So you did something, and props for that. That being said - while I respect the effort - Larionov is not a first line center in an ATD. Hell, he's not a second line center. And Makarov and Krutov aren't good enough to make up that gap. This is especially notable when you have Ted freaking Kennedy on the third line.
Your second line is pretty strong. I guess I'd have to think about Nedomansky as a second liner but if that's a knock it's a minor one.
Kennedy on the third line is luxury casting (obviously). Roberts feels like a reach though.
Your fourth line looks like a giant pain in the ass though.
Canada Cup Canada
Overall the forward lines... real life chemistry may give you a 10% buff on players but with Larionov you need more than 10% to beef him up to par. And it is kinda wild because I do think Kennedy would work pretty well with that line. That being said - C is already kind of your weakest position relative to the rest of the league (Kennedy is a low-end #1 at most), and you're making that more of an issue by putting Larionov as your top C.
Similarly, if Fetisov is not your #1 Dman why did you draft him? Especially since both Popisil and Suchy are borderline top pairing Dmen at best. Rest of your D is fine and goaltending is fine.
Look - overall this is a balance of "I want to draft a team around a cool theme", and as an exercise in that I love what you did. But assassinating it from a competitive perspective - I think you sacrificed some competitiveness for a cool team. And frankly, I'm glad you did because the team *is* cool.
Thanks for the good comments!
And, yes, I knew that as much as cool it would be to reunite the KLM and aiming for the Green Unit, missed Kasatonov by 1 pick, as much having Larionov as a 1C would be held against me. I get your point that Krutov and Makarov aren't good enought to make up for it, but I think you're are underevaluating peak Krutov and peak Makarov,
Peak Makarov has shown trough Canada Cup and Super Series that he had the talent to be the best player on the ice against the best NHLers.
Also, in his bio, there's an excellent post in his bio from TheDevilMadeMe, with stats showing that Makarov was one of the best point producer of his group age during his NHL career. So even if he was past his prime, he was still one the best amongst players past their prime.
Many night, Makarov will be one one of the top two forward on the ice. No, he's not a center, but he's a player who can compete with the best of them.
For Krutov, his NHL career is something most of us would like to forget. The guy wasn't the shadow of the man they used to call 'The Tank'. Long gone was one of the best forward of the 1987 Canada Cup. Seaking of the numerous Canada Cup, this is an other guy who well averaged over a point per match against top competition. In fact, he has He just never could adjust to life in Nort America.
Krutov is another player who has the potential to be on the best player on the ice, even if he isn't the best ranked one
For Larionov, I know he isn't a first center in an ATD, but the KLM is first line line in an ATD.
Missing out Kasatonov killed me. With him, I would have had a really better top 4 defenseman. Instead, I kept looking for that other Russian defenseman to replace him. Also, what didn't help my cause, is that I drafted Gonchar to play with Fetisov. For whatever reason, I was sure Gonchar was at least a righty, but he isn't even one... And now, I can admit that he wasn't the good fit, even if he had been a righty. In the end, I was made the proposal of playing Fetisov on the second pair with Dutton, who would make more sense as a partner on a top four for Fetisov than Gonchar. Unfortunately, Dutton isn't first pair material. Which lead me to made the better than average second pair of Suchy - Pospisil a weak first pair. However, a Fetisov on the second pair give me a luxury not a lot of team have. Also, that way, our power-play and penalty-kill will greatly benefit of a second pair playing Fetisov.
In the end, you're totally right. My team is cool. But , yeah, I may have got sacrificed a bit of value.
Again, missing out on Kasatonov killed me in many ways,
Going to fire through some teams with my thoughts while I have a little time -
Love the combination of Al Arbour and Ted Kennedy -- Kennedy is a player that Arbour would have loved. I love the Russian / European concept but I'm not convinced that Arbour (who I am generally very high on) would get the optimal use of them and as others have pointed out - Suchy is a bad pick in this concept but I guess we can ignore geopolitics here.
The concept also falls apart a bit outside the top lines.
Reuniting the KLM line is totally awesome ,and they will be more than the sum of their parts, but Larionov is individually going to be on the wrong end of any head-to-head matchups against other lines power on power by a large degree.
I could be wrong but I see Petrov as lower end #2 and that puts you in real bad shape at center which is a position that is completely emphasized in Soviet style hockey. Kennedy is a rich 3rd pairing guy, a great all around player, and a great captain.. but how much impact is he going to make in 3rd line minutes with no PP time?
Listing Fetisov on the second pairing is unusual but I get from up thread what you're doing.
Obviously Tretiak is solid between the pipes.
Overall, I like the idea but it is tough sometimes when you try to go in on a theme because you end up giving up value to get fit and you can corner yourself. (I've done it too!)
I know this isn't the ideal line-up geo-politically speaking line-up, but I had the impression a guy like the motivator who Al Arbour is and the tenacious leader Ted Kennedy is, they would be able to make that group of player work together.
I know Larionov is my main weakness, but power on power against other lines, Kruto and Makarov will fare pretty well against competiion.
For Kennedy, you're right, I might as well play him on the second power-play.
And I agree with you, I gave up value for fit on a couple of my pick,
