ATD12,René Lecavalier Quarterfinals. 4 Silver Sons of Canadavs.5Nova Scotia Voyageurs

[Leafs Forever]

The Silver Seven Sons of Canada​

GM: MXD
Coach: Cecil Hart

Aurele Joliat - Howie Morenz(C) - Johnny Gagnon
Lynn Patrick - Phil Watson - Bryan Hextall Sr.
Murray Murdoch - Fleming Mackell - Cecil Dillon
Charley McVeigh - Andy Blair - Bill Ezinicki :

Bill Goldsworty & Bob Gracie

Earl Seibert(A) - Hod Stuart
Lionel Hitchman - Flash Hollett
Ted Harris - Andrei Markov
Behn Wilson

Charlie Gardiner (A)
Lorne Chabot


PP1 : Aurèle Joliat - Howie Morenz - Cecil Dillon - Flash Hollett - Hod Stuart
PP2 : Lynn Patrick - Phil Watson - Bryan Hextall - Earl Seibert - Andrei Markov

PK1 : Charlei McVeigh - Fleming Mackell - Earl Seibert - Lionel Hitchman
PK 2 : Cecil Dillon - Murray Murdoch - Hod Stuart - Ted Harris

vs.

Nova Scotia Voyageurs


GM: Rzeznik
Coach: Jack Adams
Assistant Coach: Bun Cook

Rick Martin-Steve Yzerman (C)-Dino Ciccarelli
Dany Heatley-Doug Gilmour (A)-Cam Neely
Ray Getliffe-Dick Irvin, Sr.-Bob Nevin (A)
Adam Graves-Chris Drury-Gary Dornhoefer

Larry Robinson (A)-Jean-Guy Talbot
Ken Reardon-Ted Green
Alexander Gusev-Hamby Shore

Gump Worsley
John Ross Roach

Spares
Bob Dailey
Jozef Golonka

Minors
Dennis Maruk-Viktor Zhluktov-Ran McDonald
Garry Galley-Bob Murray
Miikka Kiprusoff

PP1: Heatley-Yzerman-Neely-Robinson-Shore
PP2: Martin-Gilmour-Ciccarelli-Reardon-Gusev

PK1: Getliffe-Nevin-Robinson-Talbot
PK2: Gilmour-Graves-Reardon-Green
PK3: Drury-Dornhoefer​

Click to read more...

 

[Rzeznik]

Howie Morenz, meet Larry Robinson. You two will be seeing a lot of each other throughout the series.

I'm off tonight so if MXD is around, we should be able to get the debate started pretty heavy.

 

[Rzeznik]

Quick Notes

Coaching: Even
Hart and Adams are both great coaches, although I think Hart may be a bit ahead of him. Cook makes up for what little gap this is though, IMO, and I'd call this a wash. Won't have much of an effect on the series.

First Lines: Slight Advantage Canada
At first glance, the SS seem to have a major edge here, with Joliat and Morenz lining up together on the top line. But my top line boasts two top-end goal-scorers in Martin and Ciccarelli anchoring the captain Stevie Y. This line will have great chemistry, although clearly not on the level of the SS, and shouldn't have a problem creating offense against any line in the draft. Obviously though, the SS top line, with two top-5 players at their respective positions, have the edge here.

Second Lines: Advantage Nova Scotia
The SS ice a top-end second line right-winger in Hextall, to go along with two guys who haven't been put into their respective roles much at this level prior to this draft. Not to say they don't deserve to be there, but with 32 teams this time around, those extra spots are key for guys like Patrick and Watson, especially with their former New York linemate. My second line though IMO, may be one of, if not the best second line, in the whole draft. Two goal-scoring extraordinaires in Neely and Heatley, who both aren't afraid to get dirty, line-up next to my favorite all-time player and a great second line center and leader, Doug Gilmour. This line will be in your face, it will hit hard, and it will provide solid two way play as well. We aren't going to line match, but don't be surprised if Killer is lining up across from Morenz for a few shifts.

Third Lines: Advantage Canada
With my favorite third line in the draft, I have to give a tip of the cap to MXD for putting such a great mix of guys together. Great in both ends of the ice, this would be a major edge against a lot of other teams. However, I believe my third line is nothing to shake your head at. Getliffe and Nevin are both solid two-way players, and Irvin, although mostly known for his offensive ability, is said to have been decent in his own zone as well. Not on the level of Mackell, Murdoch and Dillon, but still a very good line, worthy of playing against any line on the SS.

Fourth Lines: Even
Simply, both are defensively responsible, hard hitting lines that can provide a touch of offense. Ezinicki and Dornhoefer are a wash. Blair over Drury, although both are big playoff performers. Graves over McVeigh, just because Rabbit provides almost nothing offensively, and is quite small, even for his era. Pretty much a wash, although my fourth line will be able to match up with the SS second line quite nicely, compared to Canada trying to match their fourth with either of my top-two.

Overall: Slight advantage Canada
With an advantage and a slight advantage, it is clear Canada has a an advantage on the forward front. Great chemistry up front, although this advantage will lesson in the playoffs once Nova Scotia's group knows each other a little better. Man on man, the SS may have the advantage, but I like the match-up I have on home ice, being my 2nd line matching up against the Morenz line. I'll also try to avoid my 1st against that third line as much as possible, although this won't be as big a worry. I can see this being a very low scoring series.

 

[Rzeznik]

Larry Robinson vs. Earl Seibert, Slight advantage Nova Scotia

This is a very close call between two pretty good number 1's in an ATD context. Both are very good both ways, both can hit hard, and both can scrap with the best of them. I think Robinson may be a step ahead of Seibert defensively, but both guys are about as reliable as they come. Look for an absolute blood-bath of a fight if they decide to throw down as well.

Ken Reardon vs. Hod Stuart, Slight advantage Nova Scotia

Another close call between top end number 2's. They play very similar games, as both were known as hard hitters who were solid defensively, who could pull of some great rushes offensively. Both guys are in the hall as well. It's hard for me to find much info on Stuart, as there isn't much about him online, which is why I gave Reardon the slight advantage. Definitely debatable though.

Jean-Guy Talbot vs. Lionel Hitchman, Advantage Nova Scotia

Two hard-hitting guys who played for keeps, Hitchman is best known for setting an NHL record for PIMs for his time. He was a mean SOB, and very tough to play against, who could also be a very effective leader. However, he provided almost nothing offensively. Talbot was a guy, although not recognized as a star player, who was good at almost every aspect of the game. He was an excellent passer, provided rock-solid defense, and was well liked by his teammates. There may be a slight gap physically and defensively between the two, but Talbot's huge advantage in offense and puck-handling ability gives him the overall advantage here.

Ted Green vs. Flash Hollett, Slight advantage Canada

Two vastly different hockey players, Hollett was very well known for his offensive prowess and hockey sense, while Green was a stay at home defender, who hit like a truck and was tough to play against. Green has a big advantage defensively and physically, but Hollett was possibly the best offensive defenseman of his time, which has to be recognised. Still, while Hollett is on the ice, Nova Scotia will be looking for some soft dump-in's into his corner, if you know what I mean.

Alexander Gusev vs. Ted Harris, Slight advantage Canada

I'm a big Ted Harris fan. The guy was as tough as they come and looks great on a third pairing in an ATD. However, like Hitchman on the second line, he provides next to nothing offensively. Gusev was a big, lumbering defender with a huge shot. He was known for his defensive prowess, however he chipped in offensively as well, with a decent transition game and as I said, a big slapper. However, he was known for struggling against quicker forwards and for a bad turnover every now and then, which is why I gave Teddy the slight advantage.

Hamby Shore against Andrei Markov, Slight advantage Nova Scotia

Both men are recognized as two of the top defenseman of their time. Both are great both ways, partiularly in the offensive zone. They can defend pretty well, help on the transition, and skate with most anyone in the league. However, Shore was known as a pretty tough player as well, who could throw a pretty good hit every now and then. Markov's physical game is, well, lacking. I think that Markov could struggle against Nova Scotia's second and fourth lines, who have guys on there who hit to hurt, where as I trust Shore out there against any one of Canada's lines. Slight advantage comes from that.

Overall, Advantage Nova Scotia

With an advantage and three slight advantages, Nova Scotia's defensive squad is a step above the SS. Canada has a strong first pairing, with their 1 and 2 guys matching up with each other, but after that, you see the typical defensive defender with offensive defender. Nova Scotia has a solid mix of two way players all around, particularly in the defensive zone. A big advantage on the second pairing and a small one on the third more than make up for a slight disadvantage on the first pairing for the Voyageurs.

 

[Rzeznik]

Gump Worsley vs. Chuck Gardiner, Advantage Canada

Two "bad team" goaltenders, aside from Gumper's stint with the Canadiens, with career losing records who have shown they are winners. Gardiner never had the advantage Gump did with playing on a "good team", but he showed that he is one of the all-time greats in his time with the 'Hawks. His awards speak for themselves, three first-team all-stars and a second team as well, to go along with two Vezina's as well on a bad Chicago team. However, Gump has shown what he can do when he is on a good team, with four cup wins in 5 years and 2 all-star and Vezina wins as well. Gardiner has the advantage, yes, but Gump is a pretty reliable option between the pipes, one that when on his game, can be a difference maker.

John Ross Roach vs. Lorne Chabot, Advantage Canada

Two very good back-ups, with Chabot being one of the best, you have to give a tip of the cap to Canada for nabbing two goalies of Gardiner's and Chabot's calibre. However, as back-ups, I don't think you'll see either guy in the net during the series, barring some new injury system I'm not aware of. Still, Chabot is a great goaltender, who could probably be a low-end starter in this thing.

 

[MXD]

Quick Notes

Coaching: Even
Hart and Adams are both great coaches, although I think Hart may be a bit ahead of him. Cook makes up for what little gap this is though, IMO, and I'd call this a wash. Won't have much of an effect on the series.

First Lines: Slight Advantage Canada
At first glance, the SS seem to have a major edge here, with Joliat and Morenz lining up together on the top line. But my top line boasts two top-end goal-scorers in Martin and Ciccarelli anchoring the captain Stevie Y. This line will have great chemistry, although clearly not on the level of the SS, and shouldn't have a problem creating offense against any line in the draft. Obviously though, the SS top line, with two top-5 players at their respective positions, have the edge here.

Second Lines: Advantage Nova Scotia
The SS ice a top-end second line right-winger in Hextall, to go along with two guys who haven't been put into their respective roles much at this level prior to this draft. Not to say they don't deserve to be there, but with 32 teams this time around, those extra spots are key for guys like Patrick and Watson, especially with their former New York linemate. My second line though IMO, may be one of, if not the best second line, in the whole draft. Two goal-scoring extraordinaires in Neely and Heatley, who both aren't afraid to get dirty, line-up next to my favorite all-time player and a great second line center and leader, Doug Gilmour. This line will be in your face, it will hit hard, and it will provide solid two way play as well. We aren't going to line match, but don't be surprised if Killer is lining up across from Morenz for a few shifts.

Third Lines: Advantage Canada
With my favorite third line in the draft, I have to give a tip of the cap to MXD for putting such a great mix of guys together. Great in both ends of the ice, this would be a major edge against a lot of other teams. However, I believe my third line is nothing to shake your head at. Getliffe and Nevin are both solid two-way players, and Irvin, although mostly known for his offensive ability, is said to have been decent in his own zone as well. Not on the level of Mackell, Murdoch and Dillon, but still a very good line, worthy of playing against any line on the SS.

Fourth Lines: Even
Simply, both are defensively responsible, hard hitting lines that can provide a touch of offense. Ezinicki and Dornhoefer are a wash. Blair over Drury, although both are big playoff performers. Graves over McVeigh, just because Rabbit provides almost nothing offensively, and is quite small, even for his era. Pretty much a wash, although my fourth line will be able to match up with the SS second line quite nicely, compared to Canada trying to match their fourth with either of my top-two.

Overall: Slight advantage Canada
With an advantage and a slight advantage, it is clear Canada has a an advantage on the forward front. Great chemistry up front, although this advantage will lesson in the playoffs once Nova Scotia's group knows each other a little better. Man on man, the SS may have the advantage, but I like the match-up I have on home ice, being my 2nd line matching up against the Morenz line. I'll also try to avoid my 1st against that third line as much as possible, although this won't be as big a worry. I can see this being a very low scoring series.

Sorry for taking some time to answer. Basically somebody put an extra salmonella in my chicken, so I was pretty much a waste for the last three days or so.

And congrats for objectivity. I mean, I've seen some pretty weird evaluations for the playoffs over the drafts, and I must say that I haven't much to say in regards to yours.

I picked Hart for obvious reasons (coached my first line), but I do agree with your evaluation. I don't know if Lappy is my assistant coach in this, but he's more of a D-coach, as Hart doesn't strike me as a the best coach for D's.

Not much for first line either. Gagnon definitely raised some eyebrows when I picked him for the first line - however, as far as playoffs are concerned, he's as good as any "generic" 1st line RW's, when you consider eras. I think my advantage is bigger that you make it out to be, as Ciccarelli wasn't a very good playoff performer (it's actually not the scoring that is bad, it's more the -37). Add to this that he'll be matched against Joliat, and it's a terrible mismatch.

I also disagree on two-way play from Dany Heatley. I do see Watson as a kind of poor-man's Gilmour, if anything. There's the problem of Neely not playing all the games (mind you, it happened to me as well!). The goalscoring part of his game will still be there, but with Seibert/Hitchman/Harris (not to mention spare guy Wilson), Neely won't do much as far as intimidation is concerned (and will be matched up with AT LEAST one guy who's really, really stronger than he is).

Getliffe is also a guy that got a roster spot due to expansion (as a 3rd liner...). I do rank him as below Murdoch as far as offense is concerned, but he's playing with a guy that is kinda good at making his players produce, so it's not like he's a total non factor. Mismatched against Dillon, however. Of course, Murdoch, Dillon and Mackell all had terrific playoffs runs (with Mackell having a few - is he like the best non-Hab as far as '50ies are concerned?). I'm looking to play these guys a bit against the 2nd line : Murdoch can certainly do the job physically against Neely (as in, containing him, not overpowering), while Dillon exposes Heatley big time. I think I can stand a decent matchup with my 2nd against your 2nd, but I'll send that line here and there.

The 4th is basically an aggressive line. I disgress about McVeigh bringing nothing offensively. He's pretty much in Frank Finnigan's area as far as offense is concerned. Of course, he's there to play some bump-and-grind-and-check hockey, and is likely the best skater on our bottom-6. And a better defensive player than Graves as well, though the gap isn't really wide. Kinda madeup by the fact that Blair is somewhat huge for era. I'd also like to mention that my 2nd managed to outplay some terrific lines back in the days, so I don't think they'll really be outmatched. They'll have their break with the 3rd jumping in. My fourth line is really a forechecking unit able to score and and there.

 

[seventieslord]

I do see Watson as a kind of poor-man's Gilmour, if anything.

Very well-put! I agree.

I disgress about McVeigh bringing nothing offensively. He's pretty much in Frank Finnigan's area as far as offense is concerned.

Bingo. Maybe better, actually. McVeigh was, along with Himes, all the NY Americans usually had for offensive weapons. Himes was like a won-man show offensively from what I dug up, but McVeigh was a very responsible wingman with more than his share of talent.

 

[MXD]

Larry Robinson vs. Earl Seibert, Slight advantage Nova Scotia

This is a very close call between two pretty good number 1's in an ATD context. Both are very good both ways, both can hit hard, and both can scrap with the best of them. I think Robinson may be a step ahead of Seibert defensively, but both guys are about as reliable as they come. Look for an absolute blood-bath of a fight if they decide to throw down as well.

Ken Reardon vs. Hod Stuart, Slight advantage Nova Scotia

Another close call between top end number 2's. They play very similar games, as both were known as hard hitters who were solid defensively, who could pull of some great rushes offensively. Both guys are in the hall as well. It's hard for me to find much info on Stuart, as there isn't much about him online, which is why I gave Reardon the slight advantage. Definitely debatable though.

Jean-Guy Talbot vs. Lionel Hitchman, Advantage Nova Scotia

Two hard-hitting guys who played for keeps, Hitchman is best known for setting an NHL record for PIMs for his time. He was a mean SOB, and very tough to play against, who could also be a very effective leader. However, he provided almost nothing offensively. Talbot was a guy, although not recognized as a star player, who was good at almost every aspect of the game. He was an excellent passer, provided rock-solid defense, and was well liked by his teammates. There may be a slight gap physically and defensively between the two, but Talbot's huge advantage in offense and puck-handling ability gives him the overall advantage here.

Ted Green vs. Flash Hollett, Slight advantage Canada

Two vastly different hockey players, Hollett was very well known for his offensive prowess and hockey sense, while Green was a stay at home defender, who hit like a truck and was tough to play against. Green has a big advantage defensively and physically, but Hollett was possibly the best offensive defenseman of his time, which has to be recognised. Still, while Hollett is on the ice, Nova Scotia will be looking for some soft dump-in's into his corner, if you know what I mean.

Alexander Gusev vs. Ted Harris, Slight advantage Canada

I'm a big Ted Harris fan. The guy was as tough as they come and looks great on a third pairing in an ATD. However, like Hitchman on the second line, he provides next to nothing offensively. Gusev was a big, lumbering defender with a huge shot. He was known for his defensive prowess, however he chipped in offensively as well, with a decent transition game and as I said, a big slapper. However, he was known for struggling against quicker forwards and for a bad turnover every now and then, which is why I gave Teddy the slight advantage.

Hamby Shore against Andrei Markov, Slight advantage Nova Scotia

Both men are recognized as two of the top defenseman of their time. Both are great both ways, partiularly in the offensive zone. They can defend pretty well, help on the transition, and skate with most anyone in the league. However, Shore was known as a pretty tough player as well, who could throw a pretty good hit every now and then. Markov's physical game is, well, lacking. I think that Markov could struggle against Nova Scotia's second and fourth lines, who have guys on there who hit to hurt, where as I trust Shore out there against any one of Canada's lines. Slight advantage comes from that.

Overall, Advantage Nova Scotia

With an advantage and three slight advantages, Nova Scotia's defensive squad is a step above the SS. Canada has a strong first pairing, with their 1 and 2 guys matching up with each other, but after that, you see the typical defensive defender with offensive defender. Nova Scotia has a solid mix of two way players all around, particularly in the defensive zone. A big advantage on the second pairing and a small one on the third more than make up for a slight disadvantage on the first pairing for the Voyageurs.

- Don't have much to say in regards to Robinson/Seibert. I mean... Robinson is better. I'd give the nod to Seibert when it comes to defense, though, and the nod to Robinson when it comes to offence. You could have done much worse for Robinson's partner. Just might have to keep Reardon in check, as Robinson was at its best with a stay-at-home guy. Not that Reardon isn't, but he'll go on the rush here and there.

- Stuart was definitely better at controlling the game than Reardon. But overall, the nod has to go to Reardon, though.... When he plays, obviously.

- Really disagree with Hitch, though. Fact, he doesn't bring much offensively. But his job was to keep it really safe, as his partner was an offensive D-Men. Which is why I paired him with an offensive D-Men. Beware of bad decisions and untimely PIM's for Talbot, who's a two-way D-Men for sure but might be better off as not being the main offensive contributor on his pair. Which he is.

- It's indeed tough to compare Green to Hollett. Hollett, while not great defensively, did show willingness (and ability) to go back in his zone and work out defensively. He's playing with a mean SOB, so liberties will be kept at a very low.

- Indeed not a big difference between Gusev and Harris, with Harris getting the nod with mobility (...seriously). If Gusev ends up playing against either my 1st, it's lights out, but I don't think Adams plans it to really happen. Good thing there's some speed on the 2-3-4 as well.

- With Shore, there's the competition is a problem. Style-wise, they're pretty much alike. I don't think the physical gap is that wide : want it or not, Shore wasn't comparatively much better physical D than his counterparts (and still took lots of PIM's). Wilson might play a few games as well.

 

[MXD]

Gump Worsley vs. Chuck Gardiner, Advantage Canada

Two "bad team" goaltenders, aside from Gumper's stint with the Canadiens, with career losing records who have shown they are winners. Gardiner never had the advantage Gump did with playing on a "good team", but he showed that he is one of the all-time greats in his time with the 'Hawks. His awards speak for themselves, three first-team all-stars and a second team as well, to go along with two Vezina's as well on a bad Chicago team. However, Gump has shown what he can do when he is on a good team, with four cup wins in 5 years and 2 all-star and Vezina wins as well. Gardiner has the advantage, yes, but Gump is a pretty reliable option between the pipes, one that when on his game, can be a difference maker.

John Ross Roach vs. Lorne Chabot, Advantage Canada

Two very good back-ups, with Chabot being one of the best, you have to give a tip of the cap to Canada for nabbing two goalies of Gardiner's and Chabot's calibre. However, as back-ups, I don't think you'll see either guy in the net during the series, barring some new injury system I'm not aware of. Still, Chabot is a great goaltender, who could probably be a low-end starter in this thing.

Don't have anything to say about that.
Chabot is arguably the 33th best goaltender ever, if that makes sense.

 

[Sturminator]

Jean-Guy Talbot vs. Lionel Hitchman, Advantage Nova Scotia

Two hard-hitting guys who played for keeps, Hitchman is best known for setting an NHL record for PIMs for his time. He was a mean SOB, and very tough to play against, who could also be a very effective leader. However, he provided almost nothing offensively. Talbot was a guy, although not recognized as a star player, who was good at almost every aspect of the game. He was an excellent passer, provided rock-solid defense, and was well liked by his teammates. There may be a slight gap physically and defensively between the two, but Talbot's huge advantage in offense and puck-handling ability gives him the overall advantage here.

You've got the wrong idea on Hitchman, Rzez. An NHL record for PIMs?! The guy was known as a teddy bear who never retaliated, and I believe only broke the top-10 in league PIMs once in his career. I don't remember where I saw the quote about Nels Stewart beating on Hitchman with his stick and the big man doing nothing in response, but it's out there. Maybe pit can enlighten us. At any rate, Lionel Hitchman's hitting game is more or less nonexistent.

 

[MXD]

Whether the previous quote is true or false, I don't know : all I would conclude about it though is that Hitchman isn't a dirty player, but is indeed a physical player.

Hitchman's former teammate George Boucher was always ahead of him as far as PIM totals are concerned (and season total as well).

If anything, you confused Hitchman with either Corbeau (season totals) or Boucher (career totals), amongst D-Men playing prior to Eddie Shore.

 

[jarek]

I wonder if he meant the other Lionel on D - Lionel Conacher.

 

[MXD]

I wonder if he meant the other Lionel on D - Lionel Conacher.

Hummm....

Actually, on Conacher's high PIMs year, he was actually 2nd for PIM (to Red Dutton).

Either way, Conacher never lead the league in PIMs totals. By the time he passed George Boucher -- who was the leader for a while -- it was already 1936, and Shore had already passed Boucher for one, maybe two seasons. Shore himself probably not led the league for a long time either, as Horner was about to pass him as well.

Not to mention Red Dutton being neck and neck with Conacher, with Conacher passing Dutton at the end of 34-35 (by, like 5 minutes). People seems to forget how grumpy Boucher was, until they realize that Ching Johnson has lower PIMs totals than Boucher (in a few less games, I might add).

Back on topic, Hitchman broke the Top-10 only once, and he was 10th. To give an idea, his PIMs/Games ratio is a bit above Taffy Abel, and way below Albert Leduc (amongst contemporaries that I haven't mentionned yet). His closer comparable would be Sylvio Mantha.

 

[MXD]

Damn, it would have been cool to have the first frenchie matchup ever (and a remake of 1940 as well!). Good luck Rzeznik!

 

[jarek]

Damn, it would have been cool to have the first frenchie matchup ever (and a remake of 1940 as well!). Good luck Rzeznik!

I'm going to be dead honest - I think Johnny Gagnon lost you this series. Your team otherwise is very strong.

 

[MXD]

I'm going to be dead honest - I think Johnny Gagnon lost you this series. Your team otherwise is very strong.

Possible. Not something that can understand though...
I mean, he's amongst the great playoff players of the thirties. That was why I thought Gagnon was a good idea.

In fact, I just thought it was cool to have this line as my first line. The draft is about building a team you can be proud of.

 

[jarek]

Possible. Not something that can understand though...
I mean, he's amongst the great playoff players of the thirties. That was why I thought Gagnon was a good idea.

In fact, I just thought it was cool to have this line as my first line. The draft is about building a team you can be proud of.

I was mostly referring to the backlash that occurred after you selected him. He might have gotten a bad reputation from that. I can't think of why else you might have lost. Maybe not enough Hod Stuart pimping? I'm very high on Stuart, but perhaps others may not have been.

 

[MXD]

I was mostly referring to the backlash that occurred after you selected him. He might have gotten a bad reputation from that. I can't think of why else you might have lost. Maybe not enough Hod Stuart pimping? I'm very high on Stuart, but perhaps others may not have been.

I don't like to pimp my players... I mean, I think that this point, most GM's should have an idea of what X players bring.

The other, more personal reason : I'm a writer. I write to earn a living. But I'm simply terrible at the following :

- Writing to persuade (as opposed to, writing to inform)
- Writing in English (yeah, seriously).

This said, I must congratulate Rzeznik. He was pretty okay when it came to his assesments. I couldn't reply that Seibert was a better player than Robinson, because he isn't. Our main disagreements were about Hitchman (a little obscure), and Charley McVeigh (really obscure), while he conceeded Chris Drury was inferior to Andy Blair, something I wouldn't have done straight away. And so on.

 

[jarek]

I don't like to pimp my players... I mean, I think that this point, most GM's should have an idea of what X players bring.

The other, more personal reason : I'm a writer. I write to earn a living. But I'm simply terrible at the following :

- Writing to persuade (as opposed to, writing to inform)
- Writing in English (yeah, seriously).

This said, I must congratulate Rzeznik. He was pretty okay when it came to his assesments. I couldn't reply that Seibert was a better player than Robinson, because he isn't. Our main disagreements were about Hitchman (a little obscure), and Charley McVeigh (really obscure), while he conceeded Chris Drury was inferior to Andy Blair, something I wouldn't have done straight away. And so on.

Hmm. That kind of professionalism does go a long way sometimes. Either way, as far as being proud of your team, you definitely have nothing to be ashamed of. You have players that I would love to have some day (Morenz, Stuart just to name a couple). One of these days I'll be in a prime position to draft Morenz.. I dream of Morenz - Makarov. That's the kind of C-RW combo that will burn all but the most mobile of defensemen.

By the way, your english is extremely good.

 

[MXD]

Hmm. That kind of professionalism does go a long way sometimes. Either way, as far as being proud of your team, you definitely have nothing to be ashamed of. You have players that I would love to have some day (Morenz, Stuart just to name a couple). One of these days I'll be in a prime position to draft Morenz.. I dream of Morenz - Makarov. That's the kind of C-RW combo that will burn all but the most mobile of defensemen.

By the way, your english is extremely good.

It's okay. I mean... I'm bilingual.

But I feel like Michael Jordan playing baseball whenever I write in English.

...And I hate proofreading.

 

[jarek]

It's okay. I mean... I'm bilingual.

But I feel like Michael Jordan playing baseball whenever I write in English.

...And I hate proofreading.

I did mean that your english is very good, because it is.

 

[Rzeznik]

Sorry I wasn't around to finish our debate MXD. Just got back from a long roady (it's 3:30 in the morning here) and I haven't had much internet access, other than about enough time to vote.

To touch on a couple things:

-To quote wiki

Hitchman retired with 27 goals and 33 assists in 414 career NHL games. He also recorded 523 penalty minutes, the NHL career record at the time.

Haven't in fact looked up any other data to conclude this, but after looking at it, it does seem pretty low for an NHL record, even in that era. Guess that just goes to show you can't trust a publically edited source.
-As well, I just wanted to thank MXD for a great match-up. You really put a great team together, one I thought I was in pretty tough against. A tip of the cap to you, sir, and here's hoping to see you in the next ATD!