ATD 2011 Draft Thread V

[jarek]

That was exactly it. The pay was BRUTAL. I mean, back then, I think they paid store clerks more than hockey players.

 

[thatguy17]

Has a great shot and excellent hockey sense. Vaulted into stardom once he became a grittier performer. Is a quiet leader and quality teammate.

he along with ********* and ********* became one of the best lines in hockey

MARKUS NASLUND

 

[chaosrevolver]

Has a great shot and excellent hockey sense. Vaulted into stardom once he became a grittier performer. Is a quiet leader and quality teammate.

he along with ********* and ********* became one of the best lines in hockey

MARKUS NASLUND

Loved him as a player, but I think this is early for him. Had basically three years of elite play and other then that, he was just a good player.

 

[thatguy17]

Loved him as a player, but I think this is early for him. Had basically three years of elite play and other then that, he was just a good player.

i also put that in to consideration but i need to make sure i get the second line i want

 

[Leafs Forever]

Loved him as a player, but I think this is early for him. Had basically three years of elite play and other then that, he was just a good player.

I was saying this to jarek and though it seems like quite a jump, 3 FAST's and 2, 2, 4 in top-10 points is pretty appealing at this point. In a 40 team draft offensive-oriented guys like Naslund probably deserve some jumps.

 

[jarek]

One of many things to show that Duke Keats really ought to be a top-200 pick:

"Both Keats and **** are pretty much invalids right now, but this fact was entirely overlooked in selecting the best man for the job. What turned the balance in favor of the Edmonton bad man was his back checking ability. He is a two-way man, while ***** has a tendency towards a one way ticket. **** is a better shot than the Duke and a better stick handler, but Keats himself is far from being a slouch on the attack, he is an ideal pivot man, plays his position to perfection and knows all there is to know about combination. And his vigorous back checking adds all kinds of strength to his team."

The same article has this to say about Lalonde:

"Lalonde is a poor defensive forward. He enjoys hovering around the goal mouth waiting for a stray pass, but he isn't so fond of chasing an opposing player back into Saskatoon territory."

http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...NAAAAIBAJ&pg=5338,1552914&dq=duke+keats&hl=en

 

[seventieslord]

Jeez, lots to catch up on here.

Does anyone here know the earliest confirmed recordings of Norris Trophy winners?

Did they have Cleghorn listed as a winner in a year that the newspaper/internet has recorded differently?

The awards are made up, they aren't "taken" from anywhere, as in, dug up from newspapers or official NHL archives that were lost for years. I'm sure they used some research and information to put them together, but they are pretty messed up in a few years.

To answer your first question - as far as I'm concerned, from 1931-1953, whoever got the most all-star votes should be the retro Norris winner. And from 1924-1930, the defenseman who finished highest in hart voting should get that honour.

markrander is gonna have a field day with this.

"field day" means "a time of unusual pleasure and success"; in other words, "an easy time".

What you really mean is "he will disagree with this."

Glad you're not in my division.

We're going to have like 10 draft threads..

10? Try 20.

135 goals in 45 games you have got to be kidding me...

fixed it for you

If seventies jumped off a bridge, would you?

come on, guy.

I would.

Awww, Cognition, you're so sweet. It almost makes me wish I didn't find Durnan overrated

 

[seventieslord]

Of course, you are completely negating the value of Boucher's first four years, but do as you see fit.

I think it's the right thing to do if he was a forward those years. Are you saying that it's incorrect to say that he was a forward those years? Or do you just disagree with removing those from a discussion of offense from defensemen?

Damn you for taking Bernie Federko He is one of the guys I have ahead of Mike Modano.

That is all kinds of funny.

No offense, but this is among the silliest uses of statistics I've ever seen in the ATD. There's no doubt that McGee was dominant for his very short career, but using the raw numbers from those early Cup Challenge games is kind of crazy.

I was waiting for someone to say that. I was wondering why Billy didn't include my second list in his bio right away because it's not like McGee looks like crap after his stats are taken down to earth.

It doesn't "bother me so much." You said/implied something wrong so I described it as such and as you continued to say wrong/ignorant things I continued to describe them as such. If it looks like I'm overreacting it's because you insist on defending it.

That's kinda my impression of the whole thing.

Meh, whatever. I really did mean it as a knock on the Iginla of these days. I have nothing but respect for the legacy he's built up so far, just not the last few years.

He's 12th in points over the past 2 and a half seasons. With no help. At age 31-33. I'll take that anyday.

 

[seventieslord]

I know some people are weary of him because of the Kurt Cobain effect. But from what I can gather, statistically, Vezina and Benedict were close enough that the gap there is, just shouldn't be there.

His career GAA (NHL & NHA) is almost a full goal per game more than Benedict; or about 40% higher. I think he's an appropriate pick right now (and better than Giacomin, Smith, Fuhr, Cheevers, Lumley, and in the same tier as Hainsworth and Worsley) but there should be a pretty big gap there from Benedit to Vezina, IMO.

Do 7 time top 10 Norris trophy finishers qualify as pure PP specialists?

As TDMM said, he was getting Norris votes despite not being anywhere close to the best defenseman on his own team. It was completely points-based and that's just wrong.

The offensive gap isn't nearly large enough to make up for the fact that Federko was an offense-only player.

"What offensive gap?" is a better question.

8, 9, 9, 9, 10, 12, 18, 20 vs. 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, 15, 16, 30 in a more competitive league. I'll take the second guy if all other things are equal, thank you very much.

Of course, all other things are not equal. Modano was far superior defensively and better in the playoffs. He also had better longevity, even relative to era.

If Gonchar is competent in his own zone in an all-time sense, the number of defensemen who are "bad" in their own zone can be counting on your fingers.

I'm glad you were here to be the voice of reason through all of this.

Seriously, if Gonchar is "competent" defensively, then no one is incompetent. Which drafted defensemen would you say are worse than him, Billy?

Francis was great two ways and didn't shy away from taking a hit to make a play for example, but, at least from what I remember of him, you're in trouble if you're expecting him to win a lot of physical battles for loose pucks.

He wasn't physically intimidating at all despite having pretty decent size.

This is true. Francis had great vision and anticipation and stood just outside the scrums waiting for the puck to pop out.

Nels Stewart is possibly believable as a puckwinner though, given his size and strength.

 

[seventieslord]

When I went back and looked at last year's ATD draft I was shocked to see how late this guy was taken. We feel that this is a much more appropriate spot for him...

The Chicago Steelers are very pleased to select RW, Mark Recchi

A steal.

Oh my god. Thank God.

Duke Keats, center. He's probably the perfect center for Denneny at this point. PM'ing BC.

Why is he the perfect center for Denneny, and not just one of the best centers availble?

His awesome longevity makes him worthy of being a top 250, you're right.

Don't discount the guy's peak, either - he was top-5 in points three times.

Wingers who have done this since 1990:

Teemu Selanne
Pavel Bure
Jaromir Jagr
Martin St. Louis
Mark Recchi
Alexander Ovechkin
Brett Hull
Paul Kariya
Markus Naslund

What sturm is saying would be fitting under;

But Sturm did provide a source so it doesn't fit under that.

Most guys in that era typically had short careers.

Yeah.... but not that short.

One of his four seasons was a vacation in the FAHL too. Not a single non-ottawa player from that league is even drafted so I'm not sure how important we should consider the games played that season.

 

[jarek]

Why is he the perfect center for Denneny, and not just one of the best centers availble?

Perfect fit for Denneny at this point.. as in, of the centers available, I don't see a guy better suited to playing with Denneny than Keats. Obviously, I'd love to have Nighbor or Clarke, but that's not possible.

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

His career GAA (NHL & NHA) is almost a full goal per game more than Benedict; or about 40% higher. I think he's an appropriate pick right now (and better than Giacomin, Smith, Fuhr, Cheevers, Lumley, and in the same tier as Hainsworth and Worsley) but there should be a pretty big gap there from Benedit to Vezina, IMO.

I did the math, and yes, there is a gap, but half what you think it is, starting from 1914-15, where Benedict first became Ottawa's lone goalie, until 1924-25, Vezina's last full season:
Benedict: 2.96
Vezina: 3.44

Using the outside years is statistical smoke as the earlier years were higher scoring and the latter years lowerr scoring, irregardless of goalie.

But over the same spread of time, we see a clear difference in quality of teams:
Vezina's teams had a win percentage of .494, 3 games under .500 over 250 games, while Benedict's teams had a .602 win percentage.
A very clear difference. While obviously goaltending has a lot to do with winning, I think that makes for a legitimate argument that Benedict had the superior teams in front of him (And ATD Cannon would agree.) thus making the GAA difference smaller.

To add to that, Vezina played on offensively superior teams, 3.996 goals per game vs 3.795 for Benedict's team. Not a huge difference, but when you consider the difference in win percentage it tells a clear story. The teams Vezina played for played a more run and gun style, while Benedict's were much more conservative. Again, this is what ATD cannon would suggest anyway. I admit once again that goaltending is a key part of defensive hockey.

But this would once again justify the GAA gap quite a bit.

I'm not saying Vezina is better or even equal to Benedict, I'm saying that ATD cannon overrates the distance between them.

Because of the post-mortem superlatives laid at Vezina's feet, he was overrated historically, which has lead to him being underrated in ATD cannon. It's the old paradox of overrated players becoming underrated and underrated players getting overrated. It's time to properly rate Georges Vezina.

Interesting side note, over that 11 season span, Vezina missed one game and Benedict missed 4...

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

This is true. Francis had great vision and anticipation and stood just outside the scrums waiting for the puck to pop out.

Nels Stewart is possibly believable as a puckwinner though, given his size and strength.

I seem to remember a newspaper article coming up a draft or two ago that said Stewart was pretty allergic to corner work.

 

[EagleBelfour]

The things that you are talking about are physically impossible for a man of Krutov's physical stature to perform at a high level for long periods of time in a row, particularly the skating. If he was indeed doing all those things so well without any sign of tiring, I'm going to have to subscribe to Sturminator's steroids theory, unfortunately.

I agree with Overpass that Krutov was a much more complete hockey player than you give him credit for.

But I quote for this reason: since when is taking steroids drastically improve your endurance? I could be wrong but I never heard of that.

---

I'm fine if you think Krutov was a steal, a fitting selection or he was taken too early. I'm not in a competitive mood this draft and just want to build a team I will like. However, what I can say is that people who think he was taken too early, they think this only base on non-factual and sometime downright pure speculation about Krutov's drug use. No one can take Krutov's accomplishment at face value and have watched him play in the 1980's and think he's not a Top-200 All-Time Draft.

What I disagree though, is people who think he shouldn't even crack an ATD lineup. Again they only think so because of rumours and hearsay about a player drug use. This, for me, is making a mockery of one of the best winger of his generation. But anyway, at this point I won't change anyones mind, so I'll leave it at that.

 

[jarek]

Vezina played behind a very nasty D pairing that included Sprague Cleghorn and another guy. To say his team was bad is misleading.

Benedict got to play behind the strong Ottawa defensive system, though, for at least half his career. Actually, Benedict's team was very, very good in Ottawa. The Maroons team he went to wasn't that special, but it progressively got better, with the additions of Babe Siebert and Hooley Smith, for example.

Vezina's case isn't helped by him playing 4 less seasons, but I would strongly disagree that his teams sucked. On paper, his team's offense was better than anything Benedict ever played behind, and this applies to his whole career. On paper, I don't see a huge disconnect between Benedict's Maroons teams (which were probably worse than Vezina's teams), and Vezina's teams. The only time I'd say Benedict had the team advantage was in Ottawa, but again, only half his career.

I dunno.. as far as team strength, averaging their careers out, I'd say it's about even.

 

[Leafs Forever]

This is true. Francis had great vision and anticipation and stood just outside the scrums waiting for the puck to pop out.

Nels Stewart is possibly believable as a puckwinner though, given his size and strength.

Quite possible.

I seem to remember a newspaper article coming up a draft or two ago that said Stewart was pretty allergic to corner work.

If true, I think that may have well been because his linemates usually did it for him, and it may have also been because his coaches didn't appear to want to push him to improving those aspects of his game.(speculation)

 

[jarek]

I do have some more to say about Krutov's steroids usage. Specifically it involves Duke Keats. As Keats grew older, he slowed down because he put on too much weight, to the point where teams didn't really want him anymore (this was in 1928, pretty much at the end of his significant years).

What this goes to show is that adding on weight has a very profound effect on a person's ability to move at all, nevermind skate. This is why I have such a hard time believing that Krutov was naturally fast, despite his stature. His overweight stature would dictate that he would be slow and tire very easily. There's a reason why NHL teams suspend players who do not show up in shape at training camp. It's not that they're not good, it's just that they are not able to physically maintain themselves in the grueling work of the game.

As far as steroids for endurance, EB, just do a simple google search for "steroids endurance", you will find out very quickly that steroids are commonly used for endurance purposes.

 

[seventieslord]

I did the math, and yes, there is a gap, but half what you think it is, starting from 1914-15, where Benedict first became Ottawa's lone goalie, until 1924-25, Vezina's last full season:
Benedict: 2.96
Vezina: 3.44

Using the outside years is statistical smoke as the earlier years were higher scoring and the latter years lowerr scoring, irregardless of goalie.

OK, good point, I never thought of that.

However, the years before and after shouldn't be ignored, either - it's important to know whether these two goalies were maintaining averages above or below the league average.

What I disagree though, is people who think he shouldn't even crack an ATD lineup.

Who are you disagreeing with, then?

Sturm is Krutov's most vocal critic and even he said that with 40 teams, he'd consider him for 3rd line work.

Vezina played behind a very nasty D pairing that included Sprague Cleghorn and another guy. To say his team was bad is misleading.

....Vezina's case isn't helped by him playing 4 less seasons, but I would strongly disagree that his teams sucked.

Why would you disagree with the win%? Clearly they were just an average team.

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

Vezina played behind a very nasty D pairing that included Sprague Cleghorn and another guy. To say his team was bad is misleading.

Benedict got to play behind the strong Ottawa defensive system, though, for at least half his career. Actually, Benedict's team was very, very good in Ottawa. The Maroons team he went to wasn't that special, but it progressively got better, with the additions of Babe Siebert and Hooley Smith, for example.

Vezina's case isn't helped by him playing 4 less seasons, but I would strongly disagree that his teams sucked. On paper, his team's offense was better than anything Benedict ever played behind, and this applies to his whole career. On paper, I don't see a huge disconnect between Benedict's Maroons teams (which were probably worse than Vezina's teams), and Vezina's teams. The only time I'd say Benedict had the team advantage was in Ottawa, but again, only half his career.

I dunno.. as far as team strength, averaging their careers out, I'd say it's about even.

Benedict only had one year with the Maroons when Vezina was in the NHL. Over the 11 year period where they were peers, 10 were spent in Ottawa.

As for Cleghorn, there's two things:

One: He played a lot of LW in Montreal.
Two: Was he actually that good defensively? He modelled his game after Cyclone Taylor and had a viscous mean streak. Does any of that apply to actually playing good defence?

There are a lot of unimpeachable offensive players on Vezina's teams: Lalonde, Pitre, Cleghorn, Morenz, Hall and others. But, how much do we know about them defensively. You recently put forth the shadow of doubt on Lalonde. Pitre is known to have some attitude and commitment problems. Morenz was young when he played with Vezina and probably weaker than he was latter on. We look at the fact that these dynamite offensive teams were average overall. We have to take a serious look at the defensive ability of the players on them.

 

[jarek]

That's why I said "on paper".. I'm alluding to Vezina being part of the problem of why the team wasn't winning.

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

OK, good point, I never thought of that.

However, the years before and after shouldn't be ignored, either - it's important to know whether these two goalies were maintaining averages above or below the league average.

In the years where both were not peers, both players maintained averages that were above average. Vezina lead the NHA in GAA at least twice before Benedict arrived.

 

[jarek]

Benedict only had one year with the Maroons when Vezina was in the NHL. Over the 11 year period where they were peers, 10 were spent in Ottawa.

As for Cleghorn, there's two things:

One: He played a lot of LW in Montreal.
Two: Was he actually that good defensively? He modelled his game after Cyclone Taylor and had a viscous mean streak. Does any of that apply to actually playing good defence?

There are a lot of unimpeachable offensive players on Vezina's teams: Lalonde, Pitre, Cleghorn, Morenz, Hall and others. But, how much do we know about them defensively. You recently put forth the shadow of doubt on Lalonde. Pitre is known to have some attitude and commitment problems. Morenz was young when he played with Vezina and probably weaker than he was latter on. We look at the fact that these dynamite offensive teams were average overall. We have to take a serious look at the defensive ability of the players on them.

Alright, I can see where you're coming from, and you may be right. Especially Lalonde, I was very surprised to read anything bad about him defensively. Cleghorn, though, seventies and I discovered that he likely was extremely good defensively last ATD. Check our bio on him, I believe we had several really good quotes about that.

Thing is, with those kind of offensive players, you'd think that the puck wouldn't be in the Maroons' zone enough to cause any serious problems, right? I dunno though.. are we overrating Benedict, or underrating Vezina?

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

That's why I said "on paper".. I'm alluding to Vezina being part of the problem of why the team wasn't winning.

Agreed. As I've said, I make no attempt to say he's better than Benedict, just that he's only a tier or so down, rather than 3-4 tiers down like cannon says.

 

[jarek]

Agreed. As I've said, I make no attempt to say he's better than Benedict, just that he's only a tier or so down, rather than 3-4 tiers down like cannon says.

Benedict's numbers on Ottawa really seem to overrate him a bit, perhaps. That was the best defensive team in the league, by far.

In my Keats searching, I happened upon a quote during a game where Keats team lost 6-3. Even though Benedict's team won (the Maroons), apparently after Keats scored the third goal for his team, Benedict was complaining about nobody helping him defensively. The article seemed to allude to the idea that the Maroons players didn't care much about playing defense at that point.

 

[EagleBelfour]

What this goes to show is that adding on weight has a very profound effect on a person's ability to move at all, nevermind skate. This is why I have such a hard time believing that Krutov was naturally fast, despite his stature. His overweight stature would dictate that he would be slow and tire very easily. There's a reason why NHL teams suspend players who do not show up in shape at training camp. It's not that they're not good, it's just that they are not able to physically maintain themselves in the grueling work of the game.

Ok, I need to know where people are getting that Krutov was out of shape and overweight while playing in Russia. I never read a single statement on this matter. And please, a picture is not an answer. A round faces dosn't equal 'out of shape'.

But thanks for answering me on the steroids/endurance question. Shows you how much I know on this matter!