ATD#8 Foster Hewitt Semi-Final: #2 Gwinnett Gladiators vs. #3 Victoria Cougars
- Thread starter VanIslander
- Start date
VanIslander
A 19-year ATDer on HfBoards
Gwinnett Gladiators
PP1: Kharlamov - Cowley - Verbeek - Leetch - Bondra
PP2: Shutt - Morenz - Hedberg - Sologubov - Tsygankov
PK1: Sanderson - Peplinski - S.Smith - Tsygankov
PK2: Carpenter - Young - Sologubov - Tregubov
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
PP1: Kharlamov - Cowley - Verbeek - Leetch - Bondra
PP2: Shutt - Morenz - Hedberg - Sologubov - Tsygankov
PK1: Sanderson - Peplinski - S.Smith - Tsygankov
PK2: Carpenter - Young - Sologubov - Tregubov
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
Last edited:
Should be another fast-skating, free-wheeling series between two of the most offensive-minded teams in the draft. Both teams are loaded with up-tempo players, and both teams have a first line with blazing speed. Scotty Bowman was never the biggest proponent of line-matching, so hopefully we'll see the Taylor line go against the Morenz line in the games at Gwinnett. As for Sather, a high-octane line vs. a high-octane line sounds like his sort of thing. It means the checking lines might be used in spot duty.
Gwinnett has the edge in coaching, although I think the Cougars suit Sather's style more than the Gladiators suit Bowman's. But hey, you're always in great shape as long as Bowman's around.
Give an edge to Victoria in goal. Don't know how much of an edge exists - Gardiner's middle of the pack for my goalie ratings; Vezina's in the lower tier for No. 1s. I don't think it's a significant edge, but Gardiner is the better goalie. A first-team all-star in three of the first four years for the all-star teams. (And a second-team the other year).
Both teams have a good blend of defencemen who can fly, and defencemen who can hold their own zone. I think Pilote's the best defenceman in this series, and he has the perfect partner in Ivan Johnson. As has been stated many times before, Smith is miscast on the top pairing for Gwinnett. But he's likely going to see 15-18 minutes a game, so he's a top-pairing guy at even strength.
I think this series comes down to which team gets the most from their top line. I'm not convinced that Lafleur is the top forward in this series - I think Morenz is. Lafleur's a little more explosive; Morenz is better all-round. Howie had a not-so-publicized mean streak. But I like the overall top line in Victoria more, especially in a series where the focus is likely to be offence instead of defence.
Even though I'm not sold on Bondra, I like what Gwinnett has on the second line: the sheer skill of Cowley (Morenz-Cowley is one of the best 1-2 punches down the middle remaining), the scoring ability of Bondra, and Shutt's crash-the-net mentality.
I like the personel on mullin's third line, but for some reason, it doesn't work for me. They aren't a physical line, not with Damphousse. They aren't a two-way line with Guerin out there. So what are they? A third scoring line? Gwinnett's third doesn't have the greatest rhyme or reason. So expect these lines to be used the least, even with the talent that exists on both.
Don't know how much we'll see of the checking lines, but Craig Ramsay is one of the top defensive LWs in the draft. Top five, IMO. Nobody else from either team really stands out from an elite, all-time defensive perspective.
Should be a fun series to watch. Lots of speed. Lots of skill. Firewagon hockey at its finest.
Gwinnett has the edge in coaching, although I think the Cougars suit Sather's style more than the Gladiators suit Bowman's. But hey, you're always in great shape as long as Bowman's around.
Give an edge to Victoria in goal. Don't know how much of an edge exists - Gardiner's middle of the pack for my goalie ratings; Vezina's in the lower tier for No. 1s. I don't think it's a significant edge, but Gardiner is the better goalie. A first-team all-star in three of the first four years for the all-star teams. (And a second-team the other year).
Both teams have a good blend of defencemen who can fly, and defencemen who can hold their own zone. I think Pilote's the best defenceman in this series, and he has the perfect partner in Ivan Johnson. As has been stated many times before, Smith is miscast on the top pairing for Gwinnett. But he's likely going to see 15-18 minutes a game, so he's a top-pairing guy at even strength.
I think this series comes down to which team gets the most from their top line. I'm not convinced that Lafleur is the top forward in this series - I think Morenz is. Lafleur's a little more explosive; Morenz is better all-round. Howie had a not-so-publicized mean streak. But I like the overall top line in Victoria more, especially in a series where the focus is likely to be offence instead of defence.
Even though I'm not sold on Bondra, I like what Gwinnett has on the second line: the sheer skill of Cowley (Morenz-Cowley is one of the best 1-2 punches down the middle remaining), the scoring ability of Bondra, and Shutt's crash-the-net mentality.
I like the personel on mullin's third line, but for some reason, it doesn't work for me. They aren't a physical line, not with Damphousse. They aren't a two-way line with Guerin out there. So what are they? A third scoring line? Gwinnett's third doesn't have the greatest rhyme or reason. So expect these lines to be used the least, even with the talent that exists on both.
Don't know how much we'll see of the checking lines, but Craig Ramsay is one of the top defensive LWs in the draft. Top five, IMO. Nobody else from either team really stands out from an elite, all-time defensive perspective.
Should be a fun series to watch. Lots of speed. Lots of skill. Firewagon hockey at its finest.
Van I can you change this for me?
I think I'm going to make a couple of line-up changes. Quickly evaluating it. I think with the speed and skill in this series Bill Guerin might get chewed up and not offer me much back. It doesn't really look like it's going to be a war in the trenches here or anything. I was almost tempted to bring Semenko in to play with Sloan and Guerin as a crash/bang/intimidate line, but there's too much speed and skill on their side.
This is why I drafted Crisp, so I had the opportunity to insert him into the line-up if it better suited me. He's going to step in for Guerin and create a two-way line with Sloan and Damphousse. Both Crisp and Sloan can get rough and gritty if need be, all three can check their hats with decent speed. Sloan and Damphousse are both dangerous enough offensively to turn mistakes by someone like say Bondra into goals.
As a result:
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
PP1: Yakushev - Nilsson - Lafleur - Pilote - Taylor
PP2: Blake - Damphousse - Bellows - Carlyle - Jonsson
PK1: MacTavish - Ramsay - Pilote - Johnson
PK2: Crisp - Curry - Smith - Lowe
PK3: Sloan - Damphousse
(Taylor can come in on the PK if we need to pressure for a goal)
I think I'm going to make a couple of line-up changes. Quickly evaluating it. I think with the speed and skill in this series Bill Guerin might get chewed up and not offer me much back. It doesn't really look like it's going to be a war in the trenches here or anything. I was almost tempted to bring Semenko in to play with Sloan and Guerin as a crash/bang/intimidate line, but there's too much speed and skill on their side.
This is why I drafted Crisp, so I had the opportunity to insert him into the line-up if it better suited me. He's going to step in for Guerin and create a two-way line with Sloan and Damphousse. Both Crisp and Sloan can get rough and gritty if need be, all three can check their hats with decent speed. Sloan and Damphousse are both dangerous enough offensively to turn mistakes by someone like say Bondra into goals.
As a result:
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
PP1: Yakushev - Nilsson - Lafleur - Pilote - Taylor
PP2: Blake - Damphousse - Bellows - Carlyle - Jonsson
PK1: MacTavish - Ramsay - Pilote - Johnson
PK2: Crisp - Curry - Smith - Lowe
PK3: Sloan - Damphousse
(Taylor can come in on the PK if we need to pressure for a goal)
Last edited:
I don't remember Guerin being all that slow in his prime, especially for a big guy. Though his defense wasn't great, so adding Crisp to your line up does give you two solid two-way lines.
Yup but I didn't say he was slow did I? Just that the speed and skill would chew him up. He's not horrible in his own zone, but if I want to turn this line into a possible match up for Gwinnett's second unit I couldn't keep him there.
Guerin will be back in the line-up if the next series includes more of a physical element. He's also a possible fill-in 2nd line RW in case of injury.
Rick Middleton
Registered User
Gwinnett would like to announce a couple of changes. Given their lack of production, and our need to bulk up our lineup for the next round, we will be scratching Anders Hedberg and Scott Young and inserting Stan Jonathan and Chris Nilan in the lineup. The lineup is now as follows:
Valery Kharlamov - Howie Morenz - Pat Verbeek
Steve Shutt - Bill Cowley - Peter Bondra
Bobby Carpenter - Vyacheslav Starshinov - Jim Peplinski
Stan Jonathan - Derek Sanderson - Chris Nilan
Brian Leetch - Steve Smith
Babe Pratt - Gennady Tsygankov
Nikolai Sologubov - Ivan Tregubov
Georges Vezina
John Vanbiesbrouck
PP1: Kharlamov - Cowley - Verbeek - Leetch - Pratt
PP2: Shutt - Morenz - Bondra - Sologubov - Tsygankov
PK1: Sanderson - Peplinski - S.Smith - Tsygankov
PK2: Carpenter - Verbeek - Sologubov - Tregubov
Valery Kharlamov - Howie Morenz - Pat Verbeek
Steve Shutt - Bill Cowley - Peter Bondra
Bobby Carpenter - Vyacheslav Starshinov - Jim Peplinski
Stan Jonathan - Derek Sanderson - Chris Nilan
Brian Leetch - Steve Smith
Babe Pratt - Gennady Tsygankov
Nikolai Sologubov - Ivan Tregubov
Georges Vezina
John Vanbiesbrouck
PP1: Kharlamov - Cowley - Verbeek - Leetch - Pratt
PP2: Shutt - Morenz - Bondra - Sologubov - Tsygankov
PK1: Sanderson - Peplinski - S.Smith - Tsygankov
PK2: Carpenter - Verbeek - Sologubov - Tregubov
pappyline
Registered User
With all due respect, IMO, this is a big mistake. Hedberg was your best RW & a much more effective 2 way player. He was extremely fast and had great scoring ability. With Kharlamov & Morenz you had one of the best first lines in the draft. I could see them playing that criss/cross style like Hull/Nilsson/Hedberg and destroying the relatively slow Victoria defense. I simply don't see what adding Nilan & Jonathan can bring to your team other than lots of PIM's. IMO both these guys are extremely borderline for an ATD draft. Why replace a talented 2 way player with such one dimensional players.
- Feb 24, 2003
- 29,961
- 3,052
Solid changes mullin. Third line will definitely be getting some solid minutes now.
MXD
Original #4
- Oct 27, 2005
- 50,828
- 16,558
I see a big negative in your changes, RM...
Derek Sanderson definitely deserves to see more than 5-6 minutes of IT per game. The thing is, Jonathan and Nilan doesn't, and if they happen to play more than this, you're gonna have to be PK'ing much more than you afford.
Derek Sanderson definitely deserves to see more than 5-6 minutes of IT per game. The thing is, Jonathan and Nilan doesn't, and if they happen to play more than this, you're gonna have to be PK'ing much more than you afford.
Rick Middleton
Registered User
I liked the Gwinnett roster as it was. It's not going to be an overly physical series. If Gwinnett reaches the conference final, and plays a team like Nanaimo (or any other from that division), I could see swapping Verbeek and Hedberg (but keeping Hedberg in the line-up) and Young for Nilan or Jonathan. I wouldn't bring in Nilan and Jonathan. Gwinnett's original line-up works better for this series. And, as pappy mentioned, Victoria's blue-line mobility isn't stellar. Good, but not great.
I think the Guerin-for-Crisp substitution is a good one. mulls loses a fair amount of speed, but speed isn't an issue for Victoria up front. And Crisp doesn't have Guerin's shot or offensive ability. But Crisp is as physical as Guerin, and much better defensively. He gives that third line a better identity. It is a two-way line. It wasn't with Guerin there.
I think the Guerin-for-Crisp substitution is a good one. mulls loses a fair amount of speed, but speed isn't an issue for Victoria up front. And Crisp doesn't have Guerin's shot or offensive ability. But Crisp is as physical as Guerin, and much better defensively. He gives that third line a better identity. It is a two-way line. It wasn't with Guerin there.
Rick Middleton
Registered User
Yeah, scratch that. Back to the original roster.
Valery Kharlamov - Howie Morenz - Anders Hedberg
Steve Shutt - Bill Cowley - Peter Bondra
Bobby Carpenter - Vyacheslav Starshinov - Pat Verbeek
Scott Young - Derek Sanderson - Jim Peplinski
Brian Leetch - Steve Smith
Babe Pratt - Gennady Tsygankov
Nikolai Sologubov - Ivan Tregubov
Georges Vezina
JVB
Evil Sather
YOU KILL THE JOE
In a straight line, sure, but he's one of those guys whose lateral movement makes him an above average skater and nothing more. It's not a knock on him, he's good, but only a couple guys could be like Bure and maintain their speed when not going straight ahead. Guerin isn't one of them.
I don't think our D is that slow! Just saying...
But more in depth comments coming later.
I think Rick's trying to get me to bring Semenko into the game. It's tempting, Rick! But at the moment I'm gonna have to say no. I think Sloan, Ching and Dallas can handle those goons.
If the only argument is that he doesn't have Pavel Bure acceleration, the playing field seems pretty level to me.
I'm going to do a quick review of some advantages I think we have here.
Winning Attitude: The Cougars have 48 Stanley Cups between them. It's a big number. Most of the guys here who played in the NHL have at least one championship. Several of our biggest players are multi-time winners. Victoria wanted a group that knew how to win when it mattered and I think we have it.
Leadership: Not that Leetch, Verbeek and Peplinski are poor leaders or bad guys, but they don't have near the pedigree as captains and leaders that guys like Pilote, Mac T, Blake, Lowe, Crisp, Carlyle, Ramsay do. Off the top of my head look at he guys here who went on to become sucessful coaches! Blake (obviously), Crisp (cup winner), Carlyle (cup winer), Ramsay, Lowe, Mac T... that says something about the leadership of these players. It also says something about their hockey sense and ability to think the game. I don't see the same thing in Gwinnett. I think they'd be more easily rattled.
Two Way Play: We both have speed and skill, there's no questioning that. However, they don't have a player in Ramsay's league as a two-way player, and they don't have a line in Ramsay-Mac T-Curry's league as a checking unit. I'd say that Damphousse-Sloan-Crisp is actually a more effective checking unit than anything Gwinnett has, and they'd be our second line for match-ups. However, those guys are not just going out there to play D. Ramsay was a regular 20 goal scorer. Mac T and Curry scored their share of points at the NHL level including clutch situations. Damphousse is primarily known for his offensive ability (over 1000 points) but an underrated two-way player. Sloan had quite a few very good scoring seasons while being very physical and responsible. I think in terms of two-way play from forwards we're way ahead.
Incidently, that leads to...
Penalty Kill: I think if you compare the units our advantage is fairly obvious.
PK1: Sanderson - Peplinski - S.Smith - Tsygankov
PK2: Carpenter - Young - Sologubov - Tregubov
vs.
PK1: MacTavish - Ramsay - Pilote - Johnson
PK2: Crisp - Curry - Smith - Lowe
PK3: Sloan - Damphousse
Mac T and Ramsay blow Sanderson and Peplinski out of the water IMO. Add to that 1rst team all-stars Pilote and Johnson vs. Smith and Tsygankov. There's a player by player advantage for Victoria here. I think that'll make a big difference when we both have such explosive power plays.
Crisp and Curry are both known as guys counted on to play shut down rolls on Cup winning teams. Carpenter and Young can't say the same thing. Both were more well known as offensive players in their youth before developping respectable two-way games, but not to be relied upon like Crisp and Curry were in those roles. I also really love the Lowe/Smith pairing on our second PK unit as they bring great defensive awareness, Lowe's very good puck movement and Smith's strength and physical play.
Plus Sloan and Damphousse are both accomplished two-way players with some speed and Sloan's physical side.
I think it's clear Yakushev - Nilsson - Lafleur - Pilote - Taylor will score more against Sanderson - Peplinski - S.Smith - Tsygankov than Kharlamov - Cowley - Verbeek - Leetch - Pratt will against MacTavish - Ramsay - Pilote - Johnson and I think that will be a huge key for Victoria in winning this series.
Will they be able to make up the difference 5 on 5? I don't believe so. Not with my advantage in two-way forwards, equally explosive top two lines, better goaltending and IMO more responsible D.
Goaltending: Vezina gets a bit overrated IMO due to his name being on the trophy. Gardiner had one of the greatest peaks in NHL history. It was unfortunately short due to his death, but it could be argued that it's among the top 5 peak periods of any goaltender's career. He's a winner, he upped his game in the playoffs, and I believe his accomplishments rank him above Vezina.
Top D Pairing: Pilote and Johnson are both 1rst all-stars. They're both Stanley Cup winners. They were both leaders and elite players in their era. Pilote was the top scoring D of his decade while being physical enough to lay out both Richard brothers at once. Johnson was a vicious and strong checker with great defensive instincts who knew how to shut people down. Leetch is certainly worthy of a slot in the top pairing, but I don't think he has the all-around game Pilote has. He's close, but not quite there. I'd say Pilote is better in the physical game and more aware defensively while Leetch may have an edge offensively. Johnson is miles ahead of Steve Smith. Smith was barely a #2 on a regular NHL team let alone an all-time team. He may not be their #2 but he's going to be counted on to play a lot of minutes when paired with Leetch AND put on the top PK unit. I don't think Smith can handle those minutes nearly as well as Johnson can.
Other Issues: Anytime you have the greatest coach of all time you have some edge in coaching. However, I think Sather's record as a winner (4 cups) and the fact that he is very suited to my quick, skilled line-up (including Sather favourites Lowe and Mac T) is going to go a long way in negating some of that coaching advantage. I also agree with others who suggest the Gladiators aren't really a Scotty Bowman kind of team. Will he try to force some of their skilled players to play the kind of game that might diminish their returns? Will he get frustrated at the lack of two way players on this roster? I still think Scotty is an advantage, but not a significant one.
I also think we both have a tremendous amount of scoring ability. From the first to fourth lines of both teams there's a lot of speed and talent. It should be a very exciting series. I won't deny the depth up front for the Gladiators. I think it's clear Morenz is a better #1 C than Taylor (though Cyclone is a true star and does just fine), although I like my wingers and my first line overall better than theirs. I also think Yakushev is the best second line winger in the series while Bondra IMO would be the worst.
Home ice advantage will be helpful for Gwinnett in that they can get their top line away from Ramsay's line as often as possible. However, we have two lines that could be used in shut down situations and it'll be impossible for their scoring lines to always avoid one of them. We also have a strong defensive D-man in every pairing, and I'd say none of our D are remotely mistake prone. I'm also not concerned about going strength vs. strength. I think the speed and skill on our top lines equals theirs; and while both teams don't have much D on their top lines, I think the scoring would even out. Once we get to the games in Victoria it'll be a different story. Morenz's line will have Ramsay-Mac T-Curry and Pilote-Johnson in their faces all game long. Shutt-Cowley-Bondra will have to deal with either the second two-way line (Damphousse-Sloan-Crisp) or trying to hold their own against our top line. Bondra especially would get destroyed in his own zone by my top line. Other times in the game Gwinnett's third and fourth lines would face my top two units, and I don't think either line has enough two-way skill to hold them off the score sheet.
I don't want to sound like I think Gwinnett isn't going to be a tough match up. They certainly will. I wish I had a guy like Morenz on my team. I drafted Kharlamov and Leetch last draft. However, I think my leadership, two-way play and PK advantage (and as a result with such skilled PPs on both teams, my advantage in PP scoring) are absolutely the difference.
Ultimately Victoria is more playoff ready than Gwinnett.
Let the best team win!
Winning Attitude: The Cougars have 48 Stanley Cups between them. It's a big number. Most of the guys here who played in the NHL have at least one championship. Several of our biggest players are multi-time winners. Victoria wanted a group that knew how to win when it mattered and I think we have it.
Leadership: Not that Leetch, Verbeek and Peplinski are poor leaders or bad guys, but they don't have near the pedigree as captains and leaders that guys like Pilote, Mac T, Blake, Lowe, Crisp, Carlyle, Ramsay do. Off the top of my head look at he guys here who went on to become sucessful coaches! Blake (obviously), Crisp (cup winner), Carlyle (cup winer), Ramsay, Lowe, Mac T... that says something about the leadership of these players. It also says something about their hockey sense and ability to think the game. I don't see the same thing in Gwinnett. I think they'd be more easily rattled.
Two Way Play: We both have speed and skill, there's no questioning that. However, they don't have a player in Ramsay's league as a two-way player, and they don't have a line in Ramsay-Mac T-Curry's league as a checking unit. I'd say that Damphousse-Sloan-Crisp is actually a more effective checking unit than anything Gwinnett has, and they'd be our second line for match-ups. However, those guys are not just going out there to play D. Ramsay was a regular 20 goal scorer. Mac T and Curry scored their share of points at the NHL level including clutch situations. Damphousse is primarily known for his offensive ability (over 1000 points) but an underrated two-way player. Sloan had quite a few very good scoring seasons while being very physical and responsible. I think in terms of two-way play from forwards we're way ahead.
Incidently, that leads to...
Penalty Kill: I think if you compare the units our advantage is fairly obvious.
PK1: Sanderson - Peplinski - S.Smith - Tsygankov
PK2: Carpenter - Young - Sologubov - Tregubov
vs.
PK1: MacTavish - Ramsay - Pilote - Johnson
PK2: Crisp - Curry - Smith - Lowe
PK3: Sloan - Damphousse
Mac T and Ramsay blow Sanderson and Peplinski out of the water IMO. Add to that 1rst team all-stars Pilote and Johnson vs. Smith and Tsygankov. There's a player by player advantage for Victoria here. I think that'll make a big difference when we both have such explosive power plays.
Crisp and Curry are both known as guys counted on to play shut down rolls on Cup winning teams. Carpenter and Young can't say the same thing. Both were more well known as offensive players in their youth before developping respectable two-way games, but not to be relied upon like Crisp and Curry were in those roles. I also really love the Lowe/Smith pairing on our second PK unit as they bring great defensive awareness, Lowe's very good puck movement and Smith's strength and physical play.
Plus Sloan and Damphousse are both accomplished two-way players with some speed and Sloan's physical side.
I think it's clear Yakushev - Nilsson - Lafleur - Pilote - Taylor will score more against Sanderson - Peplinski - S.Smith - Tsygankov than Kharlamov - Cowley - Verbeek - Leetch - Pratt will against MacTavish - Ramsay - Pilote - Johnson and I think that will be a huge key for Victoria in winning this series.
Will they be able to make up the difference 5 on 5? I don't believe so. Not with my advantage in two-way forwards, equally explosive top two lines, better goaltending and IMO more responsible D.
Goaltending: Vezina gets a bit overrated IMO due to his name being on the trophy. Gardiner had one of the greatest peaks in NHL history. It was unfortunately short due to his death, but it could be argued that it's among the top 5 peak periods of any goaltender's career. He's a winner, he upped his game in the playoffs, and I believe his accomplishments rank him above Vezina.
Top D Pairing: Pilote and Johnson are both 1rst all-stars. They're both Stanley Cup winners. They were both leaders and elite players in their era. Pilote was the top scoring D of his decade while being physical enough to lay out both Richard brothers at once. Johnson was a vicious and strong checker with great defensive instincts who knew how to shut people down. Leetch is certainly worthy of a slot in the top pairing, but I don't think he has the all-around game Pilote has. He's close, but not quite there. I'd say Pilote is better in the physical game and more aware defensively while Leetch may have an edge offensively. Johnson is miles ahead of Steve Smith. Smith was barely a #2 on a regular NHL team let alone an all-time team. He may not be their #2 but he's going to be counted on to play a lot of minutes when paired with Leetch AND put on the top PK unit. I don't think Smith can handle those minutes nearly as well as Johnson can.
Other Issues: Anytime you have the greatest coach of all time you have some edge in coaching. However, I think Sather's record as a winner (4 cups) and the fact that he is very suited to my quick, skilled line-up (including Sather favourites Lowe and Mac T) is going to go a long way in negating some of that coaching advantage. I also agree with others who suggest the Gladiators aren't really a Scotty Bowman kind of team. Will he try to force some of their skilled players to play the kind of game that might diminish their returns? Will he get frustrated at the lack of two way players on this roster? I still think Scotty is an advantage, but not a significant one.
I also think we both have a tremendous amount of scoring ability. From the first to fourth lines of both teams there's a lot of speed and talent. It should be a very exciting series. I won't deny the depth up front for the Gladiators. I think it's clear Morenz is a better #1 C than Taylor (though Cyclone is a true star and does just fine), although I like my wingers and my first line overall better than theirs. I also think Yakushev is the best second line winger in the series while Bondra IMO would be the worst.
Home ice advantage will be helpful for Gwinnett in that they can get their top line away from Ramsay's line as often as possible. However, we have two lines that could be used in shut down situations and it'll be impossible for their scoring lines to always avoid one of them. We also have a strong defensive D-man in every pairing, and I'd say none of our D are remotely mistake prone. I'm also not concerned about going strength vs. strength. I think the speed and skill on our top lines equals theirs; and while both teams don't have much D on their top lines, I think the scoring would even out. Once we get to the games in Victoria it'll be a different story. Morenz's line will have Ramsay-Mac T-Curry and Pilote-Johnson in their faces all game long. Shutt-Cowley-Bondra will have to deal with either the second two-way line (Damphousse-Sloan-Crisp) or trying to hold their own against our top line. Bondra especially would get destroyed in his own zone by my top line. Other times in the game Gwinnett's third and fourth lines would face my top two units, and I don't think either line has enough two-way skill to hold them off the score sheet.
I don't want to sound like I think Gwinnett isn't going to be a tough match up. They certainly will. I wish I had a guy like Morenz on my team. I drafted Kharlamov and Leetch last draft. However, I think my leadership, two-way play and PK advantage (and as a result with such skilled PPs on both teams, my advantage in PP scoring) are absolutely the difference.
Ultimately Victoria is more playoff ready than Gwinnett.
Let the best team win!
Last edited:
Rick Middleton
Registered User
Jesus, by the sounds of it I might as well have the team pack their bags and start planning for their off-season excursions. To be polite, you're overestimating some of your players when compared to their counterparts and the supposed advantage you'd have against them.
Given the Euro-flavour of my team, it's unlikely I match up well against any team when comparing Stanley Cup rings. But when you add European Championships and USSR/Russian Elite League championships I'm right there with you in terms of numbers. That advantage is a wash.
I'm not sure if you're trying to be funny or if you actually think that not having an A or a C on your chest means that you'd be rattled in a playoff series. That's ridiculous. And why the heck did you add in 7 players of yours versus my captain and two assistants? Are you planning on dressing 7 players with the A? When it comes to leadership, you overlooked some minor players on my team like Howie Morenz, Steve Smith, Steve Shutt, hell, even Kharlamov cowboy upped when he had his ankle tapped by Clarke and tried to play out the rest of the series. If that doesn't show leadership I don't know what does.
You're kidding me, right? Damphousse as a defensive player? Better than my 3rd or 4th line? I won't argue that my team is based on offense first, and that you're team has arguably the better group of defensive forwards, but to dismiss players like Sanderson, Peplinski, Carpenter and Young is foolish.
Until he started to party his life away, Derek Sanderson was one of the best defensive forwards in the league, and Peplinski was a shut down PK'er. So to say that Mactavish and Ramsay blow them out of the water is a little dismissive. And I pity you if you stick Damphousse out as a PK'r against one of my lines. He'll get lit up like a Christmas tree.
Sure, you can debate whether they would outscore my top unit, but you've overlooked two things. First, you have a forward manning the point. That spells disaster against an aggressive PK unit. Second, your 2nd line PP unit doesn't hold a candle to my 2nd PP unit. So there is no tangible special team advantage.
As two other GM's have noted, your defense corps is slow. And my team is built on speed. That spells disaster 5 on 5. Get used to scenes like this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuD9-1v0Bno
Georges Vezina - #75 on the Hockey News' Top 100 players
Chuck Gardiner - #76 on the Hockey News' Top 100 players
And somehow this is a distinct advantage for Gardiner? And if worse comes to worse, I'm taking JVB over Riley Hern any day of the week. Our goaltending is a wash.
I'm growing a little tired of the Steve Smith bashing. I spread my defensive talent over the 3 units. I didn't stick my best two players on the first unit for a reason, so that when 1 group comes off I don't have to worry that I'm sending out 2 guys to get owned. These are two distinctively different defensive groups. 1 is chock full of puck movers, 1 is chock full of defensive defensemen. Both arguably play to their teams strengths.
Read Sturminator's analysis of Bondra in the player selections thread (http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?p=10689043&highlight=Bondra#post10689043). He was Washington's offense for years. He accounted for more of their offense than virtually any player in league history. Yet he's the worst of the 2nd liners in this series? In case you didn't realize it, you have Bellows on your 2nd line (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cbu9bjb44NE).
Really? Sure as **** sounded like it.
Given the Euro-flavour of my team, it's unlikely I match up well against any team when comparing Stanley Cup rings. But when you add European Championships and USSR/Russian Elite League championships I'm right there with you in terms of numbers. That advantage is a wash.
I'm not sure if you're trying to be funny or if you actually think that not having an A or a C on your chest means that you'd be rattled in a playoff series. That's ridiculous. And why the heck did you add in 7 players of yours versus my captain and two assistants? Are you planning on dressing 7 players with the A? When it comes to leadership, you overlooked some minor players on my team like Howie Morenz, Steve Smith, Steve Shutt, hell, even Kharlamov cowboy upped when he had his ankle tapped by Clarke and tried to play out the rest of the series. If that doesn't show leadership I don't know what does.
You're kidding me, right? Damphousse as a defensive player? Better than my 3rd or 4th line? I won't argue that my team is based on offense first, and that you're team has arguably the better group of defensive forwards, but to dismiss players like Sanderson, Peplinski, Carpenter and Young is foolish.
Until he started to party his life away, Derek Sanderson was one of the best defensive forwards in the league, and Peplinski was a shut down PK'er. So to say that Mactavish and Ramsay blow them out of the water is a little dismissive. And I pity you if you stick Damphousse out as a PK'r against one of my lines. He'll get lit up like a Christmas tree.
Sure, you can debate whether they would outscore my top unit, but you've overlooked two things. First, you have a forward manning the point. That spells disaster against an aggressive PK unit. Second, your 2nd line PP unit doesn't hold a candle to my 2nd PP unit. So there is no tangible special team advantage.
As two other GM's have noted, your defense corps is slow. And my team is built on speed. That spells disaster 5 on 5. Get used to scenes like this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuD9-1v0Bno
Georges Vezina - #75 on the Hockey News' Top 100 players
Chuck Gardiner - #76 on the Hockey News' Top 100 players
And somehow this is a distinct advantage for Gardiner? And if worse comes to worse, I'm taking JVB over Riley Hern any day of the week. Our goaltending is a wash.
I'm growing a little tired of the Steve Smith bashing. I spread my defensive talent over the 3 units. I didn't stick my best two players on the first unit for a reason, so that when 1 group comes off I don't have to worry that I'm sending out 2 guys to get owned. These are two distinctively different defensive groups. 1 is chock full of puck movers, 1 is chock full of defensive defensemen. Both arguably play to their teams strengths.
Read Sturminator's analysis of Bondra in the player selections thread (http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?p=10689043&highlight=Bondra#post10689043). He was Washington's offense for years. He accounted for more of their offense than virtually any player in league history. Yet he's the worst of the 2nd liners in this series? In case you didn't realize it, you have Bellows on your 2nd line (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cbu9bjb44NE).
Really? Sure as **** sounded like it.
Don't get offended Rick... I think you made some fine points for your side. It wasn't up to me to make them for you 
I was just saying what I felt my advantages were. I stand by that but of course you're going to see different things and of course play up what we think are advantages for our teams.
A couple of things from your response I'd like to point out...
-You mention that I have a forward playing the point on the PP. Cyclone Taylor played D for a very large portion of his career. He is not just some regular forward who'd be overmatched. He's known as the guy who can skate backwards as fast as he can forward.
-Brian Bellows has been on two teams that made the cup final and one championship, he scored 29 points in the North Stars playoff run, had over 1000 points and nearly 500 goals. The reason Trots and Stevens were getting on him was because he was Minnesota's biggest threat and they wanted to try to get under his skin.... typical stuff.
-You underrated Damphousse's two-way ablity. However, he's not the most important factor. He'd play almost no time on the PK but you needt o have guys ready should you get in penalty trouble. He'd also be on a line with the very good defensively Sloan and Crisp. Vinny won't have to be physical, he'll just have to rely on his good hockey sense and strong positional play.
-I simply disagree that my D are slow. Johnson is known to be slower, but he was a brilliant player. Lowe and Carlyle aren't Coffey but they wern't _slow_. Jonsson certainly wasn't. Pilote wasn't. Smith isn't speedy, but again he's a big, smart, physical D. They don't tend to be speed demons.
-The Hockey News top 100 is one source. I'll let the GMs decide if they believe it's a wash in net or not. Personally I think Gardiner is better and I think the stats and records indicate that.
-I mentioned my depth of leadership and only your captains because they are supposed to be the elite of your leadership and I think I have more than a handful of guys who are better leaders than them. Just IMO obviously.
I don't tink you can really counter the PK or Two-Way play advantage I have... but that's just how I see the series. Doesn't mean I think your team stinks! I'd love to watch them.
I was just saying what I felt my advantages were. I stand by that but of course you're going to see different things and of course play up what we think are advantages for our teams.A couple of things from your response I'd like to point out...
-You mention that I have a forward playing the point on the PP. Cyclone Taylor played D for a very large portion of his career. He is not just some regular forward who'd be overmatched. He's known as the guy who can skate backwards as fast as he can forward.
-Brian Bellows has been on two teams that made the cup final and one championship, he scored 29 points in the North Stars playoff run, had over 1000 points and nearly 500 goals. The reason Trots and Stevens were getting on him was because he was Minnesota's biggest threat and they wanted to try to get under his skin.... typical stuff.
-You underrated Damphousse's two-way ablity. However, he's not the most important factor. He'd play almost no time on the PK but you needt o have guys ready should you get in penalty trouble. He'd also be on a line with the very good defensively Sloan and Crisp. Vinny won't have to be physical, he'll just have to rely on his good hockey sense and strong positional play.
-I simply disagree that my D are slow. Johnson is known to be slower, but he was a brilliant player. Lowe and Carlyle aren't Coffey but they wern't _slow_. Jonsson certainly wasn't. Pilote wasn't. Smith isn't speedy, but again he's a big, smart, physical D. They don't tend to be speed demons.
-The Hockey News top 100 is one source. I'll let the GMs decide if they believe it's a wash in net or not. Personally I think Gardiner is better and I think the stats and records indicate that.
-I mentioned my depth of leadership and only your captains because they are supposed to be the elite of your leadership and I think I have more than a handful of guys who are better leaders than them. Just IMO obviously.
I don't tink you can really counter the PK or Two-Way play advantage I have... but that's just how I see the series. Doesn't mean I think your team stinks! I'd love to watch them.
Rick Middleton
Registered User
The difference between Bondra and Bellows is that Bellows played on some very good teams, whereas Bondra played on some real Craptacular teams. And Bondra kept scoring. I would never rank Bellows ahead of Bondra.
If you're intent on using Damphousse as a central component to checking one of my two offensive lines you're in trouble. I've watched Damphousse his entire career. I would never say that he was a lockdown defensive player, because that's what you need to have in an ATD if you're using him on a 3rd or 4th line.
Again, I'm old enough to have watched Carlyle and Lowe. Carlyle was average at best and Lowe was better but certainly not fleet of foot. Combine that with Johnson whom you admit is slow and 1/2 of your defense corps is of questionable quickness. Against arguably the fastest team in the ATD that spells trouble 5 on 5. I'm not pimping my team, just stating a fact.
A subjective selection with intent to denigrate the rest of my team. Understood loud and clear.
You don't have a sizable PK advantage, and if you are playing that 3rd PK line then good luck stopping either of my PP lines. If anything one of the few distinct advantages you do have is more two-way players, I've already stated that. The distinct disadvantage you have is a slower defense corps versus an extremely fast forward corps. Unless you're playing in old Boston Garden where team speed could be negated by a small ice surface, your team is bound to give up multiple 2 on 1's.
Sturminator
Love is a duel
For the record, I think that overall Gardiner is better than Vezina and Bondra is better than Bellows, both for reasons already discussed at length.
Ad
Upcoming events
-
2024 NHL Draft Lottery Team that wins #1 pick - PICK ONLY ONE TEAMWagers: 17Staked: $19,742.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Stanley Cup 2024 Stanley Cup Champion - ONLY BET ONE TEAMWagers: 10Staked: $17,327.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Game 2 Carolina Hurricanes @ NY Rangers - NYR leads 1-0Wagers: 4Staked: $2,309.00Event closes
- Updated:
-
