In brief (because I haven't got much time):
- you're opening up a big can of worms going after Andy Bathgate's playoff record, nik. If so inclined, I could carve a pretty good chunk out of Bill Cook's playoff record (even comparing it to Murray Murdoch's), but I don't think that's really necessary. I see Cook and Bathgate as virtual equals who both fit well in their assigned roles on the team. Cook has the advantage in leadership, but on the ice, there is little to differentiate the two in terms of overall performance.
1. as has already been established, playoff scoring in cook's era was extremely low.
it is much harder to get an idea of playoff performance when only 1 or 2 goals are scored in an entire series. double digits was a huge accomplishment.
2. cook's scoring was more consistent than bathgate's.
'27: led in scoring in both regular season and playoffs.
'28: 3rd, 2nd overall in playoffs
'29: 2nd, no points in playoffs (NYR scored 5 goals in 6 games.)
'30: 2nd, 5th in playoffs.
'31: led NYR in both.
'32: 1st, 3rd on team (5th overall)
'33: 1st, 3rd overall
'34: 5th, 3rd, no points (only 2 players had points)
'35: 2nd, 2nd
bill cook was not always the star of his team. he was sometimes outscored by boucher and bun cook, and once finished as low as 5th on the team.
bathgate led NYR in scoring for 8 seasons by a wide margin, often outscoring number 2 on the team by 20-30%. but only once did he lead his team in playoff scoring.
his playoff record is very similar to marcel dionne's.
another factor is that cook is playing with gretzky, who boosted the scoring of everyone who played with him; while bathgate is your team's best offensive player.
- As much as I was a fan of his during his time on the island, John Tonelli is simply not as good a player as Bill Barber. Tonelli's only real advantage over Barber probably lies in his strength along the boards, but he falls well behind Barber in terms of offensive ability, skating, leadership, etc. I think Barber flies under the radar a bit because he was such a consistent and steady player and didn't get the headlines of his teammates, but at least in terms of his offensive contributions, this may be somewhat illuminating:
Bill Barber career points-per-game (regular season): .98
Bobby Clarke career points-per-game (regular season): 1.06
Bill Barber career points-per-game (postseason): .84
Bobby Clarke career points-per-game (postseason): .88
Not nearly as much of a difference as their respective reputations would lead us to believe. Clarke was the leader of that team and got most of the individual glory, but Bill Barber was easily the second most important skater on those great Flyers teams, and often their best goal-scorer. I think his defensive skills and general all-around game are well-established now. John Tonelli was a great support player, but in no way does he realistically compare to Bill Barber in a scoringline role. Tonelli was never asked to be one of his team's offensive leaders, in the regular season or playoffs. Bill Barber did it season after season.
i agree that barber is better than tonelli.
tonelli was an offensive leader in '85. 100p, 3rd on NYI, finished just outside the top 10 in scoring.
b/c gretzky increased the scoring of everyone who played with him, the offensive gap is smaller.
Also, although Tonelli was a good checker, he wasn't particularly fast, which is a serious issue against Bathgate and Selanne.
park, your best defensive player, wasn't a great skater, will he struggle? chara's lateral mobility is terrible, and he's easily beat to the outside.
those seem to be bigger issues than a LW.
i think the bigger issue is whether barber will actually be on his skates long enough to defend cook.
tonelli's speed isn't a concern b/c howe, cleghorn and patrick were all great skaters.
The large gap between Barber and Tonelli and Tonelli's problems in matching speed with Springfield's right wings will go a long way to evening out the advantage that Lada holds in Gretzky. Gretzky is Lada's only clear advantage in the series.
the gap between barber and tonelli isn't that big, expecially since tonelli's playing with gretzky, and it doesn't in any way make up for the advantage of having 99. that's just a bizarre statement.
gretzky is by far the best player in the series. he and cook give me a very large primary scoring advantage.
i think my top pairing is at least as good as springfield's. park is the best, but i don't think cleghorn is much behind him, while howe is a big step above mantha.
both howe and cleghorn were very good defensively; their offensive ability is a crucial part of my first unit, and their skating ability will allow us to break through the LW lock, and defend springfield's speedy forwards.
my starting 5 is a big advantage.
art rosses: 12
hart: 9
hart finalist: 16
goal scoring titles: 8
playoff scoring titles: 5
springfield's starting 5:
AR: 0
hart: 1
finalist: 4
goals: 1
playoff scoring: 1
- Harry Lumley's got basically two seasons that could be considered special: 53-54 and 54-55. If we look at the Leafs' roster in 53-54, we see a team that is anything but mediocre defensively. Here is that Toronto teams' starting defense:
Horton - Flaman
Thomson - Boivin
Morrison - Bolton
...wow. I'm not precisely sure about the bottom pairings, but Horton-Flaman was definitely the #1 unit, and what a unit it must have been. Leo Boivin was still young (21), so I don't want to distort the picture too much, but all of the other defensemen were fully in their primes. I think a lot of goalies could have led the league in shutouts behind that unit.
hmm, didn't you say that pretty much all the d-men from those defensive maple leaf teams were overrated? now you are saying "wow," and that many goalies could have recorded a lot of SO behind them.
lumley knocked sawchuk onto the 2nd AS team. sawchuk had kelly, pronovost and goldham in front of him.
montreal had harvey, johnson, bouchard, st. laurent. also better than toronto's d-corps.
look at the '60s leafs, maybe the best defensive teams of the O6.
'60: 5 SO
'61: 2 SO
'62: 3 SO
'63: 2 SO
'64: 8 SO
'65: 4 SO
those are teams with peak horton (not the young horton that lumley played with), bower, keon, stanley, brewer, baun, armstrong, kelly, pulford, etc. they played a tight-checking style and yet bower only managed about 5 SO per season. what a chump.
lumley's SO record stood for 17 years. the '54 leafs D-corps isn't anywhere close to the best during that span. it was probably the 3rd best of the 6 teams that season.
it's also a bit ironic, b/c your criticism of lumley has been leveled at dryden so often.
if ever a goalie had an incredible d-corps in front of him, it was dryden.
'71:
tremblay
lapointe
harper
laperierre
savard
p bouchard
'73:
lapointe
savard
robinson
laperierre
roberts
murdoch
'77
robinson
lapointe
savard
bouchard
roberts
nyrop
chartraw
of course, i don't think dryden was a product of his team any more than lumley was of his.
54-55 stands up well for Lumley, as he won 1st team all-star honors in spite of the fact that Toronto foolishly traded Flaman and Boivin to the Bruins in the offseason. But we shouldn't overrate Lumley based on his rather limited regular season honors, as one of his two all-star seasons came behind a defense that would be pretty good by ATD standards, and was incredible by real-life standards. Lumley was a nice, consistent performer in his career, but he's nothing very close to Ken Dryden, and that's without examining the men's respective postseason records, which should not be necessary.
'55 proves that the '54 D-corps was not the reason for lumley's excellence. based on lumley finishing 2nd in hart voting to non-AS kennedy, it seems lumley should have won the hart in '55.
i think that bolded part is interesting b/c of what you wrote later.
- Lada's achilles heel is its second pairing, which is arguably the worst in the draft. I have already made my feelings on James Patrick clear, but it should be noted that outside of his one all-star season, Schoenfeld appeared on the Norris radar exactly once more in his career, placing 12th. I view Schoenfeld as a mediocre #4 with skating and offensive limitations. James Patrick doesn't belong on a second pairing, at all.
you noted above that thomson, who made the 2nd AS team in a weak period (glen harmon and hy buller?), boivin, morrison and bolton, who never made the AS team, are part of a very ATD good D-corps.
then you argue that norris finalist schoenfeld and patrick are not really worthy of being on the 2nd pairing...
can you explain to me how 2 undrafted players and 2 not great defensive d-men with 2 2nd AS selections in a weak period make up 2/3 of a very good ATD D-corps?
horton is a big name, but he was 24 years old, and didn't make the AS team again for 9 seasons.
Neither of Lada's second pairing defensemen can hold a candle to Springfield's #4, Zdeno Chara, nevermind Hod Stuart. Chara-Stuart may be the best 2nd pairing in the draft, and they are matched by maybe the worst.
i won't argue with hod stuart, since i am, of course, a big fan.
i do agree that you have a clearly better 2nd pairing, but you are exaggerating how much better, chara especially. schoenfeld was a very good defensive d-man, superior defensively to chara. chara's advantage comes from his offense and freakish size.
chara is not great in his own end. there are quite a few d-men in the NHL today who are better in the defensive zone.
norris '80:
robinson
salming
schoenfeld
bourque
howe
where would chara finish there in his best season?
if chara switched eras, he wouldn't be close to the norris. chara benefits from weak competition for norris/AS spots.
a certain gaffe prone maple leaf d-man and an offensive d-man from tampa bay have made the 2nd AS team in recent years.
Springfield will enjoy a very substantial advantage in secondary scoring by dint of the extreme difference in quality of the second defensive pairings. Selanne - Smith - Northcott faced much stronger defensive players in real life.
selanne, smith and northcott mostly faced much weaker players.
you are also conflating defensive ability with norris voting.
dion phaneuf isn't even the best defensively on his own team, and he's a norris finalist this season. (and for similar reasons as chara--goals, physicality)
the defensive difference in the 2 pairings is not very big. the offensive difference is.
schoenfeld and patrick were both very reliable defensive players. schoenfeld was a defensive stalwart, similar to derian hatcher. patrick wasn't elite, but he was a very good 2 way d-man with great skating ability.
i realize you're trying to focus on something to get others to focus on it, but i think overdoing it.
i disagree that springfield has a very substantial advantage in secondary scoring.
my 2nd C is better than yours, and my 3rd C is about as good as your 2nd. i think my 3rd line has more scoring potential than yours. my top 2 D have more offensive ability than yours.
i do agree that your 2nd line is better.
primary scoring is also more important than secondary, and there my advantage is large.
