ATD 2011 Draft Thread V

[BenchBrawl]

You really should stop confusing the All-Rookie Team with the All Star Teams. It's incredibly misleading, even if unintentional.

my mistake , I should learn how to read happened 2 times already

 

[EagleBelfour]

What exactly made Bert Corbeau suddenly worthy of being picked in the 300s?

As recently as ATD8, he was a MLDer. He then went from 541 to 464 to 459, which seemed ok, but then suddenly rocketed to 317 in ATD12 by a rookie GM. When questioned on it, he didn't reply IIRC. There was no new evidence presented and he still appears very mediocre compared to his drafted contemporaries.

The mistake was repeated last draft and he was taken 298th. I guess EB completes the canonization this time around by taking him in the early 300s again.

Besides toughness, one thing he does seem to have going for him is a decent offensive resume. His percentages of the 1st-place scoring defensemen in his best seasons are: 81, 61, 61, 59, 56, 48, 48, 29. This translates into about a 55-point outlier season, and six seasons from 33-46 points in a modern context. Which is much, much more significant than the last early defenseman EB's bio painted as passable offensively.

Still, to go this early he had better be damn good defensively, and not just tough.

Finally he belongs to a GM willing to do some work to sell him. I look forward to seeing what EB finds on him. He appears to be about the 12th-best defenseman of a generation; other stronger generations barely have that many selected already.

One thing is for sure - the statistical noise in this bio is going to drive me batsh!t crazy, particularly in the playoffs!

Yeah, my eyebrows definitely raised when I saw him go this early. Looking forwards to seeing what EB can dig up on him.

You guys are non-believer!

I agree that I definitely took a risk, ATD wise, with this selection. However, this is how I roll this time around: going out of my comfort zone and picking guys I'm not use too. I would of never picked Harvey #4, or Anatoli Firsov or an active player in in Chara if we were in ATD#9 or ATD#10, but I'm having so much fun just picking guys that I want to research that I couldn't care less.

To return to the selection, I really wanted an offensive-defenceman to play with Chara. My first choice was Bullet Joe Simpson. He's got speed some very good offensive numbers. The fact that his best years are in the westcoast and didn't do anything special makes him somewhat underrated, or at the least a fine selection in the late 200's (2-3 drafts ago you could see him getting picked in the 500's!). My second choice was Frank Patrick. The legwork was already done, but Jarek scoop me before my turn.

They're some good offensive-defenceman still available as we speak, but none of them stroke me as 'must' selection. I had my eyes on 3-4 defenceman, and all of them beside Corbeau are recent players (played in the 80's and 90's). Some were injured-plagged, some had short peaks, some just had a decent career, but nothing spectacular. In this draft, I'll take the question mark 10 time out of 10, just for the sake of researching the player. He might be a dud, he might an homerun, we'll see!

And it's not like I'm looking to win this draft this time around. As far as I'm concern, Nalyd has this baby all wrapped out already

 

[BenchBrawl]

Did Cognition leave a list for his 2 pick to somebody ?

 

[BraveCanadian]

Tkachuk was definitely part of the problem. In fact, he was probably the #1 choker on those choking St. Louis teams of the late 90s (Pronger was pretty bad too though).

Keith wasn't always bad in the playoffs though - he was actually considered a big game player early in his career (believe it or not). I read scouting reports before the 1996 World Cup and Tkachuk had quite the reputation as a clutch scorer at that point. And then he played very well in the 1996 World Cup.

Then he got a ridiculously inflated contract with St. Louis and sucked in the playoffs for the final 2/3 of his career. We're talking historically bad levels of suckage. I don't know how much of it was complacency with the big bucks, or if it was just because teams knew how to play against him (Adam Foote in particular would physically engage Keith, who would then get so caught up in shoving matches, he forgot what it took to score goals).

On the other hand, Tkachuk was good enough to get the special attention from guys like Adam Foote. He was viewed as St. Louis's biggest threat and other teams (successfully) gameplanned to stop him. Kevin Stevens, Rick Tocchet, or Gary Roberts? I don't think they were ever good enough for teams to gameplan against.

Edit: I guess Roberts was for a season or two in Calgary.

All of them had a season or seasons right around the same level of production at their peak (Stevens was a bit higher but Mario helped that).

I think the gameplan thing is just more a reflection of the teams than Tkachuk.

You couldn't gameplan around Stevens, Tocchet or Roberts so much because if you did the other guys on their team would burn you.

I'm sure that every team was still looking out for all these guys though. I mean guys scoring 40-50 goals, 90-100 points and 200+ penalty minutes are going to get some attention!

Tkachuk didn't have the luxury of much depth on most of his teams so he was the gameplan by default. (Although I'm sure Pronger figured in on some of those too)

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

All of them had a season or seasons right around the same level of production at their peak (Stevens was a bit higher but Mario helped that).

I think the gameplan thing is just more a reflection of the teams than Tkachuk.

You couldn't gameplan around Stevens, Tocchet or Roberts so much because if you did the other guys on their team would burn you.

I'm sure that every team was still looking out for all these guys though. I mean guys scoring 40-50 goals, 90-100 points and 200+ penalty minutes are going to get some attention!

Tkachuk didn't have the luxury of much depth on most of his teams so he was the gameplan by default.

Tocchet never had any seasons close to Tkachuk, despite often playing on the same line as Mario. Roberts had one season slightly better than Tkahcuk and never reached that level again. Stevens had 2 seasons better than Tkachuk, both on Mario's line.

Tkachuk was absolutely the best regular season player of the 4 and it isn't close. Edit: okay, you could argue Kevin Stevens was close as he played at a very high level even when Mario was injured during his brief peak.

How much you want to weigh playoffs is obviously up to you.

 

[markrander87]

You guys are non-believer!

I agree that I definitely took a risk, ATD wise, with this selection. However, this is how I roll this time around: going out of my comfort zone and picking guys I'm not use too. I would of never picked Harvey #4, or Anatoli Firsov or an active player in in Chara if we were in ATD#9 or ATD#10, but I'm having so much fun just picking guys that I want to research that I couldn't care less.

To return to the selection, I really wanted an offensive-defenceman to play with Chara. My first choice was Bullet Joe Simpson. He's got speed some very good offensive numbers. The fact that his best years are in the westcoast and didn't do anything special makes him somewhat underrated, or at the least a fine selection in the late 200's (2-3 drafts ago you could see him getting picked in the 500's!). My second choice was Frank Patrick. The legwork was already done, but Jarek scoop me before my turn.

They're some good offensive-defenceman still available as we speak, but none of them stroke me as 'must' selection. I had my eyes on 3-4 defenceman, and all of them beside Corbeau are recent players (played in the 80's and 90's). Some were injured-plagged, some had short peaks, some just had a decent career, but nothing spectacular. In this draft, I'll take the question mark 10 time out of 10, just for the sake of researching the player. He might be a dud, he might an homerun, we'll see!

And it's not like I'm looking to win this draft this time around. As far as I'm concern, Nalyd has this baby all wrapped out already

Not necessarily, he has a great team but his defense and goaltending will be exploited in the playoffs.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Not necessarily, he has a great team but his defense and goaltending will be exploited in the playoffs.

Right. Nayld has pretty much assured himself of having the best 2nd line in the draft. Or at least top 2, depending on how the LeClair-Lindros line ends up.

He's definitely a contender for the crown, but the rest of his team isn't so strong.

(I think Vezina is an solid goaltender in a 40 team draft though).

 

[EagleBelfour]

Not necessarily, he has a great team but his defense and goaltending will be exploited in the playoffs.

Don't worry, it's only my prediction!

 

[BraveCanadian]

Tocchet never had any seasons close to Tkachuk, despite often playing on the same line as Mario. Roberts had one season slightly better than Tkahcuk and never reached that level again. Stevens had 2 seasons better than Tkachuk, both on Mario's line.

Tkachuk was absolutely the best regular season player of the 4 and it isn't close. Edit: okay, you could argue Kevin Stevens was close as he played at a very high level even when Mario was injured during his brief peak.

How much you want to weigh playoffs is obviously up to you.

48 goals, 61 assists, 109 points and 250 penalty minutes is a season that isn't even close to Tkachuk? What?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

48 goals, 61 assists, 109 points and 250 penalty minutes is a season that isn't even close to Tkachuk? What?

Those 109 points were in 1992-93 and good for only 14th in the league. His 48 goals tied him for 15th in the league. Oh, and he played with one Mario Lemieux, who scored 160 points in 60 games. I believe you're a big believer in linemates helping each others' point totals, yes?

Edit: I guess "not close" isn't exactly the right wording. But I would say that it isn't debatable that Tocchet never reached the level Tkachuk played at in the regular season.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Those 109 points were in 1992-93 and good for only 14th in the league. His 48 goals tied him for 15th in the league. Oh, and he played with one Mario Lemieux, who scored 160 points in 60 games. I believe you're a big believer in linemates helping each others' point totals, yes?

:sigh:

Ok, fine then.. how about Tocchet with 96 points in 89-90 with the next highest scorer on his team being UNDRAFTED PLAYER?

Does that count as close?

I mean obviously Tkachuk was the better regular season producer I'm just saying that at their peaks all of those guys were in the same ballpark.

As soon as the paycheques stopped coming though it was a different story.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

:sigh:

Ok, fine then.. how about Tocchet with 96 points in 89-90 with the next highest scorer on his team being UNDRAFTED PLAYER?

Does that count as close?

I mean obviously Tkachuk was the better regular season producer I'm just saying that at their peaks all of those guys were in the same ballpark.

15th in points and 26th in goals in a year when Europeans really hadn't come over en mass yet. Tkachuk has multiple regular seasons quite a bit better than that.

As soon as the paycheques stopped coming though it was a different story.

Tkachuks' playoff failures are fair game obviously and definitely tarnish his legacy. But I don't see how the fact that he was mercenary is relevant to how good a player he was.

 

[BraveCanadian]

15th in points and 26th in goals in a year when Europeans really hadn't come over en mass yet. Tkachuk has multiple regular seasons quite a bit better than that.

Go ahead and adjust by scoring level (as everyone here is so fond of doing) and see how they relate to each other instead of how they relate against different competition.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Go ahead and adjust by scoring level (as everyone here is so fond of doing) and see how they relate to each other instead of how they relate against different competition.

Competition level only favors Tkachuk as he played in an era when Europeans comprised almost half the high end talent pool....

 

[BenchBrawl]

Who cares about the numbers when you have witnessed them , you should both be old enough to have seen them play , it's pretty clear Tkachuk was the best player but almost impossible to win with while Tocchet was a better team player and probably more useful if you want to win.Tkachuk dominated the ice more than Tocchet I thought it was pretty clear at the time.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Competition level only favors Tkachuk as he played in an era when Europeans comprised almost half the high end talent pool....

Yeah if prime Gretzky/Lemieux/Yzerman et al were European I would agree with you.


I'll help you out as much as I hate adjusted stats:

Tkachuk top seasons:
94
89
88
86
86
83

Tocchet top seasons:
88
80
bunch of 60's


So yes, based on scoring level at least, Tocchet peak two seasons were CLOSE to Tkachuk. Tkachuk was better relative to his competition and did it much longer for sure though.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Yeah if prime Gretzky/Lemieux/Yzerman et al were European I would agree with you.

Gretzky and Lemieux were the only true outliers in the 1980s. Yzerman was an outlier for one season only, and it wasn't either of Tocchet's big years. After Gretzky and Lemieux, the depth of talent was definitely higher in Tkachuk's era than Tocchet's. Even removing Gretzky and Lemieux doesn't make Tocchet's seasons better than Tkachuk's.

I'll help you out as much as I hate adjusted stats:

Tkachuk top seasons:
94
89
88
86
86
83

Tocchet top seasons:
88
80
bunch of 60's


So yes, based on scoring level at least, Tocchet peak two seasons were CLOSE to Tkachuk. Tkachuk was better relative to his competition and did it much longer for sure though.

Yes, and Tocchet's best year was greatly inflated by Mario Lemieux. I'm sure being helped by Mario added more than 10 points to Tocchet's total. So I would say that Tkachuk probably had at least 6 seasons that were better than Tocchet's best.*

*When you consider that Keith was by far the better goal scorer, I would say he had the better season when points totals are close.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Yes, and Tocchet's best year was greatly inflated by Mario Lemieux. I'm sure being helped by Mario added more than 10 points to Tocchet's total. So I would say that Tkachuk had at least 6 seasons that were better than Tocchet's best.

So playing with Mario, Tocchet personally played worse than he did when he was the highest scoring player on his team by 20 points with the Flyers??

And this isn't even taking account of the fact that Keith was by far the better goal scorer.

So what? I already agreed Tkachuk was definitely better in the regular season. I'll even go ahead and agree with you that he was better in his best few seasons than Tocchet was at his best. Cause I really don't care.

That doesn't make Tocchet's peak couple of seasons "not close" to him.


TDMM, what did Tocchet do to you?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

So playing with Mario, Tocchet personally played worse than he did when he was the highest scoring player on his team by 20 points with the Flyers??

This question only half makes sense to me, but I'll give it a shot: yes, I think Tocchet's season with the Flyers was more impressive than when he scored marginally more points playing on the same line as uber-generational talent Mario Lemieux, a man known for increasing the scoring totals of every player who ever played with him.

So what? I already agreed Tkachuk was definitely better in the regular season. I'll even go ahead and agree with you that he was better in his best few seasons that Tocchet was at his best. Cause I really don't care.

That doesn't make Tocchet's peak couple of seasons "not close" to him.

I already said in my edited post above that I should have said Tkachuk was better in the regular season and it wasn't debatable, rather than not close. But actually, thinking about it, it really isn't that close, when you consider that Tocchet was basically a 1-2 season wonder as a top end offensive player.

If the point of continuing this is to debate the meaning of the word "close," I'm not interested.

TDMM, what did Tocchet do to you?

Get drafted too high relative to comparable players every draft.

 

[BM67]

I'm pretty sure seventies demonstrated that Walker's point placements were incredibly overrated.

Walker isn't much of a goal scorer, maybe not even as good as Gainey or Olmstead, but he did lead his team in goals once, and finished 2nd 3 times.

His assist totals are much closer to Olmstead than Gainey though, and that is what sets him apart from the non-scoring threats. He led his team in assists 5 times, and had over 60% of the team leader in 4 other seasons. Gainey never did better than a tie for 8th in assists in Montreal. He only had 4 seasons where he had 60%+ of the 7th place player.

 

[jarek]

Walker isn't much of a goal scorer, maybe not even as good as Gainey or Olmstead, but he did lead his team in goals once, and finished 2nd 3 times.

His assist totals are much closer to Olmstead than Gainey though, and that is what sets him apart from the non-scoring threats. He led his team in assists 5 times, and had over 60% of the team leader in 4 other seasons. Gainey never did better than a tie for 8th in assists in Montreal. He only had 4 seasons where he had 60%+ of the 7th place player.

I'm not saying Walker is a zero offensively.. but to call him a two-way player is incredibly misleading. A two-way player, to me, is capable of playing solid defense while also contributing offense on a regular basis. Sure, Walker can chip in here and there, but I don't see him hitting 50-60 points over the course of a simulated ATD season like I'd expect an actual two-way player to.

 

[seventieslord]

OMFG.. I can't believe Westfall was stolen from me.. papershoes I am going to find you and egg your house.

leave the poor guy alone.... he has paper shoes.

Elias - Gretzky - MacDonald

I like it...but then again, I should.

I like it, too. Elias is like Kurri lite and on the opposite wing. MacDonald is a great glue guy and adequate 1st line finisher.

Solid pick. A bit of a one-season wonder, but he'll make a fine 2nd pairing puck mover who is responsible in his own zone.



Elias is barely a center. He should probably just be listed at LW. Or at least LW/C. And he's a great LW at this point. I wanted him to set up Starshinov from the wing.

Elias was a great pick. this is a good spot for Carlyle too.

Riddle me this: Why is Brian Propp always picked so far ahead of Elias... or ahead at all? I never saw propp play - was he elite defensively and in the corners or just very good for a scoring line guy (like Elias). Because Elias is the better regular season point producer, and while they both put up tons of points in the playoffs, Elias actually won the whole thing twice (so bonus points to him).

Why is he "so far" ahead? Beats the hell out of me. I would take him first, though. the more I read about Propp, the more I like him. He was great defensively, he was excellent along the boards, and was a fierce competitor.

I know it was the 1980s and not perfectly comparable today thanks to competition level and lack of Europeans, but he was 40-40 in scoring 8 times. Elias, despite a higher peak (3rd, 6th), only did this four times in total. Though his seasons in 45th and 48th would be about as good as Propp's 35th-ranked seasons. He was hindered by a very defensive team, but I think the same thing can be said of Propp. I'm not an expert on the team, but whatever system they had resulted in their goalies consistently being overrated pretty much from 1980-1990 so I think it was a pretty defensive one.

You guys are non-believer!

I agree that I definitely took a risk, ATD wise, with this selection. However, this is how I roll this time around: going out of my comfort zone and picking guys I'm not use too. I would of never picked Harvey #4, or Anatoli Firsov or an active player in in Chara if we were in ATD#9 or ATD#10, but I'm having so much fun just picking guys that I want to research that I couldn't care less.

To return to the selection, I really wanted an offensive-defenceman to play with Chara.

Are you calling Corbeau an "offensive" defenseman? I would really disagree with that. percentage-wise, I think he equates to a guy who'd have about 370 points in a dozen years, from a modern context.

he is a dice roll. I was wondering if you had researched him already and kew something we didn't, but it looks like you don't. I'm interested to see how this one plays out.

Tkachuk didn't have the luxury of much depth on most of his teams so he was the gameplan by default. (Although I'm sure Pronger figured in on some of those too)

that's still unfair. The guy was an NHL goal leader once, and top-10 four other times. It wasn't just a case of "there's no one better on the team to focus on, but if he was on other teams there would be". He'd have been "the guy" on most NHL teams in his prime.

 

[BraveCanadian]

I already said in my edited post above that I should have said Tkachuk was better in the regular season and it wasn't debatable, rather than not close. But actually, thinking about it, it really isn't that close, when you consider that Tocchet was basically a 1-2 season wonder as a top end offensive player.

If the point of continuing this is to debate the meaning of the word "close," I'm not interested.

Oh sure, go and soften up the position but continue arguing me after I missed the edit!

EDIT: I just realized you edited your post right as I was arguing you so it actually did get caught in my quote but that wasn't what I had read in the first place hahaha

Get drafted too high relative to comparable players every draft.

I think the one thing is that these drafts aren't necessarily going to tell you who was the best in order by any means. I know I have made picks that people might shake their heads about, but I am trying to build the best team not pick just the best players if that makes sense.

Stevens, and particularly Roberts and Tocchet are team guys big time.

 

[jarek]

If anyone steals my next guy.. I'm going to find seventies and put chickens in his house.

 

[EagleBelfour]

Are you calling Corbeau an "offensive" defenseman? I would really disagree with that. percentage-wise, I think he equates to a guy who'd have about 370 points in a dozen years, from a modern context.

lol, you know I'm gonna make a biogtaphy on him. Let me finish and afterwards you could comment!