ATD 2014 Finals: New Jersey Swamp Devils vs. Chicago Shamrocks

[BillyShoe1721]

New Jersey Swamp Devils

Style = fast, aggressive, puck possession. Built around skilled defensemen, puck possession centers, and gritty wingers.

Head coach: Tommy Ivan

Toe Blake (A) - Bill Cowley - Bill Cook (C)
Gordon Roberts - Peter Forsberg - Gordon Drillon
Tony Leswick - Vladimir Shadrin - Frank Finnigan
Ray Getliffe - Patrice Bergeron - Ryan Kesler

Babe Siebert - Red Kelly (A)
Herb Gardiner - Harry Cameron
Ryan Suter - Kevin Hatcher

Grant Fuhr
Chuck Rayner

Spares: Sergei Kapustin (LW) - Todd Bertuzzi(W), Alexei Kovalev (RW/C), Ed Van Impe (D)

PP1: Drillon - Cowley - Cook - Kelly - Cameron
PP2: Roberts - Forsberg - Blake - Siebert - Hatcher

PK1: Shadrin - Finnigan - Gardiner - Siebert
PK2: Bergeron - Leswick - Suter - Kelly
PK3: Forsberg - Blake

When defending a lead late in the game, Ivan can put out three lines that are strong defensively:

Blake - Forsberg - Cook
Leswick - Shadrin - Finnigan
Getliffe - Bergeron - Kesler

VS

Chicago Shamrocks

Head Coach: Cecil Hart
Captain: Mario Lemieux
Alternate Captains: Ebbie Goodfellow, Brian Sutter

Henrik Zetterberg - Mario Lemieux - Charlie Conacher
Busher Jackson - Milan Novy - Ace Bailey
Brian Sutter - Walt Tkaczuk - Bob Nevin
Brendan Morrow - Bill Thoms - Tony Amonte
Craig Conroy, Alf Skinner

Vladimir Lutchenko - Bill Gadsby
Ebbie Goodfellow - Bob Goldham
Brian Campbell - Jiri Bubla
Bob Dailey, Jerry Korab

Charlie Gardiner
Percy LeSueur

PP1
Busher Jackson - Mario Lemieux - Charlie Conacher
Ebbie Goodfellow - Bill Gadsby

PP2
Milan Novy - Lemieux/Zetterberg - Tony Amonte
Jiri Bubla - Vladimir Lutchenko

PK1
Walt Tkaczuk - Bob Nevin
Ebbie Goodfellow - Bob Goldham

PK2
Henrik Zetterberg - Ace Bailey
Vladimir Lutchenko - Bill Gadsby

Extra PK F: Bill Thoms​

Click to read more...

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Congrats on beating a very strong Gueph team. I'm picturing a high scoring finals.

Just so you know, I might swap some forwards around in my bottom 6 for this series. I'll let you know by tomorrow.

 

[VanIslander]

Three things jump out at first glance:

1. The ALL-MOD Finals! (I think it's an ATD first).

2. Either Vladimir Shadrin, Todd Bertuzzi, Ryan Suter will win a cup or Brendan Morrow, Tony Amonte, Brian Campbell. Both sets are unexpected starters on an all-time great championship squad.

3. Debate on the thread will probably make the difference.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Three things jump out at first glance:

1. The ALL-MOD Finals! (I think it's an ATD first).

2. Either Vladimir Shadrin, Todd Bertuzzi, Ryan Suter will win a cup or Brendan Morrow, Tony Amonte, Brian Campbell. Both sets are unexpected starters on an all-time great championship squad.

3. Debate on the thread will probably make the difference.

Why would Vladimir Shadrin be unexpected? I thought his value was pretty well established, compared to the more recent players

 

[VanIslander]

Why would Vladimir Shadrin be unexpected? I thought his value was pretty well established, compared to the more recent players

Yeah, I guess: while he had a couple of Soviet titles in the 1960's he was on one of the top lines in the early seventies, when Team USSR was clearly world class. So it isn't a stretch to see him as an ATD starter on a championship squad. He's praised as a set-up man, and he has Burtuzzi and Kapustin to set up. But he's also praised as defensively responsible, which brings Bottom-6 qualities that could be useful.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Congrats on beating a very strong Gueph team. I'm picturing a high scoring finals.

Just so you know, I might swap some forwards around in my bottom 6 for this series. I'll let you know by tomorrow.

Congrats to you as well. The two most offensive teams in the draft meeting in the finals...somewhere Sturminator is smiling. Also, how about this...

Team in the other conference it'd be interesting to meet in the finals: Chicago Shamrocks - I think it would be a really entertaining, high scoring series

Here's to a good series!

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Three things jump out at first glance:

1. The ALL-MOD Finals! (I think it's an ATD first).

2. Either Vladimir Shadrin, Todd Bertuzzi, Ryan Suter will win a cup or Brendan Morrow, Tony Amonte, Brian Campbell. Both sets are unexpected starters on an all-time great championship squad.

3. Debate on the thread will probably make the difference.

Why would Vladimir Shadrin be unexpected? I thought his value was pretty well established, compared to the more recent players

Also, wasn't Amonte a 3rd liner on last year's champion?

I don't really understand why Morrow is out of place in a 4th line role either, he had real-life success in a similar role on Team Canada, brings grit, leadership, responsible defensively. I tried asking about this in the summary thread much earlier, but got no response. He's not a great one by any means, but not out of place IMO.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Chicago Lines

Chicago will primarily be going with it's regular season lineup for the top 2 forward lines:

Henrik Zetterberg - Mario Lemieux - Charlie Conacher
Busher Jackson - Milan Novy - Ace Bailey

The reason for this is because we think a power vs. power matchup, our 1st line against New Jersey's 1st line will be very effective, and allow Henrik Zetterberg to check Bill Cook.

Of course, as in any series, lines can always be changed, so please keep in mind that Cecil Hart has the option to switch to the line setup that Chicago used in winning the Divisional and Conference finals if need be.

I am unsure if I am going to make any changes to our 4th line or bottom D pair. Will have an answer on that tomorrow.

 

[Elvis P]

The Devils are tough to beat cause they get no sleep till Brooklyn!

This post did not receive the Nalyd Psycho seal of approval.

 

[VanIslander]

A remarkable fact: Mario Lemieux has never won an ATD championship before, despite a staggering 172 points in 107 postseason games. Does NJ have the defense and goaltending to stop him?

 

[monster_bertuzzi]

^Speaking of which, the huge edge Chicago has in net with Gardiner over Fuhr is a tipping point for me.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

^Speaking of which, the huge edge Chicago has in net with Gardiner over Fuhr is a tipping point for me.

Sheesh, I don't have computer access for a few days and I come back to this? Gardiner is a little above average ; Fuhr a little below average. If that's huge, I don't know what to say

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

A remarkable fact: Mario Lemieux has never won an ATD championship before, despite a staggering 172 points in 107 postseason games. Does NJ have the defense and goaltending to stop him?

The thing is when dealing with the best players in the league, you can't completely stop them; just hope to contain them. I'll get to Mario Lemieux in a bit, but basically NJ will beat him by making him spend more time in his own zone than in the offensive zone.

In real life, Mario Lemieux won two Cups on an incredibly stacked team (young Jaromir Jagr, prime Ron Francis, prime Larry Murphy, Tom Barrasso at his absolute best, Ulf Samuelsson; Mark Recchi and Paul Coffey on one team, replaced by Rick Tocchet and Kjell Samuelsson on the second. ATD coaches Bob Johnson, replaced by Scottie Bowman when he died.

Point being that Mario is just one guy, and he put up a lot of points, but he wasn't carrying teams to Cups on his own. In fact, he only went to 2 Cup finals (the two he won) and lost in 2 Conference finals.

In the NHL playoffs, it's usually the team with the best depth (overall / at both ends) that wins Cups. If stars won Cups by themselves, the real life Crosby/Malkin Penguins would be winning a lot more often. The NJ Swamp Devils are built more like the modern Chicago Blackhawks with puck moving defensemen and lots of scoring throughout the lineup.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Lineup change to NJ's bottom 6

Against the more defensive minded teams I faced to this point, I went with a 4th line that could contribute offensively (Kapustin-Shadrin-Bertuzzi).

I drafted my spares with an eye on facing a team like Chicago in the playoffs. I don't want to call Chicago "top heavy," since they do have some good players throughout the lineup, but their big strength is definitely the Lemieux-Conacher duo on the top line.

So here goes, NJ's new defensive-minded bottom 6, featuring 2 "checking lines." I think having 2 lines that can be used as checking purposes will be a huge benefit to playing against Chicago's top line.

Tony Leswick - Vladimir Shadrin - Frank Finnigan
Ray Getliffe - Patrice Bergeron - Ryan Kesler

This restores the more two-way third line that I had originally intended to put together.

Mini-profiles related to this change

Vladimir Shadrin

Shadrin was well-known for his hockey sense and two-way game - widely considered the best defensive Soviet forward in the Summit Series.

we know that he played on the Soviet national team for ten years, from 1968 to 1978. During much of that time he played on the second line and was a top penalty killer. In the absence of other evidence, that suggests that he was a very good player. The Soviet national team was competitive with Canada's best over this time, and he played a key role.

I think coaches are the ones that evaluate players best. The key is to look at what they do with the players, not what they say. Clearly the Soviet coaches must have thought highly of Shadrin if he was an important player for the national team for so long.

Shadrin was the 2nd line center behind Petrov; Maltsev was usually converted to RW in International Tournaments.

Shadrin was also something of a big game player:

• Second in scoring for the Soviets in the '72 Summit Series with 3 goals, 5 assists, 8 points, and +7.
• Tied for the scoring lead in the 1976 Olympics (5 goals, 5 assists).

Last year, Sturminator met an old fan of Soviet hockey who described several Soviet players included Shadrin:

He said Shadrin was a great worker, terrific with his stick, always buzzing around in the neutral zone and was very dangerous in the counterattack, but could be easily pushed off the puck in the offensive zone (sounds a bit like Edgar Laprade, or a poor man's Pavel Datsyuk).

On the Swamp Devils, Shadrin is playing between two very strong and very physical checking players. He'll bring strong neutral zone play and counterattacking ability to NJ's third line.

Tony Leswick & Frank Finnigan

Both excellent defensively, capable of playing both physical and speed games. Finnigan slightly more decorated as a backchecker, Leswick possibly the greatest agitator of all-time. All this in their profiles.

But here, I'll focus on their offense to show that they won't just be fumbling away the chances Shadrin creates:

Tony Leswick:

Points – 17th(1948), 17th(1950), 19th(1947)
Goals – 6th(1947), 9th(1948), 17th(1950)
Assists – 16th(1950)

Points on his team (in a 6-team era): 1st (1947), 1stT (1950), 3rd (1948), 5th (1946), 5th (1949)

Frank Finnigan:

Points: 9th (1928), 10th (1929), 15th (1930)
Goals - 6th (1928), 6th (1929), 13th (1930), 14th (1927)

Ray Getliffe

I see him as an ideal 4th liner, like Kapustin too good to be on the bench, but with a more two-way skillset than Kapustin.

Ultimate Hockey's "Best Corner-man" of the 1940s

Points – 17th(1937), 17th(1943), 18th(1944)
Goals – 10th(1944), 15th(1937), 15th(1941)
Assists – 14th(1943)

2 x Stanley Cup Champion (1939, 1944)

Here are a few of the quotes in his profile:

Ray Getliffe was Montreal's premier "holler guy" of the 1940s. He was a fierce forechecker, one of the league's top diggers.

(Too bad I didn't have him dressed against markrander... heh) ''

A gritty left winger who was among the speediest forwards in the league, the Galt, Ontario native was a skilled two-way performer, equally adept at attacking the enemy net or playing in a defensive role. With other gifted support players like Murph Chamberlain, Bobby Fillion and Dutch Hiller as linemates, Getliffe countered the top right wingers in the league.

Ray Getliffe who played with the Montreal Canadiens and who was really a grand fellow as well as a great player. He was hard-hitting and used to get away with a lot of things, especially behind the net, and I had trouble catching him. This Getliffe was a strong boy, and he’d grab hold of an opponent by the back of the sweater, give him a little tug, and pull him down.

The strategy behind this move apparently is to use Camberlain, Getliffe and Filion as a checking line to subdue Bodnar, Carr, and Schriner, the line that packs most of the Leafs’ firepower.

Ryan Kesler

Certainly nothing special as a 4th liner, but I think he'll get the job done in limited minutes (more about 4th line usage in a bit).

35.6 adjusted even strength points per season over his best 7 years (basically Mike Peca range with a higher peak but only a few seasons as a strong offensive player)
Selke record: 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 11th

I expect Kesler to be somewhat less effective both offensively and defensively at RW than C. But he'll still be effective enough for the role I will use him for.

Despite usually played C, Kesler tends to score more goals than he sets up, which makes him a good linemate for Bergeron, who is a pretty good playmaker.

How the bottom 6 will be deployed

First off, when playing a player as good as Mario Lemieux, it really helps to have multiple options to play against him. But this is how the lines will ideally be used:

The 4th line will see limited minutes and will take the lion's share of defensive-zone draws

• The 4th line's job is to win faceoffs, play defense, get the puck out of the zone, dump in in, then change out for more skilled players.
• They will be helped in this by the fact that all 3 players on the 4th line are capable of taking draws (Getliffe is a LW/C and Kesler is obviously a C/RW).
• Despite being a defensive line, the line should also be a strong possession line, led by Bergeron.

The 3rd line will play a regular shift, very often matched against the Lemieux line

• Shadrin's job will be to muck things up in the neutral zone, prevent Chicago from entering the zone with speed, create turnovers, and help NJ's puck possession game. Basically, like a lesser version of Datsyuk would.
• Leswick will closely check Charlie Conacher (I think this deserves its own section)
• Finnigan will generally be able to cheat to help out Shadrin on Lemieux, as Zetterberg is nothing special as a 1st line LW (at least offensively).
• Bergeron will sometimes center this line for defensive-zone draws

Tony Leswick vs Charlie Conacher

I see this being a key matchup in the series, and I can see Ivan keeping this matchup (even by shuffling lines) if Hart breaks up the Lemieux-Conacher duo.

My Leswick profile is one of my better ones, but here are some cliff notes:

Here is The Trail's description of Leswick:

Among the outstanding players who possessed great skill as skaters, stickhandlers and backcheckers but were not likely candidates for the Lady Byng trophy, Tony Leswick is an example. This little player was rated as one of the best defensive forwards in the league. He played either wing and was a great penalty killer. He was a fast skater and full of hustle and spirit. His other attributes were anathema to the opposition. He kept up a constant chatter of deprecatory remarks concerning the antecedents or ability of opposing wings, interspersed with elbow action or buttends to goad them into penalties. This cost him time in the penalty box but he was usually successful in having one of the opposition stars for company... Jack Adams had observed his fine checking and scrappy play, and made a deal to get him... Retired in 1958. Some of his opponents must have sighed with relief at his departure.

Gordie Howe's biography had this to say about Leswick:

A quick, mouthy, frenetic hustler who could check, score, and fight, and who fit in ideally on the close-checking second line... a money player who always outdid himself in the playoffs...

Leswick's feud with Maurice Richard was famous:

Leswick's favourite target was Maurice Richard. Leswick would be all over the Rocket for an entire game, mixing a shower of insults with a flurry of butt-ends and slashes. Leswick was especially skilled at goading his targets into penalties. Referee Bill Chadwick was once quoted as saying that Leswick "could bring out the worst in a saint!"

Leswick trolled Gordie Howe too - Detroit supposedly traded for Leswick so Howe wouldn't have to deal with him anymore. Gordie Howe and Maurice Richard are usually considered the top 2 RWs of All-Time and nobody got them off their game better than Tony Leswick.

Leswick will closely check Charlie Conacher, talking trash, giving him subtle cheap shots, hopefully goading him into penalties (Conacher was top 10 in PIMs twice - not the most undisciplined player, but not a Lady Byng winner either). Baldy Northcott famously reduced Conacher's effectiveness in the playoffs by shadowing him; here's to Leswick doing the same.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

NJ Estimated minutes chart

Maybe this will help what I said in the post above.

Swamp Devils estimated minutes for this series

Forwards

Player | ES | PP | PK | Total
Toe Blake|15|3|1|19
Bill Cowley|13|4|0|17
Bill Cook|16|4|0|20
Gordie Roberts|12|3|0|15
Peter Forsberg|14|3|1|18
Gordie Drillon|11|4|0|15
Tony Leswick|12|0|3|15
Vladimir Shadrin|11|0|3|14
Frank Finnigan|12|0|3|15
Ray Getliffe|7|0|0|7
Patrice Bergeron|8|0|2|10
Ryan Kesler|7|0|1|8
Total |138|21|14|173

Defensemen

Player | ES | PP | PK | Total
Babe Siebert|18|2|4|24
Red Kelly|19|5|3|27
Herb Gardiner|18|0|4|22
Harry Cameron|18|5|0|23
Ryan Suter|10|0|2|12
Kevin Hatcher|9|2|1|12
Total |92|14|14|120

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Originally, I posted this as part of a muddled reply to VI, but I think it works better as it's own post.

One thing that needs to be remembered is the offense from the Swamp Devils defensemen and how having that amount of skill on the blueline is going to wreck havoc on defensive schemes. Red Kelly was the clear best offensive defenseman to ever play the game before Bobby Orr came along. And Harry Cameron looks to me like the highest scoring defenseman on a second pairing in this ATD. Babe Siebert and Herb Gardiner also had their fair share of puck skills.

Anyway, about Red Kelly. The coach of the Bruins at the time said that he gameplanned around stopping Red Kelly (NOT Gordie Howe):

Neither. I'll take Red Kelly.

Kelly is the best all-around performer in our league. Sure, Howe and Richard are great , but Red is not only great on defense , he can score too. He's the big reason Detroit has won five straight (regular season) championships.

When Kelly rushes up ice, it's something to see. He sparks Howe and Lindsay and the others. When we play the Wings, we go out to stop him.We feel there's a better chance of winning that way.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...8,2863460&dq=red+kelly+the+best+detroit&hl=en

Here's an SI quote about Red Kelly's ability to create outnumbered situations:

On the attack, the Red Wings in general play a slam-bang, puck-hounding game, relying on manpower rather than on finesse to wear down their opponents. Their offensive sorties frequently have the advantage of a "fourth forward," the great Red Kelly, perennial All-Star defenseman and a natural play-builder, shown at right (No. 4) as he leads a rush toward the Rangers' goal. Three of the last four seasons, Kelly has ranked among the top ten scorers, the only defenseman to climb into that exalted circle.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1069407/index.htm

Here's a longer SI quote about Kelly's ability to control play at both ends of the ice with his skating, as both a defenseman and a forward (it's from the year he played 1/4 of the season as a LW due to injuries):

For several seasons now Harvey and Red Kelly of Detroit have been in a class of their own, a discernible cut above the other defensemen in the league. Kelly's style of play, of course, has always been an individual one. A marvelous, tireless skater, he has the energy and the speed and the maneuverability to serve not only as a stout defender but to double as a virtually cohesive part of the offense. This season " Detroit's fourth forward," as Kelly has been called for some time, was actually pressed into service as a forward. Jimmy Skinner, the Wings coach, made the move early in December, after his team had managed to win only 6 of its first 25 games and it seemed they might never get rolling. Skinner's second and third lines had not been producing at all, and he recognized that his first tactical adjustment—using his powerful first line of Howe, Reibel and Lindsay as often as they could climb over the boards—hadn't been getting him anyplace. Overwork was diminishing the H-R-L line's punch, and lack of work wasn't helping the confidence of his newly formed third line and the sluggishness of his second line. The defense had been functioning well, though. Pronovost had been playing fine hockey, Godfrey was doing all right, old Bob Goldham—he entered the NHL way back in 1941 with Toronto (can you believe it?)—was still getting around O.K.; furthermore, Larry Hillman, a very promising defenseman, could be recalled from the minors. So Skinner made his move. He switched Kelly to left wing on his first line and sent Lindsay down to juice up the second. It was a daring bit of juggling, and it worked. Almost overnight the Wings began to win at their customary clip, and until they dropped five out of those six points in that head-on series with Montreal, it looked as if they might be on their way to recapturing all of their old grinding efficiency.

As for Kelly, he was a revelation on left wing. He remained at that position for 26 games, until Pronovost was hurt and he had to be sent back to bolster the defense. Over that stretch Red scored 11 goals and assisted in 13 others, but these statistics barely intimate what an enormous amount of wing he played. One picture or, more accurately, one series of pictures remains clearly in my mind. It is Kelly back-checking with that effortless finesse of his, breaking up one enemy rush after another before they could even get started and generally creating the impression that progress up his side of the rink was virtually impossible, a road temporarily closed to traffic.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1130918/1/index.htm

 

[monster_bertuzzi]

Sheesh, I don't have computer access for a few days and I come back to this? Gardiner is a little above average ; Fuhr a little below average. If that's huge, I don't know what to say

Fuhr a little below average?

He's one of the worst 2 or 3 starters.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Coaching = moderate advantage NJ (Ivan's ability to create defensive schemes)

Despite the fact that I actually think Ivan has been a little overrated here (usually drafted 5th or 6th), and Hart a little underrated (usually drafted 15th or 20th), I still think Ivan remains the better coach.

Both encouraged skill and creativity from their players, a rarity in an era when most of the top coaches were defense first. Ivan, in particular was something of a revolutionary in encouraging his team to play offense-first and disciplined at a time when the best coaches (Hap Day and Dick Irvin) had their teams playing more defensively and taking a lot of penalties.

I do think Ivan is a better coach. There is more information in his profile about Ivan as an innovator, and his players seem to give him more credit for their success than Hart.

While both coaches were great at getting offense from their players, Ivan's profile also has quite a bit about his defensive coaching, as well.

Cliff notes version:

• I see Ivan as an above-average coach in this (lower end of the top 10), while Hart is pretty average (probably about on the same level as Glen Sather).
• Both coaches are good at getting the most from their skilled, offensive talent, but Ivan should be better at creating defensive schemes to use against the opposition.

Goaltending = moderate advantage Chicago

I found it strange that MB thinks Charlie Gardiner is a huge step up on Grant Fuhr. My guess is that he's underrating how good Grant Fuhr was in his prime.

Basically, Gardiner was the best goalie of the early 1930s, while Fuhr was the best goalie of the late 1980s. There are many quotes in the Grant Fuhr profile I linked (thanks BC) that say as much. Gardiner's competition at the top was a little better, but it wasn't great either - Roy Worters and George Hainsworth on the tail end of their careers, prime Tiny Thompson, and the inconsistent John Ross Roach. On the other hand, there were more than twice as many teams when Fuhr played, which meant more than twice as many starting goalies with the chance to have a career year and make an impact on the awards voting.

Gardiner only played 7 seasons, and in the first two, he was a promising young goalie who regularly got shelled on a bad team.

But his legacy is based on the last 5 seasons of his career.

Gardiner All-Star record: 1st*, 1st, 1st, 1st, 2nd
Fuhr Vezina record: 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 3rd, 5th, 5th, 6th, 6th

*based off Hart voting in 1929-30, the season before the official All Star teams. Gardiner was 1st in Hart voting among goalies, though he wasn't close to winning it.

Gardiner Hart record: 7th (1930)
Fuhr Hart record: 2nd (1988), 6th (1996)

Fuhr was given a lot of credit for carrying the Oilers after Gretzky got injured in 1987-88, but for the most part, he was consistently among the best goalies in the league in the regular season, though not necessarily the best.

The playoffs are where Fuhr really made his mark:

From BC's profile:

here is a player poll conducted by The Pittsburgh Press January 21, 1990 with 123 NHL players responding:

Question: Who would you want as your goalie to stop an opponent's breakaway with 30 seconds left and the score tied in the seventh game of the Stanley Cup final?

Name|Team|Votes
Grant Fuhr|Oilers|40
Patrick Roy|Canadiens|17
Darren Puppa|Sabres|11
Mike Vernon|Flames|11
Mike Liut/John Vanbiesbrouck||8

This coming after Patrick Roy had already won a Stanley Cup, and when he was coming off two consecutive post season allstars as well as a Vezina - and in the midst of a third straight post season all star and second straight Vezina season!


Fuhr had a sterling 92W-50L record of decisions in the playoffs while raising his individual play from a save percentage average of .887 in the regular season to .900 in the playoffs. The 92 wins are good for 3rd all time.

To put Fuhr's playoff performances in a more modern perspective, I'll borrow from TCG again since he crunched the numbers to adjust Stanley Cup winning performances to current levels (ie. take with grain of salt but it gives us an idea):

Here are the save percentages for each Cup-winning goalie in the save percentage era, adjusted to league average and normalized to the current average save level (.911):

1984: Grant Fuhr, .933
1985: Grant Fuhr, .925
1987: Grant Fuhr, .932
1988: Grant Fuhr, 913

These goalies were both widely considered the best in the world for a number of consecutive years. Both were money in the playoffs (Fuhr having much more team success). Gardiner should be considered better because he was more consistently elite in the regular season (during his 5 year peak/prime)

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Fuhr a little below average?

He's one of the worst 2 or 3 starters.

You're clearly underrating Grant Fuhr then, probably because your memories of him are based on what he did long after his prime.

In the late 1980s, Fuhr was widely considered the best goalie in the world. How many ATD goalies can say that?

ATD starters Fuhr is clearly better than: Tom Barrasso, Gump Worsley, Henrik Lundqvist

ATD starters on the same level as Fuhr: Billy Smith, Tiny Thompson, George Hainsworth

Do you disagree with any of the above?

Note that with the possible exception of Henrik Lundqivst who is still in the middle of his career, NONE of these 6 goalies was ever considered the best goalie in the world for an extended period of time. Grant Fuhr was.

 

[MadArcand]

You really overrate Fuhr. He's clearly better than Lundqvist, and marginally better than Barrasso. That's it. He's on par with Worsley. Smith, Hainsworth and even Thompson are just better.

Being the best (very debatable anyway) during an era when the position was at its worst is somewhat irrelevant.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

You really overrate Fuhr. He's clearly better than Lundqvist, and marginally better than Barrasso. That's it. He's on par with Worsley. Smith, Hainsworth and even Thompson are just better.

Being the best (very debatable anyway) during an era when the position was at its worst is somewhat irrelevant.

You made it quite clear in the HOH Top goaltenders project that Fuhr is one of those modern players you have a major hate-on for, and that no amount of information about what he did before you saw him play would change your mind.

In what world is Billy Smith better than Grant Fuhr? The one where he didn't play a bunch of seasons after his prime, so MadArcand never saw him play as a shell of himself? (I'd actually rank Fuhr slightly above Smith since his regular season record is definitely better, but I think they are close enough to be on the same tier for ATD purposes).

On par with Worsley... yikes. Worsley was never among the best goalies in the world, and was much less important to his dynasty than Fuhr was to his.
____________

Keep in mind that his opposing goalie is Charlie Gardiner, not Patrick Roy, not Martin Brodeur, not even Frank Brimsek. Probably not a top 10 goalie of all-time, but close. Of course, if you care more about career value than prime value, then there is a case that Gardiner is just an average ATD goalie (he's barely above average as it is for me - 11th or 12th all-time).

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Defensemen = NJ's big advantage

This is where I think NJ wins the series - the ability of our defensemen to control the pace of the game across all 3 zones.

NJ's group of defensemen is among the best in the draft 1-6. We almost certainly have the best 2nd pairing in the draft thanks to the steal I got on Herb Gardiner. And the first pairing features Red Kelly, who is awesome, playing a Bobby Orr style without Orr's gamebreaking offense (though with excellent offense for a "normal" defensemen.

Since Chicago broke up their top 2 defensemen, I'll compare #1, #2, #3, and #4 defensemen, then a word about chemistry.

#1s (Red Kelly vs Bill Gadsby) = Big advantage NJ

Red Kelly and Bill Gadsby were contemporaries, and Kelly was much better. Better offensively, and significantly better defensively. Since they played at the same time, I don't have to bother with competition when looking at their awards records.

Hart record

Kelly Hart voting record as a defenseman only: 2, 3, 3, 4, 5, 8
Kelly Hart voting record as a center only: 6, 8, 9
Gadsby Hart voting record: 6, 6

Kellys Hart record as a center is as good as Gadsby's Hart record as a defenseman. And look at Kelly's record as a defenseman....

All-Star record

Kelly

49-50: 4th
50-51: 1st (unanimous)
51-52: 1st (unanimous)
52-53: 1st (unanimous)
53-54: 1st
54-55: 2nd (to Doug Harvey)
55-56: 3rd (to Harvey and Gadsby. Played 1/4 of the season at LW)
56-57: 2nd (to Doug Harvey)
57-58: (incomplete All-Star records but finished 6th in Norris voting)

Gadsby

52-53: 4th
53-54: 3rd (to Kelly and Harvey)
55-56: 2nd (to Harvey. Beat Kelly by a few votes when Kelly spent 1/4 of the season at LW)
56-57: 4th
57-58: 2nd (to Harvey)
58-59: 2nd (to Tom Johnson)
59-60: 8th
60-61: 13th
61-62: 7th
64-65: 3rd

Notice that until Kelly started to decline in 57-58, the ONLY season Gadsby beat him in AS voting was 55-56, when Kelly played 1/4 of the season at LW and finished 4th in Hart voting (Gadsby didn't place).

Gadsby's defensive performance

I'm going to repost some things from a previous ATD that I also posted in the HOH defensemen project.

I'm still not convinced that his defensive game was anything special, to be honest.

that is also my concern.

i have found multiple sources that call him an offensive d-man or a PP specialist. i have also read he was at his best defensively late in his career. gadsby was apparently always a big hitter. i have only seen games of him from the mid '60s.

but i cannot read new york times articles for free, so i am missing a large source of information.

The thing that bothers me about Gadsby is that he played on some really bad teams in his prime. It's hard to picture any team with some of the other defencemen taken recently ever being that bad. He changed teams a couple of times, but his departure and arrival didn't change the course of any franchises.

See the 1954-55 season. Gadsby was 27. Chicago had a 3-13-3 record (.250 W%). They traded Gadsby to New York and improved, going 10-27-14 (0.327 W%) the rest of the way. The Rangers were 6-9-3 (0.417 W%) when Gadsby arrived. With Gadsby on the team they were 11-26-15 (0.356 W%). Both teams were worse with Gadsby.

In the three seasons before Gadsby, New York averaged 59 points. In Gadsby's first three seasons there, they averaged 64 points. Chicago averaged 48 points in Gadsby's last three seasons there, and 47 points in the three seasons after he left.

The Rangers sent Gadsby to Detroit after the 1960-61 season. In the three seasons prior to that they averaged 56 points. In the three seasons after Gadsby left they averaged 58 points. Detroit averaged 64 points in the three seasons prior to acquiring Gadsby. After picking him up they averaged 69 points in three seasons.

Teams tended to improve slightly after acquiring Gadsby, and stayed about the same without him. His record just doesn't have a lot of team success on it, or evidence of making an impact, relative to other defencemen taken around here. Like Chris Pronger, for example.

Sure, this is crude analysis, and there are many factors that drive team success. But maybe the Hockey News panel, many whom watched Gadsby in his prime, knew what they were doing when they ranked him as the 99th best player in history as of 1996. I don't think most people would say that list underrated Original Six players, either

The statistics show that Kelly was better than Gadsby offensively. But the defensive gap is at least as big. Gadsby was a hard hitting, offensive defenseman. But is Lutchenko the right player to cover for him?

#2s (Babe Siebert vs Ebbie Goodfellow) = slight advantage Chicago

I thought Ebbie Goodfellow and Babe Siebert were basically equals until we looked at their records in the HOH defensemen project. Extremely similar skillsets (physical two-way defensemen who were oozing leadership). Similar peaks, but Goodfellow had a few more elite years.

Again, these are contemporaries, so competition needs not be taken into account.

Siebert Hart record: 1, 3, 14*
Goodfellow Hart record: 1, 3*, 4

*as a forward

Siebert All-Star record at D: 1, 2, 2, 5
Siebert All-Star record at LW: 1*, 5, 8
*pre-1930 based on Hart voting

Goodfellow All-Star record at D: 2, 2, 3, 5, 5, 8, 10
Goodfellow All-Star record at C: 3, 4

Siebert with the somewhat better 3 year peak, but Goodfellow wins for longevity as an impact player

#3s (Harry Cameron vs Vladimir Lutchenko = moderate advantage NJ

How do you compare these guys? I think it's safe to say that Cameron was more of an impact player.

I posted this last round, but I'll post again:

• In 1913 (Cameron's first season in the NHA), he and Frank Nighbor were the two Toronto players selected to the NHA All-Star team that would play the PCHA All-Stars in the second annual All-Star Game between the two of them (Source). Given the fact that each team only carried 2-3 defensemen, this is as close as we have to the equivalent of a First Team NHA All-Star.
• The Montreal Daily Mail polled readers to create a 1914 All Star Team. Cameron was selected All-Star Point (12 votes at point, 5 at coverpoint). Cleghorn was All-Star Coverpoint (10 votes at coverpoint, 6 votes at point) Source
• Harry Cameron was the highest paid player on Toronto's 1918 Cup winning team at $900. The rest of the players' salaries ranged from $450 to $750. (Source).

Additionally, Cameron's team in Toronto (the predecessor to the Leafs) kept dumping him because they hated his attitude. But they kept bringing him back because they needed his skills. And they won 3 Cups that way.

Vladimir Lutchenko just doesn't strike me as that big an impact player. He racked up Soviet Team All-Stars so he obviously had consistency as a very good domestic player, but in the heightened competition of international tournaments, he just didn't stand out. Lutchenko NEVER made an All-Star Team in the World Championships and was NEVER named best defenseman. His teammate Valeri Vasiliev was a 5-time WC All-Star and named Best D 3 times. Frantisek Pospisil was a 3-time WC All-Star and named Best D 2 times. I could list all the defensemen none of us heard of who managed to make a single WC All-Star team, but it would be pretty pointless.

Overshadowed by Vasiliev in international competition? Sure. But if Lutchenko was as good as Cameron, he'd be able to break through at least once.

#4s (Herb Gardiner vs Bob Goldham = Big advantage NJ

Not really fair to Goldham, since Gardiner was one of the best value picks in the entire draft. Basically, Gardiner was an "ice general" who was more defensive than offensive but skilled all-round, while Goldham was a more traditional shot blocking defensive defenseman.

Gardiner's Norris/All-Star equivalent record: 1, 4, 4, 6, 8 (see his profile for details)
Goldham's All-Star record: 3, 5, 7, 8

Questions about Chicago's top pairing

Is Vladimir Lutchenko the right type of player to cover for Bill Gadsby, who sacrificed defense to create offense in his prime (before becoming a strong defensive player after his offense left him)?

How will Vladimir Lutchenko at left D handle Bill Cook at right wing? Bill Cook, selected as one of the most physical players of All-Time by Newsy Lalonde and the NHL GMs on two separate All-Time Teams in the 1950s. Bill Cook, who led the NHL in scoring twice, and led the rival WCHL in scoring twice more (once by margin big enough to assure he'd be the Art Ross winner if the leagues were combined).[/QUOTE]

Bottom pairing = fairly big advantage NJ.

Kevin Hatcher (NJ) AS record: 5, 7, 9, 10, 12, 14
Ryan Suter (NJ) AS record: 2, ?, 6, 10, 15
Brian Campbell (Chicago) AS record: 4, 7, 9, 28

? is for the current season. Based on already released votes (available on hfboards), it's likely Suter will finished 4th or 5th.

I've said in the past that Campbell deserves a spot on an ATD bottom pairing... but in a 32-team draft. His record seems pretty weak for a starter in a 28 team draft.

Figuring out Bubla is tougher, since he played in the weaker Czecholoslovak league. He gets drafted because he was a WC All-Star twice (hey, that's 2 more times than Lutchenko! ). Let's look at Czechoslovak Golden Hockey Stick voting, for best overall player in Czechoslovakia. Is the pool of ALL players from late 70s/early 80s Czechoslovakia close to the pool of just NHL defensemen? Who knows. But let's look at it anyway.

Bubla Golden Stick voting: 3, 3, 6, 7, 10
Ryan Suter Norris voting: 2, 4/5, 6, 10, 15

I think these two are awfully close.

Kevin Hatcher (NJ) > Ryan Suter(NJ)/Jiri Bubla(CHI) > Brian Campbell(CHI)

Summary

• NJ has big advantage at #1 defenseman
• Chicago has a slight advantage at #2 defenseman
• NJ has a moderate advantage at #3 defenseman
• NJ has a big advantage at #4 defenseman
• From a chemistry perspective, is Vladimir Lutchenko the right type of player to cover for Bill Gadsby?
• Can Vladimir Lutchenko at LD handle Bill Cook at RW?
• NJ has a big advantage on the bottom pairing since Kevin Hatcher is basically a strong #5, Bubla/Suter are both good #6s, but Brian Campell is probably best served as a #7 in a smaller 28 team draft.
• Considering Chicago's top 4 defensemen are average at best (weak #1, average at all other positions), I would have liked to have seen a stronger bottom pairing.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

VsX 7 year table for top 6 players

VsX-7 is the best measure we have for regular season prime offense. There are obviously more factors that go into making a great player and I'm trying to included these in the table.

As before, the number in parenthesis is based off Dreakmur's consolidation study for pre-1926 players (Bill Cook's NHL-only number is 96.6).

The ((double parathesis)) for Novy are nothing but HT's educated guess from previous rounds than Novy is very slightly worse than Jeremy Roenick offensively (which I think was more than fair of him).

I'm using Stuminator's war-year adjustments for Cowley and Blake, so their numbers no longer have to be asterixed.

• Playoffs = noting when a player was a strong playoff performer.
• "career" means a player had significant career value outside his best 7 seasons
• Notes is everything else. Bad notes are in (parenthesis). And yes, if I am giving Cowley a minus for never backchecking, I'm doing the same for Mario Lemieux.

player|team|score|playoffs|career|notes
Mario Lemieux|CHI|120.4|very good|?|(bad defensively)
Bill Cook|NJ|(101.8)|fair|Y|power forward
Bill Cowley | NJ | 97.4|pretty good||(bad defensively)
Charlie Conacher|CHI|97.1|fair||great figher
Peter Forsberg | NJ | 90.9|very good||strong defensively and physically
Busher Jackson|CHI| 90.0 |fair||strong physically (bad defensively)
Gord Drillon | NJ | 88.1 |pretty good||(bad defensively)
Toe Blake | NJ | 85.3|very good||strong defensively and physically
Milan Novy |CHI | ((80.0))|fair||hard worker
Gordon Roberts | NJ | (77.3-)|pretty good||plus physically and defensively
Henrik Zetterberg | CHI| 76.7-|excellent||very good defensively, hard worker
Ace Bailey|CHI|68.1|||strong defensively and physically

Novy was often outshone by Hlinka in international tournaments, but he also had some good ones. NHL playoffs equivalent of "fair?"

The minus next to Gordon Roberts is because I believe Dreakmur's study overrates goal scorers (and underrates playmakers). Not that Dreakmur did anything wrong; I believe the raw data is the issue (undercounting of assists)

The minus net to Henrik Zetterberg's number is because he is playing LW here, and I think his best years were mostly at C.

I'll post a longer analysis of the forwards later today.

Average score of 1st lines

Chicago = 98.1
NJ = 94.8

Yes, it's actually pretty close. Henrik Zetterberg kind of drags down Chicago's top line in this metric. On the one hand, Lemieux has the ability to boost his linemates quite a bit, which isn't captured by these averages (which is why I haven't really been using them until now). On the other, Zetterberg's raw number is probably a little too high at the start, since he is playing LW.

Average score of 2nd lines

NJ = 85.4
Chicago = 79.4

Chicago is hurt by Ace Bailey, who was something of a one-year wonder offensively.

NJ is helped by a possible inflated score from Gordon Roberts. On the other hand, Peter Forsberg is the 2nd line version of a player who can increase the output from their lineups, and I really don't like the Jackson/Novy chemistry (more on that later).

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Top 6 comparison

First lines = advantage Chicago because Lemieux is awesome.

I think Lemieux gives Chicago the better top line.

Left Wing = significant advantage NJ

NJ has the better LW by a good margin. Both are strong defensively; I think that Zetterberg is somewhat less effective defensively at LW and once you take this into account along with Toe Blake's physical play, they should be considered equals away from the puck. So the difference is offense - and Blake beats Zetterberg quite easily.

VSX-7 = Blake 85.3, Zetterberg 76.7

Blake Top 10 points finishes = 1, 3, 3*, 6, 7, 9
Zetterberg Top Top points finishes = 6, 8

*war year.

Blake won a Hart Trophy in 1939, and was a 1st Team All Star 3 Times (1 war year), 2nd Team 2 Times

I love Zetterberg (one of my favorite active players) = he can play on my team any day. But he isn't nearly as good as Toe Blake.

Right wing = moderate advantage NJ

Bill Cook is a better offensive player than Charlie Conacher. Conacher is probably a slightly better goal scorer, but Bill Cook's overall offensive game, including his playmaking is better. Cook won 2 Art Rosses in the NHL, and finished 1, 2, 1 in his last 3 seasons in the WCHL at a time when it was as strong as the NHL. His last scoring title in the WCHL was by a huge margin and almost certainly would have won the Art Ross in a consolidated league. It's safe to say that Cook has 3-4 Art Rosses in a consolidated league.

Overall, I think the 101.8 to 97.1 in VsX-7 gives an idea about Cook's advantage offensive - it isn't huge, but it's enough to be significant. If you care about career value, Conacher has very little of it outside this time frame. Conacher basically had a strong 6 year peak, then very little else of note. Bill Cook had those dominate seasons in the WCHL, then joined the NHL at 30 and had a HHOF career in the NHL alone (VsX-7 of 96.6, Top 10 finishes in points 1, 1, 4, 4, 4, 7, 10 in the NHL alone, plus the 1, 1, 2 in his last 3 seasons in the WCHL). By comparison, Conacher had points finishes of 1, 1, 3, 4, 4 in the NHL).

Neither player was worth much defensively, but Bill Cook brought a much more robust physical game. There is a single quote by King Clancy as to Conacher being the "policeman" of his line - and that's great. But nothing about him playing a physically aggressive game otherwise, never mentioned as one of the most physical players of all time like Bill Cook, who was an a terror physically.

In shore, Bill Cook has a moderate but significant advantage offensively, and he brings a far more robust physical game than Conacher as well.

Center = Chicago obviously wins by a lot, and it has nothing to do with Cowley not being a strong #1 scoring center

The battle of two centers who don't backcheck... and Lemieux wins easily. Because of offense.

Overall

I suppose I could look at the average VsX scores of each line (Chicago = 98.1
NJ = 94.8), and the fact that Bill Cook brings a physical presence Chicago can't match, and argue that these lines are too close to call. But I don't think hockey works that way.

As the dominant player on either line, Lemieux lifts the value of his linemates to have something of an advantage. To put it another way:

Lemieux (CHI) >>> Cook (NJ) > Conacher (CHI) /Cowley (NJ)* >> Blake (NJ) >> Zetterberg (CHI)

*If Conacher is better than Cowley as an overall player, it isn't by much. Similar offensive stats, and I don't think you give it to the goal scorer in this case, as there weren't as many assists given out in the 1930s as there are today. Conacher probably is a little better, as his defensive reputation is non-existent rather than bad, but I don't think it's all that much.

Both lines have good chemistry, so I see no need to look further than the quality of players.

Chicago wins mainly because the gap between Lemieux and Cook > the gap between Blake and Zetterberg.

Second lines = advantage NJ because of better players and likely chemistry issues on Chicago

The dominant players = Forsberg is better all-round than Jackson

This might be the first time that Busher Jackson isn't the best player on either second line. Offensively, it's close (90.9 VsX-7 for Forsberg to 90.0 VsX-7 for Jackson, similar top 10 scoring finishes. Both were robust physical players but not all-time greats in the physicality department. The big difference is that Forsberg was much better defensively (and at controlling the pace of the game through puck possession) than Jackson.

Forsberg's Selke record: 2, 4, 6, 8, 11

This 1935 article calls Sweeney Schriner a better backchecker than Jackson, which is damning because Schriner wasn't a backchecker himself: http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=rxhkAAAAIBAJ&sjid=FHsNAAAAIBAJ&pg=2282,1305953&dq=&hl=en

Here's the most damning piece on Jackson's backchecking: Comparing him to Gordie Drillon!

Breaks Up Line
Even before the fans had a chance to howl, Smythe had decided to do something about the Leafs' lack of back-checking, particularly on its high-scoring line of Harvey Jackson, Syl Apps and Gordon Drillon.

He has broken up the combination that has scored 39 of the Leafs' 96 goals this season, the trio that bagged almost half the Leafs' markers last season. Jackson is being dropped back to a line composed of the big left winger, Buzz Boll and Bill Thoms. Bob Davidson will move up to work with Apps and Drillon.

It is emphasized that Jackson is not the only culprit on the highest scoring line and that the only reason he is being dropped back is that a right wing substitute wasn't available for Drillon. It seems Drillon, the league's leading point scorer, is no more a two way man than Jackson.
....
But Apps, Drillon and Jackson were never quite the back-checkers Smythe wanted, and while they scored plenty of goals, the opposition got many, while the Dynamiters were on the ice. The shift will give the No. 1 line back-checking and add scoring punch to the 2nd line.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...AJ&pg=1484,3132687&dq=bob+davidson+apps&hl=en

The support scorer - Drillon = Novy as overall players

Pretty big advantage offensively for Drillon, but Novy seems to have been a decent defensive player - not great, but did his job. I think I'm being more than generous to Novy here, considering the high level of goal scoring Drillon brings.

Chemistry between the support scorer and the dominant player = advantage NJ

I expect Forsberg and Drillon to have amazing chemistry. Forsberg dipsy doodles up the ice with the puck (supported by Harry Cameron most likely) and Drillon waits in the slot to pick up his garbage, or to bury a pass with the most accurate shot of his era. I think the fact that Drillon doesn't want the puck until the very end makes him an ideal linemate for the puck-dominant Forsberg.

Is Novy the right center for Jackson?. I agree with HT that Novy is close to Roenick level offensively, but the issue is that more of those points were goals, rather than assists, and Jackson spent his entire (quite short) prime centered by a two-way playmaking center in

Here's Novy's domestic goal scoring record: 1st, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd, 3rd, 3rd
Here's his domestic assist record: 1st, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd, 5th

Keep in mind these numbers were put up on a dynasty-level team in the relatively weak CSSR league and that internationally, Novy was good, not great.

Looks to me like Novy is someone who scored goals at a slightly higher level than he passed the puck. Is that the right center for Busher Jackson?

When I had Novy last year, I decided he needed a playmaker on the wing to make him more effective, so I moved Daniel Alfredsson there... sticking me with George Armstrong on the first line, which I'm sure was key to my eventual loss.

Basically, I just feel like the Jackson/Novy combo doesn't have quite enough playmaking to get the most out of either player.

The "glue guy" = probable small advantage NJ

I think Ace Bailey was a better defensive player than Gord Roberts (he needs to be as the defensive conscience for Busher Jackson. NJ has Forsberg to do that for Drillon with Roberts also helping out). But the offensive gap between them is pretty significant. Roberts just had more significant seasons as a top offensive player (1, 2, 5 in the PCHA; 3, 3, 6, 9 in the pre-consolidation NHL) than Bailey, who looks to have only had 4 good offensive seasons in his career (http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/b/baileac01.html) and whose offfensive decline started before the Eddie Shore incident.

Overall = NJ has the advantage in personnel (Forsberg > Jackson as an overall player, and Roberts is probably a little better than Bailey) and chemistry (I think Chicago's line is somewhat lacking in playmaking and question the chemistry Novy would have with Jackson, who had all his best years centered by Joe Primeau, who had a goals to assists ration similar to Henrik Sedin.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Been sick for the last several days and still am...nothing too serious but all I've had time for is some partial work at home days and a lot of sleeping. Anyway, just wanted to quickly post so you guys know I didn't bail on this. Thanks to TDMM for carrying the discussion. Of course I would really like to add some of my own discussion/comments and will try my best to do so in the next couple days. Apologies for the lack of participation so far, I really am very excited and honored to have made the Final this year.