The 2015 Single-A Draft (OPEN Ed.) has ended.

[chaosrevolver]

Forwards only placements of the glorious offensive threat that is Mark Osborne:

From 1982 to 1990: 75th, 130th, 105th, 294th*, 150th, 119th, 71st, 111th, 46th
* - never lower than 170th, eh?
After 1990: 201st, 207th, 206th, 230th, 343rd

As for Osborne being "one of the nhl's oldest players" in the 90s:

111th, 109th, 75th, 64th, 52nd - hardly some Mathusalem.

37 players born in his birth year (1961) played 1+ season after he retired.
34 played 2+
22 played 3+
17 played 4+
7 played 5+
6 played 6+
3 played 7+
The winners being Messier and Larionov, who played 9+. But you'll never guess who finished 3rd in this race...

Your sarcasm is pathetic.

Also you should read further before challenging his statement because you are using his "294th* placement in a year he was injured and missed the majority of the season. You seemed to ignore this from seventies post: "Over a nine season period (injury shortened 1985 excluded)."

Not sure why you have this issue with him. But calling him an average third liner doesn't change the fact he had over 500 points in over 900 games and provided a defensive presence while playing on both the PP and PK. The fact you are arguing that his resume shouldn't qualify him in this tournament is rather ridiculous. There are plenty of players who went in this draft who were just average at times with a few good seasons.

Even if he was a third liner, it's not easy to record the numbers he did for as long as he did.

 

[seventieslord]

Forwards only placements of the glorious offensive threat that is Mark Osborne:

From 1982 to 1990: 75th, 130th, 105th, 294th*, 150th, 119th, 71st, 111th, 46th
* - never lower than 170th, eh?
After 1990: 201st, 207th, 206th, 230th, 343rd

As for Osborne being "one of the nhl's oldest players" in the 90s:

111th, 109th, 75th, 64th, 52nd - hardly some Mathusalem.

37 players born in his birth year (1961) played 1+ season after he retired.
34 played 2+
22 played 3+
17 played 4+
7 played 5+
6 played 6+
3 played 7+
The winners being Messier and Larionov, who played 9+. But you'll never guess who finished 3rd in this race...

Ok, calling him "one of the oldest" is an exaggeration.

Please note where I said "injury shortened 1985 excluded"...

So he scored at a rate that would make him 3rd to 7th on an average team over a period of nine seasons, and you still insist on calling that 4th line numbers?

 

[MadArcand]

Ok, calling him "one of the oldest" is an exaggeration.

Please note where I said "injury shortened 1985 excluded"...

So he scored at a rate that would make him 3rd to 7th on an average team over a period of nine seasons, and you still insist on calling that 4th line numbers?

No, his career averages out as 3rd line numbers. Just as I said at first - average 3rd liner, both offensively and defensively.

Not sure why you have this issue with him. But calling him an average third liner doesn't change the fact he had over 500 points in over 900 games and provided a defensive presence while playing on both the PP and PK. The fact you are arguing that his resume shouldn't qualify him in this tournament is rather ridiculous. There are plenty of players who went in this draft who were just average at times with a few good seasons.

Because there are dozens upon dozens of better players left.

 

[VanIslander]

No, his career averages out as 3rd line numbers. Just as I said at first - average 3rd liner, both offensively and defensively.


Because there are dozens upon dozens of better players left.

Yes, there are. I've always scoffed at Osborne. I was 13 his rookie year and 21 his career year of 71 points, and I always traded away his card. Leafs fans are often a target of sale swaps!

 

[Elvis P]

2006-07 to 2014-15 , playing for the Philadelphia Flyers

...So he scored at a rate that would make him 3rd to 7th on an average team over a period of nine seasons, and you still insist on calling that 4th line numbers?

3 Mike Richards 2006 2011 5 PHI NHL CA C 374 122 193 315 119 33 332 67 35 20 1001 12.2 7543 0.33 0.52 0.84 0.32 2.68 26.2 9.1 35.3
4 Jeff Carter 2006 2011 5 PHI NHL CA C 380 158 143 301 125 41 248 106 42 10 1471 10.7 7329 0.42 0.38 0.79 0.33 3.87 29.1 9.2 38.3
5 Daniel Briere 2007 2013 6 PHI NHL CA C 364 124 159 283 111 -13 331 85 39 0 936 13.2 6359 0.34 0.44 0.78 0.30 2.57 27.0 5.8 32.8
6 Kimmo Timonen 2007 2014 7 PHI NHL FI D 519 38 232 270 84 44 304 18 15 5 857 4.4 11652 0.07 0.45 0.52 0.16 1.65 20.5 25.8 46.3
7 Jakub Voracek 2011 2015 4 PHI NHL CZ RW 290 85 153 238

http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...c4comp=gt&c4val=&threshhold=5&order_by=points

Agreed. I wouldn't call those guys 4th liners. I only used Flyer's points so Voracek was treated unfairly.

 

[VanIslander]

Based on all I've seen over the years:

1. Daniel Briere
2. Kimmo Timonen
3. Jakub Voracek / Mike Richards ( I oscillate between them)
5. Jeff Carter

 

[seventieslord]

Yes, there are. I've always scoffed at Osborne. I was 13 his rookie year and 21 his career year of 71 points, and I always traded away his card. Leafs fans are often a target of sale swaps!

Well I'm sold. LOL

 

[seventieslord]

No, his career averages out as 3rd line numbers. Just as I said at first - average 3rd liner, both offensively and defensively.


Because there are dozens upon dozens of better players left.

If you average in his 1991-1995 seasons then you could almost legitimately claim that his career averages out at 3rd line numbers. But since when are a player's 10th-14th best seasons well out of their prime rolled into their career in such a way?

Look, I know Osborne wasn't a star in any area, I said so myself, describing him as having a "decent assortment" of skills.

If he was going to perform in the "A" draft at a high level both offensively and defensively, he'd be taken in the AAA or higher. If he was going to perform at a high level at just one end of the ice, he'd have been taken as a starter. He made a lot of sense as a spare because he has a good enough resume offensively and defensively, at both wings, to perform in a fill-in role on any line here. (he's in the same boat as Hogue, Broten and Barnes). I am not trying to sell him as a starter, and I never selected him as one.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...c4comp=gt&c4val=&threshhold=5&order_by=points

Agreed. I wouldn't call those guys 4th liners. I only used Flyer's points so Voracek was treated unfairly.

I don't get what you're trying to say here. Can you please explain?

 

[MadArcand]

If you average in his 1991-1995 seasons then you could almost legitimately claim that his career averages out at 3rd line numbers. But since when are a player's 10th-14th best seasons well out of their prime rolled into their career in such a way?

Look, I know Osborne wasn't a star in any area, I said so myself, describing him as having a "decent assortment" of skills.

If he was going to perform in the "A" draft at a high level both offensively and defensively, he'd be taken in the AAA or higher. If he was going to perform at a high level at just one end of the ice, he'd have been taken as a starter. He made a lot of sense as a spare because he has a good enough resume offensively and defensively, at both wings, to perform in a fill-in role on any line here. (he's in the same boat as Hogue, Broten and Barnes). I am not trying to sell him as a starter, and I never selected him as one.

Well, he's basically Tanner Glass type of player here. I'm not a fan, but I guess as bench filler for both wings he's not horrible. Can slot into bottom 6 well enough, though he'd still be generally terrible in top 6 role if forced to fill in there. But things like that do happen in the NHL.

 

[King Forsberg]

Based on all I've seen over the years:

1. Daniel Briere
2. Kimmo Timonen
3. Jakub Voracek / Mike Richards ( I oscillate between them)
5. Jeff Carter

In terms of value to the team?

I'd say it's

Timonen
Richards
Voracek/Carter
Briere

Briere hope to the top when it comes playoff time though.

 

[Elvis P]

...I don't get what you're trying to say here. Can you please explain?

I was trying to give a fair example of your "3rd to 7th on an average team over a period of nine seasons". I only used Flyers points though so points scored for other teams weren't counted. VI's hockey card metaphor was awesome.

 

[seventieslord]

Well, he's basically Tanner Glass type of player here. I'm not a fan, but I guess as bench filler for both wings he's not horrible. Can slot into bottom 6 well enough, though he'd still be generally terrible in top 6 role if forced to fill in there. But things like that do happen in the NHL.

Tanner glass is a replacement level mini goon if not for his ability to kill a penalty here and there.

Osborne, by vsx and, I assume, other adjusted methods, has 80-85% the offensive ability of guys we are using as scoring line muscle here. You could not say that about glass.

In terms of value to the team?

I'd say it's

Timonen
Richards
Voracek/Carter
Briere

Briere hope to the top when it comes playoff time though.

Offensively, sure.

I was trying to give a fair example of your "3rd to 7th on an average team over a period of nine seasons". I only used Flyers points though so points scored for other teams weren't counted. VI's hockey card metaphor was awesome.

Your example was over a long term period, not seasons at a time like I was talking about.

 

[Elvis P]

...over a period of nine seasons...

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=111356339&postcount=202

...Your example was over a long term period, not seasons at a time like I was talking about.

Period - noun 1. a rather large interval of time

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/period?s=t

You used the word period which means "a large interval of time", not individual seasons. Here's the link: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=111356339&postcount=202