Flashback: Dmitry Mironov

[Gary Nylund]

Mironov was not, by any stretch, a #1 D-man for the Leafs. In the 1993 and 1994 seasons he was on the 3rd pairing, playing about 18 minutes a game in total while getting top PP minutes. In the 1995 lockout season he graduated to about 20 per game, but still was just the #4 on the Leafs.

When he went to Pittsburgh he was a distant #2 to Zubov in 1996, but at the start of the 1997 season he had fallen out of favour and was being played behind the likes of Tamer, Daigneault and Moran. But when he got to Anaheim, whose blueline was very weak and not at all deep, he actually got played like a #1. They gave him 2 more minutes a game more than the next guy (Bobby freaking Dollas!) They also played him like a #1 in the 1998 season before the wings picked him up and gave him a much more reasonable 20 minutes a game, behind Lidstrom & Murphy, but ahead of Eriksson, an ancient Fetisov and Macoun.

During the next three seasons in Washington, he played two seasons' worth of games. I don't know if that was all due to injury or because he was in and out of the lineup, but his TOI says he was a middle of the lineup guy at best, earning an average of about 19 minutes a game there.

Over his career, he averaged 21 minutes per game, a decent full career average, but his numbers aren't dragged down by the usual developmental time and progessive decline other careers tend to have (he played full time from age 27 to 34).

Even during his "peak" as the Ducks' #1 (which lasted 128 games) I would not call him one of the top defensemen in the league. His brother Boris was much better and even he only just barely snuck onto two THN annual top-20 lists (17th and 18th, IIRC).

On a career basis I would call Mironov a very good #4 or a passable #3, and a decent PP specialist.

Where do you get these ice time numbers from? Was ice time even being tracked back then? I ask because I'm super curious now to see if and/or how badly my memory is or isn't failing me. The way I remember it this:

The Leafs had a very good defence by committee mostly rolling 5 guys, Mironov, Ellett, Rouse, Lefebre and Macoun and those guys got most of the ice time with Todd Gill being the 6th guy. I couldn't label anyone as being a #1 or #3 or whatever else nor could you say that a guy was top pairing or 2nd pairing etc. because they were rolling 5 guys which made it impossible to even have set pairings. All 5 guys were quite good at that time, maybe roughly in the #2-#3 range in terms of skill but there was nobody I'd call a #1 Dman, maybe Ellett who was a really smooth skating PMD came closest. And that includes Mironov - I don't know what he did elsewhere but I don't remember being anywhere near a #1 when he was a Leaf though to be fair, #1D wasn't even a widely used term back then IIRC. Earlier it was mentioned that Gill was one of the top 5 which is news to me but again, my memory could be off and the one way to know for sure is to see the ice time numbers for the 1992-93 and 1993-94 seasons.

 

[seventieslord]

I take your point about the PP time with Kariya/Selanne, though you can say the same thing about many of the other #1D at that time. Hatcher in Pittsburgh, Lidstrom in Detroit, Leetch in New York, the list goes on. To me Mironov was a top 20D in the league from about the 94 playoffs until the 98 playoffs (his off-year in Pittsburgh notwithstanding). He also performed when it mattered against top competition, eg the ‘97 playoffs, or on Russia’s top pairing at the ‘98 Olympics (that Silver medal is still Russia’s best post-USSR finish to this day).

It sounds to me like you care far too much about point totals when judging the value of defensemen. Looking at the 1994 playoffs, for example, it's a major stretch to suggest he was a top-20 defenseman when he was not even top-4 on his own team. Macoun, Ellett, Gill and Lefebvre were playing a lot more than him, and the #5, Rouse, was playing a good minute and a half more than Mironov as well. The only reason he was that close was because of his disproportionately high PP usage. At even strength, his 13 minutes per game made him far and away the #6, three whole minutes behind Rouse and Gill.

He had the role and usage on the team similar to (though a little greater) than a Carrick or Dermott does for the current Leafs. To suggest he was top-20 in the NHL at that time was ludicrous. In Anaheim, at least he was his own team's #1, which makes the argument somewhat credible, until the depth of the team's defense compared to Mironov's usage both before and after Anaheim are reviewed.

In the middle of the period you describe, the 1995-96 season, the following defensemen were in the NHL:

Bourque, MacInnis, Coffey, Chelios, Leetch
Suter, K.Hatcher, Desjardins, Zubov, D. Hatcher
Lidstrom, Hamrlik, Murphy, Pronger, Stevens
Numminen, Svehla, Niedermayer, Ozolinsh, Duchesne
Lumme, Housley, Schneider, Galley, Brown
Konstantinov, Gonchar

...then there were consistent mainstays like Johansson, Cote, Driver, Zhitnik, Patrick. For a few seasons, Mironov made it to that range of player. It was for a much shorter time than they did, but he was there. He was possibly top-30 in the NHL, very briefly. Never top-20, and certainly not top-20 for a four-year period.

 

[seventieslord]

Where do you get these ice time numbers from? Was ice time even being tracked back then? I ask because I'm super curious now to see if and/or how badly my memory is or isn't failing me. The way I remember it this:

The Leafs had a very good defence by committee mostly rolling 5 guys, Mironov, Ellett, Rouse, Lefebre and Macoun and those guys got most of the ice time with Todd Gill being the 6th guy. I couldn't label anyone as being a #1 or #3 or whatever else nor could you say that a guy was top pairing or 2nd pairing etc. because they were rolling 5 guys which made it impossible to even have set pairings. All 5 guys were quite good at that time, maybe roughly in the #2-#3 range in terms of skill but there was nobody I'd call a #1 Dman, maybe Ellett who was a really smooth skating PMD came closest. And that includes Mironov - I don't know what he did elsewhere but I don't remember being anywhere near a #1 when he was a Leaf though to be fair, #1D wasn't even a widely used term back then IIRC. Earlier it was mentioned that Gill was one of the top 5 which is news to me but again, my memory could be off and the one way to know for sure is to see the ice time numbers for the 1992-93 and 1993-94 seasons.

These numbers were put together in 2006 by renowned historian Iain Fyffe in 2006 and they've been frequently cited since then in the ATD and HOH sections. He was able to take the situational GF and GA data (the plus minus components) which existed back to 1967 (actually back to 1960 now, thanks to the NHL's centennial stats project) and use them to formulate icetime numbers in each manpower situation. The premise is that the players who are on the ice for the most goals (both for and against combined) are on the ice the most. He used his calculations on modern seasons as well, with known TOI numbers (1999-2006) and used them to tweak his calculations to arrive at the most realistic results. In the end, the results of his formula correllated 97% with the real numbers.

There is a small limitation to his formula, and that is that "low event" players (Rouse, Lefebvre) can see their TOI underestimated slightly, and "high event" players (Mironov) can have their TOI overestimated. The reason is that the former may cause the total goals scored (both for and against) drop slightly per minute while they're on, and the latter may cause the opposite. So if the numbers are inaccurate (and they can never be perfect) it's more likely that Mironov was even further behind the other five than I cited above.

In case you're wondering what the numbers say about that magical 1992-93 and 1993-94 period, here are the significant players:

YEAR	T	TEAM	P	PLAYER	TOI	TOI-ES	TOI-PP	TOI-SH	GP
1993	0	TOR	D	ELLETT, DAVE	24.579	17.116	5.075	2.389	70
1993	0	TOR	D	MACOUN, JAMIE	23.228	17.736	1.475	4.017	77
1993	0	TOR	D	GILL, TODD	19.797	14.318	4.078	1.401	69
1993	0	TOR	D	LEFEBVRE, SYLVAIN	19.238	15.147	0.176	3.916	81
1993	0	TOR	D	ROUSE, BOB	19.224	15.893	0.174	3.157	82
1993	0	TOR	D	MIRONOV, DMITRI	17.877	13.815	3.768	0.294	59
1993	0	TOR	D	BEREHOWSKY, DRAKE	13.803	10.930	2.798	0.076	41
1994	0	TOR	D	MACOUN, JAMIE	22.907	17.564	1.368	3.976	82
1994	0	TOR	D	ELLETT, DAVE	22.807	15.470	5.100	2.237	68
1994	0	TOR	D	GILL, TODD	22.085	16.122	4.697	1.267	45
1994	0	TOR	D	LEFEBVRE, SYLVAIN	21.384	17.075	0.096	4.213	84
1994	0	TOR	D	ROUSE, BOB	20.193	15.866	0.996	3.331	63
1994	0	TOR	D	MIRONOV, DMITRI	18.550	12.961	4.467	1.123	76
1994	0	TOR	D	BEREHOWSKY, DRAKE	12.093	9.378	2.667	0.048	49

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Your recollection about rolling the main 5 guys nearly equally seems to be more accurate in the 1994 season. In 1993 though, Macoun and Ellett were the team's top guys, both easily at ES and also with a spot on the 1st unit of their suited special team, and 2nd unit on the other. (still I wouldn't call it all that accurate when Macoun and Ellett were playing nearly 3 more minutes than the #5, Rouse, but yes, it was more spread around than it was in the previous season)

Which makes sense, because prior to coming to Toronto, Ellett and Macoun were both very relied on players. Rouse and Lefebvre were never the kind of players who handled big minutes or played against the best competition anywhere (aside from Lefebvre's 1995 season with Quebec)

 

[Gary Nylund]

These numbers were put together in 2006 by renowned historian Iain Fyffe in 2006 and they've been frequently cited since then in the ATD and HOH sections. He was able to take the situational GF and GA data (the plus minus components) which existed back to 1967 (actually back to 1960 now, thanks to the NHL's centennial stats project) and use them to formulate icetime numbers in each manpower situation. The premise is that the players who are on the ice for the most goals (both for and against combined) are on the ice the most. He used his calculations on modern seasons as well, with known TOI numbers (1999-2006) and used them to tweak his calculations to arrive at the most realistic results. In the end, the results of his formula correllated 97% with the real numbers.

There is a small limitation to his formula, and that is that "low event" players (Rouse, Lefebvre) can see their TOI underestimated slightly, and "high event" players (Mironov) can have their TOI overestimated. The reason is that the former may cause the total goals scored (both for and against) drop slightly per minute while they're on, and the latter may cause the opposite. So if the numbers are inaccurate (and they can never be perfect) it's more likely that Mironov was even further behind the other five than I cited above.

In case you're wondering what the numbers say about that magical 1992-93 and 1993-94 period, here are the significant players:

YEAR	T	TEAM	P	PLAYER	TOI	TOI-ES	TOI-PP	TOI-SH	GP
1993	0	TOR	D	ELLETT, DAVE	24.579	17.116	5.075	2.389	70
1993	0	TOR	D	MACOUN, JAMIE	23.228	17.736	1.475	4.017	77
1993	0	TOR	D	GILL, TODD	19.797	14.318	4.078	1.401	69
1993	0	TOR	D	LEFEBVRE, SYLVAIN	19.238	15.147	0.176	3.916	81
1993	0	TOR	D	ROUSE, BOB	19.224	15.893	0.174	3.157	82
1993	0	TOR	D	MIRONOV, DMITRI	17.877	13.815	3.768	0.294	59
1993	0	TOR	D	BEREHOWSKY, DRAKE	13.803	10.930	2.798	0.076	41
1994	0	TOR	D	MACOUN, JAMIE	22.907	17.564	1.368	3.976	82
1994	0	TOR	D	ELLETT, DAVE	22.807	15.470	5.100	2.237	68
1994	0	TOR	D	GILL, TODD	22.085	16.122	4.697	1.267	45
1994	0	TOR	D	LEFEBVRE, SYLVAIN	21.384	17.075	0.096	4.213	84
1994	0	TOR	D	ROUSE, BOB	20.193	15.866	0.996	3.331	63
1994	0	TOR	D	MIRONOV, DMITRI	18.550	12.961	4.467	1.123	76
1994	0	TOR	D	BEREHOWSKY, DRAKE	12.093	9.378	2.667	0.048	49

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Your recollection about rolling the main 5 guys nearly equally seems to be more accurate in the 1994 season. In 1993 though, Macoun and Ellett were the team's top guys, both easily at ES and also with a spot on the 1st unit of their suited special team, and 2nd unit on the other. (still I wouldn't call it all that accurate when Macoun and Ellett were playing nearly 3 more minutes than the #5, Rouse, but yes, it was more spread around than it was in the previous season)

Which makes sense, because prior to coming to Toronto, Ellett and Macoun were both very relied on players. Rouse and Lefebvre were never the kind of players who handled big minutes or played against the best competition anywhere (aside from Lefebvre's 1995 season with Quebec)

Thanks a lot for this, that's very interesting and it looks like my memory was off. I'll take a closer look at this tomorrow.

 

[Morbo]

Tree was a decent offensive dman

 

[Gary Nylund]

These numbers were put together in 2006 by renowned historian Iain Fyffe in 2006 and they've been frequently cited since then in the ATD and HOH sections. He was able to take the situational GF and GA data (the plus minus components) which existed back to 1967 (actually back to 1960 now, thanks to the NHL's centennial stats project) and use them to formulate icetime numbers in each manpower situation. The premise is that the players who are on the ice for the most goals (both for and against combined) are on the ice the most. He used his calculations on modern seasons as well, with known TOI numbers (1999-2006) and used them to tweak his calculations to arrive at the most realistic results. In the end, the results of his formula correllated 97% with the real numbers.

There is a small limitation to his formula, and that is that "low event" players (Rouse, Lefebvre) can see their TOI underestimated slightly, and "high event" players (Mironov) can have their TOI overestimated. The reason is that the former may cause the total goals scored (both for and against) drop slightly per minute while they're on, and the latter may cause the opposite. So if the numbers are inaccurate (and they can never be perfect) it's more likely that Mironov was even further behind the other five than I cited above.

In case you're wondering what the numbers say about that magical 1992-93 and 1993-94 period, here are the significant players:

YEAR	T	TEAM	P	PLAYER	TOI	TOI-ES	TOI-PP	TOI-SH	GP
1993	0	TOR	D	ELLETT, DAVE	24.579	17.116	5.075	2.389	70
1993	0	TOR	D	MACOUN, JAMIE	23.228	17.736	1.475	4.017	77
1993	0	TOR	D	GILL, TODD	19.797	14.318	4.078	1.401	69
1993	0	TOR	D	LEFEBVRE, SYLVAIN	19.238	15.147	0.176	3.916	81
1993	0	TOR	D	ROUSE, BOB	19.224	15.893	0.174	3.157	82
1993	0	TOR	D	MIRONOV, DMITRI	17.877	13.815	3.768	0.294	59
1993	0	TOR	D	BEREHOWSKY, DRAKE	13.803	10.930	2.798	0.076	41
1994	0	TOR	D	MACOUN, JAMIE	22.907	17.564	1.368	3.976	82
1994	0	TOR	D	ELLETT, DAVE	22.807	15.470	5.100	2.237	68
1994	0	TOR	D	GILL, TODD	22.085	16.122	4.697	1.267	45
1994	0	TOR	D	LEFEBVRE, SYLVAIN	21.384	17.075	0.096	4.213	84
1994	0	TOR	D	ROUSE, BOB	20.193	15.866	0.996	3.331	63
1994	0	TOR	D	MIRONOV, DMITRI	18.550	12.961	4.467	1.123	76
1994	0	TOR	D	BEREHOWSKY, DRAKE	12.093	9.378	2.667	0.048	49

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Your recollection about rolling the main 5 guys nearly equally seems to be more accurate in the 1994 season. In 1993 though, Macoun and Ellett were the team's top guys, both easily at ES and also with a spot on the 1st unit of their suited special team, and 2nd unit on the other. (still I wouldn't call it all that accurate when Macoun and Ellett were playing nearly 3 more minutes than the #5, Rouse, but yes, it was more spread around than it was in the previous season)

Which makes sense, because prior to coming to Toronto, Ellett and Macoun were both very relied on players. Rouse and Lefebvre were never the kind of players who handled big minutes or played against the best competition anywhere (aside from Lefebvre's 1995 season with Quebec)

OK I was now able to take a few minutes to go over this, this is very interesting and enlightening and that ice time formula is very clever. I do remember that IMO Ellett and Macoun were the best guys we had but the gap wasn't huge so that fits. If you were to just flip Gill and Mironov, these numbers would fit my memory almost perfectly, if I had time I'd spend some time googling to show that memory is a funny thing and this could (and does) happen to anyone.

Lefebvre was a strange case, I remember him having some silly high +- numbers, I looked it up and yes in 1993-94 he only had 11 points but lead the team with a freaky +33, the Leafs were wise to cash in on that season by including him in the package for Sundin.

And yes Macoun was really good. I remember at the time of trade a friend of mine who was very knowledgeable about hockey, said that he didn't see how the Flames got back enough in that trade for even Macoun. Basically he was saying that even if Gilmour wasn't part of the deal it would still have been bad for Calgary which is just incredible.

Anyhow, thanks again. Without these numbers I would probably have been insisting I had this one right when obviously, I did not.

 

[seventieslord]

With the benefit of hindsight, I'd have to agree, if the trade was just for macoun we'd have still been the clear winners.

Interesting topic, actually.

At the time people would be up in arms that we traded a 27-year old not two seasons removed from a 50-goal season and the best asset we got back was a 30-year old stay at home defenseman.

It would be like if we traded Tyler Johnson (looked back 2-3 years and found a guy who broke out, hasn't matched it since and is 27 now) for Niklas Hjalmarsson (a 30-year old defensive d-man who, for the last 7 years, has played about 21 minutes a game on good teams, most similar profile to Macoun circa 1992). I think at first people would be looking at the upside of Johnson compared to how "replaceable" a stay at home guy like Hjalmarsson is and be up in arms.

But whether you just look at the career contributions following the trade, or contributions to the teams they were traded to, the Macoun side of the deal is the better side.

Career:

Macoun: 542 GP, 112 Pts, 75 PO GP, 17 Pts, 21.72 Min/GP

Leeman: 122 GP, 59 Pts, 12 PO GP, 3 Pts
Berube: 779 GP, 105 Pts, 68 PO GP, 4 Pts
Godynyuk: 174 GP, 37 Pts, no playoffs, 17.1 min/GP
Petit: 298 GP, 92 Pts, 14 PO GP, 0 Pts, 19.53 min/GP
Reese: 98 GP, .883 sv% 9 PO GP, .850 sv%

I think Macoun wins this all on his own. 542 games of a #2 defenseman (on averaged out basis over the 7 years) versus 122 GP of a one-dimensonal faded scorer, 779 GP from a goon, 174 GP from a #7-8 defenseman, 298 GP from a #4 defenseman and 98 games from a below-replacement level goalie.

But then you throw in 70 games from a #4 defenseman Ric Nattress, and 600+ from 4th line and PK center Kent Manderville, and it's a slam dunk. Manderville, in this hypothetical, is the 2nd most accomplished asset in the deal.

Looking specifically at what they did for Calgary and Toronto only makes it worse:

Macoun: 466 GP, 101 Pts, 62 PO GP, 13 Pts, 22.6 Min/GP

Leeman: 59 GP, 23 pts, no playoffs
Berube: 113 GP, 17 Pts, 6 PO GP, 1 pt
Godynyuk: 33 GP, 8 Pts, 17.4 min/GP, no playoffs
Petit: 134 GP, 48 Pts, no playoffs, 18.9 min/GP
Reese: 39 GP, .883 sv%, 4 PO GP, .813 sv%

I mean, Macoun on his own played more RS games for the Leafs than these 5 combined for the Flames, and despite being a defensive defenseman, had more points than they had combined for the Flames, too. He had more playoff points for the Leafs than they had playoff games for the Flames. And though the Flames missed the 1992 playoffs, they made the playoffs in the next 4 seasons, so it shows how critical these guys were to those efforts in the short period following the trade.

...and the Leafs received 23 points in 136 games (37 in the playoffs) from the unheralded grinder Manderville, too, as replaceable as those contributions may have been, it was he who did it and not someone else. So again, Leafs win this deal by any metric, even if it was a "package for Macoun" deal, but add in Manderville and it's a slam dunk (and add in Gilmour and it's, of course, the most lopsided trade of all-time).

 

[seventieslord]

OK I was now able to take a few minutes to go over this, this is very interesting and enlightening and that ice time formula is very clever. I do remember that IMO Ellett and Macoun were the best guys we had but the gap wasn't huge so that fits. If you were to just flip Gill and Mironov, these numbers would fit my memory almost perfectly, if I had time I'd spend some time googling to show that memory is a funny thing and this could (and does) happen to anyone.

Lefebvre was a strange case, I remember him having some silly high +- numbers, I looked it up and yes in 1993-94 he only had 11 points but lead the team with a freaky +33, the Leafs were wise to cash in on that season by including him in the package for Sundin.

And yes Macoun was really good. I remember at the time of trade a friend of mine who was very knowledgeable about hockey, said that he didn't see how the Flames got back enough in that trade for even Macoun. Basically he was saying that even if Gilmour wasn't part of the deal it would still have been bad for Calgary which is just incredible.

Anyhow, thanks again. Without these numbers I would probably have been insisting I had this one right when obviously, I did not.

Lefebvre was a very good defensive defenseman and very appreciated by fans. Rouse too, but to a lesser extent. Rouse got the job done with more toughness, Lefebvre more with smarts, though Rouse was no dummy and Lefebvre was not soft.

He did have some silly high +/- numbers. This happens from time to time when a guy plays on a deep defense corps and ends up in roles he's a little overqualified for, and defensively dominates 2nd rate competition. Look at Joe Reekie's numbers in Washington in the 90s, for another example. He was very good at what he did but there was a reason Macoun was getting the tougher defensive assignments and those extra shifts at the start and end of the period that amounted to a good 4-5 more minutes a game.

I would agree that with Lefebvre we sold high. With Clark, we did too. I think we all knew that at the time, but it still hurt, didn't it?

 

[TheGoldenJet]

It sounds to me like you care far too much about point totals when judging the value of defensemen.

Sounds to me like your putting words into my mouth?

These numbers were put together in 2006 by renowned historian Iain Fyffe in 2006 and they've been frequently cited since then in the ATD and HOH sections. He was able to take the situational GF and GA data (the plus minus components) which existed back to 1967 (actually back to 1960 now, thanks to the NHL's centennial stats project) and use them to formulate icetime numbers in each manpower situation. The premise is that the players who are on the ice for the most goals (both for and against combined) are on the ice the most. He used his calculations on modern seasons as well, with known TOI numbers (1999-2006) and used them to tweak his calculations to arrive at the most realistic results. In the end, the results of his formula correllated 97% with the real numbers.

There is a small limitation to his formula, and that is that "low event" players (Rouse, Lefebvre) can see their TOI underestimated slightly, and "high event" players (Mironov) can have their TOI overestimated. The reason is that the former may cause the total goals scored (both for and against) drop slightly per minute while they're on, and the latter may cause the opposite. So if the numbers are inaccurate (and they can never be perfect) it's more likely that Mironov was even further behind the other five than I cited above.

In case you're wondering what the numbers say about that magical 1992-93 and 1993-94 period, here are the significant players:

YEAR	T	TEAM	P	PLAYER	TOI	TOI-ES	TOI-PP	TOI-SH	GP
1993	0	TOR	D	ELLETT, DAVE	24.579	17.116	5.075	2.389	70
1993	0	TOR	D	MACOUN, JAMIE	23.228	17.736	1.475	4.017	77
1993	0	TOR	D	GILL, TODD	19.797	14.318	4.078	1.401	69
1993	0	TOR	D	LEFEBVRE, SYLVAIN	19.238	15.147	0.176	3.916	81
1993	0	TOR	D	ROUSE, BOB	19.224	15.893	0.174	3.157	82
1993	0	TOR	D	MIRONOV, DMITRI	17.877	13.815	3.768	0.294	59
1993	0	TOR	D	BEREHOWSKY, DRAKE	13.803	10.930	2.798	0.076	41
1994	0	TOR	D	MACOUN, JAMIE	22.907	17.564	1.368	3.976	82
1994	0	TOR	D	ELLETT, DAVE	22.807	15.470	5.100	2.237	68
1994	0	TOR	D	GILL, TODD	22.085	16.122	4.697	1.267	45
1994	0	TOR	D	LEFEBVRE, SYLVAIN	21.384	17.075	0.096	4.213	84
1994	0	TOR	D	ROUSE, BOB	20.193	15.866	0.996	3.331	63
1994	0	TOR	D	MIRONOV, DMITRI	18.550	12.961	4.467	1.123	76
1994	0	TOR	D	BEREHOWSKY, DRAKE	12.093	9.378	2.667	0.048	49

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Your recollection about rolling the main 5 guys nearly equally seems to be more accurate in the 1994 season. In 1993 though, Macoun and Ellett were the team's top guys, both easily at ES and also with a spot on the 1st unit of their suited special team, and 2nd unit on the other. (still I wouldn't call it all that accurate when Macoun and Ellett were playing nearly 3 more minutes than the #5, Rouse, but yes, it was more spread around than it was in the previous season)

Which makes sense, because prior to coming to Toronto, Ellett and Macoun were both very relied on players. Rouse and Lefebvre were never the kind of players who handled big minutes or played against the best competition anywhere (aside from Lefebvre's 1995 season with Quebec)

None of these numbers are official though.

 

[seventieslord]

Sounds to me like your putting words into my mouth?

Well correct me if I'm wrong, but every time you cite data to substantiate the value of a defenseman in this thread, that data is points and points per game, and nothing about how much the coaching staff trusted him out on the ice.

Regardless, you chose the first line of my post and sniped at me about that, instead of replying to the actual content of it. Which of those 30+ defensemen was Mironov better than?

None of these numbers are official though.

so? The differences between Mironov and the rest of the defense corps are well outside the margin of error. Plus if they're incorrect it would mean Mironov caused goals for and against to drop considerably when he was on the ice compared to other Leaf defensemen, and knowing what we know about him and the others, that makes absolutely no sense.

and if those numbers are meaningless then so are the ones that say he was far and away the Ducks' #1 defenseman. It's all just hearsay and recollections without the statistical data to demonstrate he was on the ice the most.

keep in mind as well that in the last three seasons of his career, when TOI was officially tracked, he earned icetime that lines up very well with what he earned in the rest of his career (except in Anaheim, of course).

 

[daveleaf]

Mironov came in with some hype but in my opinion he never lived up to it. He got his nose broke early on and seemed gun shy after that. The video showed him one timing on the power play and if you look he was almost directing it in. The guy had a horrible time hitting the net. I would get tickets back them to the games all the time and sometimes the blues. You had to duck all the time because his shots would go anywhere. He was behind Gill, Macoun, Lefebrve, Rouse. He was supposed to be that offensive guy but a year or two later I believe they traded for Murphy. At best I thought he was a second pairing guy but he lacked the confidence and the game was tougher back then and he had none.