ATD #9 Jim Robson Quarterfinal: #4 Winnipeg Jets vs. #5 Regina Pats

[FissionFire]

The Winnipeg Jets
Coach: Glen Sather
Captain: #5 Denis Potvin
Assistant Captain #1 (Home): #19 Joe Sakic
Assistant Captain #2 (Home): #25 Doug Jarvis
Assistant Captain #3 (Away): #9 Roy Conacher
Assistant Captain #4 (Away): #3 Marcel Pronovost

#9 Roy Conacher (A) - #19 Joe Sakic (A) - #21 Tim Kerr
#8 Alexander Ovechkin - #22 Buddy O'Connor - #10 Owen Nolan
#11 Jean-Paul Parise - #25 Doug Jarvis (A) - #14 Claude Provost
#12 Paul Henderson - #39 Doug Weight - #88 Ken Randall
Scratches: C, #32 Tom Lysiak, RW, #25 Willi Plett

#3 Marcel Pronovost (A) - #5 Denis Potvin (C)
#4 William "Flash" Hollett - #34 Jamie Macoun
#6 Calle Johansson - #8 Clarence "Taffy" Abel
Scratches: D, #7 Gennady Tsygankov

#2 Jiri Holecek
#35 Andy Moog

PP Unit 1: Conacher - O'Connor - Kerr - Sakic - Potvin
PP Unit 2: Ovechkin - Weight - Nolan - Hollett - Pronovost
PK Unit 1: Parise - Jarvis - Potvin - Macoun
PK Unit 2: Henderson - Provost - Pronovost - Abel



The Regina Pats
coach: Bob Johnson

Alexander Yakushev - Gilbert Perreault - Lanny McDonald (A)
Vladimir Krutov - Vincent Lecavalier - Pat Verbeek
Kirk Muller (A) - Metro Prystai - Marian Hossa
Dan Maloney - Ken Linseman - Pie McKenzie
Billy Gilmour, Peter McNab

Serge Savard (C) - Vladimir Konstantinov
Adam Foote - Steve Duchesne
Bob Goldham - Graham Drinkwater
Mattias Ohlund

Jacques Plante
John Ross Roach

PP#1
???

PP#2
???

PK#1
???

PK#2
???​

Click to read more...

 

[seventieslord]

Woohoo!!!

I'm not last!

I have to go to bed right now.... will be back tomorrow to post rosters and PP/PK units.

 

[Kuzmenkshow]

wooo go Jets!

 

[vancityluongo]

Whoa. 4th eh? That's not bad considering how many solid teams are in this division, although this means that I won't get a easy matchup.

I'll post more thoughts later, but this is going to be a helluva series 70's, and best of luck to ya.

 

[vancityluongo]

Also, could I get some feedback from someone on my PP units? I really want to have Sakic on the point, because I think that would really give the PP an extra offensive element to have that sniper wrist shot back there, but that makes me have to put Doug Weight in there somewhere, which I don't know if I want to do...

 

[FissionFire]

You could always double-shift Sakic for the entire PP and just rest him for a minute or two once it ends.

 

[Kuzmenkshow]

Hey VCL, lets put Ovechkin on the right point for one or both of the units? He has a wicked shot and plays there with the caps, how he gets a lot of his goals.

 

[vancityluongo]

You could always double-shift Sakic for the entire PP and just rest him for a minute or two once it ends.

Hey VCL, lets put Ovechkin on the right point for one or both of the units? He has a wicked shot and plays there with the caps, how he gets a lot of his goals.

Both good suggestions. Right now, I think lets go with these units:

Conacher-Sakic-Nolan-Potvin-Johansson
Ovechkin-O'Connor-Kerr-Hollett-Pronovost

Ovechkin and Sakic can play the point when needed, both can switch with Pronovost and Johansson when neccasary.

 

[seventieslord]

First, my PP and PK units:

PP1:
Yakushev-Perreault-McDonald
Savard-Duchesne

PP2:
Krutov-LeCavalier-Verbeek
Konstantinov-Hossa

PK1:
Prystai-Muller
Goldham-Foote

PK2:
Hossa-Linseman
Savard-Konstantinov

 

[vancityluongo]

Offense:

I like the top lines of both teams. I've stated a few times that I had Gilbert Perreault targeted since before the draft, but when Sakic fell to me, that plan changed. So obviously, I feel that Sakic is better then Perreault. I like Lanny McDonald, and I'll admit that Tim Kerr is a bit of a poor man's version if that's the way you want to phrase it. Roy Conacher however, is IMO a generally underrated player, and alongside Kerr and Burnaby Joe, completes IMO, a very strong top line, which as a unit, IMO, has an advantage over Regina's top line. I think physicality has to be a question mark for the Pats, especially against two physical guys in Conacher and Kerr, although Lanny wasn't bad.

Second lines are interesting. I like the mix of the second line, and while they won't score nearly as much as Regina's, I think for the role that they're in, they'll be okay. Regina has an advantage I'll admit here. Lecavalier is basically like Ovechkin if you want to look at things that way. Just that Vinny has a cup, and a few more years experience. Ovechkin's been more dominating in his limited number of years however. Don't know if I'd put Verbeek on the second line myself, but I think it probably will work for you. Similarly to my second line, I think you have guys that go well with each other. I've already shared my thoughts on my second line, but I'll say it again here: I really, really like the mix we have. Ovechkin is the talent; the goals, the speed, the flash. O'Connor is the speedy playmaking center. Nolan is the size and the grit. He'll open up some room for the smaller O'Connor and the not-massive Ovechkin. I haven't made this reference yet I don't think, but when building this line, my initial idea was to make a weakened ATD version of the WCE from the Canucks early 2000's.

Scoring from the bottom lines is a tough one IMO. You have guys like Hossa, Maloney, McNab, all capable of scoring some goals. I have guys like Henderson (he could score, I'm not just talking '72 either) Weight (playmaker, but meh, he's offensively capable), Randall, Plett, and Lysiak. I'm biased, so I obviously think I have this category, but either way I think it's at least close.

Offense from the backend will be interesting. Savard could turn on the offense if he wanted. Duchesne is offense-only. Graham Drinkwater had some ability to score goals and carry the puck. On the flip side however, Potvin, Pronovost, Johansson and Hollett are no slouches. Hollett was one of the best offensive defensemen of his time. Johansson was a super underrated guy all round, but espcially offensively. This guy had some skill. Not much needs to be said about Potvin, and while Pronovost was known as a defensive/two-way defensemen, he also had offensive abilities that were sometimes overlooked due to his stellar defensive play. I give Winnipeg the advantage here.

Winner: I like our top line, Regina has the advantage on the second line. The bottom forwards are close, while I like our defense better. I'm gonna give this one to us, although it's probably pretty close.

I'll do the rest tommorow.

 

[seventieslord]

I'm having so much fun reading the other playoff threads but now it is time to participate in my own. Here, briefly, is why I will win the series:

1) Goaltending. Plante is a top-3 goalie, and in the opinion of the highest number of ATD GM's, the best goalie. He has no weakness to his game in the regular season or playoffs. His collection of hardware is rivaled by few. He is a Hart winner and owner of a semi-official Conn Smythe trophy. His GAA goes down 10% in the playoffs while his likelihood of winning a game goes up 26%. Likewise, his shutouts per game go up 28% in the playoffs. Simply put, the man is money. Holecek is a starter in the top half of the goalies selected, and we have to attempt to picture him in this type of setting. To imagine him beating Plante in a head to head matchup requires a lot of imagination.

2) We are even at 41 cups apiece (by my count) so to say one team is loaded with winners or losers would be too easy. Looking strictly at players with a history of stepping up their game in the Playoffs, on your roster I see Joe Sakic and Denis Potvin. A case could also be made for Nine Cups Provost. On Regina's roster, you're looking at a starting goalie whose playoff excellence has already been demonstrated, a backup whose GAA gets 26% better in the playoffs, plus the cerebral Serge Savard, winner of the 1969 Conn Smythe trophy. Up front, Perreault was always a major playoff performer, although admittedly not to Sakic's level. McKenzie and Linseman also have impeccable playoff records, raising their games to new offensive heights and needling the opposition to the point of madness.

On the blueline, I call it even. You have a top-5 guy in Potvin, but I have the next best in Savard, who isn't that far behind. Your first pairing is beyond superb. IMO, it contains two #1 defensemen. Our second pairings are very similar. In the same way that Hollett is superior to Duchesne, Macoun is just a poor man's Foote. On our 3rd pairings, Abel and Goldham are similar but I'll take a 4-time cup winning captain over Calle Johansson.

Look at our top two RW's. Very similar. It could be said that you got the guys with higher peaks and I took the guys with better longevity. Tough to say who has the edge.

I could go on about how Prystai's shadowing was instrumental in Detroit's cup wins, but then you've got Provost. I could tell you how I have a great balanced 2nd pair on D with Foote and Duchesne, but Macoun and Hollett offset that. And so on.

I'm going to try to matchup Prystai's line against Sakic's. I imagine you will try to do the same thing to me. Both lines have a puck wizard, a difficult to contain large body, and another scorer on the other wing (Conacher is more talented, McDonald more robust)

I'm not going to go cutting up your roster, because I like it. I think it is a lot like mine. (aside from our 4th lines, which are contructed entirely differently) But Regina has superior goaltending and some more impressive playoff resumes. You gotta go with The Pats.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Why Winnipeg will win

- Powerplay. Kerr is one of the most underrated powerplay forwards ever. Once he plants himself in the goal crease, it's nearly impossible to move him without taking a penalty. He lead the NHL in PP goals three years in a row (second only to Lemieux one more year). Add in the Sakic's wrist shot, Potvin's point shot and Conacher's five times finishing 1st or 2nd in goals, and you one of the most dangerous powerplay units in the draft. If Regina takes too many penalties, they will pay for it.

- Duchesne. The Pats have a lot of skill and speed upfront but Duchesne is easily the best offensive defenseman on the team. He's really a #4 or #5 defenseman in this draft, but if he gets the ice time he deserves, the Pats will have a weak transition offense and lose a lot of their scoring potential. But if Regina plays him too much, his fairly frequent defensive errors will put the team at risk.


Why Regina will win

- Plante. He's my choice as the greatest goalie ever, and his level of play improves in the playoffs. Holocek is just outside my top ten, so Regina has a moderate advantage in net.

- Yakushev. The Big Yak is one of the most underrated Russians ever. He was probably the best Soviet in the 1972 Summit Series and did everything he could to help his team win (including scoring four goals over the last two games). He was large and strong, but stayed out of the box (his strength should allow him to stand up to Winnipeg's tough defense while his discipline will help ensure that the deadly Jets powerplay doesn't get too many chances).

 

[God Bless Canada]

Another very, very tough series to call. A deserving GM will win a series for the first time. Will it be 70s, or will it be the ATD's kid brother, VCL, and his partner, who was quiet throughout, and changed his name partway through the draft, to the attention of noone?

Right from the start, you had the sense that VCL might be on to something. Okay, we thought he was on something when he went with Holocek ahead of Bathgate (xxxx-Sakic-Bathgate? Ouch), but you knew this was going to be his best entry yet. Much like LL, VCL avoided the big uh oh that we've usually seen from him in the past.

Two things stand out about VCL's team. His third line is likely the best defensive line in the draft, and one of the best all-round lines. This is great. And Provost and Parise can score, too. The Perreault line is going to be in a lot of trouble. Especially in Winnipeg, where VCL has the last change. That Lecavalier line will suddenly be very, very important to Regina's success.

The other thing that stands out is that top pairing for Winnipeg. It's one of the best in the draft. They don't have a weakness. They can beat you any way you want. And they can log big minutes, too.

Regina has an edge in net. I think Plante's the best ever. I'm not the only one. But the gap from Plante to Holocek isn't that big. Not big enough that you can say Plante is going to be the difference in this series.

When in a series like this, it often comes down to coaching. Now for the bad news: not much to choose between Johnson and Sather. They were very close on my list. Both excellent offensive minds who let their guys take chances offensively. Don't know if it really suits either team (Sather might be a slightly better fit), but they're both really good coaches.

So I guess I'll let VCL and 70s war of words decide it.

Memo to VCL: Want to beat the Pats? Turn off the ice plant before the game. The Estevan Bruins used to do it all the time at the great Estevan Civic Auditorium when facing the fleet-footed Pats in the 60s. The Pats weren't so fast any more.

From the intangibles file: it's a Winnipeg vs. Regina battle. Gotta love that rivalry. VCL is hoping Winnipeg has better success this time than the last time a Winnipeg team played a Regina-based team in a big playoff match-up...

 

[vancityluongo]

Defense: Checking lines: Advantage Winnipeg. Parise-Jarvis-Provost is the best checking line the draft. Not much more to say. Three of the best defensive/two-way players ever on a line? What else can you say. Doug Jarvis goes way too far after other defensive specialist ie. Carbonneau/Gainey...hell even Provost. I'm also not a big fan of Hossa on a shutdown line. Not a huge fan of his defensive game at a ATD level, especially against our top line.

Top pairing: Advantage Winnipeg. I'm just selling my team here.

Top-6 defensemen: Actually, I think it's pretty close. I like our top pairing better, and while I had a lot of confidence in our bottom pairing for the longest time, I'm not so sure they were much better then Drinkwater, who I really like, and Bob Goldham. Meh, I still give the advantage to Winnipeg, but only because of Johansson, who I still think was really underrated when he played. I agree with what you said about the following: second pairings, both of us have a offensive guy, and a defensive guy. Hollett had a ton of skill, he just made a bunch of mistakes because of his high risk style of play. I have Jamie Macoun, probably a guy who should be on a third pairing, covering for him. Do I think he can do it? Yeah. But do I think he'll be able to fully cover Hollett's errors? I have some doubts. Adam Foote is a rock. Team him up with Konstantinov or Savard, and you have a helluva shutdown pairing. Team him up with Duchesne, and you have a frustrated guy trying to cover up for a guy who'll make mistakes in every game. Adam Foote is one of few who could probably successfully cover up for Duchesne. Macoun couldn't, I know that. I say tie between the second pairings. IMO.

7th/8th defensemen: Mattias Ohlund vs Gennady Tsygankov? Meh. I don't think any of us really know enough about Tsygankov to really decide that.

Overall defensemen: I give it to Winnipeg, although I think it's probably a bigger advantage then our advantage offensively.

Team defense: I love our team defense. I think I have the right combination of team defence, and defensive skill. Speed, grit, energy, all you could want from players that you have in a defensive role. I think this might be the biggest problem with Regina's defensive game. There doesn't really seem to be a system. There's some good defensive players, but there's something missing for me. Maybe it's because Badger Bob was an offensive coach (like Sather I guess). I think you may not neccasarily have the wrong player personnal, just the wrong combination of lines and a system. I think what I mean is that with Potvon and Pronovost, they're skilled enough to take risks offensively and cover up defensively, while if the shutdown line is on the, it's clear why Slats has them out there; to shutdown the opponent's top line, in this case the Perreault line. I don't know if what I'm trying to get to is clear here, so if needed I'll try and explain better later.


Goaltending:

Not much to argue here. It's obvious. Jacques Plante is a top-3, if not the best goalie ever. Jiri Holecek is around number-10. While I have to agree with GBC that the difference between them won't ultimately decide the series, sadly it has to be a factor, and it's advantage Regina. Although I hope nobody thinks it's by a huge margin, because I really don't think it's massive... Again, trying to be cleverly convincing... ;-)

Wait, no I can argue that Andy Moog is better then Roach...although hopefully I won't have to argue for Moog...


Coaching: Probably the most interesting thing about this series. Two legendary coaches. Yet, somehow, that doesn't mean much, because in a list of the best coaches ever, they're likely very, very close to each other. Both great offensively. Both have fairly skilled offensive teams. Both aren't the greatest fit with their teams; I think Regina could have used a defensive minded coach to get a system going, (having that top line along with Duchesne guarentees you'll be at least potent offensively) while I decided to take Slats because he was the BCA at the time, but maybe I could've drafted an defensive assistant to maximize my assets.


Miscellaneous:

-We have home ice. In Winnipeg, you won't neccasarily be able to match lines and get Prystai against Sakic.

But seriously, the leadership and playoff stepping up thing you brought up 70's? Joe Sakic and Denis Potvin are two of the greatest playoff performers ever, and you also mentioned Provost. How about Jarvis, who was crucial in Montreal's four straight cup wins in the late 70's. And speaking of the 70's, 70's, how about '72? Paul Henderson. Yeah, it wasn't the NHL playoffs, but he stepped up, big time (to quote Pierre MacGuire, he was a MONSTER ). How about Pronovost. He was a pretty good postseason performer too. Yeah, you have Plante and Savard. Meh.

 

[vancityluongo]

Thanks for the comments GBC and HO. Appreciate it. I'll just reply to a couple things:

Why Regina will win

- Plante. He's my choice as the greatest goalie ever, and his level of play improves in the playoffs. Holocek is just outside my top ten, so Regina has a moderate advantage in net.

- Yakushev. The Big Yak is one of the most underrated Russians ever. He was probably the best Soviet in the 1972 Summit Series and did everything he could to help his team win (including scoring four goals over the last two games). He was large and strong, but stayed out of the box (his strength should allow him to stand up to Winnipeg's tough defense while his discipline will help ensure that the deadly Jets powerplay doesn't get too many chances).

1) Bolded the important part. Moderate advantage. Plante was good, but he wasn't that good. Okay, well yes he was really good, but it isn't a huge huge advantage for Regina, anyway you spin it.

2) Yakushev vs Kerr/Nolan/Provost/Randall. 4 tough, smart players. Whatever.

Right from the start, you had the sense that VCL might be on to something. Okay, we thought he was on something when he went with Holocek ahead of Bathgate (xxxx-Sakic-Bathgate? Ouch), but you knew this was going to be his best entry yet.

I never actually even thought about that. Gah, oh well, I needed a goalie, and it's paying off. If I had waited, I'd be going in with someone like Belfour (with all due respect) against Jacques Plante. Not that big an advantage the way things stand, but that would've been a little more of a mismatch in the nets.

Memo to VCL: Want to beat the Pats? Turn off the ice plant before the game. The Estevan Bruins used to do it all the time at the great Estevan Civic Auditorium when facing the fleet-footed Pats in the 60s. The Pats weren't so fast any more.

From the intangibles file: it's a Winnipeg vs. Regina battle. Gotta love that rivalry. VCL is hoping Winnipeg has better success this time than the last time a Winnipeg team played a Regina-based team in a big playoff match-up...

Related to the first part of this quote, I remember reading this story a few years ago (fictional), about this team who turned up the heat in their teams own end, so that the other team would lose speed when attacking. At the intermission, when the teams would switch ends, they would do the same thing to the other side, and fix the ice on the melted side. Watch out Regina...

It's a good old Prairie battle, and barring something happening like it did for the Bombers, I think Winnipeg will come out on top in this series.

 

[seventieslord]

Defense: Checking lines: Advantage Winnipeg. Parise-Jarvis-Provost is the best checking line the draft. Not much more to say. Three of the best defensive/two-way players ever on a line? What else can you say. Doug Jarvis goes way too far after other defensive specialist ie. Carbonneau/Gainey...hell even Provost. I'm also not a big fan of Hossa on a shutdown line. Not a huge fan of his defensive game at a ATD level, especially against our top line.

Top pairing: Advantage Winnipeg. I'm just selling my team here.

Yeah, you do have an excellent checking line. Whatever advantage yours has defensively, though, mine has offensively. Prystai was excellent defensively but at the same time, placed in the top-10 in points twice. Muller was never in the top-10 but was sometimes close, was over a point per game three times, and was very good defensively. Hossa isn't a shutdown player, but he's very responsible and has three top-6 finishes in goals, during a time when the NHL is truly a global league. My third line has the definite ability to convert turnovers into goals, whereas yours has the ability to defend and not much else (I'm aware Provost had a couple good offensive seasons)

Top-6 defensemen: Actually, I think it's pretty close. I like our top pairing better, and while I had a lot of confidence in our bottom pairing for the longest time, I'm not so sure they were much better then Drinkwater, who I really like, and Bob Goldham. Meh, I still give the advantage to Winnipeg, but only because of Johansson, who I still think was really underrated when he played. I agree with what you said about the following: second pairings, both of us have a offensive guy, and a defensive guy. Hollett had a ton of skill, he just made a bunch of mistakes because of his high risk style of play. I have Jamie Macoun, probably a guy who should be on a third pairing, covering for him. Do I think he can do it? Yeah. But do I think he'll be able to fully cover Hollett's errors? I have some doubts. Adam Foote is a rock. Team him up with Konstantinov or Savard, and you have a helluva shutdown pairing. Team him up with Duchesne, and you have a frustrated guy trying to cover up for a guy who'll make mistakes in every game. Adam Foote is one of few who could probably successfully cover up for Duchesne. Macoun couldn't, I know that. I say tie between the second pairings. IMO.

We're pretty much in agreement here, except that I am not enamored with Johansson in any way. He was just an above-average defenseman for a long time. You're right, Foote will successfully cover for Duchesne. On your 2nd pairing, your stay at home guy doesn't compare to mine, and my offense-only guy doesn't compare to yours.

7th/8th defensemen: Mattias Ohlund vs Gennady Tsygankov? Meh. I don't think any of us really know enough about Tsygankov to really decide that.

Especially considering he was Fetisov's partner for a while. A lot of teams can get away with pairing an average-to-good defenseman with their #1 so as not to put all their eggs in one basket. Not sure what to make of Tsygankov either. Regardless, these guys won't make or break the series.

Overall defensemen: I give it to Winnipeg, although I think it's probably a bigger advantage then our advantage offensively.

With equal second pairings, my third pairing's excellence wipes out any advantage your first pairing has over mine.

Team defense: I love our team defense. I think I have the right combination of team defence, and defensive skill. Speed, grit, energy, all you could want from players that you have in a defensive role.

You say that as though there is no speed, grit, or energy in my bottom-6. Every player can provide at least two of the three. I'll be fine in those areas. Not to mention most of them are talented enough to put up points... even at this level.

I think this might be the biggest problem with Regina's defensive game. There doesn't really seem to be a system. There's some good defensive players, but there's something missing for me. Maybe it's because Badger Bob was an offensive coach (like Sather I guess). I think you may not neccasarily have the wrong player personnal, just the wrong combination of lines and a system. I think what I mean is that with Potvon and Pronovost, they're skilled enough to take risks offensively and cover up defensively, while if the shutdown line is on the, it's clear why Slats has them out there; to shutdown the opponent's top line, in this case the Perreault line. I don't know if what I'm trying to get to is clear here, so if needed I'll try and explain better later.

I think you might have to.

Goaltending:

Not much to argue here. It's obvious. Jacques Plante is a top-3, if not the best goalie ever. Jiri Holecek is around number-10. While I have to agree with GBC that the difference between them won't ultimately decide the series, sadly it has to be a factor, and it's advantage Regina. Although I hope nobody thinks it's by a huge margin, because I really don't think it's massive... Again, trying to be cleverly convincing... ;-)

Nope, the advantage is huge, trust me

Wait, no I can argue that Andy Moog is better then Roach...although hopefully I won't have to argue for Moog...

I'm not sure of that.

Coaching: Probably the most interesting thing about this series. Two legendary coaches. Yet, somehow, that doesn't mean much, because in a list of the best coaches ever, they're likely very, very close to each other. Both great offensively. Both have fairly skilled offensive teams. Both aren't the greatest fit with their teams; I think Regina could have used a defensive minded coach to get a system going, (having that top line along with Duchesne guarentees you'll be at least potent offensively) while I decided to take Slats because he was the BCA at the time, but maybe I could've drafted an defensive assistant to maximize my assets.

Call coaching a wash if you like, but don't try to spin it in your favour. It doesn't just easily boil down to "offensive coach = good, defensive coach = bad". You say I have a lot of offensive players - doesn't it make more sense, then, that I have an offensive coach?

Miscellaneous:

-We have home ice. In Winnipeg, you won't neccasarily be able to match lines and get Prystai against Sakic.

That's just in 4 of 7 games! Besides, it's not the end of the world if the energy line goes up against them. Kerr could be made to lose his temper against a prick like McKenzie or Linseman. (So could Nolan too, for that matter) And if either of my scoring lines go up against the Sakic line for a few shifts, so be it. Both will score against eachother fairly often, I'd reckon, since no one has mindblowing defensive skills in either of our top-6. Yes, Prystai on Sakic would be my ideal matchup but it won't be critical to winning.

But seriously, the leadership and playoff stepping up thing you brought up 70's? Joe Sakic and Denis Potvin are two of the greatest playoff performers ever, and you also mentioned Provost. How about Jarvis, who was crucial in Montreal's four straight cup wins in the late 70's. And speaking of the 70's, 70's, how about '72? Paul Henderson. Yeah, it wasn't the NHL playoffs, but he stepped up, big time (to quote Pierre MacGuire, he was a MONSTER ). How about Pronovost. He was a pretty good postseason performer too. Yeah, you have Plante and Savard. Meh.

Agree, Sakic and Potvin are money. But so are the "meh" brothers, Plante and Savard Jarvis and Pronovost won a bunch of cups, but that doesn't mean they regularly stepped it up. Great players, I love them both. But if you can say they were clutch, then I could say Goldham and Drinkwater were also clutch.

OK, so now that we agree that that all evens out, look at who else on my roster has a history of big playoffs - Perreault, McKenzie, Linseman, Prystai (from a shutdown perspective, that is) Henderson stepped it up in '72, and if that's worth something, then so is the fact that Le Gros Yak outscored him, although admittedly not with three straight game winners. Henderson, otherwise, has 12 goals in 60 pro playoff games, and Yak has 145 in 221 international games , which is the closest thing to the playoffs he's had the opportunity to play in. Now you could say "well, that's why he's on your first line and Henderson is on my fourth"... and that would be fair!

I've got more clutch factor. You know it!

 

[pitseleh]

This series intrigues me, so I want to point out two things I've noticed about it that I see having a major impact:

- For Winnipeg, they have a tremendous shut-down line that will make life difficult for Yakushev-Perreault-McDonald, but what defensive pairing will play with them? If you're going to give Pronovost-Potvin primary defensive duty, it really handicaps your team in other areas with them eating up so many minutes playing in a shutdown role without much offensive support from the forwards. On the other hand, I don't see either of Winnipeg's defensive pairs being strong enough defensively to contain that line even with a strong checking line in front of them, so they may be forced to use their top pairing in that fashion.

- For Regina, assuming that Winnipeg does use their top defensive pairing against the Perreault line, do they have the firepower throughout the rest of the lineup to outgun Winnipeg? Sakic and co. will likely outscore Perreault's line given the quality of Winnipeg's checking unit, so do they have the offense to make up for that advantage?

 

[Spitfire11]

Ha, nice discussion guys. I gave the division to Winnipeg with Regina just a few spots back, but in a playoff match-up this is very close. I think over a 7-game series Plante gives a significant advantage to Regina. Winnipeg has the better forwards and although they have the best defenseman in the series by a significant margin, overall I actually like Regina's defense just a tad more. The pairings are a little out of whack, imo this would look a lot better:
Savard - Goldham
Konstantinov - Foote
Duchesne - Drinkwater
with the elite shutdown pairing of Savard - Goldham being matched up against Winnipeg's 1st line which will do most of the damage. According to many former players Goldham belongs in the HOF, and I think he's wasted on a 3rd pairing he should at least be swapped with Foote. Bob Johnson is one of my favourites and you took him right before I was going to, but I think Regina would have been better off with a coach that had more emphasis on defense, not that big a deal though. It's a very close series and I think it's safe to say it'll go to 7.

 

[seventieslord]

Your comments are appreciated and duly noted, both of you. A few notes:

1) I've thought abut shuffling my D, but I just can't do it. Konstantinov is good enough to play on a top pairing, and though Goldham also is, he serves as a very solid partner for the puck-rushing Drinkwater. The Tall Drink Of Water was noted as having a well-rounded game, but the most prominent part of his game appears to be his puck rushing, so I can't see Duchesne being an effective partner for him. I got Foote as a "pure D" guy so I could cheap out on a "pure O" guy and I'm pretty intent on keeping them together. However, with your help, I have convinced myself of one thing: Foote and Duchesne should be my third pairing. Then, the possibly deserving hall of famer Goldham isn't wasted, and Drinkwater, by accounts, should be as good as Duchesne at rushing the puck. (The more I think about it, the more I am sure I stole this guy. I saw him slip round after round and finally had to grab him. He's a hall of famer who was probably the best all-around player on a team that won four straight cups - I stand corrected, though. He was not their captain... sorry about that, I was sure he was)

So, consider my defense to be as follows:

Savard Konstantinov
Goldham Drinkwater
Foote Duchesne

2) I think the worst kept secret on earth is that this series will go to 7 games. I have looked at the other matchups, and I just don't see any that are as hard to call.

3) Nice hidden text, VCL

 

[vancityluongo]

Yeah, you do have an excellent checking line. Whatever advantage yours has defensively, though, mine has offensively. Prystai was excellent defensively but at the same time, placed in the top-10 in points twice. Muller was never in the top-10 but was sometimes close, was over a point per game three times, and was very good defensively. Hossa isn't a shutdown player, but he's very responsible and has three top-6 finishes in goals, during a time when the NHL is truly a global league. My third line has the definite ability to convert turnovers into goals, whereas yours has the ability to defend and not much else (I'm aware Provost had a couple good offensive seasons)

Provost had a couple good offensive seasons? Provost was consistently a 40 point plus player, all while shutting down some of the big names of those days. I think he has the ability to do more then defend. How about J-P Parise's 75 points in 72-73. Yes, oooh, 75 points. It may not seem like a ton, but it's pretty damn good for a guy who doesn't have the ability to do much other then defend. Just because I haven't been selling this trio as a two-way line (which they technically aren't, they're better suited to a shutdown game then a two-way game, at least that's how I see it) doesn't mean thy're offensively inept.

Hossa is playing in a time when the NHL is a truely global league? Ooooh. I don't think he'd be any better back when Provost played if that's what you're getting at. And yeah, Prystai was two-way. Cool. Just try and shutdown Sakic and score at the same time. (I rock at trash talking.)

We're pretty much in agreement here, except that I am not enamored with Johansson in any way. He was just an above-average defenseman for a long time. You're right, Foote will successfully cover for Duchesne. On your 2nd pairing, your stay at home guy doesn't compare to mine, and my offense-only guy doesn't compare to yours.

Don't want to get into this too much more, since we've come to a mutual agreement, but Johansson was not a slouch. I'll leave it at that I guess.

Especially considering he was Fetisov's partner for a while. A lot of teams can get away with pairing an average-to-good defenseman with their #1 so as not to put all their eggs in one basket. Not sure what to make of Tsygankov either. Regardless, these guys won't make or break the series.

Nope, but it's still another advantage for Winnipeg.

With equal second pairings, my third pairing's excellence wipes out any advantage your first pairing has over mine.

Wait, what? Your third pairings excellence? Where was Graham Drinkwater's excellence last draft? I like Bob Goldham and Graham Drinkwater, and you may not like Calle Johansson, and Taffy Abel may not be a top-4 defensemen. But the difference between Serge Savard and Denis Potvin, and Vlad Konstantinov and Marcel Pronovost is not wiped out by the advantage, if there is one, that Drinkwater and Goldham have over Abel and Johansson. I just don't see it.

You say that as though there is no speed, grit, or energy in my bottom-6. Every player can provide at least two of the three. I'll be fine in those areas. Not to mention most of them are talented enough to put up points... even at this level.

That was worded badly on my part I think. I think I have the better team, but I'm not unreasonable! I really like your team.

I think you might have to.

Let's try and put it this way. You have offensive talent, with not many pure defensive players. Wouldn't it be better to have a defensive coach to help get the best defensive ability out of your guys? They're naturally gifted offensively, and have been for their whole careers. So when given the green light to score, they know how to. But when put under pressure from the likes of my top line, wouldn't it help to have a coach who implements a system that helps them in those scenarios? Hope that makes more sense.

I'm not sure of that.

Pfft.

Call coaching a wash if you like, but don't try to spin it in your favour. It doesn't just easily boil down to "offensive coach = good, defensive coach = bad". You say I have a lot of offensive players - doesn't it make more sense, then, that I have an offensive coach?

Explained (better) above.

That's just in 4 of 7 games! Besides, it's not the end of the world if the energy line goes up against them. Kerr could be made to lose his temper against a prick like McKenzie or Linseman. (So could Nolan too, for that matter) And if either of my scoring lines go up against the Sakic line for a few shifts, so be it. Both will score against eachother fairly often, I'd reckon, since no one has mindblowing defensive skills in either of our top-6. Yes, Prystai on Sakic would be my ideal matchup but it won't be critical to winning.

Gilbert Perreault can be ticked off just as easy. And actually, IMO, Prystai on Sakic is more critical to you then I think your making it to be, but I'd be open to hear why you don't think you need Prystai to stop Sakic.

Agree, Sakic and Potvin are money. But so are the "meh" brothers, Plante and Savard Jarvis and Pronovost won a bunch of cups, but that doesn't mean they regularly stepped it up. Great players, I love them both. But if you can say they were clutch, then I could say Goldham and Drinkwater were also clutch.

What has Drinkwater done that makes him clutch? Actually asking, since I didn't find any argument when I had him last draft. And yes, Jarvis and Pronovost proved that they can step it up in the playoffs; they were HUGE reasons in the cup wins. I'll try and find actual proof and stuff tommorow.

OK, so now that we agree that that all evens out, look at who else on my roster has a history of big playoffs - Perreault, McKenzie, Linseman, Prystai (from a shutdown perspective, that is) Henderson stepped it up in '72, and if that's worth something, then so is the fact that Le Gros Yak outscored him, although admittedly not with three straight game winners. Henderson, otherwise, has 12 goals in 60 pro playoff games, and Yak has 145 in 221 international games , which is the closest thing to the playoffs he's had the opportunity to play in. Now you could say "well, that's why he's on your first line and Henderson is on my fourth"... and that would be fair!

I've got more clutch factor. You know it!

I'm not giving up on this one. I'm just not prepared right now to back up any statements I make. So I'll leave this tommorow!

Also, I'll address you guys Spit and pits tommorow, thanks for commenting.

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

Another match-up where secondary scoring is needed but isn't there. Regina's 1st pairing and Winnipeg's checking line, both are just crazy good in their own end.

Don't have much to say, seem very equal. Might come down to who you think is a bigger game breaker, Potvin or Plante? Sometimes that 1st choice is everything...

 

[vancityluongo]

Thanks to the guys who posted the follwing quotes.

This series intrigues me, so I want to point out two things I've noticed about it that I see having a major impact:

- For Winnipeg, they have a tremendous shut-down line that will make life difficult for Yakushev-Perreault-McDonald, but what defensive pairing will play with them? If you're going to give Pronovost-Potvin primary defensive duty, it really handicaps your team in other areas with them eating up so many minutes playing in a shutdown role without much offensive support from the forwards. On the other hand, I don't see either of Winnipeg's defensive pairs being strong enough defensively to contain that line even with a strong checking line in front of them, so they may be forced to use their top pairing in that fashion.

- For Regina, assuming that Winnipeg does use their top defensive pairing against the Perreault line, do they have the firepower throughout the rest of the lineup to outgun Winnipeg? Sakic and co. will likely outscore Perreault's line given the quality of Winnipeg's checking unit, so do they have the offense to make up for that advantage?

-I'm thinking of possibly changing up my pairings right now. Although, I really don't want Macoun to ditch Hollett, I think I might be better off switching him with Johansson; Abel-Macoun is a decent shutdown pairing, even though I know a lot of you guys aren't Taffy Abel fans. Johansson-Hollett may be a bit of a liability, but I can always switch things up again. I'd actually love any last minute suggestions or ideas. I'm also comfortable with double shifting the top two guys occasionally, and I also think the third pairing (I'm going to mention again; Johansson was underrated) as it stands along with the shutdown line can do the job needed.

-Plante will help Regina in that department. But I have my doubts about Lecavalier's line being able to make up for the difference that will in my mind no doubt be there.

Ha, nice discussion guys. I gave the division to Winnipeg with Regina just a few spots back, but in a playoff match-up this is very close. I think over a 7-game series Plante gives a significant advantage to Regina. Winnipeg has the better forwards and although they have the best defenseman in the series by a significant margin, overall I actually like Regina's defense just a tad more. The pairings are a little out of whack, imo this would look a lot better:
Savard - Goldham
Konstantinov - Foote
Duchesne - Drinkwater
with the elite shutdown pairing of Savard - Goldham being matched up against Winnipeg's 1st line which will do most of the damage. According to many former players Goldham belongs in the HOF, and I think he's wasted on a 3rd pairing he should at least be swapped with Foote. Bob Johnson is one of my favourites and you took him right before I was going to, but I think Regina would have been better off with a coach that had more emphasis on defense, not that big a deal though. It's a very close series and I think it's safe to say it'll go to 7.

I agree that Regina should've gotten a defensive coach as I pointed out earlier. I have to disagree that Plante gives Regina a significant advantage over Holecek.

Also, I don't really see Regina having a team that steps up a lot in the playoffs. I believe I had them higher then 5th in the regular season, but when I look through their lineup, while I see some big performers, I don't see many guys that constantly stepped up a few notches in the spring.

Another match-up where secondary scoring is needed but isn't there. Regina's 1st pairing and Winnipeg's checking line, both are just crazy good in their own end.

Don't have much to say, seem very equal. Might come down to who you think is a bigger game breaker, Potvin or Plante? Sometimes that 1st choice is everything...

I think you underestimate our secondary scoring. Flash Hollett will be a fairly big source of offense. Potvin's point shot on the PP will be deadly. I like our second line, and while it isn't the best in the draft by any means, I like it as a contributer to secondary scoring. Regina's first pairing is crazy good in it's own end? yeah, well so is Winnipeg's first pairing.

Gamebreakers huh? We were kinda talking about this before, but Nalyd you bring up Potvin vs Plante. I think in a close series like this, goaltenders play a bigger role then any other individual player. Regina has the goaltending advatage, right? Does that give them that much of an advantage. Nope. Because when your star defensemen is on his A-game, not only does he contribute more, but his defense partner, the forwards that he's playing with, and his goalie, just by being on the ice with him, are benefitted.

Let's look at things this way instead: if Potvin plays this series to his "full potential" (this is HFBoards, and I have no better way to phrase that) can he take over this series. Yeah, he showed he was capable of that with those Islander teams, and even at an ATD level, I'm confident he could again do that. How about Plante? Yup, he had what, 5 straight cup wins I believe, and was a massive part of that. That doesn't clear up much, because it's impossible to really compare players from two different positions and two different eras. So let's look at the next guys for each team: Gilbert Perreault and Serge Savard for Regina and Joe Sakic and Jiri Holecek for Winnipeg. Sakic>Perreault, Savard>Holecek, That doesn't help much either. But now we can compare each player with their positional rival, since we each have a forward, defensemen and goalie.

Joe Sakic to me, is a close to top-10 center, likely top-15. Gilbert Perreault I'd have just outside my top-20 or somewhere close to there. Not a massive difference, but meh.

Denis Potvin is the #5 defensemen ever. Orr, Harvey, Shore, Bourque, Potvin. The Big 5. Serge Savard, while a good number one in this draft, is outside that, maybe in the mid-to-late 20's.

Plante is number 1. Holecek is around 10.


Looking over this, it's probably a incredibly confusing method, and I think it's probably better served for determining the draft postion of a player, but based on this method, I have a very balanced group of top game breakers, while Regina is "top-heavy" with Plante being the star netminder, and then two not-so-superstar (at a ATD level) guys. Actually, I'm almost positive this makes no sense to anyone but me, but it took me a while to type it, so I'm just gonna leave it in case anyone does follow what I'm saying.

 

[vancityluongo]

Looks like there aren't going to be any more comments before the final voting is done.

Just want to wish Regina good luck, and may the better team win.

 

[seventieslord]

Also, I don't really see Regina having a team that steps up a lot in the playoffs. I believe I had them higher then 5th in the regular season, but when I look through their lineup, while I see some big performers, I don't see many guys that constantly stepped up a few notches in the spring.

Perreault.
Linseman's playoff numbers are sick compared to his regular season numbers.
McKenzie had a couple of huge playoffs.
Prystai.
and then if you mention more multiple cup winners I could as well.

Gamebreakers huh? We were kinda talking about this before, but Nalyd you bring up Potvin vs Plante. I think in a close series like this, goaltenders play a bigger role then any other individual player. Regina has the goaltending advatage, right? Does that give them that much of an advantage. Nope. Because when your star defensemen is on his A-game, not only does he contribute more, but his defense partner, the forwards that he's playing with, and his goalie, just by being on the ice with him, are benefitted.

Then why do we rank Plante higher on an all-time list when doing the HOH voting? Ranking goalies next to forwards and defensemen is difficult, but in the end you have to think, "who helped their teams win more games, and more important games?" The answer is Plante, that is why we ranked him higher, that is why I took him before Potvin.

Let's look at things this way instead: if Potvin plays this series to his "full potential" (this is HFBoards, and I have no better way to phrase that) can he take over this series. Yeah, he showed he was capable of that with those Islander teams, and even at an ATD level, I'm confident he could again do that.

But in the ATD, he's the 5th best defenseman (in most people's opinions)... that means he's the Zubov/Phaneuf/Chara of the league. He's not Denis Potvin in this context. He was Denios Potvin when he played against a mostly ordinary players. Plante, however, is the #1 or #2 goalie here. That means he's the Brodeur/Luongo of the league. Holecek would be like the Tim Thomas or Chris Osgood of the league - in the middle of all the starters. Who's going to have more of an impact?

Serge Savard, while a good number one in this draft, is outside that, maybe in the mid-to-late 20's.

No. Closer to about 20th.

Plante is number 1. Holecek is around 10.

10th? Don't make me laugh! Here are 10 who are easily better than Holecek:

Plante
Roy
Hasek
Hall
Sawchuk
Brodeur
Dryden
Durnan
Tretiak
Benedict
Brimsek

and then, if you include playoffs, you have to consider guys who have a history of winning in the playoffs ahead of him too - and remember, this is the playoffs...

Broda
Smith
Bower
Parent
Fuhr

 

[seventieslord]

My arguments may have been too late.

Than again, maybe I said enough already.

Good luck to you, this was easily my favourite series of the ones I've been in.