Pre-WWII ATD Draft - Sign-ups & Preliminary discussions

[Dr John Carlson]

Spots still open? I've never done an ATD because of the time commitment, but I would try to make the time to do an early era version. Very interested.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Spots still open? I've never done an ATD because of the time commitment, but I would try to make the time to do an early era version. Very interested.

Yes! Welcome aboard!

What will be your team name?

 

[Habsfan18]

Pretty strong group overall. @jigglysquishy and @Dr John Carlson are the “newbies” but both played large roles in the pre-merger project and are knowledgable on the subject of early-era players.

This should be fun. And if anything, it’ll play a role in helping us uncover more info about these players and add more context regarding the value of certain players in the ATD universe. And it’s actually a fresh idea. Something that I think was needed.

 

[Dr John Carlson]

Yes! Welcome aboard!

What will be your team name?

Halifax Crescents.

 

[BenchBrawl]

So looks like we've narrowed the cutoff to "born through 1911" to "born through 1913".

To make it clear, here are the main players we have to decide whether we want IN or OUT:

Born through 1912
Toe Blake
Bill Cowley

Born through 1913
Bryan Hextall Sr.
Gordie Drillon

 

[BenchBrawl]

I think I'm inclined to include them, given that we're likely to have 10+ teams, and there aren't enough players in these 1912 and 1913 crops to drown the pool like we feared.

 

[seventieslord]

I agree, include those guys.

Who are the 1914s? Does it start to get murky with them?

 

[seventieslord]

I took a look at 1914 births, sorted by GP to get the most prominent ones at the top, checked the top 6, and all of them are predominantly pre-ww2. One is even exclusively pre-ww2 (bucko). Broda is 7&7. Most are about 70-30 to 80-20.

I don't think we need to include every birth year where the players are 50/50 or higher. And I realize there has to be a cut off somewhere. But if we included the 1914 births, approximately 75% of the seasons played by those players would be prior to the end of ww2.

 

[seventieslord]

I also just took a look at the 1915 births, and the 10 players with the most games played from that birth year have 66 seasons prior to the end of ww2, and 18 after. Brimsek (one of the two most prominent names along with apps) is 5&5, which is the only player with a remotely even breakdown. It's 61 and 13 if you exclude him. A couple didn't even play after WW2 at all.

I could have sworn apps played until 1951, my comment about him yesterday was based on that bad assumption.

 

[seventieslord]

Same analysis of 1916 births is 51 NHL seasons played before/during WW2, 48 after. A stark difference. Crawford/Pratt/Mac Colville/Armstrong combine for 28-11, the other 6 are 23-37. If we cut off 1916, I would still feel like those two defense men in particular should have been included but for the most part their birth year can be tossed out without ruining the spirit of it.

1917 births is a wasteland with only two worthy players and they're 5&7 & 5&5. Can easily toss. 1918 was a big year for big names, but there's zero argument for including any of them.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I took a look at 1914 births, sorted by GP to get the most prominent ones at the top, checked the top 6, and all of them are predominantly pre-ww2. One is even exclusively pre-ww2 (bucko). Broda is 7&7. Most are about 70-30 to 80-20.

I don't think we need to include every birth year where the players are 50/50 or higher. And I realize there has to be a cut off somewhere. But if we included the 1914 births, approximately 75% of the seasons played by those players would be prior to the end of ww2.

I also just took a look at the 1915 births, and the 10 players with the most games played from that birth year have 66 seasons prior to the end of ww2, and 18 after. Brimsek (one of the two most prominent names along with apps) is 5&5, which is the only player with a remotely even breakdown. It's 61 and 13 if you exclude him. A couple didn't even play after WW2 at all.

I could have sworn apps played until 1951, my comment about him yesterday was based on that bad assumption.

Same analysis of 1916 births is 51 NHL seasons played before/during WW2, 48 after. A stark difference. Crawford/Pratt/Mac Colville/Armstrong combine for 28-11, the other 6 are 23-37. If we cut off 1916, I would still feel like those two defense men in particular should have been included but for the most part their birth year can be tossed out without ruining the spirit of it.

1917 births is a wasteland with only two worthy players and they're 5&7 & 5&5. Can easily toss. 1918 was a big year for big names, but there's zero argument for including any of them.

Including both Broda and Brimsek would completely change the goalie market, and IMO not in a good way. Too much spoils.

Let's say we stick at 9 teams.

(Not necessarily how I rank them but how they usually go):

Cutoff at 1913:
Vézina
Gardiner
Benedict
Lehman
Worters
Hainsworth
Thompson
Holmes
Lesueur

Cutoff at 1916:
Brimsek
Vézina
Gardiner
Broda
Benedict
Lehman
Worters
Hainsworth
Thompson/Holmes/Lesueur

With the 1913 cutoff there's a steeper drop start to finish, and real pressure to pick a goalie at any point of the draft. With the 1916 cutoff it doesn't really matter whether you pick any of the Top 5-6 goalies.

With centers too, including Apps Sr. would add yet another center in the range of F. Boucher, Taylor, Lalonde, Malone.

 

[Habsfan18]

I like the 1913 cutoff, personally.

Regardless, I feel like we’re running the risk of overcomplicating this and we should try to come to a decision soon.

 

[rmartin65]

Regardless, I feel like we’re running the risk of overcomplicating this and we should try to come to a decision soon.

Agreed

I'd personally prefer 1911>1912>1913>1915>1916 (I like the idea of a true "pre-WWII"), but I'm not going to raise a stink about it.

 

[BenchBrawl]

1911-1913 are fine to me.

Beyond that it changes the landscape too much.

 

[Habsfan18]

Should we set up a poll to decide between 1911, 1912 and 1913? Or is that unnecessary?

I’m fine with any of those 3 options. I don’t like the idea of anything later.

 

[seventieslord]

Including both Broda and Brimsek would completely change the goalie market, and IMO not in a good way. Too much spoils.

Let's say we stick at 9 teams.

(Not necessarily how I rank them but how they usually go):

Cutoff at 1913:
Vézina
Gardiner
Benedict
Lehman
Worters
Hainsworth
Thompson
Holmes
Lesueur

Cutoff at 1916:
Brimsek
Vézina
Gardiner
Broda
Benedict
Lehman
Worters
Hainsworth
Thompson/Holmes/Lesueur

With the 1913 cutoff there's a steeper drop start to finish, and real pressure to pick a goalie at any point of the draft. With the 1916 cutoff it doesn't really matter whether you pick any of the Top 5-6 goalies.

With centers too, including Apps Sr. would add yet another center in the range of F. Boucher, Taylor, Lalonde, Malone.

Okay, that's a thing, but I don't see why it should be seen as a good or a bad thing, it's simply a consequence of how many players are in the pool and how many teams we are drafting. Certainly not a reason to include or exclude any year.

 

[jigglysquishy]

Perhaps an odd question. Can someone be drafted separately as a player and as a coach?

Art Ross is getting taken on the Blue line. Does that mean he can't coach? Can we do player coaches?

 

[Habsfan18]

Perhaps an odd question. Can someone be drafted separately as a player and as a coach?

Art Ross is getting taken on the Blue line. Does that mean he can't coach? Can we do player coaches?

Yes, players and coaches can be considered two separate selections even if they’re the same person. We’ve had instances in the ATD where a coach is technically coaching himself. So yes, Ross would be available as both a player and coach.

 

[BenchBrawl]

.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Perhaps an odd question. Can someone be drafted separately as a player and as a coach?

Art Ross is getting taken on the Blue line. Does that mean he can't coach? Can we do player coaches?

Toe Blake and Lester Patrick are always picked twice separately as a player and as a coach in the normal ATD.

I once proposed to give those guys double duties to increase their value and make them "Jokers" in the deck of cards, so to speak, but it never gained any traction.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Let's put the cutoff down to a vote, here's the poll:

Pre-WWII - Cutoff for eligibility? (See table in OP) (Multiple choice answer)

Here's a table of most prominent players and whether they'd be IN or OUT depending which cutoff year we choose...

forums.hfboards.com

 

[Dr John Carlson]

Another question: since this is an era-specific exercise, will we be operating under era-specific rules, most notably the red line? Or are we transporting these dudes to the modern ruleset?

 

[Professor What]

I'm not sure I've ever seen that addressed for the main ATD.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Another question: since this is an era-specific exercise, will we be operating under era-specific rules, most notably the red line? Or are we transporting these dudes to the modern ruleset?

It's fantasy so you can do whatever you like, as long as you persuade others.

 

[Elvis P]

Are you guys still gonna have the regular ATD?