ATD10-ML Sir Montagu Allan Final: #1 Regina Capitals vs. #3 Melville Millionaires

[VanIslander]

7-Game Third Round Playoff Series

Sir Montagu Allan divisional finals:



Melville Millionaires

Coaches: Tom Johnson, Dwight McMillan

Ryan Smyth (A) - Brad Richards - Zigmund Palffy
Dennis Hextall - Pierre Larouche - Keith Crowder
Jay Pandolfo - George Gee - Rob Niedermayer
Johnny Wensink - Mike Richards (A) - Doug Brown
Herb Carnegie

George Owen (C) - Garry Galley
Ed Jovanovski - Andrei Markov
Kjell Samuelsson - Sylvain Lefebvre
Sylvain Cote

Kirk McLean
Evgeni Nabokov



at



Regina Capitals

Coach: Eddie Gerard

Steve Payne - Kent Nilsson - Yevgeny Babich (A)
Slava Kozlov - Paul Haynes - Tony Amonte
Brian Rolston - Brian Skrudland (A) - Jimmy Peters
Bob Probert - Syl Apps Jr. - Alf Skinner
Mike Krushelnyski, Cal Gardner

Glen Wesley (C) - Goldie Prodger
Robert Svehla - Hy Buller
Jeff Brown - Robyn Regehr
Yevgeny Paladiev

Miikka Kiprusoff
Ed Johnston

​

Click to read more...

 

[VanIslander]

Series discussion from Thursday evening until Monday night with Tuesday as Voting Day. (If anybody has time Wednesday to do a write-up please PM me.)

 

[raleh]

In this corner, wearing the blue jersey with the red and white trim, standing 6 feet tall and weighing 200lbs (hockeydb), hailing from Cornwall, Ontario, the former heavy weight champion of the world...John Wensink!


In the other corner, wearing the white jersey with the red and blue trim, standing 6'3 and weighing a whopping 235 lbs, from Windsor Ontario, another former heavy weight champion of the word...Bob Probert!


But before tonight's main event, let's see if we can't get Kent Nilsson and Pierre Larouche to drop 'em!

 

[seventieslord]

Ian White has managed to get Markus Naslund and Ilya Kovalchuk to drop the gloves this season, so anything is possible.

 

[seventieslord]

Wow. It's nice to be here in the division final and it's nice to get another shot at a series with you guys. My first ever series was against you in ATD8, which I'm sure you both remember.

I'm sure it will be a good time. With two GMs on each team, and two of them four very wordy, who wants to start an over/under on the number of posts this one goes to?

 

[vancityluongo]

Best of luck to both GBC and raleh, I'm sure we all know what we're in for here. A clean, well argued, respectful series.

Wow. It's nice to be here in the division final and it's nice to get another shot at a series with you guys. My first ever series was against you in ATD8, which I'm sure you both remember.

I'm sure it will be a good time. With two GMs on each team, and two of them four very wordy, who wants to start an over/under on the number of posts this one goes to?

I've had a couple encounters against these two as well. More than a couple against GBC actually. More like 6 or 7 I think. Each one was better and better, and maybe this is the time that I finally beat him... As for posts, if this was an ATD matchup, I'd bet over 125. I'll go with just under 40 for this MLD thread, but definitely over 25 (1 page).

 

[God Bless Canada]

I'm really sick and tired of playing VCL in these things. I think this is our fifth series, and while I've beat him every time, I know that eventually the ATD's kid brother is going to beat me. But it won't be this time.

I'm in the process of relocating to a new place, so I won't be around much. My long-time partner in crime will have to carry the load. But I'll have a few things to say.

Travel shouldn't be an issue in this series, either. Melville and Regina are just a few hours away. (Although there might be a cancellation late February. That highway from Regina to Indian Head can be a real b*tch. Right, 70s?)

Good luck, 70s and VCL.

 

[God Bless Canada]

So how many times have the Regina Police Service had to bust Bob Probert for DUI? I think his career average was two. At least he doesn't have to worry about crossing the border in this series.

I see a lot of similarities between this Regina team, and the Peterborough team we beat in the previous round. That's advantageous for us.

I see strong goaltending, but I think we have the edge. We talked about Kipper when we went with McLean. But we went with McLean.

I see strong coaching, but I think our tandem gives us the edge. And make no mistake about this: nobody knows more about hockey in Saskatchewan better than Dwight McMillan.

I see a well-constructed first line with good skill, and a good grinder in Steve Payne who fits the complimentary winger role well. That's a dangerous first line, and they have arguably the top offensive threat in the draft.

I think we can get to the second line. I don't see that physical presence who can open up room for his linemates against our physical defence, or the grit that we have in the bottom three lines. I don't think Regina's second line will be able to generate offence. If they match up against our first line, they have to go against Richards and Smyth. If they play against the second line, they're up against Hextall and Crowder. Keith Crowder vs. Anton Stastny is a match-up we'll gladly take. As bad as Crowder vs. Stastny would be, it would be even worse if Stastny was matched up against Rob Niedermayer.

I think the Pats have better bottom two lines against Peterborough. I know the Pats fourth line centre is better than the Petes' No. 4. Apps is a highly skilled guy. They'll get some offence from the fourth line, but it is more of a miscellaneous line than a line that has a rhyme or reason.

While we have far-and-away the best defenceman in the series in George Owen, the Pats have a good, deep defence. It's too bad Jeff Brown is in a pairing with Robyn Regehr. Brown will hold Regehr back. A pairing with Regehr - one of the best defensive defencemen in the game for half-a-decade - should be a strong shut-down pairing. But with Brown there, it isn't. And Robyn will be facing a lot of odd-man rushes with Brown as his partner.

 

[seventieslord]

- We are the Capitals. The Pats are our parent team. And I don't recall recruiting Anton Stastny while beating him last round

- You should have gone with your head and not your heart on goaltenders. McLean is an average ATD goalie; Kipper is one of the finest. McLean had a great 1992 regular season and was a Vezina runnr-up; this is likely the only time he was seriously considered a top-5 goalie. Kiprusoff has been a top-5 goalie for his entire career. And now both our goalies have a Save Of The Century to their credit.

- You have some work to do in conving me Tom Johnson is an advantage over Eddie Gerard. I've posted a lot about Gerard, the way he coached, and what he accomplished compared to his contemporaries. Gerard coached for over a decade; Johnson for just under 3 years. Johnson won one cup, just like Gerard, but he had Bobby Orr - Gerard had no comparable player on his roster.

- Gerard has been minimizing the odd-man rushes against Brown by using him for limited even strength minutes and maximizing his power play time. However, he has been considering pairing him with the steady Glen Wesley and forming a shutdown pairing with Prodger and Regehr. More on that later.

- You may have a physical defense but it can't really be an advantage in this series when ours is just as physical. Prodger was known for his lust for violent physical contact. Svehla led the NHL in hits and was near the top other times. Buller had a real chip on his shoulder, and all you have to do is turn on Sportsnet to see Regehr.

- Physicality from our second line can be a concern. Kozlov can dig in the corners and is far from soft, Haynes can fight, and Amonte grinds and throws the odd hit, but the line won't punish you like Melville's second line can. That said, a comparison of a line matchup doesn't end with a quick look at which line is more physical. The players on our second line are better as a whole. Our playmaker, Haynes, was a dominant playmaker in his time while Hextall managed to crack the top-10 in assists just once in the WHA-watered-down 70's. Your goal-scorer, Larouche, is similar to our goal-scorer, Amonte in skill, but lacking hockey sense and the willingness to play as a member of a team. Crowder and Kozlov, the utility men or glue guys of the line, are the most vastly different. No question Crowder is the bigger, stronger player, but Kozlov, like his linemates, is a better all-around player. Crowder put up what appear to be great career totals, but his regular season points per game are the same as Kozlov's desipte playing at a time when scoring was considerably higher, and he retired at 31 so his numbers didn't really get a chance to decline. Kozlov has played till age 37, his numbers have had the chance to decline, and they really haven't. Kozlov has also done considerably better in the playoffs despite the era disadvantage. And don't forget that this entire line is blessed with a lot of speed. Hextall and Crowder will spend a lot of time catching up before they can inflict any punishment on these guys. Do our boys give something up physically to your second line? Absolutely. Do they have the skill to play through it? There is no question that they do. If physicality becomes a problem, Alf Skinner and Amonte can switch spots in the lineup with little problem. Skinner has goal-scoring credentials similar to Amonte's and is significantly more physical.

- You don't need to have three identical players on your fourth line for it to have a rhyme or reason. As it stands, the fourth line provides a little of everything and that's just how we wanted it. Apps/Skinner are a formidable playmaking/goalscoring combo, and Skinner/Probert are a forechecking nightmare for any defense corps. This can be an energy/grind line and it can also be a scoring line. It has the wherewithal to do both as needed without being stuck in limbo, doing neither effectively. Heck, if Apps only had an excellent playoff record, he would be Brad Richards' equal - and he's on a fouth line while Richards is on a first.

 

[God Bless Canada]

*McLean was also a Vezina finalist in 1989 with Vancouver. And he was widely considered a top five goaltender after his performance in the 1994 playoffs.

*You're right. You don't need three identical players on a fourth line. But you do need some form of continuity. It's not an offensive line. You can't call a line with Probert offensive. It's not a defensive line. Not with Probert there. And it's not a physical line. You might be able to get a good forecheck going with that fourth line against other teams, but keep in mind that we have an outstanding puck-moving goaltender in McLean - probably the best puckhandling goaltender in the draft outside of Hextall and maybe Turco. He makes life easier for our defencemen.

*I think Kozlov is really overrated in these things. Good player, but he should be AAA material. You should be wishing you have Anton Stastny. The same things I said about Stastny apply to Kozlov. Match-ups with Crowder and Niedermayer will be bad news for Slava. Amonte isn't going to give you much when it comes to physicality. He's not that type of player. You don't have anyone who can open up room for the second line against our rugged two-way guys like Crowder, Hextall, Gee, M. Richards, Niedermayer and Wensink.

*You want to shuffle your pairings? We love the sound of that. Make Regehr, Poldgers, Wesley and Brown adjust to new partners. Sometimes it works and you get instant chemistry. A lot of times it doesn't, and the defencemen are left scrambling around. We made a conscious decision to get a shut-down pairing, one that will work together throughout the season, and, simply, one that will work. You have a shutdown defenceman who may or may not have a new blue line partner.

*There's an old saying: don't mess with a good thing. If you mess with a good thing, it could be a big mistake. If you don't, it will be a mistake.

*As I've said before, the beauty of our coaching is the tandem. It's not just a Tom Johnson thing. It's Tom and Dwight, working together, bringing out each other's strengths. That's what makes them work. Plus, having an assistant coach is always advantageous. It's a second set of eyes, a second hockey person to bounce ideas off of. When that second set of eyes is the man who will soon be hockey's winningest active coach, you're in good shape.

 

[seventieslord]

*McLean was also a Vezina finalist in 1989 with Vancouver. And he was widely considered a top five goaltender after his performance in the 1994 playoffs.

You're right about 1999, I forgot about that year. A quick scan of Vezina voting results shows that he was never top-5 in voting aside from those two seasons, and never top-10 either. As for post-1994, I highly doubt he was widely considered a top-5 goalie with Roy, Hasek, Belfour, Brodeur, and Joseph around. ****** was supposed to be coming into his own for Toronto, Beezer was huge for Florida, and Detroit was in the process of fooling people into thinking Osgood was a ggreat goalie. There's no way McLean was a top-5 goalie post-1994.

*You're right. You don't need three identical players on a fourth line. But you do need some form of continuity. It's not an offensive line. You can't call a line with Probert offensive. It's not a defensive line. Not with Probert there. And it's not a physical line.

That's just saying the same thing over again. You're saying becuase Probert isn't a "pure" offensive player this line can't score. Having a Probert on a line doesn't automatically preclude it from being an offensive line. One of the top-5 playmakers in this series is on this line along with one of the top-5 goalscorers. Probert doesn't have to light it up, he just has to hold his own. He proved he can do that, especially in the playoffs.

It's not a defensive line, nor was it meant to be, because the only player on it with noted defensive ability is Apps. It will not be a liability, though.

It most certainly is a physical line - how is a line that contains two very physical players and one who is at least average physically, not physical?

*I think Kozlov is really overrated in these things. Good player, but he should be AAA material. You should be wishing you have Anton Stastny. The same things I said about Stastny apply to Kozlov. Match-ups with Crowder and Niedermayer will be bad news for Slava.

Kozlov is just the least-talented player on a second line. He'll do fine. Deadmarsh is doing fine as the least-talented player of a top line. If I were you I would also continue bringing up how Crowder and Niedermayer are more physical than Kozlov, because it helps to take attention away from the fact that he's a much better player than them.

*As I've said before, the beauty of our coaching is the tandem. It's not just a Tom Johnson thing. It's Tom and Dwight, working together, bringing out each other's strengths. That's what makes them work. Plus, having an assistant coach is always advantageous. It's a second set of eyes, a second hockey person to bounce ideas off of. When that second set of eyes is the man who will soon be hockey's winningest active coach, you're in good shape.

Two heads are better than one*, sure. Three spare players are also better than two. You get some diversity in the thinking from your coaches; we get some diversity in the spare players we can insert into the lineup.

*However, your two heads aren't necessarily better than our one. You have better coaching than you would have if you had picked just one or the other, but are they as a tandem better than Gerard is on his own? I don't think so. Show me that they are.

 

[seventieslord]

*There's an old saying: don't mess with a good thing. If you mess with a good thing, it could be a big mistake. If you don't, it will be a mistake.

I don't know this old saying, but I'm guessing you have it backwards. Otherwise it would imply that it's better to mess with a good thing, because it may or may not be a mistake as opposed to leaving things the way they are, which certainly is a mistake. Right?

 

[seventieslord]

Semi-interesting sidebar: By far, the three best defensemen in Florida history are all in this series.

 

[VanIslander]

By far, the three best defensemen in Florida history are all in this series.

I see Svehla but I don't see Ozolinsh and Yushkevich.

 

[seventieslord]

Those would be, (arguably) the three best players to ever play defense for Florida. In terms of how long they spent there and what they did there, it's Svehla, Jovo, J-Bo.

In the same way that Brian Leetch is not a better Leaf than Yushkevich or Macoun.

 

[VanIslander]

Those would be, (arguably) the three best players to ever play defense for Florida. In terms of how long they spent there and what they did there, it's Svehla, Jovo, J-Bo.

In the same way that Brian Leetch is not a better Leaf than Yushkevich or Macoun.

I agree with you mostly, except for the Jovo vs. Ozo part.

Jovo was 3rd, 4th, 2nd in blueline scoring his three full seasons there but "learning" defensively, started to put it together when he was traded to Vancouver.

Ozolinsh was 1st and 1st in blueline scoring and not a highlight-mistake reel the two full seasons he spent there.

Ozolinsh was better as a Panther than Jovo and I DON'T mean just by the scoring stats I cited. (Not that it's especially relevant to this series.)

 

[God Bless Canada]

If you would have asked hockey people for the top five goalies in the league after the 1994 playoffs, a lot of people would have had McLean on their list. He carried the Canucks to within a game of winning the Cup. It was a tremendous performance. And he followed that up with a pretty good season in 1995, and nearly 50 saves in Game 7 vs. St. Louis.

You still don't have a strong shut-down pairing to play against our scoring lines. You have a strong shut-down defenceman in Regehr, and you waste his abilities playing him with Brown. You have a strong third line, but we've made a habit of beating teams with strong third lines. If you want to try Poldgers-Regehr, that's fine, but chemistry will be an issue.

Kozlov has one effective role: scoring. He's not going to open up room for his linemates. He's not going to do well in corner and board battles against our forwards or our defencemen. He's going to be out-muscled and out-worked. Your first line will be able to get goals. But your second line won't. And neither will your fourth line. Probert is a liability. You have two-thirds of a strong scoring line. But the third member of the line will hold them back.

I think we have the edge in goal. But I don't think there is much of an advantage for our team. It's not big enough to be a difference maker. The difference maker is finding lines, defence tandems, a coaching staff (not just a coach) and a team, overall, that works. And that's the difference for Melville.
Incidentally, I'd say the greatest defenceman in Panthers' history is Bouwmeester.

 

[vancityluongo]

If you would have asked hockey people for the top five goalies in the league after the 1994 playoffs, a lot of people would have had McLean on their list. He carried the Canucks to within a game of winning the Cup. It was a tremendous performance. And he followed that up with a pretty good season in 1995, and nearly 50 saves in Game 7 vs. St. Louis.

You still don't have a strong shut-down pairing to play against our scoring lines. You have a strong shut-down defenceman in Regehr, and you waste his abilities playing him with Brown. You have a strong third line, but we've made a habit of beating teams with strong third lines. If you want to try Poldgers-Regehr, that's fine, but chemistry will be an issue.

Kozlov has one effective role: scoring. He's not going to open up room for his linemates. He's not going to do well in corner and board battles against our forwards or our defencemen. He's going to be out-muscled and out-worked. Your first line will be able to get goals. But your second line won't. And neither will your fourth line. Probert is a liability. You have two-thirds of a strong scoring line. But the third member of the line will hold them back.

I think we have the edge in goal. But I don't think there is much of an advantage for our team. It's not big enough to be a difference maker. The difference maker is finding lines, defence tandems, a coaching staff (not just a coach) and a team, overall, that works. And that's the difference for Melville.
Incidentally, I'd say the greatest defenceman in Panthers' history is Bouwmeester.

Heh, see, I know that if we had a pure shutdown pairing, we'd get criticized about them for being unable to chip in offensively. I've been a firm believer in shutdown pairings before, but I see zero reason why our top-pairing can't do any defensive job that will be required. Prodger was known for his defensive prowess, while Wesley is enough of a all-around defenseman to handle guys like Brad Richards and Ryan Smyth. All our pairings, even Brown-Regehr are defensively sound. I don't think you can say the same thing; Jovo and Markov may cause some headaches for you. A guy slick quick guy like Haynes will be perfect for getting Jovo to overplay the man, leaving Markov screwed on a odd-man situation.

Also, I have no idea why putting Prodger with Regehr would cause "chemistry issues". These two have been teammates for an entire season, do you think that they've never played together over the course of a season? It's not like we just acquired a new guy at the deadline or anything...I doubt we do make any adjustments to our pairings, but I'm really intrigued as to why you believe that making adjustments to pairings will cause issues.

As for Kozlov...meh, that's only if you match Hextall and Crowder against him. Don't know why'd you want to match your fourth line against our second, but I guess Doug Brown is physical. Either way, Haynes-Amonte is still a deadly duo, and will be an absolute handful for whoever they're matched against. On defense, likely Jovanovski and Markov at times I'm guessing, because I'm sure you'll want the other out against the top line.

Probert...maybe...I think we could sit him in this series without it being negative, not that we necessarily will. I think we could sub him for Krushelnyski, meaning Probert will not see much game action, unless someone like Wensink goes headhunting, in which case he will be there for Wensink to answer to in the next game. Would that be more of a line with direction?

Not that it isn't now, because you could probably say Probert would be able to open space for the other two...and honestly, Bob Probert is possibly the greatest enforcer ever, not only for fighting, but because he wasn't a complete goon. He has almost 30 goals once, and had a couple other times where he flirted with 20. Not saying he's gonna provide anything offensively, but he has 6 more career goals than Melville's "two-way" (your words, GBC) forward, Rob Niedermayer does (as of the beginning of this year) in only three more games. Yes, I absolutely understand that scoring won't be Niedermayer's job, and that Rob is a helluva defensive player. But give Probert some credit, this isn't Darcy "can't scoredichuk" Hordichuk or Colton Orr we're talking about.

I'd call goaltending a wash, although I know seventies believes we have the advantage. I hate arguing against Captain Kirk, and saying a stupid Flame D) deserves credit, but we gotta look at things objectively. I'd bet it'd be pretty hard for you to argue against McLean too had we swapped goalies, but IMO other than a couple of outstanding runs, he was kinda average.

 

[seventieslord]

If you would have asked hockey people for the top five goalies in the league after the 1994 playoffs, a lot of people would have had McLean on their list. He carried the Canucks to within a game of winning the Cup. It was a tremendous performance.

Depends what you mean by "a lot". I know it was a tremendous performance. But in a league with Hasek, Joseph, Belfour, Roy, and Brodeur, those are the top-5 goalies.

Post-94, right after the finals, sure, some people might have said he was top-5. In 1995, 1996, and beyond, not a chance.

And he followed that up with a pretty good season in 1995, and nearly 50 saves in Game 7 vs. St. Louis.

I wonder what his .893 playoff sv% would have been without that game.

You still don't have a strong shut-down pairing to play against our scoring lines. You have a strong shut-down defenceman in Regehr, and you waste his abilities playing him with Brown. You have a strong third line, but we've made a habit of beating teams with strong third lines. If you want to try Poldgers-Regehr, that's fine, but chemistry will be an issue.

If what you mean is, we don't have a pairing of defensemen where both players are strong defensively and provide little offense, then sure, I can agree. There is no "shut down pairing" but I don't recall it ever being a prerequisite for beating a team loaded with playoff question marks. Jeff Brown is the only defenseman on the roster whose defensive ability is weak, and it is a necessary evil in the MLD if you want a defenseman with serious offensive skills. Our other five starters are all very strong defensively, including Regehr. This leaves two other pairings who don't have any kind of liabilities associated with them. I could change up the pairings, but any partner of Brown's is going to face some odd-man rushes. That's not going to change. Therefore, shouldn't his partner be the one who is the strongest defensively? Wasted... yeah right.

(It's Prodger, I think you're combining his first and last names)

Kozlov has one effective role: scoring. He's not going to open up room for his linemates. He's not going to do well in corner and board battles against our forwards or our defencemen. He's going to be out-muscled and out-worked. Your first line will be able to get goals. But your second line won't. And neither will your fourth line. Probert is a liability. You have two-thirds of a strong scoring line. But the third member of the line will hold them back.

Kozlov has never shown that he can be intimidated. He does battle along the boards and is a wonderful complementary player. He has been deep in the playoff trenches and come out a winner, with broken eggs in all his pockets. Outmuscled? Against Crowder, of course. Not many wouldn't be outmuscled by Crowder at this level. Big deal. When Crowder has the puck on his stick in the playoffs against Svehla or Regehr or Prodger, that puck isn't going to end up in our net. Kozlov has shown numerous times that he delivers in the playoffs. Muscle's great, but you still have to score some goals to win a hockey game.

I think we have the edge in goal. But I don't think there is much of an advantage for our team. It's not big enough to be a difference maker. The difference maker is finding lines, defence tandems, a coaching staff (not just a coach) and a team, overall, that works. And that's the difference for Melville.

I doubt there are many who feel McLean has achieved more in his career than Kiprusoff. That said, if they do, there's no way it can be a difference maker. Our lines, defense tandems, and team work just fine. I'm still curious to hear what kind of coaches Johnson and McMillan are, and why they are better than Gerard, because unfortunately, "because there are two of them" doesn't cut it.

Incidentally, I'd say the greatest defenceman in Panthers' history is Bouwmeester.

Whoa, slow down there. Let's see him get to the playoffs as a Panther, finish somewhere in the top-15 in scoring by defensemen as a Panther, get his career +/- over 0 while a Panther, come close to leading the league in hits or blocks, or be his team's top penalty killer before we make declarations like that.

 

[seventieslord]

I don't think you can say the same thing; Jovo and Markov may cause some headaches for you. A guy slick quick guy like Haynes will be perfect for getting Jovo to overplay the man, leaving Markov screwed on a odd-man situation.

Hey, thanks, that's a really good point. Haynes, according to what I dug up on him in the NY Times, was pulling off great passing plays with regularity (and usually not with players like Amonte and Kozlov, either) and that is exactly what you don't want Jovo up against.

 

[seventieslord]

I agree with you mostly, except for the Jovo vs. Ozo part.

Jovo was 3rd, 4th, 2nd in blueline scoring his three full seasons there but "learning" defensively, started to put it together when he was traded to Vancouver.

Ozolinsh was 1st and 1st in blueline scoring and not a highlight-mistake reel the two full seasons he spent there.

Ozolinsh was better as a Panther than Jovo and I DON'T mean just by the scoring stats I cited. (Not that it's especially relevant to this series.)

OK, good points. I guess Jovo hadn't really come into his own and Ozolinsh was a Panther in his prime. You're probably right, although, Jovo's contributions to the finals run make it very, very close.

 

[raleh]

A guy slick quick guy like Haynes will be perfect for getting Jovo to overplay the man, leaving Markov screwed on a odd-man situation.

Ha, have you watched many Habs games this year? Markov has spent the entire season defending against odd-man rushes

I've been wanting to chime in on this discussion, but I'm honestly having a hard time deciding where to begin. Especially since GBC tends to cover things pretty well. It's as if he's got some experience writing about hockey or something...

I don't think there are any huge advantages anywhere. Obviously I think Mclean is better than Kipper, I think we picked him before you guys picked Kipper, right? His best hockey was simply better than Kipper's.

I think offensively, on the first line, it's very close. Love Babich, I chose him as one of the league all stars at LW. Not a huge fan of Nilsson, but he'll do his job. I do think Palffy is the most dangerous player in this series, but not by enough that he's going to take over by any means.

The guy that's going to take over this series could very well be Pierre Larouche. I think the biggest advantage we have is secondary scoring. Our second line is going to score quite a bit more than Regina's.

Defensively, the teams are pretty close except for the fact that we have George Owen who is the class of this series. If we've got the Owen pairing or the Kjell pairing out against the Nilsson line, I think we'll be fine. And having Rob Niedermayer out against any of Regina's LWs puts us in a pretty good position.

And I really want Wensink and Probert to go. Probert was such a late fighter and Wensink threw them so fast, I think it could be trouble for Probert.

 

[seventieslord]

Ha, have you watched many Habs games this year? Markov has spent the entire season defending against odd-man rushes

I've been wanting to chime in on this discussion, but I'm honestly having a hard time deciding where to begin. Especially since GBC tends to cover things pretty well. It's as if he's got some experience writing about hockey or something...

I don't think there are any huge advantages anywhere. Obviously I think Mclean is better than Kipper, I think we picked him before you guys picked Kipper, right? His best hockey was simply better than Kipper's.

I think offensively, on the first line, it's very close. Love Babich, I chose him as one of the league all stars at LW. Not a huge fan of Nilsson, but he'll do his job. I do think Palffy is the most dangerous player in this series, but not by enough that he's going to take over by any means.

The guy that's going to take over this series could very well be Pierre Larouche. I think the biggest advantage we have is secondary scoring. Our second line is going to score quite a bit more than Regina's.

Defensively, the teams are pretty close except for the fact that we have George Owen who is the class of this series. If we've got the Owen pairing or the Kjell pairing out against the Nilsson line, I think we'll be fine. And having Rob Niedermayer out against any of Regina's LWs puts us in a pretty good position.

And I really want Wensink and Probert to go. Probert was such a late fighter and Wensink threw them so fast, I think it could be trouble for Probert.

We're not huge Nilsson fans either. We just respect his immense talent level. Forget this series, he's got what it takes to be the most dangerous player in the draft, provided we give him the right linemates. And we've done that.

Markov has done well against odd-man rushes this year? I haven't seen enough of him to confirm or refute that so we'll take your word for it. Still, it's not an ideal situation for him to be facing a large number of them.

I don't see how McLean can be said to have played better than Kipper at their best. Both have reached the same playoff plateau and both played superbly in getting there. In the regular season, Kipper has had a career half as long and has already doubled McLean's significant achievements.

Larouche, for all his personality troubles, has been pretty decent in the postseason, numbers-wise. But his linemates haven't. Those two are major question marks. More to come on that later.

You should hope Wensink beats Probert. He needs to do something to justify his place in the lineup.

 

[raleh]

We're not huge Nilsson fans either. We just respect his immense talent level. Forget this series, he's got what it takes to be the most dangerous player in the draft, provided we give him the right linemates. And we've done that.

Markov has done well against odd-man rushes this year? I haven't seen enough of him to confirm or refute that so we'll take your word for it. Still, it's not an ideal situation for him to be facing a large number of them.

I don't see how McLean can be said to have played better than Kipper at their best. Both have reached the same playoff plateau and both played superbly in getting there. In the regular season, Kipper has had a career half as long and has already doubled McLean's significant achievements.

Larouche, for all his personality troubles, has been pretty decent in the postseason, numbers-wise. But his linemates haven't. Those two are major question marks. More to come on that later.

You should hope Wensink beats Probert. He needs to do something to justify his place in the lineup.

haha, sorry, I shouldn't have said that. It's not really relevant in the conversation. It was just me taking a shot at Markov's undrafted D partner for the majority of the season who seems to have decided that the Habs need to be down a man at all times...

 

[God Bless Canada]

Dennis Hextall was never in a situation where he had a chance to prove himself in the playoffs. His playoff record is one of those that would best be termed as "incomplete." During the three-year run when he went for at least 52 assists and 138 PIMs each year (you can throw in a 44-assist, 164 PIM season if you want), he played in six playoff games. You can't get a good evaluation of a guy based on six playoff games. (I know some of the stats freaks would like to, but they don't have a clue). But if you want to talk about the perfect LW to work with Larouche in the MLD, that would be Dennis Hextall, because he brings the playmaking ability and the grit that Larouche needs to succeed.

You're right that Crowder's playoff resume isn't sterling, but Crowder's in the complimentary role. And it's a role that suits him fine. He's excellent defensively, he's tough, he's physical, he's a force in the corners, and he can score goals, finish off chances, and pick up the garbage goals that Hextall and Larouche create with their skill. There are very few players who credibly fit the bill of a power forward in an MLD that follows a 28-team ATD. Crowder is one of the few. The days of Morrow and Doan slipping to the MLD are over.

And I think the playoff record for scorers isn't as much as an issue. That's why I don't make it a big part of my arguments. Unless someone has a sterling playoff record, like Brad Richards or Steve Payne. If a guy has that great playoff record, that's great. But if he doesn't, I don't make an issue of it like the ATD. This is a completely different level. Guys aren't playing against elite shutdown forwards or shutdown defencemen. You have strong shutdown defencemen (Samuelsson, Lefebvre, Regehr, Rick Green, etc.), but they aren't elite all-time shut-down guys. Dennis Hextall isn't facing the Broad Street Bullies (the team he faced in the 73 playoffs during his one playoff at the height of his career). He's not facing defensive defencemen the calibre of the Watsons, or defensive forwards the calibre of Clarke, Lonsberry, MacLeish, etc.

Incidentally, Hextall was the first star in our first round series, so I think a lot of guys realize that his playoff record is best defined as incomplete.

I think you've given Nilsson the right linemates. No secret around these parts that I'm a big Steve Payne fan. But I know we've given Larouche the right linemates. I know we've given Brad Richards the right linemates. (Or Ziggy Palffy the right linemates. Depends on your perspective). I don't think you've give Amonte or Haynes the right linemates. (Again, depends on your perspective). And I know you haven't given Apps the right linemates. I said last round that the Petes didn't have the right mix for the second line. I was right. And that was probably the difference in the series. And I think the Caps inability to find the right mix for the second and fourth lines is the difference in this series. Our lines work. Theirs don't.

Markov is a very, very good all-round defenceman. I thought he should have been a second-team all-star last year, but you also couldn't argue with Brian Campbell's selection, since Campbell had such a huge impact on San Jose in the final six weeks. But Markov fits in well with Jovanovski - a steady, smart, well-rounded defenceman who can also move the puck and effectively quarterback a power play. His defensive game is really underrated.

Wensink, with what he brings to the table, has no trouble justifying his place in the line-up. He's not just a toughie. And he's not going to be in the headlines for a clash with Melville RCMP after a DUI. He's not going to try to sneak "Columbian bam bam" across the border at North Portal or Regway. (The two busiest Canada-U.S. border crossing in Saskatchewan). He's a good guy (something that can't be said about Probert), he's a good locker room guy, he's tough as nails, and he's actually pretty good defensively.

Our coaching is better. Partly because it does help to have the extra set of eyes. Partly because it's the perfect tandem. Johnson is the player's coach - the guy who knows how to handle the players, who knows what to say to them and when to say it to them, and just has the great mind for the game. The perfect coach for guys like Pierre Larouche and Ziggy Palffy, but also a guy who'll get respect from the Richard's, Owen, Crowder, Smyth, Jovo, Lefebvre and Gee. Dwight McMillan - as anyone who knows anything about Saskatchewan hockey will tell you - is a master strategist, a guy who can pick the game apart and create the perfect game plan. He can be tough and demanding. But he'll turn a guy like Larouche loose, too. And for the stats freaks out there: at this time next year, Dwight will be the winningest coach in hockey. Anywhere.