ATD Chat Thread XVI

[Johnny Engine]

Dogs = wolves
Horses = zebras
Chipmunks = squirrels
Alligators = crocodiles

At a certain level it might make sense, but the more you learn about each, the more egregious the comparison.

Ironically, the most counterintuitive example above is the truest one. Doug the Pug is more or less a wolf. The rest, less so.

The thing I don't love about the comparables is that they seem more like a fun exercise for us than anything useful to spread around. I don't know what a complete history noob would get out of knowing that Slava Fetisov=Doug Harvey, and they may have some very skewed ideas of what even recently retired players were like (particularly ones who slowed down a lot while sticking around on their wits).

 

[Theokritos]

Can you give me an example of what you had in mind to help inexperienced people navigate the sea of unknown players?

Something rather simplistic. Each player's 1-2 biggest assets should be highlighted, their bios would be linked and a short note could add some information.

If you're looking for a playmaker, you should take a look at...

• Wayne Gretzky / #2 (median spot in the last five ATDs) / also one of the all-time great goalscorers
• Stan Mikita / #14 / ...
• Sidney Crosby / #18 / also a prominent goal-scorer
• Frank Boucher / #47 / also renowned defensively
• Elmer Lach / #80 / ...
• Joe Thornton / #132 / ...
• Bill Cowley / #133 / ...
• etc

If you're looking for a goalscorer, you should take a look at...

• Mario Lemieux / #4 / also an all-time great assistant
• Howie Morenz / #17 / good backchecker
• Phil Esposito / #29 / ...
• Joe Sakic / #31 / well-rounded all-around player
• etc

If you're looking for a defensive conscience, you should take a look at...

• Frank Nighbor / #25 / ...
• Bobby Clarke / #28 / ...
• Bryan Trottier / #29 / ...
• Henri Richard / #52 / ...
• etc

If you're looking for a physical presence, you should take a look at...

• Mark Messier / #19 / ...
• Milt Schmidt / #56 / ...
• Peter Forsberg / #61 / ...
• Ted Kennedy / #78 / ...
• etc

(Obviously, I restricted this attempt to centers here.)

It would be something of a starting point that gives people an idea where to start reading while they're planning their lines and picks.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Something rather simplistic. Each player's 1-2 biggest assets should be highlighted, their bios would be linked and a short note could add some information.

If you're looking for a playmaker, you should take a look at...

• Wayne Gretzky / #2 (median spot in the last five ATDs) / also one of the all-time great goalscorers
• Stan Mikita / #14 / ...
• Sidney Crosby / #18 / also a prominent goal-scorer
• Frank Boucher / #47 / also renowned defensively
• Elmer Lach / #80 / ...
• Joe Thornton / #132 / ...
• Bill Cowley / #133 / ...
• etc

If you're looking for a goalscorer, you should take a look at...

• Mario Lemieux / #4 / also an all-time great assistant
• Howie Morenz / #17 / good backchecker
• Phil Esposito / #29 / ...
• Joe Sakic / #31 / well-rounded all-around player
• etc

If you're looking for a defensive conscience, you should take a look at...

• Frank Nighbor / #25 / ...
• Bobby Clarke / #28 / ...
• Bryan Trottier / #29 / ...
• Henri Richard / #52 / ...
• etc

If you're looking for a physical presence, you should take a look at...

• Mark Messier / #19 / ...
• Milt Schmidt / #56 / ...
• Peter Forsberg / #61 / ...
• Ted Kennedy / #78 / ...
• etc

(Obviously, I restricted this attempt to centers here.)

It would be something of a starting point that gives people an idea where to start reading while they're planning their lines and picks.

Sure, if someone wants to do that it could be a good idea.

What we need now is new people coming in, so anything that helps should be tried.

 

[Habsfan18]

I do wonder if the actual interest would be there. This all sounds like a great idea, but it’s all for nothing if we can’t find the interested parties.

I’m sure a “committee of vets” of sorts would be simple enough to create, and of course some ATD regulars would be available through PM, but finding the GM’s may be a different story.

 

[BenchBrawl]

These comparisons obscure more than they enlighten.

Can't expect people to be obsessed like us. If they were, we would have met them by now.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I do wonder if the actual interest would be there. This all sounds like a great idea, but it’s all for nothing if we can’t find the interested parties.

I’m sure a “committee of vets” of sorts would be simple enough to create, but finding the GM’s may be a different story.

Yeah I agree, no point in doing a lot of effort if there's no demand at all.

 

[Habsfan18]

Yeah I agree, no point in doing a lot of effort if there's no demand at all.

We’d likely have to come up with a gameplan of sorts.

Step 1: Establish the actual plan/goal of the draft, which for the most part we have already come up with. But I mean “officially” decide on a plan.

Step 2: Gauge the interest level. Create a thread on the main board? Send PM’s? Not really sure what to do here. We could make it clear that we’re looking for “casual” historical fans that are eager to learn more about the history of our great game, and that some HoH/ATD regulars had come up with an idea to bring in some new blood and help broaden their knowledge, for those that have the desire to do so.

Step 3: If the interest is there in terms of new GM’s, set up a vets committee (say 10-12 vets?) whose role would be voting on the regular season and playoffs as well as giving feedback/advice whenever necessary or requested through PM. Also, if some members want to create a “guide” to assist the new GM’s with player roles/comparisons etc..that would be great.

Step 4: Draft. We all watch an all-newbie ATD and hopefully if all goes well we have some new blood for the regular ATD’s.

 

[Habsfan18]

And we’d make it clear that by “casuals” we’d be aiming at the people that already have some level of knowledge on historical players (every big hockey fan would know of Orr, Lemieux, Roy, Messier etc..). But I would assume many if not most of those same people wouldn’t have any clue who Bun Cook, Frank Nighbor, Cecil Dillon and Igor Liba were. Those would be the posters we’re aiming this at. Those who want to learn about hockey history on a larger scale and deeper level.

 

[vancityluongo]

Stumbled into this chat again haha; the best way IMO to get someone into an ATD (although I'm sure it's changed since I last did this) is to just do one.

The biggest obstacle for the vets would be to hold back if someone drafted Jonathan Toews, at like, 75. It would be a learning process for them, but that learning was a lot of fun for me as a literal kid with no knowledge beforehand, even if it may have been frustrating for some of the old guys. As long as that is okay, just open things up and see how it goes.

That doesn't mean reaching out to the polls boards and just recruiting anyone who votes correctly on the latest Gretzky vs Crosby thread...however, I think it would be really interesting to recruit some people from other spheres of the hockey world (Twitter, Reddit, etc.) that clearly have the base knowledge, but maybe have never even heard about the History of Hockey section or this draft. For starters, I'd hit up some of the bloggers that are currently writing for the Nation Network or similar. Could also look into partnering with a publication like the Athletic; the ATD is basically the Hockey News lists on steroids, aka very worthy of being behind a paywall. Having this run every year on HHOF weekend would be a great, deep dive series for them.

Finally, speaking of HHOF *weekend*; the other thing is the time commitment. A huge part of the ATD is the methodical research that takes place for the weeks while the draft takes place; however, that means that you are on the clock once every few days for like two months. It's a grind, and as the sport becomes more accessible in other ways with media evolving, I imagine it's hard to find people willing to dedicate that much time to a very niche activity. However, maybe there's someway to run it similar to the NHL draft from a time perspective (crush out a Friday evening/night first 5 rounds, and then 10 rounds per day Saturday & Sunday), followed by two weeks of bios, arguments and roster tweaking (trading would be essential), and then four weeks of voting (one week for each round, with the actual results disseminated on the weekend).

Anyways, just my two cents on this. Glad to see some of the familiar names still here. And happier than anything to see @seventieslord and @VanIslander as feisty as ever.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Stumbled into this chat again haha; the best way IMO to get someone into an ATD (although I'm sure it's changed since I last did this) is to just do one.

The biggest obstacle for the vets would be to hold back if someone drafted Jonathan Toews, at like, 75. It would be a learning process for them, but that learning was a lot of fun for me as a literal kid with no knowledge beforehand, even if it may have been frustrating for some of the old guys. As long as that is okay, just open things up and see how it goes.

That doesn't mean reaching out to the polls boards and just recruiting anyone who votes correctly on the latest Gretzky vs Crosby thread...however, I think it would be really interesting to recruit some people from other spheres of the hockey world (Twitter, Reddit, etc.) that clearly have the base knowledge, but maybe have never even heard about the History of Hockey section or this draft. For starters, I'd hit up some of the bloggers that are currently writing for the Nation Network or similar. Could also look into partnering with a publication like the Athletic; the ATD is basically the Hockey News lists on steroids, aka very worthy of being behind a paywall. Having this run every year on HHOF weekend would be a great, deep dive series for them.

Finally, speaking of HHOF *weekend*; the other thing is the time commitment. A huge part of the ATD is the methodical research that takes place for the weeks while the draft takes place; however, that means that you are on the clock once every few days for like two months. It's a grind, and as the sport becomes more accessible in other ways with media evolving, I imagine it's hard to find people willing to dedicate that much time to a very niche activity. However, maybe there's someway to run it similar to the NHL draft from a time perspective (crush out a Friday evening/night first 5 rounds, and then 10 rounds per day Saturday & Sunday), followed by two weeks of bios, arguments and roster tweaking (trading would be essential), and then four weeks of voting (one week for each round, with the actual results disseminated on the weekend).

Anyways, just my two cents on this. Glad to see some of the familiar names still here. And happier than anything to see @seventieslord and @VanIslander as feisty as ever.

Lots of good points and thank you for chiming in. Always nice to see old GMs come back to the section.

 

[The Macho King]

We’d likely have to come up with a gameplan of sorts.

Step 1: Establish the actual plan/goal of the draft, which for the most part we have already come up with. But I mean “officially” decide on a plan.

Step 2: Gauge the interest level. Create a thread on the main board? Send PM’s? Not really sure what to do here. We could make it clear that we’re looking for “casual” historical fans that are eager to learn more about the history of our great game, and that some HoH/ATD regulars had come up with an idea to bring in some new blood and help broaden their knowledge, for those that have the desire to do so.

Step 3: If the interest is there in terms of new GM’s, set up a vets committee (say 10-12 vets?) whose role would be voting on the regular season and playoffs as well as giving feedback/advice whenever necessary or requested through PM. Also, if some members want to create a “guide” to assist the new GM’s with player roles/comparisons etc..that would be great.

Step 4: Draft. We all watch an all-newbie ATD and hopefully if all goes well we have some new blood for the regular ATD’s.

First - I don't know if I'd count as a newbie, but I'd be down.

Second - I think if you go main board on this you're in for a bad time. Targeted recruitment would get a better quality of poster in this. I've done a full and a OPPF draft so far and one thing I didn't appreciate before is how much *work* there is even drafting a bad team. You want people with an interest in the history of the sport and willing to do the work - that's hard to pull off out of the general population.

I like step 3 - important that a) the voting is done on by vets, and b) the vets are available as a resource. I'd prefer a "council" rather than kind of co-GMs to prevent unequal levels of help, but beyond that I have no comments.

Step 4 - Of course.

One thing I'd add is perhaps - throughout the process (after each couple of rounds?) have a mini-assassination of who the value picks were, who the reaches were, and why. This allows for *some* adjustment on the fly as people are getting their feet wet. For instance - my first draft I went very C heavy at the start, and did not get good value out of those positions because everyone was gobbling up wingers and Dmen. Some guidance going in + course corrections through out would help a lot.

Finally - I think we should update the bios thread with the most recent bios and also link to the HoH lists as resources. Yeah people can track that stuff down on their own, but accessibility is key here.

Just some thoughts from a relative newbie based on my experiences.

 

[Theokritos]

One thing I'd add is perhaps - throughout the process (after each couple of rounds?) have a mini-assassination of who the value picks were, who the reaches were, and why. This allows for *some* adjustment on the fly as people are getting their feet wet.

I think that's a very good idea.

 

[Johnny Engine]

Seventies did that at the end of each round when he introduced the ATD to Maple Leafs Chat. Obviously it's better to have several voices doing that than one guy with opinions and biases that aren't checked by anything other than his own sense of propriety, so we have that too.

 

[ImporterExporter]

That is how Twitter works.

Twitter is arguably the biggest cesspool in the developed world. Never been on there, never will be.

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

An all-newbie ATD with say anywhere from 16-20 teams (might be difficult to find that many posters interested) of posters who are interested in learning more about hockey’s history but haven’t yet taken part in a draft.

Liked your contribution... but I think 16-20 novice GMs would be wildly optimistic. I'd consider it a success if we could find six.

First - I don't know if I'd count as a newbie, but I'd be down.

Well, in my previous post I DID say "Freshmen/Sophomores," so (even though you're an "underclassman" with experience and a scarily-good learning curve), it would be fine by me.

...important that a) the voting is done on by vets, and b) the vets are available as a resource. I'd prefer a "council" rather than kind of co-GMs to prevent unequal levels of help, but beyond that I have no comments.

A) I like the idea of a general "advice council" much more than the idea of co-GMing. Problem with co-GMing is that it could turn out like the Chess mini-match Morphy & Barnes v. Staunton & Owen, with the newcomers playing the roles of Barnes and Owen. Also, a pool of Veterans doing the voting would make for the closest-to-impartial, agenda-free voting structure yet put in place in the history of the project. Like it a lot.

One thing I'd add is perhaps - throughout the process (after each couple of rounds?) have a mini-assassination of who the value picks were, who the reaches were, and why. This allows for *some* adjustment on the fly as people are getting their feet wet.

And this idea is even better. How frequent they could be would be a point for future discussion... but I'm fond of the concept.

To this I would add- if it turns out interest is low (say, around the '6' level that I'd consider a good start), I'd definitely advocate for some limitation(s) on the available pool, in order to 'force' us to take a dive into Hockey History, e.g.: no active players, and/or must have (x) number of players from the O-6 era or before (or whatever strata of eras we wish to cordon off), and/or must have (x) number of overseas players on the roster. [Counting by development & training, NOT place-of-birth, so no ridiculous/disingenuous counting of Stan Mikita, Charlie Gardiner, Rod Langway et al as overseas players.]

I hope that more "underclassmen" express a willingness to participate. The future of this initiative could well depend on them. I also think it would be more fun for them than jumping headlong into the deep end. Those guys got more courage than me. It would be an honor to sit on a virtual "Board of Governors" with them.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Just food for thought but not insinuating intentional dishonesty after your (anyone) team gets bounced from the playoffs, in a debate you (anyone) didn't bother showing up for might be something to ponder.....or not, when considering how to attract new blood while keeping long standing and reputable members around.

That and the same, tired and fully predictable ATD needs to be scrapped. Not only have the numbers waned considerably over the past half decade, nobody gives a damn or gets involved with the post draft process. And those who do either end up getting bounced or accused of 4th grade BS. When i can count on 1 hand the number of pages a ATD final debate thread has, you have a problem.

I'll be running an auction based ATD starting in January to run concurrently with the normal run of the mill ATD. No trades, no draft picks, just daily randomly selected pools of players to bid on. Plus GM's will build the teams and people from the HoH community (reputable and willing members) will vote. No more of this GM only voting crap where 6 people vote on a final matchup and we act like it means something.

It's called progress. Be a part of it.

 

[ResilientBeast]

First - I don't know if I'd count as a newbie, but I'd be down.

Second - I think if you go main board on this you're in for a bad time. Targeted recruitment would get a better quality of poster in this. I've done a full and a OPPF draft so far and one thing I didn't appreciate before is how much *work* there is even drafting a bad team. You want people with an interest in the history of the sport and willing to do the work - that's hard to pull off out of the general population.

I like step 3 - important that a) the voting is done on by vets, and b) the vets are available as a resource. I'd prefer a "council" rather than kind of co-GMs to prevent unequal levels of help, but beyond that I have no comments.

Step 4 - Of course.

One thing I'd add is perhaps - throughout the process (after each couple of rounds?) have a mini-assassination of who the value picks were, who the reaches were, and why. This allows for *some* adjustment on the fly as people are getting their feet wet. For instance - my first draft I went very C heavy at the start, and did not get good value out of those positions because everyone was gobbling up wingers and Dmen. Some guidance going in + course corrections through out would help a lot.

Finally - I think we should update the bios thread with the most recent bios and also link to the HoH lists as resources. Yeah people can track that stuff down on their own, but accessibility is key here.

Just some thoughts from a relative newbie based on my experiences.

I've engaged in that, and it's pretty hit or miss. I think a couple of the people in the last draft were people I reached out to directly.

I'm all for the idea of a beginner draft, or something similar. I'd happily co-gm with a beginner or advise whoever asks (warning I've yet to make a finals...but I've gotten closer each year)

The bio thread will updated before ATD 2020, I've got some vacation coming up so I'll devote some time to making sure players have their most recent bio posted. If I'm feeling particularly ambitious,
I will have a list of all players picked last ATD without a single bio and try and pick away at that.

My positional project was on hold due to some professional/private issues and will be done by ATD 2020 with game scoring logs (since it's not hard to grab while doing positions) and I'll have a folder of all the game summaries for the bio builders out there.

From the course correction point of view, I've been in every ATD since 2014 and even now I ask vets who are in or outside of the draft like Sturminator (not around often), @seventieslord and @TheDevilMadeMe for their input on if I'm overvaluing a player or missing fit issues. For the most part everyone participating who is veteran wants the highest quality teams with the richest surrounding discussion.

 

[BenchBrawl]

We should do a mini draft where we pick units that existed instead of players.

4 lines, 3 pairings, 1 goalie tandem. So 9 picks total with the coach. Longevity together, peak performance, all time value of each, etc, would all count towards the evaluation.

For weird ass lines that had a cha ging 3rd wheel, just pick the best one and focus on the duo. Still a weakness to the line though.

 

[Johnny Engine]

Ooh, I kind of like that.
What would your standards be for international lines being real lines? Obviously Marchand-Crosby-Bergeron is better than anything else you can put together with Crosby, but Team Canada lines, even ones they seem to go back to regularly, aren't the same thing as Soviet lines.

Edit: re-read and saw the bit about longevity. Makes sense.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Ooh, I kind of like that.
What would your standards be for international lines being real lines? Obviously Marchand-Crosby-Bergeron is better than anything else you can put together with Crosby, but Team Canada lines, even ones they seem to go back to regularly, aren't the same thing as Soviet lines.

Edit: re-read and saw the bit about longevity. Makes sense.

Yes I kindda want to stress longevity for this reason.

I want to avoid cheap use of short-lived lines like say "Lemieux-Gretzky-Goulet" or whatever. But I also want to avoid losing all-time great duos just because they had an ever-changing 3rd wheel.

On another front, I'm open to let the same player be drafted twice, as long as he comes in different unit. This can be discussed. For example, Georges Boucher can come with Eddie Gerard or with King Clancy. OTOH, it should be somewhat emphased that he was more offensive with Gerard, and more defensive with Clancy. I have no pure formula for how to evaluate all of this, but intuitively it should be doable.

 

[ResilientBeast]

We should do a mini draft where we pick units that existed instead of players.

4 lines, 3 pairings, 1 goalie tandem. So 9 picks total with the coach. Longevity together, peak performance, all time value of each, etc, would all count towards the evaluation.

For weird ass lines that had a cha ging 3rd wheel, just pick the best one and focus on the duo. Still a weakness to the line though.

I just noticed this, that would be another fun side draft

 

[BenchBrawl]

I just noticed this, that would be another fun side draft

Yeah we should do it after the ATD but before the OPPF. It's a quicker draft since there's a fewer rounds.

 

[ResilientBeast]

Yeah we should do it after the ATD but before the OPPF. It's a quicker draft since there's a fewer rounds.

I know it's kind of as the mood strikes us, but we should probably hash out a semi-regular calendar. That way it's easier for lurkers to know when to jump in, I think someone mentioned that as an idea

ATD - January
MLD - May

Etc.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I know it's kind of as the mood strikes us, but we should probably hash out a semi-regular calendar. That way it's easier for lurkers to know when to jump in, I think someone mentioned that as an idea

ATD - January
MLD - May

Etc.

We can't anymore. Have to take it draft by draft since participation is always uncertain.

I have no interest in doing a MLD, for example, but may do the ATD, Unit Draft or the OPPF.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Well, actually, if you want to do it like this, it's up to you. You're the commish of all drafts now. Just do what you think is best and impose your will, and hopefully people will follow.

Last ATD I thought we would have 10 teams max, there was no ATD happening at all, nobody did anything, then I just started the signup thread, imposed a very quick deadline and BOOM! Many people registered to my surprise.