Red Fisher Conference Prelim Round - Montreal Canadiens vs Dawson City Nuggets

[Sturminator]

The Border Cities Star, Oct 4, 1934:

"A star pitcher in the Northwestern Baseball League, Leroy Goldsworthy, a forward who goes to the Canadiens, is an all around athlete. About 22 years old, he is regarded as a smart hockey player. Tommy Gorman credits him with thinking out the "fore-checking" method of defense which won the world's title for the Hawks."

Yeah, I know. It matters not at all. Lester Patrick let the Bread Line go to the other end of the ice during practice and think up their own plays. So what? Saying "hey coach, maybe we should try going in and pressuring the defense with all five players?" is a far cry from implementing a radically new system, teaching it to two teams and winning a couple of Cups with it.

Besides, I have a bunch of modern players on my roster. So there goes that criticism.

Recall bias cuts both ways.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Yeah, I know. It matters not at all. Lester Patrick let the Bread Line go to the other end of the ice during practice and think up their own plays. So what? Saying "hey coach, maybe we should try going in and pressuring the defense with all five players?" is a far cry from implementing a radically new system, teaching it to two teams and winning a couple of Cups with it.

So you know, but conveniently forgot about it so that you could claim Gorman invented it?

I think it does matter.

And I am the one here who is supposedly biased according to you.

Full marks for implementing it and obviously Gorman is a great motivator based on his bio as well.. but holy hell man..

Recall bias cuts both ways.

You shouldn't be pointing fingers at this point.

 

[Sturminator]

So you know, but conveniently forgot about it so that you could claim Gorman invented it?

I didn't forget about it, at all. It's from one of the articles Reen found, the original link to which has always been available from the first bio he posted. So nice sleuthing work, but you could have known about that weeks ago if you'd bothered. I just copied the quote he used. But no, I don't consider it important that Gorman gave a random third liner credit for contributing some idea to the system. Players contribute their ideas to the way teams are run all the time.

 

[BraveCanadian]

I didn't forget about it, at all. It's from one of the articles Reen found, the original link to which has always been available from the first bio he posted. So nice sleuthing work, but you could have known about that weeks ago if you'd bothered. I just copied the quote he used. But no, I don't consider it important that Gorman gave a random third liner credit for contributing some idea to the system. Players contribute their ideas to the way teams are run all the time.

To anyone reading this thread: if you click on a single link associated with the Montreal team, please let it be the link to Tommy Gorman's profile.

And yet I don't see it in the bio that I am am supposed to read if I read any in this series, though?

Please direct me to it in this important bio that changes everything and makes Gorman a top coach of all time.

I think you might find that some other people around here *do* consider it important when you're trying the hard upsell.

You discount Goldsworthy completely, but you have absolutely no way of knowing what level of contribution Goldsworthy made to the idea.

We *do* know that Gorman apparently credited Goldsworthy for the idea.

So there is that.

Anyways I've had enough of this.. enjoy

 

[BillyShoe1721]

I'm also not a big fan of Doan on a 2nd line. I think he works if he's next to two strong 2nd liners, but only Balderis is a strong 2nd liner, Roenick is more average to below average. Doan really has no peak to speak of, he's all longevity, and his scoring in the playoffs is actually quite bad, which I'd never realized until now. Doan broke a VsX of 70 just twice in his career. He's played on some pretty bad offensive teams, and led them in scoring 7 times. The best players he was ever ahead of were Geoff Sanderson, Ladislav Nagy, Radim Vrbata, and Ray Whitney/Olli Jokinen(for one year each). He led those guys by an average of 13.38 points. Again, what he's had to work with is very bad, but his offense is weak.

 

[Sturminator]

Please direct me to it in this important bio that changes everything and makes Gorman a top coach of all time.

Posting live links in bios is generally not done, because links have been known to die. This is simply an ATD convention.

You discount Goldsworthy completely, but you have absolutely no way of knowing what level of contribution Goldsworthy made to the idea.

Eh...Gorman also said this, which is in the bio:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...&pg=4176,2923533&dq=gorman+forechecking&hl=en

We studied and developed a system which consisted of our center and wings going right down into their opponents' territory while our defensemen moved over our own blueline.

Nobody ever suggested that Tommy Gorman awoke from a fever dream, scrabbled wild genius nonsense on a chalkboard, and suddenly the Hawks couldn't lose. Developing a new system doesn't happen in a vacuum. Of course the players had something to do with it. Do you think Gorman was sitting in the corner doing crossword puzzles while one of his 3rd liners was coaching the team for him? I guess I need to hire Goldsworthy as an assistant coach then, eh?

You never did answer my question about Lester Patrick. Does it matter that Patrick let the Bread Line, which was centered by his eventual successor behind the Rangers bench, design their own plays? Does that somehow diminish his legacy as coach? Does it matter that Al Arbour learned a lot from Scotty Bowman in St. Louis? We can pick around the edges of every coach's career if we wish. It changes nothing.

 

[Sturminator]

I'm also not a big fan of Doan on a 2nd line. I think he works if he's next to two strong 2nd liners, but only Balderis is a strong 2nd liner, Roenick is more average to below average. Doan really has no peak to speak of, he's all longevity, and his scoring in the playoffs is actually quite bad, which I'd never realized until now. Doan broke a VsX of 70 just twice in his career. He's played on some pretty bad offensive teams, and led them in scoring 7 times. The best players he was ever ahead of were Geoff Sanderson, Ladislav Nagy, Radim Vrbata, and Ray Whitney/Olli Jokinen(for one year each). He led those guys by an average of 13.38 points. Again, what he's had to work with is very bad, but his offense is weak.

Eh...Doan is the glue guy on the line. He's not being counted on for a lot of offense. How many ATD 2nd lines this year have a 3rd best scorer that is clearly better?

 

[Sturminator]

The Border Cities Star, Oct 4, 1934:

"A star pitcher in the Northwestern Baseball League, Leroy Goldsworthy, a forward who goes to the Canadiens, is an all around athlete. About 22 years old, he is regarded as a smart hockey player. Tommy Gorman credits him with thinking out the "fore-checking" method of defense which won the world's title for the Hawks."

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=_BA_AAAAIBAJ&sjid=204MAAAAIBAJ&pg=4483,1635976

Just fyi, Leroy Goldsworthy was 27 years old at the time that article was written. I'm not sure if we should consider the Border Cities Star a definitive source of information on the inner workings of the Blackhawks if they can't get simple details right.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I'm also not a big fan of Doan on a 2nd line. I think he works if he's next to two strong 2nd liners, but only Balderis is a strong 2nd liner, Roenick is more average to below average. Doan really has no peak to speak of, he's all longevity, and his scoring in the playoffs is actually quite bad, which I'd never realized until now. Doan broke a VsX of 70 just twice in his career. He's played on some pretty bad offensive teams, and led them in scoring 7 times. The best players he was ever ahead of were Geoff Sanderson, Ladislav Nagy, Radim Vrbata, and Ray Whitney/Olli Jokinen(for one year each). He led those guys by an average of 13.38 points. Again, what he's had to work with is very bad, but his offense is weak.

Doan is a below average second liner, but is his offense all that weak for a second line glue guy? I'm not going to do the work for Sturm, but it would be interesting to see Doan's offense compared to John Tonelli, Bob Nevin, Bill Guerin, Rick Tocchet, Gary Roberts, Vic Hadfield, Brian Propp, Tim Kerr, Clark Gillies, Harry Watson, Steve Larmer, Esa Tikkanen, Dean Prentice, Trevor Linden, Dick Duff and whoever else Sturm feels like comparing him to. I was just listing guys who are often used as glue guys on scoring lines around here who may or may not be comparable to Doan.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Doan is a below average second liner, but is his offense all that weak for a second line glue guy? I'm not going to do the work for Sturm, but it would be interesting to see Doan's offense compared to John Tonelli, Bob Nevin, Bill Guerin, Rick Tocchet, Gary Roberts, Vic Hadfield, Brian Propp, Tim Kerr, Clark Gillies, Harry Watson, Steve Larmer, Esa Tikkanen, Dean Prentice, Trevor Linden, Dick Duff and whoever else Sturm feels like comparing him to. I was just listing guys who are often used as glue guys on scoring lines around here who may or may not be comparable to Doan.

Here's a start...I did this during the lineup advice thread.

Adjusted ES Pts Comparison
Bob Nevin: 60, 56, 55, 52, 43, 41, 40, 40, 39, 38, 34, 33, 31, 25, 25, 15
Shane Doan: 57, 57, 55, 52, 50, 49, 48, 47, 47, 42, 41, 31
Owen Nolan: 60, 52, 52, 49, 47, 46, 43, 41, 41, 40, 38, 35, 35, 33, 33, 32, 31, 28, 13
Rick Tocchet: 63, 58, 57, 53, 51, 47, 44, 44, 42, 42, 40, 39, 35, 35, 32, 30, 30, 29, 27, 24, 23, 21

 

[Sturminator]

For anyone still interested in the curious case of Leroy Goldsworthy, there is no corroborating evidence of Goldsworthy's role in the development of forechecking. I had already investigated this angle before (I was thorough and looked closely into Pete Green's role with those Ottawa teams, as well) and found nothing more, but I have double checked my work now, and taken a much more detailed look at Goldsworthy's career. I still cannot find a single other reference to Goldsworthy as having played any role in the development of the forechecking system, but he did become coach of the Buffalo Bisons in the 1940's, so most likely he had a good understanding of the game. Here are a couple summaries of Goldsworthy's career. Neither mentions anything about his role in the development of the Chicago system:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...AJ&pg=1629,4847793&dq=leroy+goldsworthy&hl=en

http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...AJ&pg=1644,4712007&dq=leroy+goldsworthy&hl=en

I was already satisfied in Goldsworthy's insignificance before, but now I am sure of it. If he was so important to the development of what was a major innovation in the sport, we'd be able to find more than a single passing reference to it in an article that doesn't even get his age right. There is quite a volume of documents at this point which credit Gorman as the progenitor of forechecking, but if anyone wants a more specific attribution, I had also found a document which directly calls Gorman the "inventor" of the system. Here it is.

10.5.1949 - Ottawa Citizen:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...&pg=6462,2661106&dq=gorman+forechecking&hl=en

For Tommy Gorman the victory meant gaining the supreme prize in his first year as owner of the Ottawa hockey club. As the inventor of the modern system of "forechecking" and the only manager ever to win the Stanley Cup two years in succession with different teams, Mr. Gorman's experience has paid off again.

But I hadn't included this document, either, because Gorman's role on that Allan Cup team is similarly insignificant to his legacy. There is so much information on Tommy Gorman out there that I didn't feel it necessary or wise to cram every tangential shred of data into what is already a very long bio. It is what it is. Leroy Goldsworthy is a footnote, nothing more.

 

[Sturminator]

I'm also not a big fan of Doan on a 2nd line.

I'll just refer all questions about Shane Doan's scoring to this post from now on. And please note that the weighting system clearly hurts Doan, who as you say "has no peak", but strong scoring longevity down to his 10th best season.

 

[Sturminator]

lol...my firm just purchased a one month online subscription to the Boston Globe's website to follow the proceedings there (we do a lot of business with tech firms in the Boston area). Naturally, I've taken it upon myself to download as many PDF documents (normally hidden behind a paywall) about Joe Klukay's time with the Bruins as I can. This should give us a better overview of his career, though it will mean the profile takes even longer to complete.

Early returns are interesting. Klukay seems to have played RW exclusively in Boston, and was used on the RW in 1953 when the famous "Shadow Line" was successful in checking the Production Line in a playoff upset. Pelletier's profile says that Klukay was used to check Gordie Howe in this series, but I am now almost certain that Howe was Dumart's check, and Klukay was shadowing Ted Lindsay. This was an ad hoc unit put together only for those playoffs, and the wingers Dumart and Klukay seem to have been considered the heroes of the series. At this point, Alex Delvecchio was not centering Howe and Lindsay, but rather Metro Prystai, for whatever reason.

At any rate, Klukay played some RW in Toronto, as well, but we now have a clearer picture of where he played at which points during his career. He seems to have played almost as much RW as LW, and had good success there. An idea is forming in my mind as to how the Montreal 3rd line might check opposing units that are heavier on the left wing than the right, but we'll discuss that strategy when and if it becomes necessary.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

lol...my firm just purchased a one month online subscription to the Boston Globe's website to follow the proceedings there (we do a lot of business with tech firms in the Boston area). Naturally, I've taken it upon myself to download as many PDF documents (normally hidden behind a paywall) about Joe Klukay's time with the Bruins as I can. This should give us a better overview of his career, though it will mean the profile takes even longer to complete.

Early returns are interesting. Klukay seems to have played RW exclusively in Boston, and was used on the RW in 1953 when the famous "Shadow Line" was successful in checking the Production Line in a playoff upset. Pelletier's profile says that Klukay was used to check Gordie Howe in this series, but I am now almost certain that Howe was Dumart's check, and Klukay was shadowing Ted Lindsay. This was an ad hoc unit put together only for those playoffs, and the wingers Dumart and Klukay seem to have been considered the heroes of the series. At this point, Alex Delvecchio was not centering Howe and Lindsay, but rather Metro Prystai, for whatever reason.

At any rate, Klukay played some RW in Toronto, as well, but we now have a clearer picture of where he played at which points during his career. He seems to have played almost as much RW as LW, and had good success there. An idea is forming in my mind as to how the Montreal 3rd line might check opposing units that are heavier on the left wing than the right, but we'll discuss that strategy when and if it becomes necessary.

My Dumart bio has two sources (Who's Who In Hockey and Ultimate Hockey) giving him credit for shutting down Howe in the 53' playoffs as well.

EDIT: UH also mentions Klukay shutting down Lindsay. Who was the center on that line?

 

[Sturminator]

My Dumart bio has two sources (Who's Who In Hockey and Ultimate Hockey) giving him credit for shutting down Howe in the 53' playoffs as well.

EDIT: UH also mentions Klukay shutting down Lindsay. Who was the center on that line?

Schmidt.

You'll have much more direct quotes from contemporary Boston Globe articles when I get done with the Klukay bio. I'll try to wrap it up this weekend.

 

[Sturminator]

I have updated the Jeremy Roenick bio. It's mostly new stuff talking about his play after he left Chicago, which seems to be the aspect of his career which is most at issue. It also includes one nice article on which I think BC and I can both agree:

10.2.2012 - Fox Sports Arizona:

Roenick never came close to matching those magical seasons he posted in Chicago with a perennial Stanley Cup contender. Part of the reason was that knee injury, which robbed him of just a fraction of his speed and recklessness. Part of it was a host of rule changes that made 100-point seasons a rarity in the NHL. Part of it was the overall talent on the Coyotes' roster, which couldn't match what Roenick enjoyed in Chicago.

But Jim Schoenfeld, Roenick's coach for two seasons in Phoenix, remembers a player whose style belied his talent level. "Sometimes skill players aren't as willing to play the other rough and tumble parts of the game, but he was that type of player," Schoenfeld said. "He didn't shortcut the process." Schoenfeld knew right away which role he wanted Roenick to fill.

"For a while in the NHL, the idea was to match your best defensive line against the other team's best offensive line, but we wanted Jeremy to go against the other team's top line because he was a great two-way player. We wanted him to outperform and outscore the other team's top talent,†Schoenfeld said. "We didn't win a championship that way, but there were a whole lot of other reasons for that."

It is almost certainly the case that Roenick lost a bit of his edge after the knee injury. What I took objection to was the idea that he'd gotten worn down and wasn't able to maintain the style of play that he's shown in Chicago, which is simply not true. He wasn't quite as violent a player after the knee injury simply because he lost a bit of explosiveness, but he didn't go soft by any means, and other than the couple years of missed games due to the knee injury, he was actually very healthy until he got into his mid-30's

 

[BraveCanadian]

I have updated the Jeremy Roenick bio. It's mostly new stuff talking about his play after he left Chicago, which seems to be the aspect of his career which is most at issue. It also includes one nice article on which I think BC and I can both agree:

10.2.2012 - Fox Sports Arizona:

It is almost certainly the case that Roenick lost a bit of his edge after the knee injury. What I took objection to was the idea that he'd gotten worn down and wasn't able to maintain the style of play that he's shown in Chicago, which is simply not true. He wasn't quite as violent a player after the knee injury simply because he lost a bit of explosiveness, but he didn't go soft by any means, and other than the couple years of missed games due to the knee injury, he was actually very healthy until he got into his mid-30's

So now I have watched enough Coyotes games?

Cause that article sounds an awful lot like what I said..

 

[BillyShoe1721]

I'll just refer all questions about Shane Doan's scoring to this post from now on. And please note that the weighting system clearly hurts Doan, who as you say "has no peak", but strong scoring longevity down to his 10th best season.

There's something to be said for peak scoring, which basically all of the guys on that list have on Doan. At their best, almost all of those guys were better than Doan. All but 3 of those guys have a better "best" year compared to Doan. The three that aren't are Lonsberry and Linden(who have no place in an ATD top 6 honestly), and Propp, which surprised me. Look at their 5 best seasons, and Doan comes out tied for 14th out of 25. There is certainly a balance that needs to be struck between valuing peak vs. longevity. Doan's longevity is among the best of those guys listed, but his peak is among the worst.

 

[Sturminator]

There's something to be said for peak scoring, which basically all of the guys on that list have on Doan. At their best, almost all of those guys were better than Doan. All but 3 of those guys have a better "best" year compared to Doan. The three that aren't are Lonsberry and Linden(who have no place in an ATD top 6 honestly), and Propp, which surprised me. Look at their 5 best seasons, and Doan comes out tied for 14th out of 25. There is certainly a balance that needs to be struck between valuing peak vs. longevity. Doan's longevity is among the best of those guys listed, but his peak is among the worst.

The statistics are what they are, and I have already weighted them to favor peak over longevity somewhat. Maybe you would weight them differently, I dunno, but that is splitting hairs, especially as team situation arguments are almost all in Doan's favor in comparison to a lot of these guys like Propp, Barber, Stevens, Larmer, etc. The simple fact of the matter is that Doan's even strength production ends up being very similar to that of guys like Lanny and Tonelli.

 

[Sturminator]

So now I have watched enough Coyotes games?

Cause that article sounds an awful lot like what I said..

Ehhh...you were still underrating Roenick's post-Chicago years, and his longevity in general. Just for a little more reference, here are a few of Roenick's peers in VsX rating:

Player|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|10| Total
Darryl Sittler| 107| 86| 84| 82| 79| 75| 74| 71| 67| 63| 79.9
Denis Savard| 100| 98| 83| 82| 81| 78| 75| 62| 59| 56 | 79.2
Mike Modano| 86| 86| 82| 78| 76| 76| 73| 71| 68| 63| 78.5
Jeremy Roenick | 89 |89| 83| 82| 79| 74| 72| 67| 63| 62| 77.2

Hard to see much difference, eh? The slope of Roenick's career was actually quite normal for a star scorer of his era. You were repeating, in not so many words, the common misconception that Roenick fell of badly after leaving Chicago and "was not the same player" in the desert. He was the same player, just a little less explosive version of same.

The truth of the matter is that JR added substantially to his career after leaving the Blackhawks, with his 3rd, 5th and 6th best seasons in VsX coming in either Phoenix or Philadelphia. Roenick was always underrated around here because of the peculiar timing of his injury, which coincided almost perfectly with the beginning of the dead puck era. The fact that he actually did come back and continue being an excellent player was lost in the shuffle of generally suppressed leaguewide scoring levels, because a perfunctory look at his raw scoring totals makes it look like he fell off quite a bit more than he actually did. This is a general error which has been made about Roenick's career and it is certainly not your fault, alone. You were just the easiest foil for me to make my argument.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Ehhh...you were still underrating Roenick's post-Chicago years, and his longevity in general. Just for a little more reference, here are a few of Roenick's peers in VsX rating:

Player|1|2|3|4|5|6|7|8|9|10| Total
Darryl Sittler| 107| 86| 84| 82| 79| 75| 74| 71| 67| 63| 79.9
Denis Savard| 100| 98| 83| 82| 81| 78| 75| 62| 59| 56 | 79.2
Mike Modano| 86| 86| 82| 78| 76| 76| 73| 71| 68| 63| 78.5
Jeremy Roenick | 89 |89| 83| 82| 79| 74| 72| 67| 63| 62| 77.2

Hard to see much difference, eh? The slope of Roenick's career was actually quite normal for a star scorer of his era. You were repeating, in not so many words, the common misconception that Roenick fell of badly after leaving Chicago and "was not the same player" in the desert. He was the same player, just a little less explosive version of same.

The truth of the matter is that JR added substantially to his career after leaving the Blackhawks, with his 3rd, 5th and 6th best seasons in VsX coming in either Phoenix or Philadelphia. Roenick was always underrated around here because of the peculiar timing of his injury, which coincided almost perfectly with the beginning of the dead puck era. The fact that he actually did come back and continue being an excellent player was lost in the shuffle of generally suppressed leaguewide scoring levels, because a perfunctory look at his raw scoring totals makes it look like he fell off quite a bit more than he actually did. This is a general error which has been made about Roenick's career and it is certainly not your fault, alone. You were just the easiest foil for me to make my argument.

If the scoring numbers told the whole story about a player you'd have a better chance of convincing me.

I saw it with my own eyes and apparently others agree with me.

He did have a drop off in his game after the injuries.

That being said it is true that the changing era around him made it look more pronounced on the scoring front than it maybe otherwise would have..

 

[Sturminator]

I saw it with my own eyes and apparently others agree with me.

He did have a drop off in his game after the injuries.

Injury in the singular. I'm pretty sure he had a problem with one knee which lasted over his last two seasons in Chicago before it properly healed. And I agree with you. Roenick fell off a bit physically in Phoenix because he lost a little of his explosiveness. His approach to the game didn't change. He fell of a bit as a scorer, too, but much less than many people realize. And that is the point. Roenick was still a tough, aggressive player after he left Chicago, just not quite the wrecking ball he'd been for the first five years of his career. There was a fairly long and good "middle part" to Roenick's career in-between the "JR Superstar" years and the crappy dancing for the Kings/Sharks years that a lot of people don't seem to know happened.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Injury in the singular. I'm pretty sure he had a problem with one knee which lasted over his last two seasons in Chicago before it properly healed. And I agree with you. Roenick fell off a bit physically in Phoenix because he lost a little of his explosiveness. His approach to the game didn't change. He fell of a bit as a scorer, too, but much less than many people realize. And that is the point. Roenick was still a tough, aggressive player after he left Chicago, just not quite the wrecking ball he'd been for the first five years of his career. There was a fairly long and good "middle part" to Roenick's career in-between the "JR Superstar" years and the crappy dancing for the Kings/Sharks years that a lot of people don't seem to know happened.

Agreed. He was still a very good hockey player.

But in Chicago he was really, really, something. Exciting player to watch.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Montreal doesn't get through this series without coming up with a strategy to deal with Bobby Orr.

 

[Sturminator]

Montreal doesn't get through this series without coming up with a strategy to deal with Bobby Orr.

Well, either one of the two historically successful Orr-trolling strategies are open to Gorman here. Montreal is strong defensively down the middle, so he can have the centers check Orr up and down the ice like the real Canadiens did, or he can send in forecheckers, not to hit Orr, but rather to cut off his angles before he can get up to full speed and force him to pass the puck up to his forwards, which was Émile Francis's successful strategy in New York in the 1973 playoffs.

The New York strategy worked because none of the Boston forwards, but particularly the Esposito line, were especially dangerous carrying the puck up ice, so getting the puck off of Orr's stick took a lot of the teeth out of the Bruins' transition offense. Moore and Richard are both relatively dangerous in transition, but the rest of Dawson City's forwards are not, so I think this is probably the strategy that Tommy Gorman would prefer, and he is maybe the best coach in history to implement it. When Orr is on the ice, rather than going in hard on the forecheck, the forwards will focus on containment when there is a chance for Orr to win the puck cleanly. If Bobby Orr is not running wild carrying the puck up ice in transition, I don't think Dawson City is very scary offensively, and I'll take my chances with Moore and Richard.