PP1: Kharlamov-Petrov-Mikhailov Lutchenko-Bourque
PP2: Vickers/Lambert-Weiland-Dillon Greschner-Bourque
PK1: Luce-Dillon Bourque-Flaman
PK2: Weiland-Dineen Vasiliev-Harper
I'd ask everyone not to vote on this series as I will be out of town and away from a computer until Thursday morning so I'll be unable to argue my point. Anyone wanna take over for a couple days until I get back? GBC? You live for this time of year
.
But if you don't and people don't wait to vote I understand. Best of luck to Shawnmullin in any case, you have a solid team (albeit one with holes I will ruthlessly exploit
).
When is voting due anyway?
Best of luck to you too sir. You have a solid team... albeit one with holes I will ruthlessly exploit
A battle between Cranbrook and Trail! Not too shabby. Old rivals and an easy travel schedule.
First thing that strikes me here is that I think we each have a couple of obvious advantages.
I think the clearest edge the Smoke Eaters have is in goal. Mike Ricther is better suited for back-up duty in this draft than anything else. He had one very strong playoff run in his career. But cosnsistency is an issue there. He was never the best goalie in the NHL and I'd suggest rarely even in the top 3 during his career. Richter was magnificent in one World Cup, but tell me what goaltender hasn't had a handful of great games in a row? It was a legendary performance, but it doesn't match up with the rest of his career. On the other hand, Bill Durnan is one of the best goalies of all time. He was the top goaltender in the NHL for almost his entire career. We're talking about an elite starter versus at the best a lower tier starter and more likely a good backup.
Look at Richter's voting history...
89-90: 7th place in Vezina voting (1 third place vote), No all-star votes
90-91: 3rd place in Vezina voting (1 first, 1 second, 5 thirds), 5th in all-star votes, 4th in Caldver voting
91-92: 9th in Vezina votes (1 third), 7th in all-star votes
92-93: No Vezina votes, No all-star votes
93-94: 6th place in Vezina voting (1 second, 5 thirds), 4th place in all-star votes
94-95: No Vezina votes (14 other goalies got votes), No all-star votes
95-96: No Vezina votes (11 other goalies got votes), No all-star votes
96-97: 6th place in Vezina voting (2 thirds), 10th place in all-star votes (1 third)
97-98: No Vezina votes (9 other goalies got votes), No all-star votes
98-99: No Vezina votes (9 other goalies got votes), No all-star votes
99-00: No Vezina votes (10 other goalies got votes), No all-star votes
00-01: No Vezina votes (12 other goalies got votes), No all-star votes
01-02: No Vezina votes (11 other goalies got votes), No all-star votes
02-03: doesn't count only played 13 games
Over his career, Mike Ricther was never on the post-season all-star team. He only received votes four times. Once 4th, once 5th, once 7th and once 10th.
He never won a Vezina and only received votes five times. Once 3rd, twice 6th, once 7th and once 9th.
According to both those measuring sticks, Mike Ricther was never the best goalie in the world. He was never even second best. He may have been third for one season. He was only worthy of even getting votes for either achievement in four or five seasons out of his long career. In the years he didn't, he was essentially not even considered top 10 in the league.
On the other hand, Bill Durnan was voted to the first all-star team 6 out of the 7 seasons he played in the NHL. He was recognized as being the best goalie in the league every year he played in it but one. He had the best GAA (the Vezina trophy) six out of the seven seasons he played in the NHL.
-6 time first all-star
-6 time Vezina winner
-He finished second in Calder voting in 44
-He finished third in Hart voting in 46
-He finished second in Hart voting in 49
-He finished fifth in Hart voting in 50
It's a monumental mis-match in my favour. The record of achievement isn't in the same ballpark IMO.
Coaching is another distinct advantage for me given that I have the greatest and winningest coach of all time teamed with his long time assistant (and a cup winner as a head coach himself) on a team that suits their winning style of play. Bowman will get the most out of these players and develop a winning strategy.
Up front the Smokies I think have superior depth. The Russian 5 are a strong unit, but at this point pervious chemistry pretty much goes out the window. That's great early in the regular season, but by now all these great players should've adapted to each other. I'm sure in a regular season and playoff round Joliat/Trots/Hodge have become a unit too. Especially when they're a line that suits each other's skills. There's more scoring and more physical play from all my forward lines than what the ice can bring. I think physical play will be a definate advantage on my sides when it comes to forwards. I think my fourth line brings a lot more to the table with guys who can play two ways, hit hard and score more than almost any fourth line in the draft. I think almost my entire forward group is defensively responsible. There are maybe one or two guys you could point to that aren't known for being able to check their hat and play at both ends of the ice. So even if the Ice have an advantage on the blue line, my forwards are clearly capeable of contributing to an elite team defensive scheme.
Up the middle I'm clearly stronger IMO with Trottier/Larionov/MacLeish/Otto vs. Petrov/Weiland/Luce/Ricci... the most obvious advantages ther are Trottier vs. Petrov and Otto vs. Ricci IMO. However I think I win those match ups one through four. That being said he definately has an advantage in terms of third line RW. Dillon vs. Doan is certainly at this point a plus for the Ice.
On the other hand, the Ice have a superior defensive top 4 and I won't even try to dispute that. Bourque is clearly the best defenceman and probably the best player in this series. However, his advantage there is because of a particularely strong defensive top four that I think weakens him elsewhere in the line-up. Is my top four as strong? Absolutely not. But my defence is a well balanced group built for a well balanced team. I don't put too much pressure on any pairing. For example, Lapperiere will be the most used ES defenceman and PK defenceman, but Simpson and Cameron carry the PP duties. No one will get overworked or exposed here. The Ice have an advantage on D more so than I would suggest we have a disadvantage.
The Ice are a very tough, challenging team with a lot of players I like. I think they'll be tough to beat. However, clearly better netminding, superior depth at forward and the best coaching in the draft (IMO) should make up for a disadvantage against their defence and any possible chemistry advantage they may still have with the Russian 5.