ATD 2011 Lineup Advice Thread II

[markrander87]

You think? As close as Robinson and Coffey are, you must really have a thing for Allan Stanley. The problem that most ATD GMs have in evaluating Paul Coffey is not in understanding that he was a great offensive defenseman, but in understanding the scope of his greatness. Coffey, like Bobby Orr, was so offensively dominant that he is difficult to evaluate in normal terms. He was a walking distortion - a defenseman who was as productive offensively as an elite first line forward in addition to being above average defensively (when he felt like it). The thing that people don't grasp when comparing Paul Coffey to other defensemen is that he was good enough offensively to be a strong first line ATD forward. Here is an offensive comparison of Paul Coffey vs. Jarri Kurri (with Wayne Gretzky and Mario Lemieux not removed for either man, which is brutal to both):

Jarri Kurri: 100 [-54] - 88
Paul Coffey: 100 [-63] - 87
Paul Coffey: 98 [-56] - 87
Jarri Kurri: 100 [-69] - 86
Paul Coffey: 83 [16] - 85
Jarri Kurri: 93 [-64] - 80
Paul Coffey: 90 [-72] - 76
Paul Coffey: 80 [-19] - 76
Jarri Kurri: 90 [-81] - 74
Paul Coffey: 71 [-22] - 67
Jarri Kurri: 84 [-88] - 66
Jarri Kurri: 72 [-39] - 64
Paul Coffey: 77 [-104] - 56
Jarri Kurri: 64 [-55] - 53
Paul Coffey: 67 [-76] - 52
Jarri Kurri: 61 [-65] - 48
Paul Coffey: 61 [-138] - 43.4

They are shockingly similar offensive players (Coffey is actually slightly better), only one plays right wing and one plays defense. Now...Paul Coffey was much criticized for his defensive play, and some of that was deserved (he was, for example, a terrible shot-blocker - he often turned backwards to block shots and tried to block them with his butt, which is just technically...wrong), but does anyone seriously think that he and Kurri were even remotely comparable as defensive players? Jarri Kurri was not nearly as useful defensively as even an average NHL defenseman, and Coffey was actually pretty good when he cared to be (mostly in the postseason). Paul Coffey was, in fact, a much better all-around hockey player than Jarri Kurri, and was even better offensively, not just for their respective positions, but in an absolute sense.

Paul Coffey's offensive advantage over defensemen like Robinson is so huge and distorted that people who didn't witness his prime don't really understand it. Larry Robinson was a very good offensive defenseman in his prime, but they are far, far apart offensively. Here is an offensive comparison of Coffey and Robinson (Gretzky and Lemieux not removed):

Paul Coffey: 100 [-63] - 87
Paul Coffey: 98 [-56] - 87
Paul Coffey: 83 [16] - 85
Paul Coffey: 90 [-72] - 76
Paul Coffey: 80 [-19] - 76
Paul Coffey: 71 [-22] - 67
Larry Robinson: 70 [-60] - 58
Paul Coffey: 77 [-104] - 56
Paul Coffey: 67 [-76] - 52
Larry Robinson: 58 [-34] - 51
Larry Robinson: 51 [-21] - 47
Paul Coffey: 61 [-138] - 43.4
Larry Robinson: 53 [-103] - 32
Larry Robinson: 40 [-49] - 30
Larry Robinson: 48 [-95] - 29
Larry Robinson: 37 [-46] - 28
Larry Robinson: 47 [-111] - 25

Robinson's three-year offensive peak is comparable to Coffey's three year post-peak (his 7th, 8th and 9th best seasons), but that leaves us comparing Coffey's peak to the rest of Robinson's career, and there is hardly and grounds for comparison there. If we were comparing forwards, we would be talking about a first line winger vs. a 4th liner/spare. That is the offensive difference here. Is the defensive difference between Coffey and Robinson just as great? Perhaps, but that would only make them equals, and I'm not even sure it was that great, especially in the postseason and especially on a team where Coffey is the 7th best (including the spare) penalty-killing defenseman on the roster (one of Paul's biggest problems is that he was a mediocre penalty killer, and yet teams kept running him out there - he got 2nd unit PK minutes for much of his career).

Someone made the comparison a while ago that if Coffey was a 19/20 offensively and a 12/10 defensively while Robinson was a 14/20 offensively and a 17/20 defensively that they were essentially equal. I think this is actually a distortion caused by an underestimation of the offensive gap between Orr and Coffey and "the field". I think a more accurate accounting (assuming that Orr is 100 offensively and Harvey 100 defensively) would look like:

Coffey: offense 85 // defense 55

Robinson: offense 55 // defense 85

It's the fact that Larry Robinson would only have an offensive value of 55 on a scale of 100 that people have a hard time grasping, but that's because the offensive differences between the all-time best offensive defensemen and the pack are much bigger than the differences between the all time best defensive defensemen and the pack.

I wish there was a statistical smoke icon I could post. So you've rated Offense and defense (which I dont agree with) what would you rank them in terms of toughness and shut down ability? A pretty important criteria for first pairing ATD defenseman. Did you leave those out of convenience to your own arguement or by accident?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I am noticing that some teams list a Captain and 3 A's. Is this allowed? If so, why would you only list 2?

I m a stickler to NHL rules, so I only list 2 As. In the past, GMs listed 3 because it was allowed on junior. Last time, VI specifically said you needed a C and two As. In guess nobody really talked about it his time.

 

[BenchBrawl]

some teams alternate A's depending if they're at home or on the road.

only reason I can see why

 

[Sturminator]

I wish there was a statistical smoke icon I could post.

Not sure what's smoky about it. The vast majority of the statistics I posted there were meaningful statistics designed to illustrate the very large offensive difference between Robinson and Coffey because a lot of people don't get just how much better Paul Coffey was than even a "very good" offensive defenseman. I was actually pretty brutal to Coffey in that analysis, generating his VsNext numbers by comparing his scoring to by far the greatest scorer of all time, and he still comes out miles ahead of Robinson offensively. That bit at the end was just my attempt to rate the two against the greatest of all time in a couple of categories. It was meant as an illustration of historical proportion, not as a serious statistical argument.

So you've rated Offense and defense (which I dont agree with) what would you rank them in terms of toughness and shut down ability? A pretty important criteria for first pairing ATD defenseman. Did you leave those out of convenience to your own arguement or by accident?

The difference in toughness is obvious and I don't think anything needs to be said about it. Shutdown ability? Not really sure how that differs from defensive value, in general, and at any rate whether or not "shutdown ability" is particularly important for a top pairing defenseman has a lot to do with his role on the team, wouldn't you say? Hockey games are won by scoring more goals than the opposition, whatever the method.

 

[markrander87]

Not sure what's smoky about it. The vast majority of the statistics I posted there were meaningful statistics designed to illustrate the very large offensive difference between Robinson and Coffey because a lot of people don't get just how much better Paul Coffey was than even a "very good" offensive defenseman. I was actually pretty brutal to Coffey in that analysis, generating his VsNext numbers by comparing his scoring to by far the greatest scorer of all time, and he still comes out miles ahead of Robinson offensively. That bit at the end was just my attempt to rate the two against the greatest of all time in a couple of categories. It was meant as an illustration of historical proportion, not as a serious statistical argument.


.

Trying to quantify "85/100 defensive value" and "55/100 Offensive value" is absolutely statistical smoke.

A simple question is all you have to ask: Is the difference between Robinson's defensive play larger than the difference in Coffey's offensive game (Baring in mind the type of Defenseman they were during thier careers)

Im sure 99% of GM's if asked that question would bet on Robinson. On top of that you have the immense difference in physical play (Intimidation, checking, Fighting etc..) and your claim that Coffey has the same value to Robinson is somewhat laughable.


Edit: It's downright laughable

 

[jarek]

Trying to quantify "85/100 defensive value" and "55/100 Offensive value" is absolutely statistical smoke.

A simple question is all you have to ask: Is the difference between Robinson's defensive play larger than the difference in Coffey's offensive game (Baring in mind the type of Defenseman they were during thier careers)

Im sure 99% of GM's if asked that question would bet on Robinson. On top of that you have the immense difference in physical play (Intimidation, checking, Fighting etc..) and your claim that Coffey has the same value to Robinson is somewhat laughable.


Edit: It's downright laughable

Coffey is definitely better offensively than Robinson than Robinson is better than Coffey defensively.. and it's not very close, either. You don't seem to understand just how ridiculous a factor Coffey is for a team that utilizes his talents to the maximum. He is a GAME BREAKER offensively, he's EASILY top-3 among defensemen offensively (if not just flat out right behind Orr to begin with), and IMO, he's top-5 in terms of "offensive impact" (among ALL players). You can talk about Gretzky all you want, but I doubt the Oilers are a dynasty without Coffey. The man was INSANELY GOOD at what he did.

There's also the issue that Coffey's amazing offense is a lot more valuable in a vacuum than Robinson's defense. You just don't find guys who did what Coffey did anywhere.. he's among a select very few. There are many guys "like" Robinson, that just didn't provide the offense that he did. The fact that he DID provide all that offense, on top of all the other goodies and still being elite defensively is what gets him rated so high. Coffey is rated around Robinson - but it is mostly for offense. To say that Robinson's defense is better than Coffey's offense is an insane position to take.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

The difference in offense in favor of Coffey is obviously greater than the difference in D.

The next question then becomes - do we weigh offense and defense as equal for defensemen? Most of us weigh defense more heavily - to some amount.

 

[jarek]

The difference in offense in favor of Coffey is obviously greater than the difference in D.

The next question then becomes - do we weigh offense and defense as equal for defensemen? Most of us weigh defense more heavily - to some amount.

Coffey is a very unique case where you HAVE to value his offense more, simply because he's the kind of player that will INCREASE the offense of the entire team. Guys like that don't grow on trees.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

The oilers actually did win 2 of their Cups without Coffey, including their most dominant playoffs ever the year after he was traded. That's always been the knock against Coffey - teams kept winning Cups right after trading him.

Of course, coffey himself was a dominant playoff player, so it's not entirely fair.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Coffey is a very unique case where you HAVE to value his offense more, simply because he's the kind of player that will INCREASE the offense of the entire team. Guys like that don't grow on trees.

It's a two edged sword. Coffey also decreases the defense of the whole team. It's why Bowman hated him. Edit - before Sturm goes off on me, I mean a team is forced to play run and gun whenever Coffey is on the ice. Coffey is a very high risk / high reward player. He brings a ton of good, but does have his drawbacks.

 

[jarek]

It's a two edged sword. Coffey also decreases the defense of the whole team. It's why Bowman hated him. Edit - before Sturm goes off on me, I mean a team is forced to play run and gun whenever Coffey is on the ice. Coffey is a very high risk / high reward player. He brings a ton of good, but does have his drawbacks.

If that's what the team was built for, I don't see a problem with that. Sure, you're going to get scored on somewhat more often, but at the same time, you're going to score a LOT more goals than most other lines will simply because of Coffey. I would imagine that goals for:goals against ratio increases with Coffey, even if absolute goals against do go up.

 

[Sturminator]

The oilers actually did win 2 of their Cups without Coffey, including their most dominant playoffs ever the year after he was traded. That's always been the knock against Coffey - teams kept winning Cups right after trading him.

They won one of those Cups two seasons after trading Gretzky, as well, but I don't think that says anything about Wayne as a player. Those Oilers were a dynasty for a reason.

 

[Dwight]

Yeah, that Oilers team was too strong. Probably could've won a 6th cup if it weren't for Steve Smith. Don't see why that should be held against Coffey

 

[Sturminator]

It's a two edged sword. Coffey also decreases the defense of the whole team. It's why Bowman hated him. Edit - before Sturm goes off on me, I mean a team is forced to play run and gun whenever Coffey is on the ice. Coffey is a very high risk / high reward player. He brings a ton of good, but does have his drawbacks.

I actually agree with you here, for the most part. You're not going to make Paul Coffey into a defensive defenseman, so if he's your #1 you're sort of forced to accept how he plays and adapt to it. Bowman tried and for a while partially succeeded in making Coffey into a more defensive player, but in the end the leopard couldn't change his spots.

In the ATD one of Coffey's biggest defensive problems - that being the fact that he was a weak penalty-killer for a #1 NHL defenseman - is largely mitigated because it is so easy to find better penalty killers that there's really no necessity to use him on the penalty-kill, at all, preserving his energy for what he does best.

I don't quite agree with you about Coffey forcing a team into "run and gun" hockey, though. Gwinnett, for example, is quite an offensively oriented team, but I'm not sure I would describe it as damn-the-torpedoes run and gun hockey. I specifically placed great emphasis on drafting forwards early (Boucher and Smith) who I knew were excellent defenders in open ice and drafting an elite defensive partner for Coffey because I wanted Paul to have a safety net in place that would free him to do his thing. Those Edmonton teams played run and gun hockey, yes, but they also did a very good job of rotating (mostly wingers) back to cover for Coffey's rushes and always had Coffey paired with a partner who was strong defensively.

But I guess in the sense that it is similar to the Edmonton model, it is still "run and gun" hockey, just with far superior defensive personnel. Coffey definitely forces the GMs who own him into building around his style. You can't just slot him into a normal team and expect to get the best out of him. They never really got the formula right in Pittsburgh, for example.

 

[Derick*]

My first powerplay unit has...

All-time leader in powerplay goals
Best offensive defenseman, overall defenseman, player, of all time
A top 50 all-time forward in Abel and two top 100 all-time forwards in Petrov and B. Hextall

Andreychuk - Petrov - B. Hextall
Abel - Orr

I would like to know where some people think it will rank in the ATD.

 

[Sturminator]

If that's what the team was built for, I don't see a problem with that. Sure, you're going to get scored on somewhat more often, but at the same time, you're going to score a LOT more goals than most other lines will simply because of Coffey. I would imagine that goals for:goals against ratio increases with Coffey, even if absolute goals against do go up.

I posted this long ago after drafting Coffey, but it bears repeating.

1985-86: Oilers 426 GF // 310 GA (+116) - Coffey wins Norris (79 GP ; 1.75 PPG)

1986-87 Oilers: 372 GF // 284 GA (+88) - Coffey struggles with back spasms all season (59 GP ; 1.14 PPG)

1987-88 Oilers: 363 GF // 288 GA (+75) - Coffey traded in the off-season

The difference in total GF/GA is quite striking, and that is ignoring the fact that Mark Messier blossomed offensively during those two seasons (there were no other major personnel changes). The Oilers did get better defensively by handing their still strong top-4 defense after Coffey (Smith, Huddy, Beukeboom and Lowe) more icetime, but what they gained in defense they lost threefold in offense.

It should be noted that the same effect cannot be observed in Pittsburgh, though I think that is largely a matter of the development of offensive stars (Jagr among them) coinciding with Coffey's departure and the fact that the Penguins never really used Coffey very well. The difference in Coffey's impact in Edmonton and Pittsburgh illustrates pretty well, I think, the ultimate difficulty in building a team to suit his particular talents.

 

[Derick*]

Goaltenders are Bill Durnan and ???

Also, Green can't play on the PP unless he's dressed.

Damn, I thought we got to dress all our skaters, because there were more roster spots. Like the Olympics.

Now almost my entire reason for drafting Semenko and Green is gone. If I had known they were injury backups I would have drafted versatile extras, not two players good at exactly one thing that I wanted them to do.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Abel is not a top 50 all time player - he's fringe top 100. The others aren't particularly close to top 100 players.

Orr and Dave are great Obviously. Not sure if Abel really has the skillset to be on the point.

 

[Sturminator]

My first powerplay unit has...

All-time leader in powerplay goals
Best offensive defenseman, overall defenseman, player, of all time
A top 50 all-time forward in Abel and two top 100 all-time forwards in Petrov and B. Hextall

Andreychuk - Petrov - B. Hextall
Abel - Orr

I would like to know where some people think it will rank in the ATD.

I'm not an expert on Sid Abel (in spite of having owned him)...was he a regular pointman during his career?

Andreychuk and Orr to start out with is a stupid good combination, though I don't know if I like the other forwards so much here or know exactly what their roles are supposed to be. Petrov and Hextall were both primarily goalscorers, and there's only one puck, as they say. It seems like there's very little playmaking down low, and everything can't run through Bobby Orr (although a lot certainly can).

Even with its flaws, certainly one of the top units in the league.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Abel's skating isn't the best, I never read anything about his slapshot. He can pass and shoot at a high level and is a monster along the boards. Fairly creative too. Was the defensive conscience and trailer on the production line.

I really would like him better down low, where he can control the boards.

 

[Derick*]

Abel is not a top 50 all time player - he's fringe top 100. The others aren't particularly close to top 100 players.

Orr and Dave are great Obviously. Not sure if Abel really has the skillset to be on the point.

I meant among forwards.

 

[Derick*]

I'm not an expert on Sid Abel (in spite of having owned him)...was he a regular pointman during his career?

Andreychuk and Orr to start out with is a stupid good combination, though I don't know if I like the other forwards so much here or know exactly what their roles are supposed to be. Petrov and Hextall were both primarily goalscorers, and there's only one puck, as they say. It seems like there's very little playmaking down low, and everything can't run through Bobby Orr (although a lot certainly can).

Even with its flaws, certainly one of the top units in the league.

I was not under the impression Petrov was primarily a goalscorer. Was he not setting up M and K? Is he not the all-time leader in assists at the world championship?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

If you believe Soviet League stats, Petrov is their all-time leader in assists I think.

Kharlamov has the rep for being the primary playmaker of the line though.

 

[Derick*]

Both Abel and Petrov are excellent at both shooting and passing. Betweem them and Orr there will be plenty of playmaking.

 

[Sturminator]

If you believe Soviet League stats, Petrov is their all-time leader in assists I think.

Kharlamov has the rep for being the primary playmaker of the line though.

Yeah...Petrov and playmaking is something I struggle somewhat to get my head around. I think he was probably somewhat like an Esposito (a quite underrated playmaker) in that he wasn't his line's primary puckcarrier in transition (the classic mark of a playmaking forward), but was a strong passer in tight situations due to good hands and high hockey IQ. I should probably give Petrov more credit for his all-around game (both offensive and in general) than I do. He's probably pretty good as a puck controller and playmaker down low.