Jim Coleman Conference Quarterfinals: (1) New Jersey Swamp Devils vs (2) Montreal NDG Maroons

Dreakmur

Registered User
Mar 25, 2008
18,552
6,730
Orillia, Ontario
Vezina wasn’t even the best goalie of his era, Benedict was. Fuhr was considered the best in the world for at least 3 years.

Vezina was definitely better than Benedict - that's old news, isn't it?

After the big 6 goalies (Hasek, Roy, Plante, Sawchuk, Hall, and Brodeur), Vezina is in the conversation. I have him behind Dryden, and Brimsek for sure, and about equal to Tretiak. He's a top 10 goalie.

What 3 years was he considered the best in the world? Through most of his prime, he put up about equal numbers to his back-up. Fuhr is one of the weaker starters in the draft, though he does have big-game pedigree, which improves his play-off stock somewhat.

Fetisov was better, but “quite a bit” better? No. Pronger dominated for 30 minutes a game and was considered the best player in the world one year, not just best dman.

Fetisov' probably between Red Kelly and Larry Robinson, which puts him safely inside the top 10 defensemen of all time. Pronger is down in the 20s. That is quite a bit better.

Pulford we talked about. He didn’t shadow Jean in real life, he had help from Kelly, how will he do it on his own here? And he wasn’t even a natural center from what I understand.

As discussed, Pulford is one of the few checking centers who has the combination of skating and strength to be able to handle Beliveau. He played both LW and C through his career, and excelled in a checking role at both positions.

According to Dick Duff, Pulford was used against Beliveau - " We knew we had to stop Beliveau, so Bob Pulford would be assigned to him. Pully was supposed to bump him all night to slow him down."

As I said above, Pulford is not going to shut down Beliveau. We know that. He will, however, slow him down, especially with the help of Provost on the wing and our very solid defense core.



I don’t know about your scoring claim either. Have to dig into that. Morris on a third line is a luxury from my understanding and this crowd seems split on Perreault but Orr said he was his toughest opponent. The other guys on that line: Martin, Gaborik have multiple 50 goal seasons and add Niedermayer and I don't see anything you could do to deal with the combo of speed, skill and snipe, especially on your PK and blue line.

You put your 7 season vs. x scores right on your roster page. A 73.1 for Martin and 69.9 for Gaborik is pretty weak. Iginla has 86.7 and Gottselig a 74.8. Iginla is especially effective at even strength, with an ES vs. X of 91.9.

Morris has some skill yes, but if he's being used in a checking role, how much will he be able to use that skill? He's not getting any significant PP time, so how much is he really going to score? I would expect his checking line counterpart, Claude Provost, to out-score him significantly.

Madden-Holik shut down Mario-Jagr with Madden at LW and Holik cheating on draws with Madden ready to step in. You aren’t going to win any puck battles against them. Add Finnigan, the best defensive player of his decade.

As far as checking lines go, that's one of the weaker ones in the draft. Holik especially will get exposed.

If you want to match Madden-Holik-Finnigan against either of New Jersey's top 2 lines, I don't think Green would even try to avoid that.
 

ChiTownPhilly

Not Too Soft
Feb 23, 2010
2,095
1,381
AnyWorld/I'mWelcomeTo
Vezina was definitely better than Benedict - that's old news, isn't it?
Put me in the camp that doesn't hold it as a settled matter that Vezina is [definitely(?!?)] better than Benedict. Not wanting to go on too big a digression- but I feel that most of the "Vezina>Benedict" conclusions are drawn from comparisons favorable to Vezina in the contemporaneous accounts of the time- and (so it's reasoned)- who'd know better than the people that actually saw them play? I believe there are reasons to avoid accepting those accounts uncritically. I've written about that elsewhere. I think you could make a case for Vezina falling outside the top-dozen, all time.

That said, he doesn't need to be in the top-dozen to be superior to Grant Fuhr.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tinyzombies

Dreakmur

Registered User
Mar 25, 2008
18,552
6,730
Orillia, Ontario
Put me in the camp that doesn't hold it as a settled matter that Vezina is [definitely(?!?)] better than Benedict. Not wanting to go on too big a digression- but I feel that most of the "Vezina>Benedict" conclusions are drawn from comparisons favorable to Vezina in the contemporaneous accounts of the time- and (so it's reasoned)- who'd know better than the people that actually saw them play? I believe there are reasons to avoid accepting those accounts uncritically. I've written about that elsewhere. I think you could make a case for Vezina falling outside the top-dozen, all time.

That said, he doesn't need to be in the top-dozen to be superior to Grant Fuhr.

If we ignore contemporary reports, there's basically nothing to measure the early era goalies. If you read what was written at the time, Vezina was the best goalie of all time until Frank Brimsek probably overtook him. Charlie Gardiner probably would have passed him too, but he tragically only had half a career.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheDevilMadeMe

ChiTownPhilly

Not Too Soft
Feb 23, 2010
2,095
1,381
AnyWorld/I'mWelcomeTo
I didn't advocate ignoring contemporary accounts- I merely suggested that I was disinclined to accept them uncritically. The statistical record, fragmentary as it is, shows Benedict in a very favorable light. I think there are two factors that worked to Vezina's advantage in the reportage of the day: 1) he was viewed as possessing a 'pure' stand-up technique, and thus was more likely to be praised as tending goal "the-way-it's-supposed-to-be-done," and to a lesser extent- 2) Vezina played in a larger market, which seldom hurts when it comes to positive press for a star.

Appreciated your interesting speculations about Charlie Gardiner. In that 10-15 range for all-time netminders, I don't see much space between Vezina, Gardiner, and Benedict. In fact, I see that they're one right after the other on the old 'top goaltenders' HoH project. To me, that's well within the parameters of the "reasonable people may disagree" standard.
 

tinyzombies

Registered User
Dec 24, 2002
16,826
2,338
Montreal, QC, Canada
Vezina was definitely better than Benedict - that's old news, isn't it?

After the big 6 goalies (Hasek, Roy, Plante, Sawchuk, Hall, and Brodeur), Vezina is in the conversation. I have him behind Dryden, and Brimsek for sure, and about equal to Tretiak. He's a top 10 goalie.

What 3 years was he considered the best in the world? Through most of his prime, he put up about equal numbers to his back-up. Fuhr is one of the weaker starters in the draft, though he does have big-game pedigree, which improves his play-off stock somewhat.



Fetisov' probably between Red Kelly and Larry Robinson, which puts him safely inside the top 10 defensemen of all time. Pronger is down in the 20s. That is quite a bit better.



As discussed, Pulford is one of the few checking centers who has the combination of skating and strength to be able to handle Beliveau. He played both LW and C through his career, and excelled in a checking role at both positions.

According to Dick Duff, Pulford was used against Beliveau - " We knew we had to stop Beliveau, so Bob Pulford would be assigned to him. Pully was supposed to bump him all night to slow him down."

As I said above, Pulford is not going to shut down Beliveau. We know that. He will, however, slow him down, especially with the help of Provost on the wing and our very solid defense core.





You put your 7 season vs. x scores right on your roster page. A 73.1 for Martin and 69.9 for Gaborik is pretty weak. Iginla has 86.7 and Gottselig a 74.8. Iginla is especially effective at even strength, with an ES vs. X of 91.9.

Morris has some skill yes, but if he's being used in a checking role, how much will he be able to use that skill? He's not getting any significant PP time, so how much is he really going to score? I would expect his checking line counterpart, Claude Provost, to out-score him significantly.



As far as checking lines go, that's one of the weaker ones in the draft. Holik especially will get exposed.

If you want to match Madden-Holik-Finnigan against either of New Jersey's top 2 lines, I don't think Green would even try to avoid that.

I didn’t say Morris was on a checking line. But he adds potential second line atd scoring to my third line, which would offset the style considerations for putting Gaborik/Hyland with the French Connection. If it makes for a better line to have Morris with Perreault I’d do that
 

Dreakmur

Registered User
Mar 25, 2008
18,552
6,730
Orillia, Ontario
I didn’t say Morris was on a checking line.

It may not be a checking line, but it's a line that likely won't see many offensive opportunities. For starters, they will see reduced minutes in offensive situations - those big offensive shifts are still going to go to your top offensive lines.

Second, it doesn't look like they'll see much power play time, which knocks about 1/3 of a normal player's scoring off. According to your roster, Gaborik has a score of 69.9, but only 68% of his scoring was done at even strength. You, however, don't have him on the power play, so his impact will be that of a player with a score of 47.5.

But he adds potential second line atd scoring to my third line, which would offset the style considerations for putting Gaborik/Hyland with the French Connection.

As mentioned above, for players who won't play on the power play, you can basically erase that part of their offensive contributions. That's what makes Claude Provost so amazing - at even strength, he is going to score as well as just about any "offensive" players that land on 3rd lines, and that's even before you account for their changing role and line mates.

If it makes for a better line to have Morris with Perreault I’d do that

Well, Morris is a far better player than Gaborik, if that's what you're asking.[/quote][/QUOTE]
 
  • Like
Reactions: tinyzombies

Dreakmur

Registered User
Mar 25, 2008
18,552
6,730
Orillia, Ontario
What is the NESN offense?

North, east, south, north.

North - from up high down low
East - behind the net
South - up high
North - shot on net

Basically, you take the puck all the way around the outside if the defenders to make them skate a lot. This stretches out the defenders, and creates lanes if anyone gets lazy or tired.
 

tinyzombies

Registered User
Dec 24, 2002
16,826
2,338
Montreal, QC, Canada
North, east, south, north.

North - from up high down low
East - behind the net
South - up high
North - shot on net

Basically, you take the puck all the way around the outside if the defenders to make them skate a lot. This stretches out the defenders, and creates lanes if anyone gets lazy or tired.

Awesome thanks. Talking with a guy on fb who knows Hitch. They are speculating on his future
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->