2019 OPPF divisional semi-final: Chicago Cougars vs. Richmond Renegades
- Thread starter VanIslander
- Start date
VanIslander
A 19-year ATDer on HfBoards
Chicago
PP1: Schriner - Lindros - Jagr - Sakic - Gadsby
PP2: Bucyk - H. Richard - Mikhailov - Seibert - Cleghorn
PK1: Tonelli - Peca - Pospisil - Seibert - Sawchuk
PK2: H. Richard - Broadbent - Cleghorn - Pietrangelo - Sawchuk
vs.
Renegades
PP1: Hull - Dionne - Bossy - Orr - Malkin
PP2: Shanahan - Kennedy - Dillon - Weber - Boyle
PK1: Dillon - Kennedy - Langway - Orr - Dryden
PK2: Holik - Petrov - Ramsay - Weber - Dryden
PP1: Schriner - Lindros - Jagr - Sakic - Gadsby
PP2: Bucyk - H. Richard - Mikhailov - Seibert - Cleghorn
PK1: Tonelli - Peca - Pospisil - Seibert - Sawchuk
PK2: H. Richard - Broadbent - Cleghorn - Pietrangelo - Sawchuk
vs.
Renegades
PP1: Hull - Dionne - Bossy - Orr - Malkin
PP2: Shanahan - Kennedy - Dillon - Weber - Boyle
PK1: Dillon - Kennedy - Langway - Orr - Dryden
PK2: Holik - Petrov - Ramsay - Weber - Dryden
Last edited:
Theokritos
Global Moderator
- Apr 6, 2010
- 12,541
- 4,937
The Macho King
Back* to Back** World Champion
- Jun 22, 2011
- 48,756
- 29,246
I'm with my mother at the hospital so I cant do a deep dive, but my impression is this -
Forwards are close. Chicago has an advantage at 1C, 2C is a push, 3C Richmond has a strong edge, and 4C is also a bit of a push (depends on usage). I feel like I have a slight edge in the top 6 wings, and fourth is more about chemistry. Your Cs are all at least decent two way players, but I think that advantage is slim when considering your top pairing is frankly weak.
I feel like the difference between G and F, to the extent there is one, is slight. I have a large advantage in coaching over Day with Bowman, and I think my top pair advantage is massive. Second pair is close, third pairing is close, but Cleghorn-Seibert is overmatched against Orr-Langway.
On top of it, Sawchuk is not the greatest playoff goaltender. Detroit should have won more Cups than they did, and some of that is on Sawchuk.
Forwards are close. Chicago has an advantage at 1C, 2C is a push, 3C Richmond has a strong edge, and 4C is also a bit of a push (depends on usage). I feel like I have a slight edge in the top 6 wings, and fourth is more about chemistry. Your Cs are all at least decent two way players, but I think that advantage is slim when considering your top pairing is frankly weak.
I feel like the difference between G and F, to the extent there is one, is slight. I have a large advantage in coaching over Day with Bowman, and I think my top pair advantage is massive. Second pair is close, third pairing is close, but Cleghorn-Seibert is overmatched against Orr-Langway.
On top of it, Sawchuk is not the greatest playoff goaltender. Detroit should have won more Cups than they did, and some of that is on Sawchuk.
Johnny Engine
Moderator
- Jul 29, 2009
- 4,979
- 2,361
There’s a lot of chaff on Sawchuk’s record, but that’s a weird way to characterize a guy who won the cup 3 out of his first 5 years in Detroit, got traded away, and then came back after the team’s core was gutted.
The Macho King
Back* to Back** World Champion
- Jun 22, 2011
- 48,756
- 29,246
They were also first in the regular season every year but only won 3. That early 50s Deteoit team should have been a dynasty, and they don't get enough criticism for it.
Hawkey Town 18
Registered User
I think you're being way too critical of Sawchuk. In his first 5 years in the league Sawchuk's team finished 1st in the regular season every year, won the Stanley Cup 3 times, and Sawchuk was awarded a Retro Conn Smythe twice during that time (52 and 54).
You're acting as if whoever finishes in first place should win the Cup every year. And even if I were to agree that the Wings underachieved, why is Sawchuk taking the blame? The above Retro Conn Smythes suggest he was an excellent playoff performer those years.
Let's also look at how the Wings did the year after Sawchuk left the team...they go from 95 pts to 76 pts
You're acting as if whoever finishes in first place should win the Cup every year. And even if I were to agree that the Wings underachieved, why is Sawchuk taking the blame? The above Retro Conn Smythes suggest he was an excellent playoff performer those years.
Let's also look at how the Wings did the year after Sawchuk left the team...they go from 95 pts to 76 pts
Last edited:
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
In Sawchuk's first 5 years, it looks like he had:
Perhaps the best playoffs any goalie in history has ever had (1952)
Another great performance leading to a Cup (1954)
A strong individual performance in a first round loss (1951)
A season when he put up average numbers and was carried to the Cup largely by his team's offense (1955)
A season when he played not-so-great (if not poorly) and was a reason his team lost in the first round (1953)
Perhaps the best playoffs any goalie in history has ever had (1952)
Another great performance leading to a Cup (1954)
A strong individual performance in a first round loss (1951)
A season when he put up average numbers and was carried to the Cup largely by his team's offense (1955)
A season when he played not-so-great (if not poorly) and was a reason his team lost in the first round (1953)
Last edited:
Hawkey Town 18
Registered User
I'm pretty busy this week and may not have time for an in depth line by line/pair by pair analysis, so I'll hit some of the main points here...
Chicago is set up very well to play against a Bobby Orr team. In real life, opponents had the most success against Orr with a strong forecheck. Chicago's forward lines have several strong forecheckers...Bucyk, H. Richard, Mikhailov, Lindros, Broadbent, and the entire 4th line of Tonelli - Peca - Ward. H. Richard himself is one of the best forecheckers of all time. Combine this with the fact that while Orr's partner Langway will do a good job of covering for Orr when he is able to make a rush, he does not give Orr a good option to move the puck to when being forechecked. Langway is a weak puckmover in a draft this size, and puts extra pressure on Orr.
While in a vacuum Scotty Bowman is a better coach than Hap Day, I think Day is a much better fit for his team here. Bowman, a coach who required his centers to play a strong defensive game, will surely have issues with the his top 2 centers, Dionne and Malkin, who are both below average defensively. Later in his career Bobby Hull bought in to playing a more defensive style, but his offense did decline some at this time, so we should expect a decline if Bowman requires the same. Day has just the kind of team he likes, a blueline who will take care of their own end and defensive forwards up and down the lineup. Day's teams stuck to a system which should help in containing the likes of Orr and Hull.
I think you are being overly critical of my D and not critical enough of yours. Cleghorn and Seibert are high-end/above average #2's in a draft this size. Orr is Orr, and is a huge advantage over just about anyone, but Langway is a #3 at best in this draft, some would say a #4.
Gadsby is by far the best player on either team's 2nd pair, and would be fine as a below average #2 in this draft. Stuart and Weber are likely borderline #3/#4's (Stuart is so hard to rank, but I think this is being generous). Pospisil is the weakest on either pair, but I think the gap between him and Weber/Stuart is smaller than the gap up to Gadsby.
Mike Ramsey is easily the worst player on either 3rd pairing, the other 3 guys have multiple 2nd team all stars. Stanley is the best of the bunch pretty clearly. Boyle and Pietrangelo, while definitely different kinds of players, are looking close right now, both a couple 2nd team AS selections and both a #1 D on a Cup winner, although I'd argue Pietrangelo was more important to his team/a bigger contributor.
That's all I have time for right now, hopefully I'll be able to contribute more later.
Chicago is set up very well to play against a Bobby Orr team. In real life, opponents had the most success against Orr with a strong forecheck. Chicago's forward lines have several strong forecheckers...Bucyk, H. Richard, Mikhailov, Lindros, Broadbent, and the entire 4th line of Tonelli - Peca - Ward. H. Richard himself is one of the best forecheckers of all time. Combine this with the fact that while Orr's partner Langway will do a good job of covering for Orr when he is able to make a rush, he does not give Orr a good option to move the puck to when being forechecked. Langway is a weak puckmover in a draft this size, and puts extra pressure on Orr.
While in a vacuum Scotty Bowman is a better coach than Hap Day, I think Day is a much better fit for his team here. Bowman, a coach who required his centers to play a strong defensive game, will surely have issues with the his top 2 centers, Dionne and Malkin, who are both below average defensively. Later in his career Bobby Hull bought in to playing a more defensive style, but his offense did decline some at this time, so we should expect a decline if Bowman requires the same. Day has just the kind of team he likes, a blueline who will take care of their own end and defensive forwards up and down the lineup. Day's teams stuck to a system which should help in containing the likes of Orr and Hull.
I think you are being overly critical of my D and not critical enough of yours. Cleghorn and Seibert are high-end/above average #2's in a draft this size. Orr is Orr, and is a huge advantage over just about anyone, but Langway is a #3 at best in this draft, some would say a #4.
Gadsby is by far the best player on either team's 2nd pair, and would be fine as a below average #2 in this draft. Stuart and Weber are likely borderline #3/#4's (Stuart is so hard to rank, but I think this is being generous). Pospisil is the weakest on either pair, but I think the gap between him and Weber/Stuart is smaller than the gap up to Gadsby.
Mike Ramsey is easily the worst player on either 3rd pairing, the other 3 guys have multiple 2nd team all stars. Stanley is the best of the bunch pretty clearly. Boyle and Pietrangelo, while definitely different kinds of players, are looking close right now, both a couple 2nd team AS selections and both a #1 D on a Cup winner, although I'd argue Pietrangelo was more important to his team/a bigger contributor.
That's all I have time for right now, hopefully I'll be able to contribute more later.
Hawkey Town 18
Registered User
Didn’t have a ton of discussion, but that’s on both of us. You built a good team @The Macho Man
The Macho King
Back* to Back** World Champion
- Jun 22, 2011
- 48,756
- 29,246
Yeah my mom was in the hospital so I just lost track of this, but good series.
Obviously it's easier to build in a 12 team draft, but I'm still proud of how much better I did versus the ATD I participated in. I felt that I knew a lot more, and additionally the format forced me to look into players I wouldn't otherwise consider.
If I had to do it over again - there was one series of picks where I waffled a bit. I initially planned to use a mid-late round pick on a Montreal goalie (which I obviously ended up doing), so I burned some picks I otherwise wouldn't have, but I didn't expect to see Larry Robinson on the board as late as he was. I almost went Broda and Robinson instead of Kennedy and Dryden. It would have changed my focus going forward into focusing on two-way players since Dionne and Malkin are obviously not inspiring two-way Cs, but that would have left me with Robinson and Orr patrolling my top two pairs, which would have given me a pretty massive advantage in my top 4 over any other team. That's not to say my second pair was bad - I think the fit was good - but it was relatively lacking in talent to some of the other top teams.
I also picked up Bossy instead of Trottier with my second pick, which I regretted about 4 seconds after I did it. I think a Trottier/Malkin top two Cs looks very different than a Malkin/Dionne top two, and since I also got Hull, I still would have been fine. It also would have made my decision to pick up Robinson much easier later in the draft (I initially drafted Kennedy to be my 2C, but picked up Dionne in like the 13th round or something). So if I had to trace back my draft to where I lost a chance at the championship, it was probably when I picked Bossy over Trottier. Trottier would have given me easier decisions later on, while picking up Bossy left me with a situation where I was searching for centers for the next ten rounds.
