seventieslord
Student Of The Game
Also, I realized that post was getting long so I hit send on my phone and went to my PC to finish it. So it's much longer than the post @Hockey Outsider and @Hawkey Town 18 liked in the last ten minutes...
ATD Chat Thread XVIII
- Thread starter ResilientBeast
- Start date
Hawkey Town 18
Registered User
I'd be lying if I said I wasn't a bit disappointed with the original post!
The stuff about team character is interesting, everyone knows it's a big factor of success, but seems rare for players to talk about the specifics in a negative context. I understand why, but I wish we heard about that kinda stuff more often.
Did he say why he thinks the current Leafs don't have the right character? Like a specific thing that is missing or any other details?
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
No he didn't, he used it as a lead-in to the Clark/Odjick story, like he was using that as an example of the kind of mentality a good team has.
In a world where there was more time and preparation I'd have asked if he thinks the leafs have to acquire that character or develop it themselves.
VanIslander
A 19-year ATDer on HfBoards
Great guy to take the time.
I have met my first hockey idol Ken Dryden. He was in Ottawa as GM of the opposing playoff Leafs that spring and I happened to be in the city and saw him signing a long line of autographs (outside somewhere). I walked right up to him quickly and said i just wanted to shake the hand of my first hockey hero. He stopped signing, turned his huge frame, put his mammoth paw around my hand and gently shook it, we talking for a few minutes, probably to the gruffing of the long line, but i oblivious to it all.
I have met my first hockey idol Ken Dryden. He was in Ottawa as GM of the opposing playoff Leafs that spring and I happened to be in the city and saw him signing a long line of autographs (outside somewhere). I walked right up to him quickly and said i just wanted to shake the hand of my first hockey hero. He stopped signing, turned his huge frame, put his mammoth paw around my hand and gently shook it, we talking for a few minutes, probably to the gruffing of the long line, but i oblivious to it all.
Iceman
Registered User
- Jun 9, 2014
- 10,640
- 2,024
How are you guys doing everyone? Haven't been on in I don't even know how long, I probably can't count that high anyway. Been busy with work myself and changing jobs but otherwise life has been pretty good. Glad to see ATD is still going strong and that there is still interest in it. 
VanIslander
A 19-year ATDer on HfBoards
If I was a millionaire (like even marginal NHLers), I'dHow are you guys doing everyone? Haven't been on I'm I don't even know how long, I probably can't count that high anyway. Been busy with work myself and changing jobs but otherwise life has been pretty good. Glad to see ATD is still going strong and that there is still interest in it.
tinyzombies
Registered User
One of the coolest moments of my life first time walking into the Forum as a kid and seeing the ice surface and the crowd, and then seeing Dryden's mask. It was the first thing I looked for.
tinyzombies
Registered User
Found this quote from Trevor Timmins interesting: "When scouts talk about a top-two defenceman we talk about it being on a top-eight team; that’s how we talk. Not on all 32 teams…top eight teams."
VanIslander
A 19-year ATDer on HfBoards
In other words, dmen who get heavy minutes on bad teams aren't as good as their TOI stats might suggest.
The Macho King
Back* to Back** World Champion
- Jun 22, 2011
- 48,730
- 29,191
This checks out - which is why the whole "a #1 Dman just means top 31/32 in the league" argument is stupid.
I think it's somewhat the same with points as well. Like - someone needs to score. Someone needs the top PP time. There are 60 minutes in a game and someone needs to play.
Johnny Engine
Moderator
- Jul 29, 2009
- 4,979
- 2,360
It also goes to show how completely arbitrary the designation is.
When the league had 24 teams, were there 6 #1 defensemen (a quarter of the league)? Would a huge influx of expansion teams make a guy like Damon Severson into a #1? Or is 8 the key number?
What about in the original 6? Was Bill Gadsby a #1 defenseman, and if not, was that due to his own flaws, or the existence of Harvey and Kelly?
I think most sensible people can get some context out of statements like "Dion Phaneuf is the worst #1 defenseman in the league" (out of the 30 guys playing the most of their teams) or "Cale Makar is a bonafide #1 defenseman" (and the Avs could win it all with him if the forwards and goalies show up), or "Hampus Lindholm is holding down a #1 job in Anaheim" (and the minutes he plays are not the primary reason that teams sucks). Why get bent out of shape about statements like that when it's obvious what they mean?
When the league had 24 teams, were there 6 #1 defensemen (a quarter of the league)? Would a huge influx of expansion teams make a guy like Damon Severson into a #1? Or is 8 the key number?
What about in the original 6? Was Bill Gadsby a #1 defenseman, and if not, was that due to his own flaws, or the existence of Harvey and Kelly?
I think most sensible people can get some context out of statements like "Dion Phaneuf is the worst #1 defenseman in the league" (out of the 30 guys playing the most of their teams) or "Cale Makar is a bonafide #1 defenseman" (and the Avs could win it all with him if the forwards and goalies show up), or "Hampus Lindholm is holding down a #1 job in Anaheim" (and the minutes he plays are not the primary reason that teams sucks). Why get bent out of shape about statements like that when it's obvious what they mean?
The Macho King
Back* to Back** World Champion
- Jun 22, 2011
- 48,730
- 29,191
I'm generally not bothered by it - I think it's people trying to be overly pedantic and think they're making a clever point.
#1 is about role for me. It's the guy who is an option to be the first over the boards in any scenario. Up one, down one, PP, PK. Rest of the D may move them around based on circumstances (for instance, Hedman is on the second PK unit now because when you have Ryan McDonagh you may as well use him), but he's a good *option* for it.
As an aside, one of the reasons I was never high on Ryan Suter is that his biggest claim to fame was he played a lot of minutes. He "ate minutes." But those minutes were low event - both ways. I don't know - I want my #1 to be an impact player, and Ryan Suter never was that. Steady yes. Reliable yes. But he doesn't make things happen.
tinyzombies
Registered User
tinyzombies
Registered User
To continue the conversation comparing Jack Crawford to Bob Goldham, etc. from the ATD Redux thread:
La presse, 27 décembre 1986:
"On December 27, 1942, Maurice Richard suffered a fractured ankle bone in his right foot when checked by defenseman Jack Crawford of the Boston Bruins. The Rocket, who had contributed a goal and two assists to the 4-2 victory of his own, was not to play this season, his first in the National league."
***
"Crawford has all the qualities to succeed Eddie Shore. With a little more experience, he will be one of the best in the circuit. He still takes dangerous (trips up ice?). For the defensive, he is precise and has solid judgment. He made few mistakes on defense. All hockey fans consider young Crawford to be a Young Star. He's rough and tough. He knows how to give and take punishment.
His style resembles that of Shore. He attacks like Shore and defends like Shore. He might not have the dynamism of the great Eddie, but he will probably acquire that with time. Crawford is always at his post if there is an impasse. Like an attacking player, he accelerates quickly for a colossus. His shot is precise and powerful. Currently, Dit Clapper is his partner while Portland forms a pair with Shore. Shore is surprised that he possesses this level of skill. He can’t believe he just left the minors this winter. Ross discovered Crawford two years ago in Lake Shore, a district of Northern Ontario. I only played one season at Providence. "
So, Clapper played LD or RD all those years with Crawford? I know this was Shore's last year with Boston so maybe they moved to different pairs. I have both on my Redux team.
***
La patrie, 17 octobre 1946
A piece on Bobby Bauer taking over the captaincy from Crawford, but only because the Bruins were naming a different player as captain each year.
***
La patrie, 28 mars 1947
Here they call Crawford a "sentinel".
***
Crawford (6) attempts to block Rocket's shot in game 1 of the 1946 finals. Brimsek made the save here, but Rocket scored in OT to give Habs 1-0 series lead.
La presse, 27 décembre 1986:
"On December 27, 1942, Maurice Richard suffered a fractured ankle bone in his right foot when checked by defenseman Jack Crawford of the Boston Bruins. The Rocket, who had contributed a goal and two assists to the 4-2 victory of his own, was not to play this season, his first in the National league."
***
"Crawford has all the qualities to succeed Eddie Shore. With a little more experience, he will be one of the best in the circuit. He still takes dangerous (trips up ice?). For the defensive, he is precise and has solid judgment. He made few mistakes on defense. All hockey fans consider young Crawford to be a Young Star. He's rough and tough. He knows how to give and take punishment.
His style resembles that of Shore. He attacks like Shore and defends like Shore. He might not have the dynamism of the great Eddie, but he will probably acquire that with time. Crawford is always at his post if there is an impasse. Like an attacking player, he accelerates quickly for a colossus. His shot is precise and powerful. Currently, Dit Clapper is his partner while Portland forms a pair with Shore. Shore is surprised that he possesses this level of skill. He can’t believe he just left the minors this winter. Ross discovered Crawford two years ago in Lake Shore, a district of Northern Ontario. I only played one season at Providence. "
So, Clapper played LD or RD all those years with Crawford? I know this was Shore's last year with Boston so maybe they moved to different pairs. I have both on my Redux team.
***
La patrie, 17 octobre 1946
A piece on Bobby Bauer taking over the captaincy from Crawford, but only because the Bruins were naming a different player as captain each year.
***
La patrie, 28 mars 1947
Here they call Crawford a "sentinel".
***
Crawford (6) attempts to block Rocket's shot in game 1 of the 1946 finals. Brimsek made the save here, but Rocket scored in OT to give Habs 1-0 series lead.
Last edited:
VanIslander
A 19-year ATDer on HfBoards
Indeed.
I was there at games in Montreal when the Habs faithful were shouting in unison "Breeze-by, breeze by". The utter contempt and ridicule of the fan base was equivalent to what I saw Jason Spezza endure in juniors when his lazy butt was in Windsor.
tinyzombies
Registered User
Brisebois didn't deserve it. It was because he signed that huge 4m contract lol.
VanIslander
A 19-year ATDer on HfBoards
Can you cry on demand?
I used to think Meryl Streep was something special for her legendary ability for waterworks.
Well, I lost my beloved father and two daughters. I can turn it on easily on a dime.
I think anyone who has suffered greatly can.
I used to think Meryl Streep was something special for her legendary ability for waterworks.
Well, I lost my beloved father and two daughters. I can turn it on easily on a dime.
I think anyone who has suffered greatly can.
tinyzombies
Registered User
Game 2 of the 1916 finals, Montreal vs Portland (
Morning Oregonian., March 23, 1916
:
Under Eastern Rules in game 1:
Morning Oregonian., March 23, 1916
:
Under Eastern Rules in game 1:
Last edited:
When is the next atd? I'm not interested in the minor league shit, i don't know enough for that... but i am down for a ~20-30 team draft
VanIslander
A 19-year ATDer on HfBoards
Hockey Outsider
Registered User
- Jan 16, 2005
- 9,133
- 14,385
Are there any examples in hockey history of two teams frequently facing off in the playoffs (say four times in six years), with one team winning every series, but every match being close (each series taking six or seven games)?
Hawkey Town 18
Registered User
I thought the 60's Hawks might have a good shot at being the answer to this question, but no luck, the closest I found was the below vs. the Red Wings:
1963: lost in 6
1964: lost in 7
1965: won in 7
1966: lost in 6
(they also beat the Wings in 6 for the Cup in 1961 shortly before the above)
Hockey Outsider
Registered User
- Jan 16, 2005
- 9,133
- 14,385
The closest I found so far was the Leafs-Senators rivalry. They met 4 times in 5 years in the playoffs, with Toronto taking all four matches. Two of the series went to game 7, one went to game 6 (the Leafs had a come-from-behind OT win in game 5, and were down 2-0 early in the second period of game 6), but the 2001 sweep "ruins" the pattern.
(In case anyone is curious why I'm asking - I'm trying to see if there's any parallels in hockey to the Kasparov-Karpov rivalry in chess. They faced off five times in seven years for the world championship. Kasparov won four series (one was suspended, with Karpov in the lead but Kasparov rapidly catching up), but all of the series were very close).
(In case anyone is curious why I'm asking - I'm trying to see if there's any parallels in hockey to the Kasparov-Karpov rivalry in chess. They faced off five times in seven years for the world championship. Kasparov won four series (one was suspended, with Karpov in the lead but Kasparov rapidly catching up), but all of the series were very close).
Last edited:
Hawkey Town 18
Registered User
VanIslander
A 19-year ATDer on HfBoards
The Bruins lost to the Habs four (4) consecutive playoffs in the 1950's.
In 1952, in 7 games in the semi final.
In 1953, in 5 games in the cup final.
In 1954, in 4 games in the semifinal.
In 1955, in 5 games in the semifinal.
I knew about this in the late 1970s when CBC used to repeatedly feature it as part of the history of the Montreal-Boston rivalry (that was intense in my youth).
In 1952, in 7 games in the semi final.
In 1953, in 5 games in the cup final.
In 1954, in 4 games in the semifinal.
In 1955, in 5 games in the semifinal.
I knew about this in the late 1970s when CBC used to repeatedly feature it as part of the history of the Montreal-Boston rivalry (that was intense in my youth).
