ATD#8 Foster Hewitt Final: #1 Oakland Seals vs. #3 Victoria Cougars

[VanIslander]

The Foster Hewitt division

Third Round Match-Up



Oakland Seals

Coaches: Cecil Hart, Tom Gorman
Captain: Wayne Gretzky
Alternates: Valeri Vasiliev, Bruce Stuart

Syd Howe - Wayne Gretzky - Andy Bathgate
Paul Kariya - Bernie Federko - Bruce Stuart
Jiri Holik - Edgar Laprade - Frank Finnigan
Tom Phillips - Jack Adams - Cecil Dillon

Valeri Vasiliev - King Clancy
Si Griffis - Red Horner
Mattias Norstrom - Harry Cameron

Jiri Holocek
Normie Smith

Billy Boucher, George McNamara



vs.



Victoria Cougars

Coach: Glen Sather
Captain: Pierre Pilote
Alternates: Toe Blake, Craig MacTavish

Toe Blake - Cyclone Taylor - Guy Lafleur
Alexander Yakushev - Ulf Nilsson - Brian Bellows
Craig Ramsay - Craig MacTavish - Floyd Curry
Vincent Damphousse - Tod Sloan - Terry Crisp

Pierre Pilote - Ching Johnson
Randy Carlyle - Kevin Lowe
Dallas Smith - Tomas Jonsson

Chuck Gardiner
Riley Hern

Dave Semenko, Jason Smith, Bill Guerin



----------
​

Click to read more...

 

[VanIslander]

Oakland Seals

PP1: Kariya - Gretzky - Bathgate - Cameron - Clancy
PP2: Howe - Federko - Dillon - Griffis - Vasiliev

PK1: Laprade - Finnigan - Vasiliev - Horner
PK2: Phillips - S. Howe - Griffis - Norstrom

vs.

Victoria Cougars

PP1: Yakushev - Nilsson - Lafleur - Pilote - Taylor
PP2: Blake - Damphousse - Bellows - Carlyle - Jonsson

PK1: MacTavish - Ramsay - Pilote - Johnson
PK2: Crisp - Curry - Smith - Lowe

 

[Hockey Outsider]

A few quick thougths:

- Both teams have a first-pair defenseman that might be better off with less icetime. Horner, a reckless eight-time PIM leader, risks putting the Seals a man short against a very dangerous Victoria powerplay (though, in fairness to Horner, a big part of those PIMs were probably coincidental fighting majors). Johnson was described as "slow-footed" and could be exposed against a very fast Oakland team with a great transition game.

- There are a couple of unsung playoff heroes on both teams. In my essay about the Chicago Blackhawks from last year, I showed that Pilote was an incredibly dominant playoff performer, significantly increasing his already excellent level of offense in the spring. Also, I've been convinced by Nalyd and Sturm's write-ups that Federko is the perfect example of a great playoff performer perennially stuck on weak teams.

- Really like Cecil Dillon on the 4th line. While I don't see him as a conventional 4th liner, he's protected by a solid checking LW and a very tough C. Nobody can question his durability - playing in Eddie Shore's era, he didn't miss a game for eight straight years. Dillon is probably the best goal-scorer on either team excluding 4th liners and Yakushev.

- Very interesting goalie matchup (and, coincidentally, they were taken with consecutive picks in the 4th round). Holocek is widely considered one of the top five Czechs in hockey history. In terms of non-NHL goalies, I'm not entirely sure that he's better than Tretiak, but I believe the gap is much closer than most believe. Gardiner died shortly after reaching a phenomenal peak (first team all-star 3 times in 4 years, captained (!) the Blackhawks to their first Cup in history, retired with a career 1.42 PO GAA).

- Yakushev was a big steal and looks great on the second line. I think he matches Kariya's talent and offensive instincts, but is stronger, tougher (though still clean) and can fight through traffic more effectively. He was excellent during the last few games of the Summit Series.

 

[God Bless Canada]

I'll post more extensive thoughts on this series Thursday afternoon, but IMO, the bottom line for this series is simple: do you think Oakland can effectively shadow Gretzky's line, and limit them to say, 20 cumulative points in a seven-game series? If you do, vote for Victoria. And I really like Victoria's team. It's the perfect team for that division.

If you think Gretzky's line is going to bust loose and dominate, like they did against Dubai, it's lights out. (I think Detroit and Nanaimo have the players to effectively shadow the Gretzky line, but I'm not sure about Victoria).

Craig Ramsay is a terrific defensive winger. Smart, clean and effective. He's in my top five for two-way line LWs. Gave him a long look when we got Tik. But even Ramsay would have his hands full with Bathgate. Better question: can MacT handle Gretzky. Not a slight against MacT, but this is Gretzky we're talking about. MacTavish and Kevin Lowe often played as part of a five-man shut down unit in Edmonton, and you can expect Slats to have those two out against the Gretzky unit every possible chance in Victoria.

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

One change for this series.

Top two defence pairings:
Vasiliev-Clancy
Griffis-Horner

-We need mobility to shutdown the Lafleur line, size isn't an issue. At 6'0 Lafleur is the big man of the line while Blake is 5'10 and Taylor 5'8. Clancy is strong enough to handle them, he just gets exposed by players over 6'0 and Vasliev and Holik will be double teaming Lafleur while Clancy will be talking trash and pissing off the arrogantly proud Cyclone Taylor. Finnigan can handle Toe Blake while Laprade will handle Taylor in transition and the blueline in the defensive zone. I feel comfortable saying that no defensive pairing has the mobility this one does.

-The change in the 2nd unit is simple, we respect Yakushev, the only reason we passed on him was because we wanted a better playmaker on the wing. As such, we want to make his life hell. Alex, meet Red, Red, meet Alex. Si's compossure and mobility should counter and calm Horner and limit Nilsson and Bellows.

More to come.

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

Here's Oakland's strategy.

For starters, I'd like to say that the goaltending is a wash, Gardiner has the peak value, Holocek the career value. Net value is splitting hairs.

Line Matching​

Vasiliev-Clancy
Holik-Laprade-Finnigan

vs

Lafleur-Taylor-Blake​

Already explained the logic here. If you have questions, please ask.

Griffis-Horner
Kariya-Federko-Stuart

vs

Bellows-Nilsson-Yakushev​

Already explained the defense. Up front Stuart vs Yakushev gives more power on power. Yakushev may be big and strong as an ox, but, he's not a power forward, so we believe that Horner & Stuart pounding him all series will take him off his game. We're really gunning for him, if we take him off his game, this line will be poor for a 2nd line. We like the Kariya/Bellows match up, neither is great defensively, but Kariya is much more dynamic and will be able to exploit defensive deficiencies in all three zones, while Bellows only will in the offensive zone, where Griffis will neutralize Bellows and Kariya will pressure the points. And with Victoria having a slower defense corps, Kariya's quick breakouts will lead to a lot of odd-man rushes. And with Horner having arguably the best breakout pass in the series, Kariya should be flying. Federko vs Nilsson isn't going to be anything dynamic, neither are special defensively, but both read the game well enough to not be liabilities. But we do believe Federko is a significantly better 2nd line center. And, lets face it, with a Hewitt division match-up there has to be some good fire-wagon hockey.

Norstrom-Cameron
Howe-Gretzky-Bathgate

vs

Ramsay-MacTavish-Curry​

First, this group is a perfect example of why I favour depth and diversity on defense over a concentration of talent at the top. For many teams, using Clancy as a shutdown guy would mean they lack a player who can effectively activate their top line. But, we still have hockey's first true offensive defenseman. (Previous rushing d-men like Taylor were converted forwards/rovers and often switched position, while Cameron was the first full time defenseman to be a major offensive contributor.) So yeah, we're going to go head on into the checking line. Why? Well, one, they aren't good enough to handle Gretzky. Not a knock, the truth is, no one can stop Gretzky, a rare few checking lines can slow him down. Two, with Cameron on defense it's a four man blitz, very hard to contain. Three, Victoria's checking line is very poor offensively. This means Norstrom as a safety and Holocek will be able to counter any counter attacks. Therefore, the forwards can go balls out offense without retribution.

Also, some people have questioned Howe's offense. Here's the quirk in his game, he's not a good offensive leader. If he's asked to be the playmaker, he can excel. If he's asked to be a sniper, he can excel. If he's asked to carry a line, her struggles. He's the third man on this line. And with two brilliant playmakers, his job will be to stay open in the slot and wait until Gretzky and Bathgate decide he's in great scoring position.

Vasiliev-Clancy
Phillips-Adams-Dillon

vs

Crisp-Sloan-Damphousse​

Vasiliev and Clancy double time due to being awesome. The other pairings will see time here, but these two will likely get 25 minutes a night each. Victoria's 4th line is like ours, a subversive scoring line that opponent's may not expect. Ours doubles as a pest line. Phillips and Adams are chippy, they forecheck hard and get in their opponent's face. One of their jobs is to get Sather to make the mistake of dressing Semenko, which means having a dead weight for a few minutes a game and overworking Blake and Yakushev, and them being tired is a good thing for Oakland. Damphousse and Dillon are much the same, strong offensive talents "slumming it". Dillon is better defensively and a better finisher, while Damphousse is faster and a better playmaker. Sloan's goal scoring was inconsistant and Crisp's offense is not ATD calibre. So I'm not sure how useful Damphousse's playmaking will be. Phillips' speed and skill will definitly set Dillon up though. Sloan and Adams are wash's skill wise. Adams has a better peak value and is tougher, Sloan has better career value and is better defensively. But overall they're equal. The kicker in this match-up is that Phillips is head and shoulders above Crisp. But also that the Seals' tougher line has an added purpose to just tertiary scoring.

Hart & Gorman

vs

Sather​

Hart and Sather are about equal in coaching an offensive and creative team. They know how to let players play and inspire unique play. The kicker here is Gorman. Sather is not going to create a great defensive scheme for the team. Gorman is. I say this knowing both teams are offense first, but, late in the game, the Seals will be better at locking down. And during the game they'll have better strategies to fall back on. Also, the checking units will have a strong system under the Seals team.

Note: We are not using solid five man units, there will be some mixing and matching, but for Victoria's first three lines, the defensive match-up will be the same. Against the 4th line, Vasiliev-Clancy will be most common, but others will show up, even ones not used normally. Also, the Gretzky line will steal ice time from other lines regularly, because with a line that good, 20 minutes a game is called for. The key is to do it when Sather least expects it.

Any questions, comments or concerns, I'm glad to hear and answer, so please, don't be shy.

That's all from me tonight, but the Seals organization still has more to say on this series.

 

[Sturminator]

My colleague has already explained our overall strategy quite nicely. We will seek to match 1st/3rd lines when on home ice (our 1st vs. their 3rd, etc.), but will match 2nd and 4th lines straight across. My own impressions:

Goaltending:

As Nalyd said, it is a wash. Holecek is not merely a "top 5 Czech goalie"; he is a very solid 2nd (what is the other competition - Dzurilla, whose starting job Jiri stole for most of a decade? No chance of that) behind Hasek and there is no sense in arguing which of Gardiner and Holecek is better because they're awfully close. If we must get into a debate about goalies, I've got plenty more to say about Holecek (few of the GMs here know the stories of the Czech triumphs over the Soviet Union - there was a lot of drama and probably bigger games than any Cup finals because of the political pressure), but I respect Gardiner and think it's essentially a waste of time.

Secondary scoring:

Again, GBC seems to think that Oakland cannot score past the top line (it's the only thing I can conclude from his statements about the Gretzky line being the absolute key to victory for the Seals), but that is absolutely untrue. Oakland has the best depth scoring of any team remaining in the league, and can easily survive a team that places all its eggs in one basket to check Gretzky and Bathgate, as Dubai did in the last round. The argument that the Seals beat Dubai because "the Gretzky line went off last round" in reference to how Jungosi chose to write up the series (Oakland's 3rd and 4th lines registering zero points) is pretty silly. No offense, GNC, but that's no argument, at all. A write-up is a write-up. Who knows why the voters voted as they did? HO, at the very least, seems to have a healthy respect for Oakland's depth scoring, and I suspect that other GMs do, as well.

Kariya, Federko, Dillon and Phillips are all prime secondary scorers, and Adams and Stuart are talented, as well. And that doesn't even take into account the 3rd line, which in addition to being a high-end checking unit, also has the horses to launch very effective counterattacks against defensively indifferent units (like, for example, Blake - Taylor - Lafleur), especially given the offensive talent of Oakland's defensemen. Actually, Blake and Taylor will both backcheck a bit (though neither is a defensive dynamo), but Lafleur was a complete cherry picker. Holik - Lafleur - Finnigan is arguably the most offensively talented 3rd line in the league (though I'm sure GMs in Aurora and New Jersey might have something to say about that) and will score in the counterattack against any line that sells out for offense.

Gretzky and Bathgate can afford not to backcheck much (though Syd Howe was actually a very good backchecker) because who on Victoria's 3rd line will hurt them going the other way...MacTavish? Victoria's 3rd line cannot mount a credible counterattack, while Oakland's has three guys who all possess excellent speed and know what to do with the puck in the offensive zone. Edgar Laprade is specifically mentioned in his HHOF bio as being good at exactly this:

Blessed with exceptional lateral mobility and an effortless skating style, he was a brilliant penalty killer and determined checker. Laprade could also score and was one of the league's most dangerous skaters on the counterattack.

Simply put, even if Victoria is able to match the Gretzky line's scoring (which I doubt. I respect the defensive abilities of Pilote and the Cougars' 3rd line, but Victoria doesn't have a #2 defenseman with the mobility necessary to hang with Gretzky and Co.), Oakland will kill the Cougars in secondary scoring.

- I agree that Kariya vs. Yakushev is close, and have said so in the past. The matchup is not close, however. Stuart's size, speed and checking ability is a very good counter to Yakushev's size and speed (let's not get foolish and compare Yakushev's mobility to Kariya's, however - Yak was a very good skater for a big man and could move quickly in a straight line, but he had nothing resembling Kariya's acceleration or lateral mobility) while Bellows is toast against Kariya.

- Tom Phillips vs. Terry Crisp is the single ugliest matchup of this round. I remember Crisp - he was a mediocre fringe player for a few years, then played very well for two seasons as a checker in Philly before he got hurt and was finished. He's Sammy Pahlson all over again, and he's dogmeat against Tommy Phillips, who doesn't belong on a 4th line, anyway, nevermind skating against one of the worst 4th liners in the league.

- I actually like Tod Sloan a bit better than Jack Adams. They are similar players (both are gritty scorers) and while Adams showed up more often among the league scoring leaders, Sloan played in an era of stiffer competition and I think that gives him the offensive edge here. It's not a huge difference (not the six rounds that their draft positions would indicate - Adams is underrated), but I think Sloan is a bit better. That being said, Dillon - Adams - Phillips eats Damphousse - Sloan - Crisp for lunch.

- Vinny Damphousse learned to backcheck a bit later in his career, but as a Sharks fan I can tell you (as I said a number of times before this series), he wasn't that great at it. Also, Damphousse the top-10 scorer and Damphousse the backchecker are two different players. Like Steve Yzerman, you don't get both at the same time. Cecil Dillon the checker and Cecil Dillon the record-breaking playoff goal-scorer (and retro Conn-Smythe winner) are the same player. In fact, if any retro Conn-Smythe is basically unquestionable, it is Dillon's. He simultaneously helped check Toronto's kid line to a standstill and broke the playoff goal-scoring record in the same season. Cecil Dillon vs. Damphousse is not a pretty picture for Victoria, especially given Oakland's offensive D and how badly the Seals outclass the Cougars on the line's other wing.

Clancy - Vasiliev:

This is a nightmare defensive pairing for Victoria's top line because the Cougars can't outskate those two, and they can't outskate any of Holik - Laprade - Finnigan, either. Oakland's speed on the new top pairing and 3rd line is a perfect counter to Blake - Taylor - Lafleur, while Victoria will struggle to contain the Gretzky line because of Johnson's footspeed issues. Clancy's only issue is size; he was very good in the defensive zone even in spite of his size and against a line that cannot push him around, his value goes up to that of a truly dominant 2-way defenseman.

Overall, I have a lot of respect for mullin's team, but Oakland is just a bad, bad matchup for Victoria.

 

[Jungosi]

My colleague has already explained our overall strategy quite nicely. We will seek to match 1st/3rd lines when on home ice (our 1st vs. their 3rd, etc.), but will match 2nd and 4th lines straight across. My own impressions:

Goaltending:

As Nalyd said, it is a wash. Holecek is not merely a "top 5 Czech goalie"; he is a very solid 2nd (what is the other competition - Dzurilla, whose starting job Jiri stole for most of a decade? No chance of that) behind Hasek and there is no sense in arguing which of Gardiner and Holecek is better because they're awfully close. If we must get into a debate about goalies, I've got plenty more to say about Holecek (few of the GMs here know the stories of the Czech triumphs over the Soviet Union - there was a lot of drama and probably bigger games than any Cup finals because of the political pressure), but I respect Gardiner and think it's essentially a waste of time.

Secondary scoring:

Again, GBC seems to think that Oakland cannot score past the top line (it's the only thing I can conclude from his statements about the Gretzky line being the absolute key to victory for the Seals), but that is absolutely untrue. Oakland has the best depth scoring of any team remaining in the league, and can easily survive a team that places all its eggs in one basket to check Gretzky and Bathgate, as Dubai did in the last round. The argument that the Seals beat Dubai because "the Gretzky line went off last round" in reference to how Jungosi chose to write up the series (Oakland's 3rd and 4th lines registering zero points) is pretty silly. No offense, GNC, but that's no argument, at all. A write-up is a write-up. Who knows why the voters voted as they did? HO, at the very least, seems to have a healthy respect for Oakland's depth scoring, and I suspect that other GMs do, as well.

Kariya, Federko, Dillon and Phillips are all prime secondary scorers, and Adams and Stuart are talented, as well. And that doesn't even take into account the 3rd line, which in addition to being a high-end checking unit, also has the horses to launch very effective counterattacks against defensively indifferent units (like, for example, Blake - Taylor - Lafleur), especially given the offensive talent of Oakland's defensemen. Actually, Blake and Taylor will both backcheck a bit (though neither is a defensive dynamo), but Lafleur was a complete cherry picker. Holik - Lafleur - Finnigan is arguably the most offensively talented 3rd line in the league (though I'm sure GMs in Aurora and New Jersey might have something to say about that) and will score in the counterattack against any line that sells out for offense.

Gretzky and Bathgate can afford not to backcheck much (though Syd Howe was actually a very good backchecker) because who on Victoria's 3rd line will hurt them going the other way...MacTavish? Victoria's 3rd line cannot mount a credible counterattack, while Oakland's has three guys who all possess excellent speed and know what to do with the puck in the offensive zone. Edgar Laprade is specifically mentioned in his HHOF bio as being good at exactly this:



Simply put, even if Victoria is able to match the Gretzky line's scoring (which I doubt. I respect the defensive abilities of Pilote and the Cougars' 3rd line, but Victoria doesn't have a #2 defenseman with the mobility necessary to hang with Gretzky and Co.), Oakland will kill the Cougars in secondary scoring.

- I agree that Kariya vs. Yakushev is close, and have said so in the past. The matchup is not close, however. Stuart's size, speed and checking ability is a very good counter to Yakushev's size and speed (let's not get foolish and compare Yakushev's mobility to Kariya's, however - Yak was a very good skater for a big man and could move quickly in a straight line, but he had nothing resembling Kariya's acceleration or lateral mobility) while Bellows is toast against Kariya.

- Tom Phillips vs. Terry Crisp is the single ugliest matchup of this round. I remember Crisp - he was a mediocre fringe player for a few years, then played very well for two seasons as a checker in Philly before he got hurt and was finished. He's Sammy Pahlson all over again, and he's dogmeat against Tommy Phillips, who doesn't belong on a 4th line, anyway, nevermind skating against one of the worst 4th liners in the league.

- I actually like Tod Sloan a bit better than Jack Adams. They are similar players (both are gritty scorers) and while Adams showed up more often among the league scoring leaders, Sloan played in an era of stiffer competition and I think that gives him the offensive edge here. It's not a huge difference (not the six rounds that their draft positions would indicate - Adams is underrated), but I think Sloan is a bit better. That being said, Dillon - Adams - Phillips eats Damphousse - Sloan - Crisp for lunch.

- Vinny Damphousse learned to backcheck a bit later in his career, but as a Sharks fan I can tell you (as I said a number of times before this series), he wasn't that great at it. Also, Damphousse the top-10 scorer and Damphousse the backchecker are two different players. Like Steve Yzerman, you don't get both at the same time. Cecil Dillon the checker and Cecil Dillon the record-breaking playoff goal-scorer (and retro Conn-Smythe winner) are the same player. In fact, if any retro Conn-Smythe is basically unquestionable, it is Dillon's. He simultaneously helped check Toronto's kid line to a standstill and broke the playoff goal-scoring record in the same season. Cecil Dillon vs. Damphousse is not a pretty picture for Victoria, especially given Oakland's offensive D and how badly the Seals outclass the Cougars on the line's other wing.

Clancy - Vasiliev:

This is a nightmare defensive pairing for Victoria's top line because the Cougars can't outskate those two, and they can't outskate any of Holik - Laprade - Finnigan, either. Oakland's speed on the new top pairing and 3rd line is a perfect counter to Blake - Taylor - Lafleur, while Victoria will struggle to contain the Gretzky line because of Johnson's footspeed issues. Clancy's only issue is size; he was very good in the defensive zone even in spite of his size and against a line that cannot push him around, his value goes up to that of a truly dominant 2-way defenseman.

Overall, I have a lot of respect for mullin's team, but Oakland is just a bad, bad matchup for Victoria.

I agree with Sturminator here. Oakland's second scored a good amout of points and for the third and fourth lines I must admit that I overlooked them a bit in terms of scoring as I did in the first write-up. My thoughts were a bit like that they will have their hands full with shutting down the Russians (who are responseable defensily) and won't do much damage against Dubai's 2nd line.

 

[shawnmullin]

Unfortunately guys I'm in Quesnel and Prince George this weekend with the Smoke Eaters. I'll do my best to defend my side of things here, but I don't have a lot of time and internet access to do it.

I have a lot of faith in a Ramsay/Mac T/Curry/Pilote/Johnson unit up against the Gretzky unit.

1) Ramsay is one of the best two-way wingers ever. He'll be key in taking away Gretzky's passing options, stealing pucks and shutting down the PP.

2) Mac T is a cup winning shut down C. He was a fantastic face off man so he'll get control of the puck from Gretzky off the draw more often than not. He blocks shots, gets in lanes, puts his body on the line and has very good puck anticipation. He also knows Gretzky. They played together several years and Mac is a student of the game. Surely he's analyzed Wayne and knows some of his tends. You can never STOP Gretzky but you can work to contain him. Mac T knows him and will do everything in his power.

3) Curry is underrated as a two-way player. He spent his life as a threat offensively but converted his game in the NHL so he could be a part of a winning team in Montreal. However, just like the others on this line that Oakland says couldn't threaten offensively, he has an underrated game in that way. For example, Curry scored 20 goals and 38 points one year. 14 goals and 38 points another year. 12 points in 12 playoff games one year, including 8 goals. 7 points in 11 playoff games in another year.

Craig Ramsay scored 672 points in 1070 games while focusing primarily on defending the other team's top line. Clearly if he had been focused on scoring his numbers could've been higher. He had 8 consecutive seasons of 20 plus goals! He wasn't a fluke scorer one year, he was a consistent threat while being lights out as a checker.

Mac T scored 20 plus goals 5 times. 40 plus points 4 times. That despite being a checking line player who didn't ever see time with scoring forwards or PP time.

I'm not arguing that these guys are top line scorers, but I am saying that if your players are forced into mistakes... these guys can capitalize on them. Ramsay especially has a very good touch.

4) Pierre Pilote is Pierre Pilote. I know you guys all ready gave him the credit he deserves. An important part of his game is also his physical play. He is going to try to beat up on Gretzky any chance he gets.

5) Ching Johnson, once again bashed for his skating. No one is saying he's Paul Coffey, but that didn't stop him from being a 1rst team All-Star and Cup winner. His physical play will be unmatched by anyone on your top unit, his positioning and defensive play is how he makes up for his speed. It's easy to point out one flaw in any player, and I'm sure people told Johnson his whole career he wasn't fast enough, yet he kept getting the job done and he kept winning. Gretzky isn't exactly known for his skating either. Intelligence on the ice is what makes good players great. Johnson will do his job and he'll do it well.

But I know Gretzky's line will get their points. As GBC suggested, the idea is to try to stop them from winning the series for you.

I'm considering the option of Yakushev on the top line. Anyone have any thoughts on that possibility? Maybe create a bit more traffic in front that way, add some size. Though I really like the pure speed and skill on that line as it is.

 

[shawnmullin]

Incidently, I respect Holicek as well. I wouldn't trash him. I think both goalies should and could go higher in the draft than they do. I think Gardiner had a greater peak but it's VERY difficult to compare their competition isn't it? How do you compare a star goaltender in the 1930s NHL to a star goaltender in international competition?

I still believe Gradiner's peak is top 5 in NHL history, but it's tough for me to qualify how that would compare him to your 'tender.

 

[shawnmullin]

I'll defend these things in incriments when I have moments as I do now...

RE: Terry Crisp

A fringe player for several seasons is not a fair statement. It's easier to say his abilities as a checker were only successful in Philadelphia because that's where he won his Cups. However, what about in St. Louis? Where his checking ability was an important part of a team that dominated their division and went to several Cup finals? He wasn't ever really a scorer, he's a pest, he's physical, and he will make life difficult for his opponents. He did score around 0.4 points per game in the regular season and the playoffs. Not dangerous offensively but not completely inept or anything. But it'll be Damphousse and Sloan who convert the chances on that line when they do get them.

And this leaves me Guerin as a fill in forward should things get physical or someone gets hurt.

 

[Sturminator]

4) Pierre Pilote is Pierre Pilote. I know you guys all ready gave him the credit he deserves. An important part of his game is also his physical play. He is going to try to beat up on Gretzky any chance he gets.

5) Ching Johnson, once again bashed for his skating. No one is saying he's Paul Coffey, but that didn't stop him from being a 1rst team All-Star and Cup winner. His physical play will be unmatched by anyone on your top unit, his positioning and defensive play is how he makes up for his speed. It's easy to point out one flaw in any player, and I'm sure people told Johnson his whole career he wasn't fast enough, yet he kept getting the job done and he kept winning. Gretzky isn't exactly known for his skating either. Intelligence on the ice is what makes good players great. Johnson will do his job and he'll do it well.

Gretzky wasn't known for his speed the same way that Jerry Rice wasn't: he never looked like he was moving that fast, and yet noone could ever seem to catch him. Gretzky often didn't skate as fast as he could because he was the master of letting a play develop before making his move, but when he wanted to go, Wayne could certainly move. Comparing Ching Johnson's skating to Gretzky's is probably not really the angle you want to take.

As for Pilote beating up on Gretz, are you serious? Nevermind the fact that Gretzky was probably the hardest player in NHL history to lay a clean check on (did Wayne ever put his head down?), is "getting physical" with Pierre Pilote really the right thing to do against a team that ices Red Horner, not to mention Andy Bathgate on Gretzky's line? Although I respect Pilote's physicality and strength, either of those men could crush him in a fight (Horner might send him to the hospital) and do you really think the refs are going to protect Pilote if he starts taking cheap shots at Gretzky (which is damn near the only way to hit him...cough...Suter...cough)? I'll take the trade off of Bathgate or Horner for Pilote in a fight if it comes to that, ignoring for a moment the fact that Pilote may very well be injured in the process.

 

[Sturminator]

I'll defend these things in incriments when I have moments as I do now...

RE: Terry Crisp

A fringe player for several seasons is not a fair statement. It's easier to say his abilities as a checker were only successful in Philadelphia because that's where he won his Cups. However, what about in St. Louis? Where his checking ability was an important part of a team that dominated their division and went to several Cup finals?

Crisp was exposed and taken in two consecutive expansion drafts, going from the Boston organization (after getting a three game cup of coffee with the Bruins) to St. Louis and then from St. Louis to the New York Islanders (which is where Crisp enters the picture for me - he was an original Islander), where he played for part of a season before being traded to Philly. He was not a player who would have seen anything resembling regular NHL icetime had it not been for expansion - it's as simple as that. By modern NHL standards, Crisp was a good 3rd line checker who had a nice little peak and then got hurt. By ATD standards, he doesn't belong in the league. Tommy Phillips is good enough to overmatch any 4th liner in the league (besides maybe Cecil Dillon), but against Crisp it's not even remotely close.

 

[shawnmullin]

Gretzky wasn't known for his speed the same way that Jerry Rice wasn't: he never looked like he was moving that fast, and yet noone could ever seem to catch him. Gretzky often didn't skate as fast as he could because he was the master of letting a play develop before making his move, but when he wanted to go, Wayne could certainly move. Comparing Ching Johnson's skating to Gretzky's is probably not really the angle you want to take.

As for Pilote beating up on Gretz, are you serious? Nevermind the fact that Gretzky was probably the hardest player in NHL history to lay a clean check on (did Wayne ever put his head down?), is "getting physical" with Pierre Pilote really the right thing to do against a team that ices Red Horner, not to mention Andy Bathgate on Gretzky's line? Although I respect Pilote's physicality and strength, either of those men could crush him in a fight (Horner might send him to the hospital) and do you really think the refs are going to protect Pilote if he starts taking cheap shots at Gretzky (which is damn near the only way to hit him...cough...Suter...cough)? I'll take the trade off of Bathgate or Horner for Pilote in a fight if it comes to that, ignoring for a moment the fact that Pilote may very well be injured in the process.

RE: Ching

I wasn't comparing his skating to Gretzky. What I was saying is being quick is not the only way to be effective. Gretzky is not a fast straight line skater but he didn't need to be.

The point is not that Johnson is as quick as Gretzky, the point is that one flaw in his game is not enough to say he wouldn't be effective when there's a great deal of history suggesting he always was.

RE: Pilote

I don't intend to have him take cheap shots. I'm saying he can get physical with him and he's certainly more likely to lay him out with a legit hit than most defenceman. This is a guy who knocked out both Richard brothers. We're not talking about scrubs.

I Don't want Pilote fighting but he's certainly not going to get sent to the hospital.

 

[Sturminator]

The point is not that Johnson is as quick as Gretzky, the point is that one flaw in his game is not enough to say he wouldn't be effective when there's a great deal of history suggesting he always was.

As for the one flaw in Ching's game, it's all matchup dependent. Against many teams and lines, it wouldn't be such a liability, but against the Gretzky line lack of footspeed is a pretty big issue. Not only are they fast (as is the entire team, including defensemen), but they're also one of the best passing lines that it is possible to assemble (Gretzky is Gretzky and Bathgate is arguably the best playmaking RW in history - this line could have Taylor Pyatt on the left wing and still be maybe the best passing unit in the league); the puck movement between those three and Oakland's offensive D is going to take very quick defensemen to follow. It's just a poor matchup for Johnson, in transition and down low.

 

[Sturminator]

I Don't want Pilote fighting but he's certainly not going to get sent to the hospital.

You do realize that with one punch Red Horner left Eddie Shore lying unconscious in a pool of his own blood after the Ace Bailey incident, right? Pierre Pilote is tough, but tougher than Eddie Shore? Horner is a much bigger man who is quite possibly the toughest fighter in hockey history (though arguments can be made for Earl Seibert and Lionel Conacher, as well). It would be in the Cougars' best interests to avoid fighting, entirely.

At any rate, as far as PIMs in the playoffs are concerned, I showed earlier that Ching Johnson actually drew them at a higher rate than Horner over his career, so if we want to discuss penalty liabilities and dangerous powerplays, it works both ways. A bit more on Johnson's penalty issues - this comes from a 1933 New York Times article on game 1 of the Stanley Cup Finals between the Rangers and Leafs:

Maple Leaf penalties gave the Rangers an opening in the next period. They failed to take advantage of it, as did the Leafs in the last period when bald-headed Ching Johnson got one of his frequent penalties for tripping.

Ouch. And that's Johnson's hometown paper talking about his penchant for taking minor penalties. Ching Johnson wasn't known as a great fighter and yet his PIMs balloon in the playoffs to more that 2.5 PIMs/game. If we want to discuss players who are likely to put their team down a man in the playoffs (especially against a line that he can't keep up with), I submit Ching Johnson as Exhibit A.

- also, there is a broader point that should be made concerning Red Horner. He may end up taking a fair number of 5 minute majors against teams that want to get physical, but he is also going to win the vast majority of his fights. Everyone knows that players get hurt sometimes in fights. The tradeoff to fighting with Red Horner is that although you may get an advantageous exchange in terms of matching penalties, you may also end up with players who have, in the immortal words of The Pixies, "a broken face".

Actually, looking around the league, I don't see too many more Dale Hunters out there, so most of the guys who Horner may fight in this series and beyond (should Oakland advance) aren't going to be superb tradeoffs in terms of talent if both end up in the penalty box.

 

[Sturminator]

1) Ramsay is one of the best two-way wingers ever. He'll be key in taking away Gretzky's passing options, stealing pucks and shutting down the PP.

Uhm...if you said of Dickie Moore "he's one of the best two-way wingers ever" I would agree with you, but in Ramsey's case, it's hyperbole. Ramsey was a very good checker with some offensive skills, though I shouldn't have to remind you that scoring 20 goals in the 70's wasn't quite the same thing as scoring 20 goals back when Frank Finnigan was doing it.

2) Mac T is a cup winning shut down C. He was a fantastic face off man so he'll get control of the puck from Gretzky off the draw more often than not. He blocks shots, gets in lanes, puts his body on the line and has very good puck anticipation. He also knows Gretzky. They played together several years and Mac is a student of the game. Surely he's analyzed Wayne and knows some of his tends. You can never STOP Gretzky but you can work to contain him. Mac T knows him and will do everything in his power.

The "familiarity" argument works both ways. Are we assuming that Gretzky learned nothing in practice against MacTavish? That MacTavish was the smarter player? Generally, I would favor the smarter player in terms of who gains from familiarity, in which case Gretzky wins this going away. The fact that Gretz and MacT played together in Edmonton is a wash for Victoria, at best.

3) Curry is underrated as a two-way player. He spent his juniors career as a threat offensively but converted his game in the NHL so he could be a part of a winning team in Montreal. However, just like the others on this line that Oakland says couldn't threaten offensively, he has an underrated game in that way. For example, Curry scored 20 goals and 38 points one year. 14 goals and 38 points another year. 12 points in 12 playoff games one year, including 8 goals. 7 points in 11 playoff games in another year.

Fixed that for you.

Ramsey - MacTavish - Curry have some offensive talent, but not a single one of them is as good offensively as any of Holik - Laprade - Finnigan. Defensively, the lines are about even, but there is a big gap offensively, not to mention the fact that Oakland's defense is better going both ways on both the 1st and 3rd pairings (which are the likely matchups here).

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

Once again, my reasons for prefering depth over top end talent on defense.

Pilote is a dynamic rushing defenseman. He does great work with the type of players you have on your front line. He's also the only d-man on your team with the combination of smarts and mobility to have a chance against the Gretzky line.

So what's it going to be? Do you overwork Pilote? Do you utilize his defensive strengths, but leave the Lafleur line with Randy Carlyle activating them? Do you use him with Lafleur but give the Gretzky line space to opperate?

 

[shawnmullin]

Once again, my reasons for prefering depth over top end talent on defense.

Pilote is a dynamic rushing defenseman. He does great work with the type of players you have on your front line. He's also the only d-man on your team with the combination of smarts and mobility to have a chance against the Gretzky line.

So what's it going to be? Do you overwork Pilote? Do you utilize his defensive strengths, but leave the Lafleur line with Randy Carlyle activating them? Do you use him with Lafleur but give the Gretzky line space to opperate?

I _do_ think I have depth on defense. Pilote is a top end talent, but it's not like I loaded up with top end guys and got scrubs for my bottom 4. Carlyle is a Norris winner, Johnson is a first team all-star, Lowe is the picture of steady and reliable... and a winner. Smith is very reliable in his own zone and strong as an ox. Jonsson is a Cup winner who is was very good at moving the puck.

My D has a puck mover on each pairing so they'll be fine. Carlyle absolutely could activate the Lafleur line. Pilote absolutely can play 30 minutes a game. It's playoff time, that's what top D men do come playoff time. So he can spend some time in both situations.

 

[shawnmullin]

Uhm...if you said of Dickie Moore "he's one of the best two-way wingers ever" I would agree with you, but in Ramsey's case, it's hyperbole. Ramsey was a very good checker with some offensive skills, though I shouldn't have to remind you that scoring 20 goals in the 70's wasn't quite the same thing as scoring 20 goals back when Frank Finnigan was doing it.

Ramsey - MacTavish - Curry have some offensive talent, but not a single one of them is as good offensively as any of Holik - Laprade - Finnigan. Defensively, the lines are about even, but there is a big gap offensively, not to mention the fact that Oakland's defense is better going both ways on both the 1st and 3rd pairings (which are the likely matchups here).

Wait, back when Frank Finnigan was doing it... twice? Ramsay didn't do it just twice, he did it over and over again. Your third line has a scoring edge, but it's not nearly as big as you believe it is. Finnigan scored 20 goals twice. He only scored 115 times in 556 games. It's not like he was an offensive machine. Laprade scored 20 goals once. 108 goals in 500 games. Less scoring in their era sure, but we're not talking about all-star goal scorers.

Ramsay scored 252 in 1070 games. 213 in 1093 games. Floyd Curry scored 105 goals in 601 games. Their GPG ratios are not far off.

However, my checking line knows what their focus is. They're a better checking line and I have a lot of faith in their abilities in that role.

 

[Sturminator]

Wait, back when Frank Finnigan was doing it... twice? Ramsay didn't do it just twice, he did it over and over again. Your third line has a scoring edge, but it's not nearly as big as you believe it is. Finnigan scored 20 goals twice. He only scored 115 times in 556 games. It's not like he was an offensive machine. Laprade scored 20 goals once. 108 goals in 500 games. Less scoring in their era sure, but we're not talking about all-star goal scorers.

Actually, Finnigan probably would have been an all-star had such a thing existed during his peak. Frank Finnigan's offensive peak came during the 44 game season era (the changeover from 44 to 48 games came in-between the 30-31 and 31-32 seasons). In 26-27, he scored 15 goals, which placed him one goal outside of the NHL top-10 (the 10th leading goalscorer had 16 goals). In the next two seasons, Finnigan would finish 6th in NHL goalscoring, putting up 20 and 15 goals, respectively, before his 21 goal campaign in 29-30 (the outlier year), which again saw him narrowly out of the top-10.

During his peak, Frank Finnigan was a 1st line forward who was known as one of the best two-way players in the league. Scoring 15-20 goals during Finnigan's peak years was the equivalent of scoring 40-50 during Ramsay's peak years, both because of fewer games played and differences in the style of play. Finnigan's post-peak years (in which he scored 8, 9, 10 goals) are comparable to Ramsay's scoring pace, and in fact, at that point in his career Finnigan played much the same role as Ramsay - that of a checker who could contribute a bit offensively.

But that was Frank Finnigan past his prime. Frank Finnigan in his prime was a 1st liner on some very good Ottawa teams, and carved out enough of a place for himself in history to garner a few votes from the fine people at the Worldwide Hockey Hall of Fame (who are notorious for not giving old-timers their credit). At his peak, Finnigan was simply a much better offensive player than Ramsay was. Defensively, they're about equal. I don't think Finnigan's three retro Selke's from Ultimate Hockey make him the better defensive player, but suffice it to say he was, like Ramsay, an excellent checking forward.

Laprade was a playmaker moreso than a goalscorer, and in fact peaked at 3rd in the NHL in assists in 47-48. During his peak, Laprade also placed just outside the top-10 on a couple of other occasions, tallying 25 assists in 46-47 when the 10th place finisher had 27, and finishing one goal out of the top-10 in 49-50 in just 60 games (the league played 70 game seasons at the time). This was on some really bad offensive Rangers teams which featured little in the way of scoring talent besides Laprade and Buddy O'Connor. It should also be noted that Edgar Laprade played in the first four all-star games, consecutively, back when the format was the Cup winners vs. the best of the rest of the league. Obviously, his contemporaries thought he was a pretty good hockey player, and the guys in Toronto seem to share that opinion.

Jiri Holik is probably the best offensive player on the line, but I already discussed him enough in the last round.

Comparing the raw numbers straight across without taking into account number of games played (even in Laprade's era, they played only 70 games) and leaguewide scoring badly distorts the offensive comparisons. All three of Oakland's 3rd liners are players who peaked as high-end scorers while none of Victoria's 3rd liners even came near a top-10 scoring finish.

It should also be said that Syd Howe is the best backchecker on either 1st line and that Oakland's 3rd pairing of Cameron - Norstrom (which will often skate with the Gretzky line) is considerably better than Smith - Jonsson mostly because Harry Cameron kills every other 3rd pairing defenseman in the league. So not only do the Seals have by far the better 3rd line in counterattack, but they also defend better straight across.

Unless, of course, you're planning on using Carlyle - Lowe with the 1st line and using Smith - Jonsson against Kariya - Federko - Stuart. I sort of get the impression that's your plan, but if that's the case, the Kariya line is going to have a field day with Smith and Jonsson, who are both solid 3rd pairing defensemen in their respective roles, but not the guys you want lined up against players like Kariya and Federko with Oakland's offensive D in support, especially considering how little backchecking Victoria's 2nd line will do.

However, my checking line knows what their focus is. They're a better checking line and I have a lot of faith in their abilities in that role.

They are most definitely not better defensively than Holik - Laprade - Finnigan.

 

[shawnmullin]

Right, I gotcha... they're much worse offensively AND defensively. Glad we cleared that up!

We all like our teams so you know, fair enough. You can certainly think that. As a checking unit there's no question I would take Ramsay/Mac T/Curry over Holik/Laprade/Finnigan. You think your line is better defensively and offensively hey by all means. Ultimately the voters will decide what Ramsay/Mac T/Curry can do against a top offensively unit. Personally I have a lot of faith in that line and expect very good things from them. I also really believe in the strength of my PK and defensive pairings in standing up in our own zone and turning up the juice offensively for my top units.

It's kinda tough debating one man against two when I'm as busy as I am right now... but I'll keep doing my best! Won't go down without a fight *laugh*

 

[Sturminator]

Right, I gotcha... they're much worse offensively AND defensively. Glad we cleared that up!

Actually, I think the 3rd lines are pretty much equal defensively. I think I said something to that effect earlier, but if not, there it is. I never saw Floyd Curry play, however I saw enough of Ramsay and MacTavish to know that they were excellent checkers, but then so were Holik, Laprade and Finnigan. The difference is on offense, not defense.

 

[VanIslander]

Divisional Finals: Game One

Seals slaughtered at home 7-1
Lafleur's late hat trick angers Oakland crowd

(vi) The game was effectively over by the 16-minute mark with the Cougars' fourth goal of the opening period on their first shot against the hometown backup goalie Normie Smith who had moments before replaced the struggling Seals starter Holecek, the Czech star having given up three even-strength goals on nine shots, to Bellows, Blake and Yakushev, in the third, eleventh and fifteenth minutes respectively. Pilote scored the backbreaker, his first goal of the series and second of four points on the night, on a chip toward a net-crashing Yukushev that had eyes and bounced through traffic to make it 4-0. The second period was scoreless but not through a lack of effort as Oakland took a 26-14 shot advantage into the third. Cougars star netminder Gardiner made two highlight saves, off of Gretzky and Bathgate, and he later credited the defense with keeping Seals forwards at bay and clearing several key rebounds. The winning goalie was tested early in the third on a Kariya wristshot from the left face-off circle, deflecting it just wide with his blocker. The Cougars took a double minor unsportsmanlike penalty on a clearing attempt as Ching Johnson rocketed the puck off of Federko's forehead, opening a gash. King Clancy got a 5-minute major and game misconduct in suckerpunching Johnson shortly after he got out of the box. Two quick goals by Lafleur on the powerplay drove up the score and rounds of boos circled the arena. The biggest cheers of the evening came on Finnigan's goal with six minutes remaining, to ruin Gardiner's shutout bid. Lafleur's empty netter in the last minute was met with debris on the ice which took nearly ten minutes to clean up to finish the game. The three stars of the game: 1. Pilote 2. Gardiner 3. Lafleur

 

[VanIslander]

Divisional Finals: Game Two

Bathgate scores OT winner
Four assists to Gretzky ties series 1-1

(vi) This game had a bit of everything so it's apt that it ends on an overtime powerplay goal off the stick of Cougars Dallas Smith in a botched clearing attempt after a hard slapper of Seals Bathgate from The Great One in his office. The Seals had tied the game up in the middle of the third on a partial breakaway by Syd Howe thanks to a Gretzky pass which split Carlyle and Lowe like slices of bread. "Last round we beat two who looked like Gretzky (Kharlamov, Morenz), now we have to beat the real thing," said Cougars coach Sather after the game. The penalty kill was identified as needing improvement as the boys from Victoria gave up two goals on five penalties taken in the tight 4-3 game. Cougars goalie Gardiner played well but many of the 32 shots he faced were quality scoring chances. At the other end, Holecek robbed Lafleur and Damphousse early in the first and the only soft goal was a five-hole flicker by Bellows in close. Blake and Yakushev opened an early Cougars 2-0 lead but Clancy narrowed the gap shortly thereafter and Bathgate tied it all up before the first period was over. The three stars of the game: 1. Gretzky 2. Bathgate 3. Taylor