ATD2011 Sam Pollock Finals: (1) McGuire's Monsters vs. (2) Gwinnett Gladiators

[Dreakmur]

Eh? Bourque vs. Coffey is close, but do you honestly think Stuart / Egan / Buller compare well to Boucher / Timonen?

I think Boucher is better than Egan as an overall player, but Egan is better offensively, and his heavy shot will serve him well on the PP. As a PP player, Egan is better than Boucher.

Hod Stuart is better than Timonen, Buller is weaker. Averaged out, it's about even.

You do realize that Egan's biggest scoring season was 1943-44, the year he played forward?

You do realize you are full of it?

First of all, 1944 was Egan's 3rd best season.

Second, he only played a handful of games at forward that season. He ws moved to forward in late December, and then traded to Boston early in January, where he was once again a full time defenceman. That leaves just 5 or 6 games in Detroit after he was moved up, and we don't even know that he stayed up after he was moved. He may have moved up for one game and then moved right back after. Either way, him playing between 1 and 6 games as a forward doesn't change his placement, as he was way ahead of the next guy.

 

[Dreakmur]

Brian Rolston is an elite penalty killer. He's 13th all-time in shorthanded goals with 33. He was the primary PK'er for thoes Bruins and Devils teams that perenially led the NHL in PK'ng.

Rolston is a good penalty killer, but he's not elite. He's better than Hebenton and Stanfield, but he's certainly nowhere near the best of the best.

Having a lot of SH goals means you were good at scoring SH goals, but not neccissaily defending in your own zone. Rolston was a great couter-attacker, but not so much in his own end. He's similar to Hebenton, but a little better.

He'd be the #3 PK forward on must teams, including mine.

Bobby Carpenter is an elite penalty killer. He was a great face off man and integral to the good PK teams of Boston in the late 80's early 90's. I watched him play, I know his ability to shut down opposing teams.

Carpenter spent most of his career as a one dimensional offensive player. Late in his career, he changed his game and became a very good defensive player and PKer. Those 5 years don't make him elite.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Rolston is a good penalty killer, but he's not elite. He's better than Hebenton and Stanfield, but he's certainly nowhere near the best of the best.

Having a lot of SH goals means you were good at scoring SH goals, but not neccissaily defending in your own zone. Rolston was a great couter-attacker, but not so much in his own end. He's similar to Hebenton, but a little better.

Where is TDMM on this one? I'm pretty sure at least in the NHL Rolston at his best was quite good.

And the threat of counterattack is a defense too or Bure and Bobby Hull wouldn't have killed penalties. It keeps the PP honest.

Carpenter spent most of his career as a one dimensional offensive player. Late in his career, he changed his game and became a very good defensive player and PKer. Those 5 years don't make him elite.

Again we need TDMM!

 

[Dreakmur]

Where is TDMM on this one? I'm pretty sure at least in the NHL Rolston at his best was quite good.

And the threat of counterattack is a defense too or Bure and Bobby Hull wouldn't have killed penalties. It keeps the PP honest.

I had Rolston in a past MLD, and remember tha TDMM wasn't a fan.... but maybe I am misremembering.

Again we need TDMM!

He was good defensively in New Jersey, bad before then. As I said already, a few seasons at the end of his career doesn't make him elite.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Rolston was a very good PKer, but not a great one in NJ (the later Madden-Pandolfo pair were better). Rolston really blossomed in Boston IIRC and may have been elite in the PK at the time. Statistically, he's a great all-time PKing winger based on a table overpass posted.

Bobby Carpenter was the Devil's top defensive guy and PKer for about 5 years, but it was when he was past his scoring prime and reinvented himself as a defensive specialist under Lemaire. I'm not sure how that translates here.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I had Rolston in a past MLD, and remember tha TDMM wasn't a fan.... but maybe I am misremembering.



He was good defensively in New Jersey, bad before then. As I said already, a few seasons at the end of his career doesn't make him elite.

I wasn't a fan of Rolston at center (terrible at face-offs) and he was not a great defensive player in NJ. You actually convinced me that he became much better defensively as he matured in Boston and Minnesota.

In an all-time sense, I don't think his defensive game at even strength is anything special and he's kind of soft, but he's a good (probably not great) first unit pker as a wing.

 

[Sturminator]

I think Boucher is better than Egan as an overall player, but Egan is better offensively...

You must be joking. Here are George Boucher's top-10 scoring finishes as a defenseman (*note: this is overall scoring, not just among defensemen*):

Goals: 7th, 8th, 11th, 13th, 13th

Assists: 1st, 4th, 7th, 10th, 20th

Points: 2nd, 7th, 9th, 14th, 14th

----------------------------------

Here are Pat Egan's:

Goals:

Assists: 19th*

Points:

*played forward in 1943-44

Now, Boucher's peak was pre-consolidation, so these numbers have to be seen with that in mind, but Egan's peak was during the craptastic 40's, and the only time he was ever top-20 in anything was at the height of the war when Adams moved him up to forward because he was tired of his lousy defence. In the 1923-24 season, George Boucher came within a single point of being the only defenseman other than Orr to ever lead the NHL in scoring. Boucher is also a legendary stickhandler - quite possibly the best of his generation - which is a particularly important skill on the powerplay for obvious reasons.

I have no idea what makes you think Pat Egan is anywhere close to George Boucher offensively, nevermind better. Honest question: were you thinking of the wrong player?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

To be fair sturm,, defensemen were much more frequently among the scoring leaders pre-forward pass than after it, but yeah.... I always thought of Cameron, Cleghorn, and Boucher as a tossup for best defenseman offensively before Clancy. (Cleghorn as obviously the best overall of them).

 

[overpass]

Statistically, Rolston is among the best penalty killing wingers of the last 30 years. But you could argue there have been no great penalty killing wingers (or even great defensive wingers) since Bob Gainey. The best defensive players play centre now. It's not like the 1970s when Gainey, Ramsay, and Westfall were among the best PKers and defensive forwards.

 

[overpass]

To be fair sturm,, defensemen were much more frequently among the scoring leaders pre-forward pass than after it, but yeah.... I always thought of Cameron, Cleghorn, and Boucher as a tossup for best defenseman offensively before Clancy. (Cleghorn as obviously the best overall of them).

Don't forget Joe Simpson! I will say from what I've read Boucher was pretty spectacular in 1924.

 

[Rick Middleton]

Statistically, Rolston is among the best penalty killing wingers of the last 30 years. But you could argue there have been no great penalty killing wingers (or even great defensive wingers) since Bob Gainey. The best defensive players play centre now. It's not like the 1970s when Gainey, Ramsay, and Westfall were among the best PKers and defensive forwards.

So a first unit that contains Rolston, Laperriere and Burrows. I'd say that's elite.

 

[BillyShoe1721]

Statistically, Rolston is among the best penalty killing wingers of the last 30 years. But you could argue there have been no great penalty killing wingers (or even great defensive wingers) since Bob Gainey. The best defensive players play centre now. It's not like the 1970s when Gainey, Ramsay, and Westfall were among the best PKers and defensive forwards.

What about Kurri? Statistically, he is the 6th best shorthanded threat of all time, tied with Poulin.

 

[BraveCanadian]

What about Kurri? Statistically, he is the 6th best shorthanded threat of all time, tied with Poulin.

Yeah but was that penalty killing or attacking shorthanded?

Man, those were the days.

 

[seventieslord]

What about Kurri? Statistically, he is the 6th best shorthanded threat of all time, tied with Poulin.

based on what? Career SHG?

There is certainly more to it than that, such as SHA, and certainly GP and PK usage would give a player more of a chance to "compile" SHP in their career.

Want to know who the best post-expansion shorthanded threats of all-time are? Try this:

- take overpass' adjusted stats sheet
- eliminate all players with under 600 GP post-expansion and all players with under 25% PK usage, then we only have players with reasonable sample sizes.
- multiply everyone's GP by their PK usage%, creating a sort of "career time spent on PK" stat
- divide their career adjusted SHP by their career time spent on the PK.

There's your answer.

Pretty sure Mario and Wayne will be #1 and 2. I did something like this at leafscentral, but I forget the results.

 

[overpass]

What about Kurri? Statistically, he is the 6th best shorthanded threat of all time, tied with Poulin.

Kurri would certainly be among the best penalty killing wingers of the last 30 years. Playing with Gretzky would have boosted his SHG a bit, but he's still up there.

A couple of guys I forgot when posting earlier - Jere Lehtinen and Esa Tikkanen might be considered great defensive wingers, although I don't think either was a great penalty killer.

Statistically, Kelly Miller is actually by far the best penalty killing winger of the past 30 years. No winger spent more time on the penalty kill in the last 30 years, and Washington had a really good penalty kill during the decade-plus that he was there.

 

[overpass]

based on what? Career SHG?

There is certainly more to it than that, such as SHA, and certainly GP and PK usage would give a player more of a chance to "compile" SHP in their career.

Want to know who the best post-expansion shorthanded threats of all-time are? Try this:

- take overpass' adjusted stats sheet
- eliminate all players with under 600 GP post-expansion and all players with under 25% PK usage, then we only have players with reasonable sample sizes.
- multiply everyone's GP by their PK usage%, creating a sort of "career time spent on PK" stat
- divide their career adjusted SHP by their career time spent on the PK.

There's your answer.

Pretty sure Mario and Wayne will be #1 and 2. I did something like this at leafscentral, but I forget the results.

Quality of competition is a huge issue here for which there is no data, as far as I know. I'm talking about playing against the first unit power play vs the second unit power play. IMO players who start out on the penalty kill are far less likely to have good shorthanded scoring records vs players on the second wave and players who get the last 20 seconds. In fact, if you looked at ratio of SHG (or SHP) to PPGA for players, I'd bet that almost all the leaders did not start the penalty kill. Although I have no way of verifying that because we don't have the data.

 

[Dreakmur]

I have no idea what makes you think Pat Egan is anywhere close to George Boucher offensively, nevermind better. Honest question: were you thinking of the wrong player?

Boucher's placement in scoring among defensemen:
Points – 1st(1923), 1st(1924), 2nd(1925), 3rd(1921), 3rd(1922), 5th(1920), 5th(1926), 9th(1928), 9th(1929), 10th(1927)

All of his top-5s came before the Western players came into the NHL.


Here are Egan's:
1st(1947), 1st(1949), 2nd(1944), 3rd(1942), 4th(1946), 6th(1948), 7th(1945)

He got a 2nd and 7th during the War Years, but he also missed 1943 while serving in the military.

Egan was a much better scorer than passer, and here are his goal finishes:
2nd(1944), 2nd(1946), 2nd(1947), 2nd(1948), 2nd(1949), 3rd(1942), 5th(1951), 7th(1945), 7th(1950), 8th(1940)




Once you account for the fact that Boucher accomplished his scoring feats against only half the best players, and in a smaller league, I think it's fair to saay Egan's scoring finishes are more impressive.

 

[Dreakmur]

So a first unit that contains Rolston, Laperriere and Burrows. I'd say that's elite.

A unit that has Laprade, Bourque, and Green is just as good, isn't it?

 

[Sturminator]

A unit that has Laprade, Bourque, and Green is just as good, isn't it?

You honestly think Ted Green belongs on a first unit penalty kill?!

 

[Dreakmur]

You honestly think Ted Green belongs on a first unit penalty kill?!

Absolutely!

The guy is very good defensively. He's excellent at clearing the crease and battling along the boards. He's also skilled enough to make sure the puck is out when he gets it on his stick.

 

[Sturminator]

Once you account for the fact that Boucher accomplished his scoring feats against only half the best players, and in a smaller league, I think it's fair to saay Egan's scoring finishes are more impressive.

You apparently think league size defines strength of competition. The difference between competing for scoring placements against Cleghorn, Cameron, Clancy and Gerard vs. Anderson, Harmon, Pratt, Quackenbush and the like is somehow in Egan's favor now?!

Pat Egan peaked during the single worst era for defensemen in NHL history, including pre-consolidation, and it's not close.

 

[Sturminator]

The guy is very good defensively.

You just admitted he was worse defensively than Kimmo Timonen. That doesn't make him good defensively as a 1st unit penalty killer at this level; it makes him one of the worst.

 

[Dreakmur]

You apparently think league size defines strength of competition.

League size doesn't define strength of competition, but it does make it easier or tougher to place in the top-10 or top-20.

The difference between competing for scoring placements against Cleghorn, Cameron, Clancy and Gerard vs. Anderson, Harmon, Pratt, Quackenbush and the like is somehow in Egan's favor now?!

Harry Cameron was sent out west in 1923. Eddie Gerard retired in 1923. King Clancy didn't peak untill after Boucher's best years. Sprague Cleghorn really slowed down before Boucher's peak.

Boucher's competition wasn't nearly as strong as you seem to think it was.

Pat Egan peaked during the single worst era for defensemen in NHL history, including pre-consolidation, and it's not close.

Egan peaked in the late 40s (1947-49)

Yeah, he was against, Quackenbush, Pratt, and Harmon, but there's a few other guys you forgot....

By that time, Red Kelly, Doug Harvey, and Bill Gadsby were starting to hit their peaks.

Jimmy Thomson and Gus Morton were already peaking.

Ken Reardon and Jack Stewart returned from the war and were in their primes.

Then there's the lesser guys like Fern Flaman, Wally Stanowski, Neil Coleville, Bill Barilko, Jack Crawford, etc.

 

[Dreakmur]

You just admitted he was worse defensively than Kimmo Timonen. That doesn't make him good defensively as a 1st unit penalty killer at this level; it makes him one of the worst.

I said that because I beleive Timonen is pretty good defensively. If you want to convince me Timonen is not that good, then Green is definately better.

 

[Dreakmur]

It looks like voting is about to open, so I'll present my closing arguments. This is why you should vote for the McGuire's Monsters....

Goaltending:
With Vldislav Tretiak against Tom Barrasso, this is by far the biggest mismatch of the series. Tretiak a top-10 goalie. Barrasso is in the bottom-10. This will give the Monsters a huge edge in every game this series.

Scoring Punch:
With Alf Smith, Norm Ullman, and Andy Bathgate, the Monsters have one of the most powerful lines of the draft. Without an elite checking line or elite shut-down pair, there is no stopping this line, and Gwinnett definately does not have the bodies to do the job. This line is too skilled and they're going to be a load on the cycle.

Gwinnett, on the other hand, has their scoring spread out. That will lead to them having better secondary scoring. The problem, though, will be that they have no primary scoring. Their best line is Dany Heatley, Frank Fredrickson, and Hooley Smith, which simply will not be able to carry the offensive load. Frank Boucher will be passing to guys who aren't good enough to convert, and Frank Foyston will be playing with guys who aren't skilled enough to get him the puck, so both guys will fail to produce offensively.

Basically, the advantage the Monsters have in primary scoring decisively outweighs the advantage Gwinnett has in secondary scoring.

Physical Punch:
Despite Strum's claims that his forwards are a bunch of Hulks, the Monsters have the edge in physical play.

Gwinnett has three major physical forces in Hooley Smith, Wilf Paiement, and Mark Tinordi. The Monsters have Alf Smith, Red Hamill, Ted Green, Pat Egan, and Ken Randall.

The only soft player on either team is Dany Heatley, and he's going head to head with the right side of my defense group, which is pretty much a death zone.

Offense from the Defense:
Even will Paul Coffey, I think the Monsters have slightly more offense coming from the blueline. Every single one of the Monster defensemen has some pretty strong offensive credentials, so there will always be a threat on the ice. Tonordi and Burrows are offensive black holes. Laperriere is decent, and Timonen appears to only produce on the PP.

Gwinnett has the most coming from their #1, but the Monsters have the most from the 2-6 slots. The scoring coming out of the bottom will outweigh the scoring coming from Coffey over Bourque.




Good luck to you, Sturm. You built a very strong team. I beleive the Monsters should edge out Gwinnett in a 7 game series, but if the voters see it the other way, I won't be upset to lose to an excellent team.