ATD 2010 Rene Lecavalier Final: Minnesota F. Saints (1) vs. New Jersey S. Devils (2)
- Thread starter VanIslander
- Start date
VanIslander
A 19-year ATDer on HfBoards
Minnesota Fighting Saints
PP1: Andreychuk - Oates - Hull - MacInnis - Simpson
PP2: Goulet - Sakic - Litzenberger - Laperriere - Stanfield
PK1: Brind'Amour - Tremblay - Laperriere - Hatcher
PK2: Sakic - Stanfield - Burrows - Van Impe
vs.
New Jersey Swamp Devils
PP1: Jackson-Abel-Howe-Salming-Blake
PP2: Tkachuk-Savard-Martinec-Siebert-Leduc
PK1: Lepine-Marshall-Siebert-Green
PK2: Abel-Howe-Salming-Blake
PP1: Andreychuk - Oates - Hull - MacInnis - Simpson
PP2: Goulet - Sakic - Litzenberger - Laperriere - Stanfield
PK1: Brind'Amour - Tremblay - Laperriere - Hatcher
PK2: Sakic - Stanfield - Burrows - Van Impe
vs.
New Jersey Swamp Devils
PP1: Jackson-Abel-Howe-Salming-Blake
PP2: Tkachuk-Savard-Martinec-Siebert-Leduc
PK1: Lepine-Marshall-Siebert-Green
PK2: Abel-Howe-Salming-Blake
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
Congratulations Nayld on making it to the finals of our brutal division!
For what it's worth, the Fighting Saints are coming off a series that went to Game 7 OT, while NJ got an extra day or two of rest after dispatching a very good Regina team in 6 hard fought games.
For what it's worth, the Fighting Saints are coming off a series that went to Game 7 OT, while NJ got an extra day or two of rest after dispatching a very good Regina team in 6 hard fought games.
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
My first thought on this series is that the Fighting Saints really don't have a forward line that is going to be able to contain NJ's first line.
Sakic is the only center on Minnesota who is anything special defensively (Oates is pretty good but nothing special). And Sakic's wingers are not exactly defensive aces.
I actually went searching for quotes on Stanfield's defense when I was looking for centers on the lower lines and I found absolutely nothing. As far as I can tell, he was the third most talented member of Boston's 2nd line (centering Bucyk and Pie McKenzie). His major strength is that he can play the point on the PP, which is what you are using him for. I don't think he ever killed penalties or was used in defensive situations.
I supposed Minnesota could put Tremblay next to Sakic, but that makes their first line even weaker offensively than it already is.
Sakic is the only center on Minnesota who is anything special defensively (Oates is pretty good but nothing special). And Sakic's wingers are not exactly defensive aces.
I actually went searching for quotes on Stanfield's defense when I was looking for centers on the lower lines and I found absolutely nothing. As far as I can tell, he was the third most talented member of Boston's 2nd line (centering Bucyk and Pie McKenzie). His major strength is that he can play the point on the PP, which is what you are using him for. I don't think he ever killed penalties or was used in defensive situations.
I supposed Minnesota could put Tremblay next to Sakic, but that makes their first line even weaker offensively than it already is.
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
Roster for this series
PP1: Busher Jackson - Sid Abel - Gordie Howe - Börje Salming - Rob Blake
PP2: Keith Tkachuk - Denis Savard - Vladimir Martinec - Babe Siebert - Albert Leduc
PK1: Pit Lepine - Don Marshall - Babe Siebert - Ted Green
PK2: Sid Abel - Gordie Howe - Börje Salming - Rob Blake
PK3: Murray Oliver - Dirk Graham - Babe Siebert - Ted Green
*Howe will see some extra minutes double-shifting on the 4th line.
_______________________________
Desired matchups:
NJ1 vs. M1
In the past, Minnesota has used the Sakic line as their primary checking line. That suits NJ fine. Our first line much better offensively and likely better defensively (if Sakic is the best defensive forward on either line, Abel and Howe are certainly next best).
NJ3 vs. M2 (alt= NJ4 vs. M2]
NJ's primary checking line will be matched against the Oates line when possible. Don Marshall will shadow Brett Hull. More about this later. NJ has an advantage in that we have 2 checking lines, so when the Lepine line isn't available, the Oliver line will be matched against Oates. With 2 options and a superior coach, NJ shouldn't have too much trouble getting one of our checking lines out there against Hull.
NJ2 vs. M3/4
Minnesota's lower lines are nothing special defensively, so NJ's 2nd line will be put out to try to take advantage of that.
Defensive pairings
Our defensive matchups aren't as important, as the two top pairs are both solid defensively. The preferred matchup is to have the Salming/Blake pair out there with Howe against Sakic to take advantage of their speed and offense. Nobody on Minnesota's 2nd line is fast, so Siebert/Green should work well against them (Siebert is faster than either Oates or Hull). Minnesota's bottom 2 lines aren't particularly potent, so any of NJ's 3 pairs will do.
New Jersey Swamp Devils
Coach: Tommy Ivan
Busher Jackson - Sid Abel - Gordie Howe*
Keith Tkachuk - Denis Savard - Vladimir Martinec
Don Marshall - Pit Lepine - Dirk Graham
Jiri Holik - Murray Oliver - Wilf Paiement*
Börje Salming - Rob Blake
Babe Siebert - Ted Green
Brian Engblom - Albert Leduc
Charlie Gardiner
Charlie Hodge
Coach: Tommy Ivan
Busher Jackson - Sid Abel - Gordie Howe*
Keith Tkachuk - Denis Savard - Vladimir Martinec
Don Marshall - Pit Lepine - Dirk Graham
Jiri Holik - Murray Oliver - Wilf Paiement*
Börje Salming - Rob Blake
Babe Siebert - Ted Green
Brian Engblom - Albert Leduc
Charlie Gardiner
Charlie Hodge
PP1: Busher Jackson - Sid Abel - Gordie Howe - Börje Salming - Rob Blake
PP2: Keith Tkachuk - Denis Savard - Vladimir Martinec - Babe Siebert - Albert Leduc
PK1: Pit Lepine - Don Marshall - Babe Siebert - Ted Green
PK2: Sid Abel - Gordie Howe - Börje Salming - Rob Blake
PK3: Murray Oliver - Dirk Graham - Babe Siebert - Ted Green
*Howe will see some extra minutes double-shifting on the 4th line.
_______________________________
Desired matchups:
NJ1 vs. M1
In the past, Minnesota has used the Sakic line as their primary checking line. That suits NJ fine. Our first line much better offensively and likely better defensively (if Sakic is the best defensive forward on either line, Abel and Howe are certainly next best).
NJ3 vs. M2 (alt= NJ4 vs. M2]
NJ's primary checking line will be matched against the Oates line when possible. Don Marshall will shadow Brett Hull. More about this later. NJ has an advantage in that we have 2 checking lines, so when the Lepine line isn't available, the Oliver line will be matched against Oates. With 2 options and a superior coach, NJ shouldn't have too much trouble getting one of our checking lines out there against Hull.
NJ2 vs. M3/4
Minnesota's lower lines are nothing special defensively, so NJ's 2nd line will be put out to try to take advantage of that.
Defensive pairings
Our defensive matchups aren't as important, as the two top pairs are both solid defensively. The preferred matchup is to have the Salming/Blake pair out there with Howe against Sakic to take advantage of their speed and offense. Nobody on Minnesota's 2nd line is fast, so Siebert/Green should work well against them (Siebert is faster than either Oates or Hull). Minnesota's bottom 2 lines aren't particularly potent, so any of NJ's 3 pairs will do.
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
Minnesota Powerplay
Nalyd made some bold claims about his powerplay during the lineup assassination thread.
So I'm going to examine his powerplay in more detail:
FIRST UNIT
Dave Andreychuk
Dave Andreychuk is a one-dimensional powerplay specialist. His game is to stand in front of the net, screening the goalie and getting rebounds. He was amazingly efficient at it in the regular season.
Yet, his playoff numbers are quite poor:
In the playoffs, Andreychuk has mere 43 goals in 162 career games - a mere .26 goals per game, well off his regular season pace of .39 goals per game. He has 25 career PP goals. But it's worse than that - 12 of Andreychuk's goals and 8 of his PP goals were in 92-93, playing next to Doug Gilmour in the playoff year that made Gilmour a legend. Take away just that one season, and Andreychuk has only 31 goals (and 17 PP goals) in 141 playoff games, a mere .22 overall goals per game.
In my last series, I said I don't care if a player didn't perform in the playoffs. I care about why. And for Andreychuk the answer is easy:
1) Andreychuk's net game is totally one-dimensional and defenses in the playoffs catch on quickly.
2) Playoff teams tend to have better defenses and defensemen who can move Andreychuk from the front of the net. If you can move Andreychuk from the front of the net, he's pretty much useless.
NJ has Babe Siebert - one of the strongest men of his era - on our PK. He should have no problem keeping Andreychuk out of the crease. If Siebert is distracted, Ted Green will have no problem treating Dave rather roughly. On the 2nd PK unit, Salming and Blake are both very strong men too.
The pointmen
Al MacInnis is a great PP QB, of course. Better than Salming or Blake on the point. His weapon, of course, is his lethal shot and ability to get that shot on net.
I'm not impressed by Bullet Joe Simpson. He was a rushing defenseman who put up pretty good numbers against relatively poor competition right after World War I. I'm not sure if he's any better offensively than my own Albert Leduc, on my 2nd unit.
Joe Simpson and MacInnis are both right handed shots, which means they aren't going to both be able to be in prime shooting position at the same time. It also makes it easier for NJ's PKers to clear the zone.
I assume MacInnis will be the featured shooter from the point, which means he'll be the guy in good position to shoot.
Given questions about how good Simpson actually was offensively and the fact that he shoots from the same side as MacInnis, NJ's PKers are going to be able to cheat to MacInnis's side.
Ted Green is a great shot blocker (used at forward sometimes on the PP because of how good he was at blocking shots), and he's probably crazy enough (freaking metal plate in his head) to actually block a MacInnis slapper.
The First Unit relies on Oates to distribute the puck
Simply put, neither Hull nor Andreychuk is known for passing. MacInnis is a great pointman, but his primary weapon is his shot, not his passing ability. Oates has options - MacInnis on the point, Hull in the slot. Andreychuk in the rare instance he's actually able to set up in front. But the fact that Minnesota's PP lacks a playmaker other than Oates makes it more predictable, and therefore easier to stop.
THE SECOND UNIT
Joe Sakic on the second unit is a luxury. But what about the rest of the unit?
His wingers are very solid second unit wingers, but nothing particularly great.
The pointmen
Quite simply, Jacques Laperriere is not a great PP defenseman. His offensive game is okay, but nothing special. JC Tremblay was the guy who ran Montreal's powerplay and transition game. Laperriere was more of a PK specialist. In fact,
Fred Stanfield put up great PP numbers playing the point next to Bobby Orr. But Bobby Orr was obviously the featured shooter.
The mediocre pointmen on Minnesota's second unit will allow NJ's PKers to focus more on Sakic.
Conclusion
Minnesota's PP is strong, but not as strong as Nalyd claimed earlier.
In fact, NJ's first unit might be better than Minnesota's. The forwards are definitely better and less predictable (both Howe and Abel are excellent passers and Jackson is okay. All three can shoot the puck, as well). And while NJ has no MacInnis on the point, Blake and Salming are both probably better than Simpson.
And NJ has the advantage of having a LH shot and RH shot at the point of both units.
Nalyd made some bold claims about his powerplay during the lineup assassination thread.
So I'm going to examine his powerplay in more detail:
FIRST UNIT
Dave Andreychuk
Dave Andreychuk is a one-dimensional powerplay specialist. His game is to stand in front of the net, screening the goalie and getting rebounds. He was amazingly efficient at it in the regular season.
Yet, his playoff numbers are quite poor:
In the playoffs, Andreychuk has mere 43 goals in 162 career games - a mere .26 goals per game, well off his regular season pace of .39 goals per game. He has 25 career PP goals. But it's worse than that - 12 of Andreychuk's goals and 8 of his PP goals were in 92-93, playing next to Doug Gilmour in the playoff year that made Gilmour a legend. Take away just that one season, and Andreychuk has only 31 goals (and 17 PP goals) in 141 playoff games, a mere .22 overall goals per game.
In my last series, I said I don't care if a player didn't perform in the playoffs. I care about why. And for Andreychuk the answer is easy:
1) Andreychuk's net game is totally one-dimensional and defenses in the playoffs catch on quickly.
2) Playoff teams tend to have better defenses and defensemen who can move Andreychuk from the front of the net. If you can move Andreychuk from the front of the net, he's pretty much useless.
NJ has Babe Siebert - one of the strongest men of his era - on our PK. He should have no problem keeping Andreychuk out of the crease. If Siebert is distracted, Ted Green will have no problem treating Dave rather roughly. On the 2nd PK unit, Salming and Blake are both very strong men too.
The pointmen
Al MacInnis is a great PP QB, of course. Better than Salming or Blake on the point. His weapon, of course, is his lethal shot and ability to get that shot on net.
I'm not impressed by Bullet Joe Simpson. He was a rushing defenseman who put up pretty good numbers against relatively poor competition right after World War I. I'm not sure if he's any better offensively than my own Albert Leduc, on my 2nd unit.
Joe Simpson and MacInnis are both right handed shots, which means they aren't going to both be able to be in prime shooting position at the same time. It also makes it easier for NJ's PKers to clear the zone.
I assume MacInnis will be the featured shooter from the point, which means he'll be the guy in good position to shoot.
Given questions about how good Simpson actually was offensively and the fact that he shoots from the same side as MacInnis, NJ's PKers are going to be able to cheat to MacInnis's side.
Ted Green is a great shot blocker (used at forward sometimes on the PP because of how good he was at blocking shots), and he's probably crazy enough (freaking metal plate in his head) to actually block a MacInnis slapper.
The First Unit relies on Oates to distribute the puck
Simply put, neither Hull nor Andreychuk is known for passing. MacInnis is a great pointman, but his primary weapon is his shot, not his passing ability. Oates has options - MacInnis on the point, Hull in the slot. Andreychuk in the rare instance he's actually able to set up in front. But the fact that Minnesota's PP lacks a playmaker other than Oates makes it more predictable, and therefore easier to stop.
THE SECOND UNIT
Joe Sakic on the second unit is a luxury. But what about the rest of the unit?
His wingers are very solid second unit wingers, but nothing particularly great.
The pointmen
Quite simply, Jacques Laperriere is not a great PP defenseman. His offensive game is okay, but nothing special. JC Tremblay was the guy who ran Montreal's powerplay and transition game. Laperriere was more of a PK specialist. In fact,
Fred Stanfield put up great PP numbers playing the point next to Bobby Orr. But Bobby Orr was obviously the featured shooter.
The mediocre pointmen on Minnesota's second unit will allow NJ's PKers to focus more on Sakic.
Conclusion
Minnesota's PP is strong, but not as strong as Nalyd claimed earlier.
In fact, NJ's first unit might be better than Minnesota's. The forwards are definitely better and less predictable (both Howe and Abel are excellent passers and Jackson is okay. All three can shoot the puck, as well). And while NJ has no MacInnis on the point, Blake and Salming are both probably better than Simpson.
And NJ has the advantage of having a LH shot and RH shot at the point of both units.
Last edited:
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
How NJ will stop Oates/Hull
The Oate/Hull combo on Minnesota's second line is deadly, but it's also incredibly predictable.
-I ran the numbers and Adam Oates only finished in the Top 20 in goals once - finishing 19th in the weird 92-93 season (a year when he didn't have Hull or Neely on the wing and was probably forced to shoot more).
-Rod Brindamour was 8th in goals in 97-98, and never Top 20 again. In fact, Rod was never Top 10 in league scoring once! He's incredibly poor offensively for someone playing on an ATD scoring line. He's very good defensively and fairly gritty, but he's not overly physical either.
-Other than MacInnis (who I assume will be busy trying to check Gordie Howe), Minnesota lacks defensemen who can really support the offense.
-Minnesota's second line relies almost entirely on Brett Hull to finish plays.
The key to limiting Minnesota's second line is to limit Brett Hull's ability to get open.
Brett Hull was one of the most one-dimensional players to ever play hockey. He was slow, often out of shape, not physical, and was fairly poor defensively for most of his career. He's also a pretty poor playmaker - never Top 10 in assists (but on the cusp once later in his career after his goal scoring was no longer elite).
Hull had two things:
1) An amazing shot, including probably the best one-timer in history
2) An amazing ability to "disappear" and reappear in prime scoring position just in time for an elite playmaker (like Oates) to feed him the puck.
NJ's checking line will play against the Oates/Hull line. Don Marshall will shadow Brett Hull.
Don Marshall was a defensive specialist with the Canadiens, and was good enough defensively to be awarded 2 Retro Selkes by UH, so I think he's up to the task. Marshall has the speed to keep up with the much slower Hull. Hull isn't particularly physical, nor is there a physical presence on the line, so Marshall will have no reason not to be on Hull at all times.
If Hull's biggest strength is the ability to disappear, Marshall will make sure that he can't by following him all around the ice. Marshall is good enough defensively to tie up Hull's stick when he sets up for the one-timer.
Pit Lepine (best defensive center of the 30s) and Selke-winning Dirk Graham are more than capable of taking care of Oates and Brind'amour.
NJ's 2nd checking line (the Oliver line) is also available
If NJ's primary checking line is unavailable, our 4th line is more than capable of playing against the Oates line. All 3 players are very good two-way players. Jiri Holik is probably the best two-way player Czechoslovakia ever produced, and it will be his job to follow Hull around the ice when Marshall isn't on the ice.
Since NJ has 2 options to go against Hull and a superior tactician as our coach, it will be incredibly difficult for Bob Johnson to get Hull away from these matchups in a way that doesn't reduce his ice time (which would play right into NJ's hands).
With no real physical presence on the Oates line, NJ's physical defensemen are free to rough up Oates and Hull without fear of retribution.
-Babe Siebert and Terrible Ted Green and the primary matchup against Oate/Hull, but Salming/Blake are very tough too.
The Oate/Hull combo on Minnesota's second line is deadly, but it's also incredibly predictable.
-I ran the numbers and Adam Oates only finished in the Top 20 in goals once - finishing 19th in the weird 92-93 season (a year when he didn't have Hull or Neely on the wing and was probably forced to shoot more).
-Rod Brindamour was 8th in goals in 97-98, and never Top 20 again. In fact, Rod was never Top 10 in league scoring once! He's incredibly poor offensively for someone playing on an ATD scoring line. He's very good defensively and fairly gritty, but he's not overly physical either.
-Other than MacInnis (who I assume will be busy trying to check Gordie Howe), Minnesota lacks defensemen who can really support the offense.
-Minnesota's second line relies almost entirely on Brett Hull to finish plays.
The key to limiting Minnesota's second line is to limit Brett Hull's ability to get open.
Brett Hull was one of the most one-dimensional players to ever play hockey. He was slow, often out of shape, not physical, and was fairly poor defensively for most of his career. He's also a pretty poor playmaker - never Top 10 in assists (but on the cusp once later in his career after his goal scoring was no longer elite).
Hull had two things:
1) An amazing shot, including probably the best one-timer in history
2) An amazing ability to "disappear" and reappear in prime scoring position just in time for an elite playmaker (like Oates) to feed him the puck.
NJ's checking line will play against the Oates/Hull line. Don Marshall will shadow Brett Hull.
Don Marshall was a defensive specialist with the Canadiens, and was good enough defensively to be awarded 2 Retro Selkes by UH, so I think he's up to the task. Marshall has the speed to keep up with the much slower Hull. Hull isn't particularly physical, nor is there a physical presence on the line, so Marshall will have no reason not to be on Hull at all times.
If Hull's biggest strength is the ability to disappear, Marshall will make sure that he can't by following him all around the ice. Marshall is good enough defensively to tie up Hull's stick when he sets up for the one-timer.
Pit Lepine (best defensive center of the 30s) and Selke-winning Dirk Graham are more than capable of taking care of Oates and Brind'amour.
NJ's 2nd checking line (the Oliver line) is also available
If NJ's primary checking line is unavailable, our 4th line is more than capable of playing against the Oates line. All 3 players are very good two-way players. Jiri Holik is probably the best two-way player Czechoslovakia ever produced, and it will be his job to follow Hull around the ice when Marshall isn't on the ice.
Since NJ has 2 options to go against Hull and a superior tactician as our coach, it will be incredibly difficult for Bob Johnson to get Hull away from these matchups in a way that doesn't reduce his ice time (which would play right into NJ's hands).
With no real physical presence on the Oates line, NJ's physical defensemen are free to rough up Oates and Hull without fear of retribution.
-Babe Siebert and Terrible Ted Green and the primary matchup against Oate/Hull, but Salming/Blake are very tough too.
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
NJ's Second Line (The Savard Line)
NJ's 2nd line might be somewhat behind Minnesota's on paper, but it is harder to gameplan against
-Adam Oates is a guy who looks better if you look at goals and assists seperately. If you just look at points finishes, he's barely ahead of Denis Savard.
-I think Hull is ahead of Martinec, but not by a great deal (I think Martinec is just behind Mikhailov and right there with Maltsev in terms of value).
-But Denis Savard and Vladimir Martinec are both unpredictable players. Savard is obviously biased towards passing, but he can score as well (he loved taking bad angle shots).
Minnesota's bottom lines are nothing special defensively.
-Stanfield's wings are pretty good defensively, but Stanfield himself is nothing special.
-Minnesota's 4th line doesn't provide much defensively (and other than Lecavalier, it doesn't provide much offense at even strength).
-NJ's gameplan is to get the Savard line out against Minnesota's bottom 2 lines. Given the lack of an elite checking presence on Minnesota's bottom 2 lines, it's possible that NJ's second line will outscore Minnesota's.
NJ's 2nd line might be somewhat behind Minnesota's on paper, but it is harder to gameplan against
-Adam Oates is a guy who looks better if you look at goals and assists seperately. If you just look at points finishes, he's barely ahead of Denis Savard.
-I think Hull is ahead of Martinec, but not by a great deal (I think Martinec is just behind Mikhailov and right there with Maltsev in terms of value).
-But Denis Savard and Vladimir Martinec are both unpredictable players. Savard is obviously biased towards passing, but he can score as well (he loved taking bad angle shots).
Minnesota's bottom lines are nothing special defensively.
-Stanfield's wings are pretty good defensively, but Stanfield himself is nothing special.
-Minnesota's 4th line doesn't provide much defensively (and other than Lecavalier, it doesn't provide much offense at even strength).
-NJ's gameplan is to get the Savard line out against Minnesota's bottom 2 lines. Given the lack of an elite checking presence on Minnesota's bottom 2 lines, it's possible that NJ's second line will outscore Minnesota's.
Last edited:
VanIslander
A 19-year ATDer on HfBoards
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
Defense
First pair = Close at even strength
-Minnesota might have slightly better players on the first pair, but any advantage they have is on special teams.
1) Salming = MacInnis at even strength. Salming is good offensively, but MacInnis is better. MacInnis is good defensively, but Salming is better.
-MacInnis is usually ranked slightly higher than Salming because of his work on the PP.
2) Blake = Laperriere (more or less)
-Blake is a bit better offensively, Laperriere is a bit better defensively (opposite of Salming vs. MacInnis).
-If Laperriere is to be ranked higher (which I personally wouldn't do), it's due to his work on the PK.
-Laperriere probably had a slightly better peak, but Blake might have more career value by now, due to Laperriere's injury problems.
Blake: 1 Norris, 1 First Team, 3 Second Teams
Laperriere: 1 Norris, 2 First Teams, 2 Second Teams
Blake had Lidstrom, Pronger, and older versions of Bourque, Stevens, and Chelios as competition.
Laperriere had Pilote and Horton (and then a big drop) as competition.
2nd Pair = Advantage NJ
1) Hatcher = Green. Hatcher might be a bit better defensively, but Green is a bit better offensively. Both have a single single 2nd Team All-Star. They play similar styles.
2) But Babe Siebert is a lot better than Bullet Joe Simpson. Siebert is very good at both sides of the puck and is very strong. I'm not sure how good defensively Joe Simpson is.
Minnesota's 2nd line will be facing a much stronger 2nd defensive pairing than NJ's 2nd line will
-If Simpson isn't up to the task defensively, Denis Savard and Vladimir Martinec will skate circles around the much slower Hatcher.
First pair = Close at even strength
-Minnesota might have slightly better players on the first pair, but any advantage they have is on special teams.
1) Salming = MacInnis at even strength. Salming is good offensively, but MacInnis is better. MacInnis is good defensively, but Salming is better.
-MacInnis is usually ranked slightly higher than Salming because of his work on the PP.
2) Blake = Laperriere (more or less)
-Blake is a bit better offensively, Laperriere is a bit better defensively (opposite of Salming vs. MacInnis).
-If Laperriere is to be ranked higher (which I personally wouldn't do), it's due to his work on the PK.
-Laperriere probably had a slightly better peak, but Blake might have more career value by now, due to Laperriere's injury problems.
Blake: 1 Norris, 1 First Team, 3 Second Teams
Laperriere: 1 Norris, 2 First Teams, 2 Second Teams
Blake had Lidstrom, Pronger, and older versions of Bourque, Stevens, and Chelios as competition.
Laperriere had Pilote and Horton (and then a big drop) as competition.
2nd Pair = Advantage NJ
1) Hatcher = Green. Hatcher might be a bit better defensively, but Green is a bit better offensively. Both have a single single 2nd Team All-Star. They play similar styles.
2) But Babe Siebert is a lot better than Bullet Joe Simpson. Siebert is very good at both sides of the puck and is very strong. I'm not sure how good defensively Joe Simpson is.
Minnesota's 2nd line will be facing a much stronger 2nd defensive pairing than NJ's 2nd line will
-If Simpson isn't up to the task defensively, Denis Savard and Vladimir Martinec will skate circles around the much slower Hatcher.
Last edited:
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
Because forward lines containing opposing forward lines is a myth.
Defencemen contain forward lines. And my defence is excellent.
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
I'm not going to get into the big debate, because, honestly, the ATD is fun and ripping each others teams apart isnt fun.
The difference between the two teams is this:
Minnesota has sacrificed having major strengths with the benefit of having no weaknesses. There are no lines that can't score, there are no lines that can't defence and there are no lines that are soft. On the flipside, we have no OMG scoring lines, no lockdown defensive lines and no bowl you over intimidating physical lines.
New Jersey on the other hand has the better scoring line and the better shutdown line. But their second line is the weakest scoring line a defensive liability. While the checking line is offensively weak.
The defences are both well balanced and roughly equal. (New Jersey has the better #3, but Minnesota has the better 4th and 5th. So pretty balanced.)
Coaching has a slight edge to New Jersey.
Goaltending has a slight edge to Minnesota.
So, overall. It comes down to this. Do you prefer a team that is very balanced and can play a uniform gameplan top to bottom? Or do you prefer a team with specialized units each with strengths and weakness?
But, the kicker is this.
Special teams.
Minnesota has amazing special teams. Loaded top to bottom with not just talented players, but players who were known to excel in their roles. Am I guessing Andreychuk has the skills to park himself in the crease? No. I know he has the skills because he used those skills to become the all-time PP goal leader. Am I guessing Brett Hull is great in the high slot? No. I know he excelled. Al MacInnis as a point man? Since the modern pointman role was invented, no one has done it better. (Except maybe Ray Bourque.) Derian Hatcher as a crease clearer? Proven impact player.
Minnesota's special teams aren't a guess or approximation, they are proven fact.
What we have here is a case of two even teams, where one has superior special teams.
P.S. My girlfriend says you should vote for me because I'm awesome.
The difference between the two teams is this:
Minnesota has sacrificed having major strengths with the benefit of having no weaknesses. There are no lines that can't score, there are no lines that can't defence and there are no lines that are soft. On the flipside, we have no OMG scoring lines, no lockdown defensive lines and no bowl you over intimidating physical lines.
New Jersey on the other hand has the better scoring line and the better shutdown line. But their second line is the weakest scoring line a defensive liability. While the checking line is offensively weak.
The defences are both well balanced and roughly equal. (New Jersey has the better #3, but Minnesota has the better 4th and 5th. So pretty balanced.)
Coaching has a slight edge to New Jersey.
Goaltending has a slight edge to Minnesota.
So, overall. It comes down to this. Do you prefer a team that is very balanced and can play a uniform gameplan top to bottom? Or do you prefer a team with specialized units each with strengths and weakness?
But, the kicker is this.
Special teams.
Minnesota has amazing special teams. Loaded top to bottom with not just talented players, but players who were known to excel in their roles. Am I guessing Andreychuk has the skills to park himself in the crease? No. I know he has the skills because he used those skills to become the all-time PP goal leader. Am I guessing Brett Hull is great in the high slot? No. I know he excelled. Al MacInnis as a point man? Since the modern pointman role was invented, no one has done it better. (Except maybe Ray Bourque.) Derian Hatcher as a crease clearer? Proven impact player.
Minnesota's special teams aren't a guess or approximation, they are proven fact.
What we have here is a case of two even teams, where one has superior special teams.
P.S. My girlfriend says you should vote for me because I'm awesome.
VanIslander
A 19-year ATDer on HfBoards
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
This is most fair but:
I wouldn't call NJ's 2nd line a defensive liability. There is certainly nobody on the line who is good defensively, but nobody who is a real liability. I made it a point not to draft any players who were real defensive liabilities this time.
Is Hatcher really better than Ted Green? I think they are really comparible. If there is a difference, it certainly isn't as big as the difference between Blake(or Siebert) and Simpson.
I wouldn't call NJ's 2nd line a defensive liability. There is certainly nobody on the line who is good defensively, but nobody who is a real liability. I made it a point not to draft any players who were real defensive liabilities this time.
Is Hatcher really better than Ted Green? I think they are really comparible. If there is a difference, it certainly isn't as big as the difference between Blake(or Siebert) and Simpson.
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
NJ has much better PKing forwards
Nayld keeps talking about his special teams. I already went over his powerplay in detail, so I'll point out one area where NJ has a definite edge:
NJ has much better PKing forwards. I actually invested a lot into having forwards who excelled at killing penalties.
Don Marshall
-Awarded two Retro Selkes by Ultimate Hockey (1959, 1960).
Retro Selkes don't mean much on their own, but it seems like elite penalty killing plays a huge part in awarding them (Klukay and Metz basically owned the retro Selkes for the 40s).
His legends of hockey bio says he became "one of the league's premiere penalty killers" in Montreal as he won 5 straight Cups. His Pelletier bio says that " continued to be a top penalty killer in New York but also received more ice time and therefore a more offensive role."
Pit Lepine
-Awarded 3 Retro Selkes (1931, 32, 34)
Dirk Graham
-Selke winner in 1991
In a 1993 poll of 21 NHL coaches, Graham received
-2 votes for “Best Defensive Forward”
-2 votes for “Best Penalty Killer”
Murray Oliver
"adept at killing penalties."
He was sometimes paired with Pulford and sometimes paired with Keon on the great Toronto PKs of the 60s.
Gordie Howe
criticized by Maurice Richard for spending too much time and energy killing penalties
Sid Abel
Used by Tommy Ivan in a penalty killing role before he put the Production Line together.
Nayld keeps talking about his special teams. I already went over his powerplay in detail, so I'll point out one area where NJ has a definite edge:
NJ has much better PKing forwards. I actually invested a lot into having forwards who excelled at killing penalties.
Don Marshall
overpass said:
-Awarded two Retro Selkes by Ultimate Hockey (1959, 1960).
Retro Selkes don't mean much on their own, but it seems like elite penalty killing plays a huge part in awarding them (Klukay and Metz basically owned the retro Selkes for the 40s).
His legends of hockey bio says he became "one of the league's premiere penalty killers" in Montreal as he won 5 straight Cups. His Pelletier bio says that " continued to be a top penalty killer in New York but also received more ice time and therefore a more offensive role."
Pit Lepine
-Awarded 3 Retro Selkes (1931, 32, 34)
Ultimate Hockey said:
Dirk Graham
-Selke winner in 1991
In a 1993 poll of 21 NHL coaches, Graham received
-2 votes for “Best Defensive Forward”
-2 votes for “Best Penalty Killer”
Murray Oliver
"adept at killing penalties."
He was sometimes paired with Pulford and sometimes paired with Keon on the great Toronto PKs of the 60s.
Gordie Howe
criticized by Maurice Richard for spending too much time and energy killing penalties
Sid Abel
Used by Tommy Ivan in a penalty killing role before he put the Production Line together.
Last edited:
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
Compared to Minnesota's PKers:
We already know about Brindamour and Sakic. Solid, but not spectacular for their roles.
Gillies Tremblay
His legends of hockey bio simply mentions that he "could contribute on both specialty teams." That's pretty weak for a first unit PKer. Certainly not the PKing resume of Don Marshall, Pit Lepine, or Dirk Graham.
Fred Stanfield
Never a regular penalty killer in the NHL.
We already know about Brindamour and Sakic. Solid, but not spectacular for their roles.
Gillies Tremblay
His legends of hockey bio simply mentions that he "could contribute on both specialty teams." That's pretty weak for a first unit PKer. Certainly not the PKing resume of Don Marshall, Pit Lepine, or Dirk Graham.
Fred Stanfield
Never a regular penalty killer in the NHL.
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
Summary of arguments
Why NJ should win:
1) NJ's top line should win the head to head matchup with Minnesota's top line quite handily.
2) NJ is well equipped to limit the damage of Minnesota's 2nd line.
a) Minnesota's 2nd line is predictable and relies almost entirely on Brett Hull for goalscoring.
b) NJ has 2 checking lines to use against Oates/Hull
c) NJ's checking left wings (mainly Don Marshall) will shadow Brett Hull, which prevents Hull from disappearing and reappearing in prime scoring position.
d) NJ has a much better 2nd defensive pair (Siebert > Simpson), so Minnesota's 2nd line will face tougher defensemen than NJ's will.
3) Minnesota doesn't really have any checking lines to go against NJ's scoring lines.
4) NJ's defensemen (especially Babe Siebert) are well equipped to keep Andreychuk out of the crease.
-Andreychuk's numbers historically go down in the playoffs because better defenses can keep him out of the crease.
5) NJ has much better PKing forwards, which limits any advantage Minnesota may have on special teams.
Oh, and Nayld's ex-girlfriend says you should vote for me because he's a jerk!
How Minnesota could win:
1) Better second line that can do serious damage if NJ's plan to contain Brett Hull fails.
Counter: The plan won't fail.
2) Minnesota does have the best PP QB (MacInnis) and the best top PK duo of defensemen (Laperriere/Hatcher).
Counter: I examined the weaknesses of Minnesota's PP in detail earlier.
Counter: Minnesota's PKing forwards aren't anything special.
3) Minnesota's 3rd line is pretty good offensively - they should be able to chip in some points.
Counter: They will still lose the head to head matchup with NJ's 2nd line.
Why NJ should win:
1) NJ's top line should win the head to head matchup with Minnesota's top line quite handily.
2) NJ is well equipped to limit the damage of Minnesota's 2nd line.
a) Minnesota's 2nd line is predictable and relies almost entirely on Brett Hull for goalscoring.
b) NJ has 2 checking lines to use against Oates/Hull
c) NJ's checking left wings (mainly Don Marshall) will shadow Brett Hull, which prevents Hull from disappearing and reappearing in prime scoring position.
d) NJ has a much better 2nd defensive pair (Siebert > Simpson), so Minnesota's 2nd line will face tougher defensemen than NJ's will.
3) Minnesota doesn't really have any checking lines to go against NJ's scoring lines.
4) NJ's defensemen (especially Babe Siebert) are well equipped to keep Andreychuk out of the crease.
-Andreychuk's numbers historically go down in the playoffs because better defenses can keep him out of the crease.
5) NJ has much better PKing forwards, which limits any advantage Minnesota may have on special teams.
Oh, and Nayld's ex-girlfriend says you should vote for me because he's a jerk!
How Minnesota could win:
1) Better second line that can do serious damage if NJ's plan to contain Brett Hull fails.
Counter: The plan won't fail.
2) Minnesota does have the best PP QB (MacInnis) and the best top PK duo of defensemen (Laperriere/Hatcher).
Counter: I examined the weaknesses of Minnesota's PP in detail earlier.
Counter: Minnesota's PKing forwards aren't anything special.
3) Minnesota's 3rd line is pretty good offensively - they should be able to chip in some points.
Counter: They will still lose the head to head matchup with NJ's 2nd line.
Last edited:
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
Good luck, Nalyd!
To be honest, having the Saints in my division had a big influence on how I drafted and set up the lower end of my team.
As soon as you drafted Hull and Oates for your second line, I knew I wanted my #2 defenseman (who turned out to be Siebert) to play on my second pair.
It also affected the way I put together my two checking lines.
Basically, I tried to construct NJ to be a team that could beat your team in a head to head matchup. We'll see if I succeeded.
To be honest, having the Saints in my division had a big influence on how I drafted and set up the lower end of my team.
As soon as you drafted Hull and Oates for your second line, I knew I wanted my #2 defenseman (who turned out to be Siebert) to play on my second pair.
It also affected the way I put together my two checking lines.
Basically, I tried to construct NJ to be a team that could beat your team in a head to head matchup. We'll see if I succeeded.
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
I thought you were on a roll here, and then you said this:
Sakic, yes. Brind'Amour, though, is one of the most prolific penalty killing forwards of all-time.
Sakic, yes. Brind'Amour, though, is one of the most prolific penalty killing forwards of all-time.
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
I should note that your numbers on Dave Andreychuk are misleading. He played 64 of his 162 playoff games after the age of 36.
Look at his 92-93 playoffs and you'll see a very different story.
Maybe not liabilities, but, the weakest defensive line in the series by a clear margin.
I think Hatcher is clearly better, he shouldered a bigger load and was more feared around the league. I dont think anyone would have said Green was the best defensive defenseman in the game, back in 2000 Hatcher would have been a front runner. But, I could also bring up my first pairing being superior. If anything, calling defence a wash is me being overly generous.
Look at his 92-93 playoffs and you'll see a very different story.
Maybe not liabilities, but, the weakest defensive line in the series by a clear margin.
I think Hatcher is clearly better, he shouldered a bigger load and was more feared around the league. I dont think anyone would have said Green was the best defensive defenseman in the game, back in 2000 Hatcher would have been a front runner. But, I could also bring up my first pairing being superior. If anything, calling defence a wash is me being overly generous.
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
Good Luck TDMM. When I saw how the divisions shaping up, you were the team I respected most. Win or lose, we both have great teams.
May the best team win.
May the best team win.
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
About Andreychuk, yes, he is a unique case because of the high proportion of his playoff games coming late in his career. His career drop of 27% from the regular season to the playoffs is pretty poor when stated that way, but breaking his career up into two sections would tell us a better story.
He had 28 points in 64 playoff games post-36 (0.44). During that time he had 0.46 regular season PPG so he was actually performing very well offensively in the playoffs.
Prior to that he had 69 points in 98 playoff games (0.70). During that time he had 0.94 regular season PPG so he was actually mediocre offensively in the playoffs. That is still a 25% drop from the regular season which is well above the average. This also highly weighs his two good seasons with Toronto, as they represent 40% of his playoff games during that time, but only 9% of his regular season games.
In fact, though they are often considered his career's apex, Andreychuk still saw a large drop from regular season to playoff performance in those seaons, going from 1.20 PPG in the regular season with the Leafs, to 0.74 in the playoffs, a 38% drop.
For example, in those two seasons, Gilmour experienced a cumulative PPG rise of 13%, Anderson rose by 28%, and Clark rose by 4%.
So no, I don't think Andreychuk's playoff record is really all that forgivable by any measure.
He had 28 points in 64 playoff games post-36 (0.44). During that time he had 0.46 regular season PPG so he was actually performing very well offensively in the playoffs.
Prior to that he had 69 points in 98 playoff games (0.70). During that time he had 0.94 regular season PPG so he was actually mediocre offensively in the playoffs. That is still a 25% drop from the regular season which is well above the average. This also highly weighs his two good seasons with Toronto, as they represent 40% of his playoff games during that time, but only 9% of his regular season games.
In fact, though they are often considered his career's apex, Andreychuk still saw a large drop from regular season to playoff performance in those seaons, going from 1.20 PPG in the regular season with the Leafs, to 0.74 in the playoffs, a 38% drop.
For example, in those two seasons, Gilmour experienced a cumulative PPG rise of 13%, Anderson rose by 28%, and Clark rose by 4%.
So no, I don't think Andreychuk's playoff record is really all that forgivable by any measure.
Last edited:
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
I might not have explained myself well.
Theoretically, the 60 best PKers in the ATD should be on the first units. Is Brind'amour one of the Top 20 PKing forwards in the ATD? I doubt it. He's no Clarke, Nighbor, Ramsey, Luce, Gainey, Madden, Klukay, Metz, etc.
If I had to guess, I'd say he's 20-40, which would make him solid for a first pair.
It's a shame we don't have any of those coaches polls since the early 90s (did they stop doing them?)
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
I think they did. I think all the ones that exist have been dug up and posted. I hope I am wrong, though.
overpass
Registered User
- Jun 7, 2007
- 5,271
- 2,808
I estimate Brind'Amour as 3rd since 1968 among forwards in the sheer amount of penalty killing he did, behind Messier and Carbonneau. The method is basically player PPGA adjusted for team PPGA. (or the numerator of the SH% I posted over on the history section.)
Top 10: Messier, Carbonneau, Brind'Amour, Ramsay, Westfall, Luce, Yzerman, Jarvis, Gainey, Goring.
But unlike all of the other forwards in the top 10, Brind'Amour's teams were basically average at killing penalties over his career. The others' teams were all 10-25% better than league average. So you could question whether he was as effective as the other top volume PKers, or if it's less impressive to kill a lot of penalties on weaker teams.
No, the Toronto Star hasn't done coaches polls since 1994. I searched the Star's archives and all the ones that exist have been posted, as far as I can tell.
Ad
Upcoming events
-
2024 NHL Draft Lottery Team that wins #1 pick - PICK ONLY ONE TEAMWagers: 23Staked: $26,012.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Stanley Cup 2024 Stanley Cup Champion - ONLY BET ONE TEAMWagers: 13Staked: $59,839.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Game 2 Carolina Hurricanes @ NY Rangers - NYR leads 1-0Wagers: 10Staked: $20,975.00Event closes
- Updated:
-
-
