ATD 2011 Draft Thread II

[DoMakc]

Cook's a beauty.

Cue all the old, knowledgeable GMs coming in to add "I don't see what makes Cook any worse than Guy Lafleur"...

...an argument to which I have no logical response.

His center would have taken him over Howe.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Chelios seems pretty comparable in value to MacInnis to me, with most of his value in the defensive end and most of MacInnis's value in the offensive end.

HO, I don't think your evaluation of Chelios is that controversial. Chelios has as good a case as anyone for best defensive d-man since his career began, IMO. He was the weakest offensively of any drafted d-man, OTOH.

IMO, you're doing a disservice to Chelios. During his offensive peak, he was considered, along with Bourque, one of the very best offensive defensemen in the league (check out the coach's polls).

MacInnis was never considered one of the best defensive defenseman in the league. Even late in his career, when he got better defensively, he was still never in that catagory of the "very best."

I never remember MacInnis being strictly matched against the best competition from opponents - though he was never hidden from them.

And there is statistical support for Chelios' PK dominance, like there is for MacInnis's PP dominance.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Comparing Coffey to Richard, who was known for circling at the blueline waiting for an outlet pass is...a little bit absurd, Eagle. We'll discuss this a little bit more later.


.

As the owner of the Rocket, I need to raise an objection.

I have yet to see proof that Rocket played that way before Doug Harvey joined the team. In fact, Harvey bios always talk excessively about how his ability with the puck "allowed his forwards to play firewagon hockey."

 

[BraveCanadian]

As the owner of the Rocket, I need to raise an objection.

I have yet to see proof that Rocket played that way before Doug Harvey joined the team. In fact, Harvey bios always talk excessively about how his ability with the puck "allowed his forwards to play firewagon hockey."

For what it is worth, Gretzky and Lemieux both said Coffey's puck recovery, transition game and long passing ability allowed them to cheat a bit too. (although as I recall Lemieux already was )

 

[BenchBrawl]

Cook's a beauty.

Cue all the old, knowledgeable GMs coming in to add "I don't see what makes Cook any worse than Guy Lafleur"...

...an argument to which I have no logical response.

Because Lafleur was better.Jesus Christ let's not get there , nah , I'm not going there.

Ok let's get there ,Lafleur dominated more his competition for a start , Lafleur was better in the playoff and his peak was higher.Bill Cook is a beauty indeed , but let's not get crazy everytime we research a player.They're all beauty until later.Cook got outscored by Boucher in his prime , Lafleur never got outscored by anybody on his team during his 6 years peak.I personally think Lafleur as the best peak outside the top 4 and maybe Hasek but I hate to compare goalies and players , pointless.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Seriously, Chelios was a bonehead for the first 2/3rds of his career lol... great great player but lots of stupid penalties and behaviour. I'll take Big Bird any day over Chelios as great as he was..

Despite Chelios' "stupid penalties," his teams had the best PKs in the league more often than any other defenseman since expansion, with him generally their leading PKer.

 

[chaosrevolver]

C/LW: Frank Nighbor

Frank Nighbor was one of the NHL's first great players. He had played in the PCHA(Pacific Coast Hockey Association) and the NHA(National Hockey Association), the forerunner to the NHL. In fact, if you put Frank's statistics into modern day equivalents, he would have, in some of his better seasons(not the same season) scored 67 goals, 157 assists and 194 points. Some of those numbers look awful close to Gretzky's!

It has been recorded that Frank possessed a skating ability rivaled by few players of his era. His playmaking prowess and great defensive ability made him a threat no matter where he was on the ice. Before the NHL was formed, Nighbor had twice scored 6 goals in a game, a number which by today's standards would rank him second in most goals in a game, and he would be only the second player in any era to have done it twice, XXX XXXXXX had a 7 and a 6 goal game in his career.

An outstanding two-way center throughout his career, Frank Nighbor played a vital part on some of Canada's mightiest professional teams and his exemplary conduct on the ice earned him the respect of fans and players across the country. Nighbor was considered the master of the "poke-check," which he used to full advantage against the game's most dangerous scorers. A smooth skater, he worked superbly with his wingers as a crafty and unselfish playmaker.

"The Flying Dutchman." "The Pembroke Peach." Frank Nighbor had many nicknames. That was because he was one of the most creative geniuses ever to play the game.

Newspaper archives heap generous adjectives on Nighbor. "An effortless skater," he was "a marvel of physical endurance" who often played the entire game without a rest. He was "a crafty and unselfish playmaker" (when he retired he was the NHL's all time leader in assists) and also, when needed, "a flashy goal scorer." With his famed poke check he embraced the defensive side of the game with equal zeal. "One of the brainy greats of the game" was quite possibly the most complete and "peerless" player in hockey in his era.

Nighbor is best known as an Ottawa Senator. He played on Stanley Cup championship teams in 1920, 1921, 1923, and 1927. He was also the initial winner of two of the games greatest trophies: The Hart (1924) for Most Valuable Player; and the Lady Byng (1925 and 1926) for gentlemanly play and sportsmanship.

Nighbor developed into a bona fide scoring star, and when the team joined the new NHL in 1917, he was ready to take on the best of the best. Over his first 75 games and four years, Nighbor scored 75 goals, a goal-a-game pace that was a remarkable accomplishment in a defensive era of the game. The Senators won the Cup in 1920 and 1921, and again two more times, in '23 and '27.

In addition to his scoring skills as a centreman, Nighbor was also the master of the sweep check, a move which literally took the puck off an opponent's stick without him being aware of it. Today, it is a common check; back then, it was pioneering for its effectiveness.

"Cyclone" Taylor has great admiration for Frank Nighbor as a player, naming the famous poke-check king the greatest player of all-time.

Now, Howie Morenz was probably the most colourful of all those flying forwards yet if we look back we do not find that he ever put Frank Nighbor in the shade. In fact, I will be so different that I will suggest with conviction that Nighbor was the more effective player of the two and I say this despite the fact that poor Howie was one of my closest friends.
...
There were a lot of people who worshipped at the Morenz shrine, but there were just as many who gave that highest award to the stoical Pembroke Peach. It is all a matter of opinion.

So far ahead of all hockey players in defensive ability, in starting plays and in outguessing the opposition is Frank Nighbor that it would be almost a shame to mention another in the game at the present time. There is only one "Old Master" and aspiring players have a star to aim at.

From what I've been able to gather from old articles is that Nighbor is very often mentioned as the second best center after Morenz (and surprisingly ahead of Lalonde). Maybe the people who saw him play valued defensive play more than we seem to, but he is consistently mentioned as a great of the game right there with Morenz and Shore.

XXX XXXXXX and Frank Nighbor are tied as the leading goal-getters in the NHA.
....
It is an odd fact that Nighbor has been harassed and nagged all thru the season while XXXXX is seldom the butt of opposing players. The answer lies here:

Nighbor irritates opposing players, not only in the skill in which he pops in goals, but in his persistency in trailing the puck, and in his almost uncanny efficiency in snagging it off the other fellow's stick. In doing this he nearly always makes his victim look like what is termed in sporting parlance a "sucker," and very frequently his opponents seek to make up their lack of hockey skill by rough-house.

XXXXXX as a player is not of the same value as Nighbor, even tho he is by a fluke of circumstances tied with the Pembroke boy in scoring. Malone has done his work in bursts while Nighbor has plugged steadily. Nor is XXXXXX the equal of Nighbor in speed or back-checking ability. But for sheer stick-wizardry, particularly close to the nets, XXXXXX has the edge.

Skating backward and waving his stick in wandlike fashion, preparatory for use in his devastating poke check, was also a marvel of coordination. It was hard for his admirers to make up their minds at which he was best, offense or defense.

Baz O'Meara (Montreal Star sportswriter) was talking only yesterday about XXXXX XXXXXXX and in course of the conversation told how Benny, when he was playing for the old Ottawa Senators, used to point to Frank Nighbor and say "There's the best goaltender in the league." Although Nighbor was a centre, he was probably the greatest defensive forward of all time, which made Benny's chore a lot lighter.

Frank Nighbor, the 'Gliding Ghost' of Pembroke, was the centre ice star for the Ottawa teams of that era and there probably never was a cleaner nor more sporting player than this poker-faced exponent of the hook-check, who at times became almost a team in himself.

A reader signing himself "Old Hockey Fan" suggests that some screen news company is missing a bet in not making a "short" of Frank Nighbor in order to reveal to all hockey fans and to preserve for posterity the mechanics and finesse of the famed Nighbor "poke-check" which made the old Ottawa star a "one man defense" at centre ice and broke the heart of so many rival attackers. The idea would be to show Frank making the play at normal speed and then in slow motion shots to depict the progressive phases of his poke-check.

While admitting that Nighbor has long since retired from hockey, "Old Hockey Fan" believes Frank is "still spry enough to give us a flash of the old-time magic," for although Nighbor can no longer play, it is inconceivable that he would have forgotten the technique of how to poke-check.

Our correspondent writes, "in many a game played in Ottawa some 20 years ago, and in many other games played in Montreal in more recent years, I have been puzzled as to just how Nighbor managed to take the puck away from the other fellow so deftly and without any apparent effort. And I am willing to wager I am not the only one who wondered how it was done."

He concludes by stating that such a "short" as he proposes would "solve the mystery" of Nighbor's now almost legendary poke-check. Such a revelation might also serve to teach young players that remarkable defensive art.

Nighbor rose to greater heights than ever to repel the crimson charge of Canadiens, and it was his clever defensive work in the last analysis that that thwarted the league leaders. Time after time, he broke up their rushes, and it was his work that held Morenz as in a vise. The latter never could get going in his usual meteoric fashion.

Meanwhile, out near center-ice, Frank Nighbor, his face dripping blood all through the game after an accidental jab in the early passages, was a heroic figure. His far-reaching stick was almost magnetic, as it hooked the puck off Canadien sticks, Nighbor bending low, his long reach sweeping almost from side to side of the ice, breaking up one attack after another, and keeping the Habitants from getting to close quarters with their usual good effect.
....
Howie Morenz got away while XXXXXX XXXXXXX was serving one of his numerous penalties, and was inside the defense, with a goal a seeming certainty, but Nighbor streaked up behind him at a terrific clip, and Morenz delayed his shot a fraction of a second too long, for Nighbor hurled himself full length, fell on Morenz' stick, smothering stick and puck, and sliding into the boards behind the net with both beneath him--possibly the most spectacular save of the night.
....
...the Habitants could seldom pass the Nighbor menace at centre-ice.

"I won the (Hart Trophy) but Nighbor is the greatest player in hockey."

With all due respect to the many wonderful players who have come and gone since 1900, there are few who could be rated above Frank Nighbor. Someone once called him the "peerless centre," and I can think of no label which would have been more apt. We always felt he could have played a complete game of hockey in formal attire without even putting a wrinkle in his suit. He was a leading scorer, an expert passer and a playmaker; and no rival forward could come close to him in defensive skill. Along with XXXXX XXXXXX he developed the poke-check to such an extent that his contemporaries were forced to revamp completely their style of play in order to cope with him.

I roomed with Frank Nighbor, who was then (i.e. early '20s) regarded as the best player in the world.

Nighbor was an outstanding checker who played at centre ice. Nobody could handle a hockey stick like Frank Nighbor. He was the master of the poke-check. .... Nighbor should really be credited as the greatest hook-check artist of them all. Instead of poking the puck off someone's stick, he had a knack of trapping the puck with a hook-check and bringing it back to his own stick as if the puck were on a string. It was a magician's touch. And once he got the puck, he rarely gave it away again.

He perfected the poke and hook check which he used to break up opposing attackers and it was nothing to see his own defensemen resting on their sticks and his goaler stifling many a yawn as the Pembroke Peach massacred eight out of ten plays that came through his center slot.

Frank Nighbor is the greatest defensive hockey player I have ever seen.
....
...in my opinion, by far the greatest defensive centre in the game.

Available stats do not fully reflect Nighbor's offensive ability for several reasons. firstly, about half of his prime was played before the NHL ('13-'17). secondly, Nighbor was more a playmaker than a goalscorer, but he played in an era in which the scoring race was biased towards goal scorers, b/c assists were rarely recorded.

'13 (assists not recorded)
Lalonde: 25g
Nighbor: 25g

Nighbor played in the PCHA in '14 and '15. 3rd in scoring in '15 and on pace for 3rd in scoring in '14.

'16
Lalonde: 34p (1st)
Nighbor: 24p (7th)

'17
Lalonde: 35p (4th)
Nighbor: 51p (1st)

'18 (both players missed some games)
Lalonde: 30p (on pace for 3rd)
Nighbor: 19p (on pace for 5th)

'19
Lalonde: 32p (1st)
Nighbor: 28p (2nd)

'20
Lalonde: 46p (2nd)
Nighbor: 41p (3rd)

'21
Lalonde: 43p (1st)
Nighbor: 29p (5th)

total minus injured seasons
Lalonde: 215
Nighbor: 198

Lalonde was clearly the superior offensive player, but they were usually fairly close in scoring, and both won a scoring title (Nighbor in '17, Lalonde in '16, '19, '21).

Nighbor was there with some great stick handling and he kept XXXXXX busy with his accurate shooting.

The only real feature of the game was the playing of Nighbor (at LW) and XXXXXX for the locals. The former played his best game of the season, his shooting being at all times excellent, every shot being dead on the goal. His puck carrying was also the best he has shown here this season. Time and again he secured the puck, and by fake passes, worked his way inside the defense. He scored six goals.

Frank Nighbor, the Pembroke star, reported back to Senators Saturday morning, displaying a right hand which had been gashed painfully in practice at the North Renfrew town last week. But Nighbor signed up, consented to play and gave a dazzling display of all around hockey. Seldom, if ever, in fact, has he excelled it. His sore hand did not prevent him from going through the Canadien defense time after time, with the result that six of the seven Ottawa goals were credited to the Pembroke idol. His back-checking, his poke check, his passing, shooting and dodging were all typical of Nighbor at his best.

Nighbor attempted a golf stroke, in the first period, which scored a hole in one, by landing on a spectator's nasal organ, much to the spectator's discomfiture, as the last seen of him was a claret colored handkerchief, as he beat a hasty retreat to safer quarters.

We must not forget that Frank Nighbor was a pivot man and most unselfish. On occasions too numerous to mention he passed when he could have scored alone. In one game back in the '20s I saw him sacrifice a dozen opportunities to tally so that "XXXXXXXX or XXXXXXX could do the firing.

It was a pretty effort, with Nighbor coaxing the Cougar defense men to check him and then slipping the puck to his mate, uncovered on the right boards. The typical Nighbor play earned the goal and XXXXX had no chance to save.
....
In tying the score, Nighbor had XXXXX just as much in his mercy. He got the puck straight out from the net and took his time to place it perfectly in an unguarded corner.
....
Nighbor, master pivot, led the Ottawa attack to victory. He worked his youthful wings to perfection and famous check was as disastrous as ever to Cougar rushes.

Nighbor Outstanding
Although XXXXXXXX scored 4 of the 5 goals obtained by the visitors, he was not their most outstanding player. Either Nighbor or XXXXXX earns this honor. The great centre man, who it is rumored is about to retire, gave a wonderful exhibition of how to play the centre ice position, and there is no doubt that he is without a peer. His uncanny poke checking, speedy dashes and stick handling were a treat to watch, and several goals were due to him.

Despite their aversion to seeing Ottawa win, they did not fail to applaud the good work of Frank Nighbor, who has certainly got himself "in right" with Toronto fans. His poke-check was responsible for breaking up several likely-looking rushes. He also found time to score three goals. But the thing that commended itself most was the strategy he used in directing his team. Now and again XXXX XXXXXXX was wont to break up his team's defensive system by doing needless checking and skating. It was here that Nighbor, with eagle eye, detected probable loopholes for scoring and he promptly advised XXXXXX, not on one occasion, but on several, to play his position. The above is not intended to reflect on the playing ability of XXXXXXXX, who proved himself in Saturday's game to be a player of no mean calibre, but it goes to show how a captain should control his team on the ice.

Frank Nighbor at center was a tower of strength to the Ottawas, both offensively and defensively. He was given rather a rough ride by heavy body checks, but returned bumps for bumps and all together played one of his very best games. In the second period, X attempted to cross-check Ottawa's famous center-ice player, but the latter beat the Canadien to a punch, although Ottawa supporters thought both should have gone off, if a penalty was deserved.

A curious thing happened midway in the second period, when Morenz, at top speed, charged at Nighbor. The latter saw what was coming and neatly side-stepped him, with a result that Morenz crashed into X, knocking the Canadien defense man down on the ice.

Goalscoring, top-2, 5, 10, 15, 20 - Playmaking, top-2, 5, 10, 15, 20

Nighbor 1-4-6-7-8, 2-5-7-8-11
Taylor 1-5-5-5-5, 6-7-7-8-8
Lalonde 3-9-10-11-11, 2-3-3-6-8
Morenz 2-7-8-8-10, 1-5-7-8-8

Is he better then them? No probably not...but he isn't much worse either. Those other three names are fantastic offensive players as well.​

By the way, if anyone wants more info..check out nik's insane bio from last draft. It's truly incredible and I thank him for the majority of my quotes.

 

[seventieslord]

I have a lot of catching up to do.

First, I'll say that Chelios was a fantastic pick, selected as late as he was. 3 Norris trophies over prime Ray Bourque - in the running for best offensive and defensive defenseman in the league in his prime (along with Bourque, well ahead of several others). Clearly a better player than MacInnis, and they both played at the same time.

And after his offensive prime, he continued as an elite defensive player.

Definitely one of the best PKers in the draft.

I'm really not sure why most GMs have a perceived gap between Larry Robinson and Chris Chelios, to be honest.

A record of "4th, 5th, 5th, 8th, 8th, 9th, 9th" is not really in the running for the best offensive defenseman in the league. I realize from a percentage perspective, he still did pretty well, with 60 point seasons in years where the #2-3 guys were getting 75-85, but still, he was never quite elite in that department.

As the owner of the Rocket, I need to raise an objection.

I have yet to see proof that Rocket played that way before Doug Harvey joined the team. In fact, Harvey bios always talk excessively about how his ability with the puck "allowed his forwards to play firewagon hockey."

I did a whole thread about this at leafscentral, detailing every piece of evidence I could find about Richard's defense, or lack thereof.

Because Lafleur was better.Jesus Christ let's not get there , nah , I'm not going there.

Why? Because canon says so?

It's too late, you went there. Let's talk about this. What do you know about Bill Cook, and why is Lafleur so obviously better?

 

[BenchBrawl]

Why? Because canon says so?

It's too late, you went there. Let's talk about this. What do you know about Bill Cook, and why is Lafleur so obviously better?

I edited my post before reading this one.
It's pointless , everybody knows Lafleur is better than Cook , but I still provided arguments without going into crazy details.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Despite Chelios' "stupid penalties," his teams had the best PKs in the league more often than any other defenseman since expansion, with him generally their leading PKer.

Well that was nice of his teammates to kill off all those penalties for him.

Just getting your goat a bit.. and sure Chelios was really good on the PK but he took a lot of bad penalties.

And yeah I still haven't forgiven him for that elbow on XXXX. I liked XXXX quite a bit at the time!

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

A record of "4th, 5th, 5th, 8th, 8th, 9th, 9th" is not really in the running for the best offensive defenseman in the league. I realize from a percentage perspective, he still did pretty well, with 60 point seasons in years where the #2-3 guys were getting 75-85, but still, he was never quite elite in that department.

I might have overrated Chelios' offense a bit, but still:

1993 coach's poll (21 NHL coaches)

Best Defensive Defenceman: Chris Chelios (9), Ray Bourque (7)
Best Offensive Defenceman: XXX (6), Ray Bourque (4), Chris Chelios (4)

1994 coach's poll (20 NHL coaches)

Best Defensive Defenceman: Ray Bourque (8), Chris Chelios (4)
Best Offensive Defenceman: XXX (8), Ray Bourque (7), Paul Coffey (3), Chris Chelios (1), Al MacInnis (1)

At his peak, Chelios was very close to MacInnis level offensively, but didn't maintain that level into his later career like MacInnis did.

MacInnis, on the other hand, would never get any votes for "best defensive defenseman." He certainly very reliable, but not a "shutdown guy."

 

[BraveCanadian]

if you put Frank's statistics into modern day equivalents, he would have, in some of his better seasons(not the same season) scored 67 goals, 157 assists and 194 points

I'm gonna have to say good luck proving that one.

 

[seventieslord]

I edited my post before reading this one.
It's pointless , everybody knows Lafleur is better than Cook , but I still provided arguments without going into crazy details.

Don't rely on canon. Make a point if it's so obvious.

Just getting your goat a bit.. and sure Chelios was really good on the PK but he took a lot of bad penalties.

He definitely did early on.

 

[BraveCanadian]

I might have overrated Chelios' offense a bit, but still:

1993 coach's poll (21 NHL coaches)

Best Defensive Defenceman: Chris Chelios (9), Ray Bourque (7)
Best Offensive Defenceman: XXX (6), Ray Bourque (4), Chris Chelios (4)

1994 coach's poll (20 NHL coaches)

Best Defensive Defenceman: Ray Bourque (8), Chris Chelios (4)
Best Offensive Defenceman: XXX (8), Ray Bourque (7), Paul Coffey (3), Chris Chelios (1), Al MacInnis (1)

At his peak, Chelios was very close to MacInnis level offensively, but didn't maintain that level into his later career like MacInnis did.

MacInnis, on the other hand, would never get any votes for "best defensive defenseman." He certainly very reliable, but not a "shutdown guy."

I usually agree with you TDMM but I'm gonna have to say that Chelios was no where near MacInnis offensively. He's a full notch or two back from that.

The years that Chelios was higher in defenseman scoring was usually when one of Bourque, MacInnis, Leetch or Coffey were injured.. which helped him in the placing.

I'm pretty sure MacInnis has like twice as many 60+ point seasons and peaked out about 30 points higher than Chelios.

 

[seventieslord]

I'm gonna have to say good luck proving that one.

Nice to see you are reading the bio.

I agree, by the way.

Adjusted stats try to get us closer to the truth and they often do, such as taking the 1980s numbers from out of whack, into reasonable realms. But pre-expansion they just don't work against the post-expansion figures. If you want to use 1930-1967 adjusted numbers against eachother, you will probably have a relatively easy time too. But adjusted numbers from before that suffer from poor sample sizes (particularly in assists) and are nothing more than fantasy.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Don't rely on canon. Make a point if it's so obvious.



He definitely did early on.

Bill Cook production during the playoff dropped , and his prime top finishes are not equal to Lafleur , what else is there to say?

What argument can you make for Cook to be considered Lafleur's equal?

 

[chaosrevolver]

I'm gonna have to say good luck proving that one.

Going from a quote. Wasn't going to include it, but figured I might as well anyway.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

A record of "4th, 5th, 5th, 8th, 8th, 9th, 9th" is not really in the running for the best offensive defenseman in the league. I realize from a percentage perspective, he still did pretty well, with 60 point seasons in years where the #2-3 guys were getting 75-85, but still, he was never quite elite in that department.

I agree that those finished are not quite elite, but back to the original comparison to MacInnis...how many years was MacInnis considered a top 5 or top 10 defensive defenseman? I'm thinking that it was less than the times Chelios was top 5 or 10 offensively.

 

[Sturminator]

Coffey is a unique player in this draft. His offence at even strength was awesome and second only to Orr among dmen. My questions about him arise from the fact that he was also on the ice for a very high number of ES goals against, even in his prime. It suggests he was trading off defence for offence. OTOH, the numbers I looked at are regular season only. The Oilers as a team ha better defensive numbers in theplayoffs, so maybe Coffey could play defence when he wanted to.

Coffey's regular season +/- numbers during his prime years in Edmonton were actually really good, both relative to the league and to his teammates - he was top-5 in +/- four years in a row, and was second only to Gretzky in +/- on the team over that span. 82-86 Oilers +/-:

Gretzky: +305 (incredible)
Coffey: +220
xxxxx: +206
xxxxx: +192

Those numbers are basically the league +/- leaderboard over the same time period. That Edmonton team was killing everybody at even strength, and Coffey was Edmonton's second best +/- player, behind Gretzky. Whatever they were doing at even strength, it was working. You can say that Gretzky made those numbers, but look at Gretzky's change in scoring with Coffey's development and then later injury and departure from Edmonton (with no other major personnel changes). Here it is:

80-81: 164 points - Coffey DNP in Norris vote
81-82: 212 points - Coffey 3rd in Norris
82-83: 196 points - Coffey 5th in Norris
83-84: 205 points - Coffey 2nd in Norris
84-85: 208 points - Coffey wins the Norris
85-86: 215 points - Coffey wins the Norris
86-87: 183 points - Coffey is hurt and only plays 59 games
87-88: 149 points - Coffey is traded away

After which point, Gretzky was, himself, traded out of Edmonton. He would never again top 163 points. This also mirrors Edmonton's overall +/- during that period.

Edmonton GF/GA:

80-81: +1 - Coffey DNP in Norris vote
81-82: +122 - Coffey 3rd in Norris
82-83: +109 - Coffey 5th in Norris
83-84: +132 - Coffey 2nd in Norris
84-85: +103 - Coffey wins Norris
85-86: +116 - Coffey wins Norris
86-87: +88 - Coffey is hurt and only plays 59 games
87-88: +75 - Coffey in traded away

After which Gretzky goes, and the numbers are no longer reflective of "Edmonton without Coffey". Those numbers paint a pretty clear picture, though, both in terms of Gretzky's production and the team's GF/GA output. Paul Coffey was a huge part of that team's success, especially at even strength. Yeah, they gave up a lot of goals with Coffey on the ice, but he seems to have added about +30 to the team's goal differential and about 50 points to Gretzky's scoring totals. This sharp drop in production without Coffey makes you understand why people made such a big deal out of the trade.

Coffey's +/- numbers in Detroit were good, as well. He was 4th in team +/- his first season wearing the wheel (and led the team in +/- in the playoffs), and then 13th in the league and 1st on the team in his second, Norris winning season, which was the end of his peak.

The only phase of Coffey's peak in which his +/- is anything other than very good is the Pittsburgh years, but I think that's clearly a case of the Penguins not having the system or the personnel to deal with Coffey's style of hockey, as the article I posted indicates. Aside from the Pittsburgh years, he was always a big even-strength plus in his prime.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Going from a quote. Wasn't going to include it, but figured I might as well anyway.

No worries, I have an "I generally hate adjusted stats" bias hahaha

 

[seventieslord]

Bill Cook production during the playoff dropped significantly , and his prime top finishes are not equal to Lafleur , what else is there to say?

What argument can you mook for Cook to be considered Lafleur's equal?

Bill Cook's offensive production in the playoffs was a symptom of the dead puck playoffs of the 1930s. The league average GPG dropped considerably compared to the regular season, once as much as 43%. By the standard of comparing a player's playoff stats to their regular season stats, the 1930s would not have a single good playoff performer. That doesn't make sense because clearly someone was performing, and winning playoff games.

Cook was actually one of the higher playoff scorers of his time. Obviously not at Lafleur's level. But Lafleur obviously didn't bring anything close to what Cook did in the areas of toughness, leadership and defense.

As for their prime offensive finishes, what do you mean they aren't equal to Lafleur? Cook was the league's goals leader at 30, 35, and 36. His points finishes of 1st, 1st, 4th, 4th, 4th match up well with Lafleur's 1, 1, 1, 3, 3, 4, and this was all from age 30-40. Prior to that, he was in the west and was likely as good as he was in his 30s in the NHL. He was almost certainly the game's top offensive player in 1926 when he destroyed the WHL. In 1925 he was one point off the league lead. In 1924 he again led the league in dominant fashion, scoring 40 points, with the next 4 players being HHOFers with 26-34 points apiece. With no one standing out from the pack in the NHL that year as well, he was likely the game's top offensive player that season too. That's seven elite level seasons: 1, 1, 1, 1, 4, 4, 4.

 

[seventieslord]

I agree that those finished are not quite elite, but back to the original comparison to MacInnis...how many years was MacInnis considered a top 5 or top 10 defensive defenseman? I'm thinking that it was less than the times Chelios was top 5 or 10 offensively.

oh, absolutely. Don't worry about that, I don't know that anyone here would take MacInnis over Chelios, it was a newbie mistake.

 

[BraveCanadian]

He definitely did early on.

Contrast Chelios' PIM with another sometimes nasty, physical defenseman like Denis Potvin and it really stands out. Potvin is every bit as physical if not more so and averages way less.

Chelios is a great player for sure but he took a lot of boneheaded penalties over the majority of his career. (in my opinion)

 

[BraveCanadian]

oh, absolutely. Don't worry about that, I don't know that anyone here would take MacInnis over Chelios, it was a newbie mistake.

I am a newbie but I would, depending on how I was attempting to build my team.

Chelios does have 2 more Norris trophies but MacInnis was the best player on a Stanley Cup winner, did win a Norris too, and is one of only 5 defensemen to ever crack 100 points.

Also, for post season allstars Chelios has 8 and MacInnis has 7.

I think they are close to equal value depending on the team they are on. One is better defensively and more physical and one is more offensive, that's all.

I think both are particularly valuable in this draft because they are right hand shots too.

 

[Stoneberg]

The Cook pick threw me off and has caused me to completely change my draft strategy.

The Mooseheads select G, Martin Brodeur.