoting the things that made me go "huh?" without actually replying...

Firsov blows Elias out of the water here, massive advantage given that Firsov has an all round game and is an offensive catalyst that Elias has never really been.

Skimming the bios are Trottier or Modano really capable of playing shut down hockey? .

And this was just funny:

When you look at their lineup as a whole, it looks like a guy with big muscles in the upper body (forwards), but who has chicken legs (defense) and is not very intelligent (coaching).

The Maroons:

 

[ResilientBeast]

Just quoting the things that made me go "huh?" without actually replying...

That was a genuine question I was unaware of Trottier's deployment.

Modano I knew he became a good two way player and BC's post was the kind of information I was looking for

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Elias has no seasons in the top 10 of PP goals or points

Thompson we have no idea and to suggest that he is better is garbage. We barely know anything about Thompson truly a forgotten star.

Gilbert 3 times top 10 in PP goals 2nd, 4th, 7th

Gilbert also had the benefit of playing with Ratelle and Park on the PP, while Elias was usually the driving force on the Devils' PP (co-driving force with Rafalski for a few years). Devils also received fewer power plays than any other team of the era. I wouldn't be sure which of these two is better on the PP.

 

[seventieslord]

This is from the dishing the dirt thread when I dug up the 1925 MacLeans all time team

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=128120775&postcount=546



I wonder why Bowie got praise, but Frederickson didn't by people who got to see both of them play?
He got one vote same as his contemporaries Duke Keats and Mickey MacKay.

I'm not particularly high on Frederickson, but you did quote me to make a point, so let me just point out that Frederickson still had six years to play when this article was published - just like Nighbor did, which I noted as a potential reason he didn't get more support. Same would apply to Frederickson.

Also, let's be careful not to value these all-star teams more than they deserve. It's great to get a little glimpse of who certain people gave a 1st place vote to, but there's no depth beyond that. For all we know, Frederickson would have been every contributor's 2nd choice... or maybe they didn't consider him top-10. Who knows? Not us.

because the other methodology ignores injuries and Bernie couldn't help but get injured often. No surprise what methodology you prefer.

It's not about what method one prefers, it should be completely fair game using a methodology like this in demonstrating the actual talent level of your player. How healthy you can expect him to be is a completely separate matter. I've been beating this drum for years.

Fair enough for Elias < Gilbert on the PP.But chances are strong Thompson had similar finishes than Gilbert.I guess we can't know for sure..

You mean Gilbert > Elias

...that's what he said....

 

[ResilientBeast]

I'm not particularly high on Frederickson, but you did quote me to make a point, so let me just point out that Frederickson still had six years to play when this article was published - just like Nighbor did, which I noted as a potential reason he didn't get more support. Same would apply to Frederickson.

Also, let's be careful not to value these all-star teams more than they deserve. It's great to get a little glimpse of who certain people gave a 1st place vote to, but there's no depth beyond that. For all we know, Frederickson would have been every contributor's 2nd choice... or maybe they didn't consider him top-10. Who knows? Not us.



It's not about what method one prefers, it should be completely fair game using a methodology like this in demonstrating the actual talent level of your player. How healthy you can expect him to be is a completely separate matter. I've been beating this drum for years.





...that's what he said....

You're 100% correct but it's one of the few ways a group of people who have seen both players got to judge them and for such a difficult comparison I wanted to use as much as I can.

I'm still having a hard time understanding why BenchBrawl prefers Frederickson over Bowie. The PCHA was at its weakest when he won his scoring titles. Understandably Bowie's competition was weaker but he was just so much better than his peers. And the high variance in valuations of why he falls so far even though the HOH list has him in the mid 40s.

There was an edit and he corrected his post, if you see the post I quoted my comment makes more sense

 

[ResilientBeast]

At some point BB commented that his third line wingers definitely better than mine offensively. And if he didn't here's the comparison for the voters

Smokey Harris (Bolded finishes are from playing with PCHA peak Taylor) (italicized finishes are from years that as shown earlier the PCHA was weak)

1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 7, 10, 10, 10

George Armstrong

*No top 10 finishes*

Weak though he did lead the Leafs in playoffs scoring during their 62-64 streak. And there's a reason many past GMs have considered him an elite third line glue guy besides just scoring.

Jamie Benn

1st, 2nd, 9th

Tony Amonte

6th

Now depending on how you value PCHA stats, just because he's played a full career you might value Harris's finishes higher or lower than Benn's. Intangibles Benn is physical but doesn't seem to be particularly special defensively. Harris has a few mentions of physicality and defensive play. (Though Harris was a seemingly common name back then so finding new stuff for my bio was a little tough)

Reading Amonte's bio he strikes me as someone who will give 110% and do whatever the coach asks of him. He had one big offensive season in him. Based on ATD canon, and the HOH I favor Armstrong overall.

In pure offence depending on your evaluation of PCHA finishes BB might have better wingers considering purely offence. Though this ignores how my third line is constructed. We know very little about Bowie besides he was fast, might be able to pass and he could put the puck between two poles. So my line was constructed to fill in every possible weakness Bowie has with two guys who both have intangibles, one who was a strong complimentary star (Harris) and the other who can do it all.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

You're 100% correct but it's one of the few ways a group of people who have seen both players got to judge them and for such a difficult comparison I wanted to use as much as I can.

I'm still having a hard time understanding why BenchBrawl prefers Frederickson over Bowie. The PCHA was at its weakest when he won his scoring titles. Understandably Bowie's competition was weaker but he was just so much better than his peers. And the high variance in valuations of why he falls so far even though the HOH list has him in the mid 40s.

There was an edit and he corrected his post, if you see the post I quoted my comment makes more sense

My general rule of thumb is that when the talent pool is rapidly expanding, a 1st tier superstar of the earlier generation is about equal to a 2nd tier star of the subsequent stronger generation.

By that rule of thumb, Bowie and Fredrickson are quite close.

I'd almost always draft Fredrickson over Bowie, however. Fredrickson was huge and strong,, at least decent two-ways, and fairly balanced between scoring and passing. So he can be used in a variety of roles.

Bowie is easily a better goal scorer than Fredrickson, but that's really his only ATD-worthy talent. He's small, probably didn't play defense, and while I think he could pass the puck to teammates, it wasn't really his strong suit. I'd only draft Bowie over Fredrickson if I had toughness and playmaking already on the wings and just needed a center to finish the plays.

 

[ResilientBeast]

My general rule of thumb is that when the talent pool is rapidly expanding, a 1st tier superstar of the earlier generation is about equal to a 2nd tier star of the subsequent stronger generation.

By that rule of thumb, Bowie and Fredrickson are quite close.

I'd almost always draft Fredrickson over Bowie, however. Fredrickson was huge and strong,, at least decent two-ways, and fairly balanced between scoring and passing. So he can be used in a variety of roles.

Bowie is easily a better goal scorer than Fredrickson, but that's really his only ATD-worthy talent. He's small, probably didn't play defense, and while I think he could pass the puck to teammates, it wasn't really his strong suit. I'd only draft Bowie over Fredrickson if I had toughness and playmaking already on the wings and just needed a center to finish the plays.

This is ultimately why I ended up with Bowie. I think Armstrong and Harris are the perfect compliments in a draft of this size.

To be clear I'm not even trying to say Bowie > Frederickson

I just want to challenge the idea that BB's team has the advantage down the middle because of Frederickson.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I

At some point BB commented that his third line wingers definitely better than mine offensively. And if he didn't here's the comparison for the voters

Smokey Harris (Bolded finishes are from playing with PCHA peak Taylor) (italicized finishes are from years that as shown earlier the PCHA was weak)

1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 7, 10, 10, 10

George Armstrong

15th, 16th, 16th, 18th, 18th

Weak though he did lead the Leafs in playoffs scoring during their 62-64 streak. And there's a reason many past GMs have considered him an elite third line glue guy besides just scoring.

Jamie Benn

1st, 2nd, 9th

Tony Amonte

6th

Now depending on how you value PCHA stats, just because he's played a full career you might value Harris's finishes higher or lower than Benn's. Intangibles Benn is physical but doesn't seem to be particularly special defensively. Harris has a few mentions of physicality and defensive play. (Though Harris was a seemingly common name back then so finding new stuff for my bio was a little tough)

Reading Amonte's bio he strikes me as someone who will give 110% and do whatever the coach asks of him. He had one big offensive season in him. Based on ATD canon, and the HOH I favor Armstrong overall.

In pure offence depending on your evaluation of PCHA finishes BB might have better wingers considering purely offence.

Any particular reason you are posting Armstrong's 11th-20th place finishes, but only using top 10s for Amonte and Benn?

You have a great team; you don't need to resort to deception like this.

For the record, I'd take Armstrong over Amonte too, due to team situation and playoff performance. But there really is no excuse to push Armstrong's top 20s, while ignoring everything Amonte did below 10th.

 

[ResilientBeast]

I just grabbed the finishes from their bios, I've edited my post but I see I miss Amonte's my apologies

 

[seventieslord]

I'm still having a hard time understanding why BenchBrawl prefers Frederickson over Bowie. The PCHA was at its weakest when he won his scoring titles. Understandably Bowie's competition was weaker but he was just so much better than his peers.

Well we're talking about 3rd lines here. Typically we expect more than just offense from our 3rd lines. Considering you have Harris and Armstrong on yours, I'd say you tend to agree, otherwise you'd have just taken Lynn Patrick and Phil Kessel late.

I'm really not sold on Frederickson having enough intangibles to be a particularly useful 3rd liner, and it's something I wish I hammered on more a couple weeks ago... but what does that say about Bowie??

I might rank Bowie higher and definitely think he's a better offensive player, but he ain't no third liner; he's just offensive overkill and makes little to no sense even in this new world of offensive bottom sixes.

At some point BB commented that his third line wingers definitely better than mine offensively. And if he didn't here's the comparison for the voters

Smokey Harris (Bolded finishes are from playing with PCHA peak Taylor) (italicized finishes are from years that as shown earlier the PCHA was weak)

1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 7, 10, 10, 10

George Armstrong

*No top 10 finishes*

Weak though he did lead the Leafs in playoffs scoring during their 62-64 streak. And there's a reason many past GMs have considered him an elite third line glue guy besides just scoring.

Jamie Benn

1st, 2nd, 9th

Tony Amonte

6th

Now depending on how you value PCHA stats, just because he's played a full career you might value Harris's finishes higher or lower than Benn's. Intangibles Benn is physical but doesn't seem to be particularly special defensively. Harris has a few mentions of physicality and defensive play. (Though Harris was a seemingly common name back then so finding new stuff for my bio was a little tough)

Reading Amonte's bio he strikes me as someone who will give 110% and do whatever the coach asks of him. He had one big offensive season in him. Based on ATD canon, and the HOH I favor Armstrong overall.

In pure offence depending on your evaluation of PCHA finishes BB might have better wingers considering purely offence. Though this ignores how my third line is constructed. We know very little about Bowie besides he was fast, might be able to pass and he could put the puck between two poles. So my line was constructed to fill in every possible weakness Bowie has with two guys who both have intangibles, one who was a strong complimentary star (Harris) and the other who can do it all.

Why top 10 finishes, of all things? Harris vs. Amonte in top-10 finishes is just the worst possible way to compare them. I mean, you're using three consolidated 10ths (and calling them that is legitimate enough, IMO), but those seasons he had less than half what the leader had. The player who looks the best by this metric - Harris - is actually only 16% ahead of the player who looks the worst - your George Armstrong.

You are in an ATD semifinal series in 2017. Try not to regress to archaic methods of analysis.

Amonte, for example, had six seasons where he was between 58th and 72nd in scoring, where he was closer to the leader than Harris in those "10th" place seasons. Quantitative methods are just better.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I just grabbed the finishes from their bios, I've edited my post but I see I miss Amonte's my apologies

I see your edit. Frankly, I would have just included all their top 20s (Amonte's are listed in his bio, actually), rather than just cutting it off at top 10s, but consistency is what matters most.

Anyway, VsX would make Amonte look quite good, though I think Armstrong is one of those Original 6 players really hurt by VsX's brutality towards players who weren't always scoring line/first PP.

 

[ResilientBeast]

Well we're talking about 3rd lines here. Typically we expect more than just offense from our 3rd lines. Considering you have Harris and Armstrong on yours, I'd say you tend to agree, otherwise you'd have just taken Lynn Patrick and Phil Kessel late.

I'm really not sold on Frederickson having enough intangibles to be a particularly useful 3rd liner, and it's something I wish I hammered on more a couple weeks ago... but what does that say about Bowie??

I might rank Bowie higher and definitely think he's a better offensive player, but he ain't no third liner; he's just offensive overkill and makes little to no sense even in this new world of offensive bottom sixes.



Why top 10 finishes, of all things? Harris vs. Amonte in top-10 finishes is just the worst possible way to compare them. I mean, you're using three consolidated 10ths (and calling them that is legitimate enough, IMO), but those seasons he had less than half what the leader had. The player who looks the best by this metric - Harris - is actually only 16% ahead of the player who looks the worst - your George Armstrong.

You are in an ATD semifinal series in 2017. Try not to regress to archaic methods of analysis.

Amonte, for example, had six seasons where he was between 58th and 72nd in scoring, where he was closer to the leader than Harris in those "10th" place seasons. Quantitative methods are just better.

For line with an elite third line glue guy in Armstrong and Harris who is fine as a secondary intangible and offensive player I see no problems with Bowie being a third liner. He's the worst of my centers defensively by far I'm well aware. I needed more offensive punch and took the best offensive player available when I picked, I don't see how he can't be a third liner if put in the right situation. This isn't like last year where I'm trying to pass off Bowie as a second liner.

So where ideally do you think he should be in a lineup?

Where did the 16% come from?