ATD2018 - Draft Thread 3

[VanIslander]

... I was caught off guard by just how personal some take the debates on their rosters. This is a great exercise but it should all be in good fun, by passionate fans of the game’s history. Getting into childish bickering contests as grown ass men is just ridiculous. I’m all for healthy debates, but when the personal insults start all because someone dares to have a different opinion than someone else..that’s going to turn people away.

Anyways, the draft itself was a blast.

Word.

 

[Habsfan18]

One thing I noticed as a first-timer, is that once the draft ends, the ATD essentially turns into a contest in activity. Well I suppose I understand the concept in rewarding the real active GM’s, it seems others get penalized for not having the time to get into huge debates. Take roster A vs roster B. Is Roster A automatically better than roster B just because GM A had the time to write out massive paragraphs and GM B simply didn’t have the time to debate the matchup as much? It means they were more active, yes. But does it always mean they put together the better roster? Absolutely not. Letting us know HOW you’re going to use specific players and line combos in specific situations is nice, but we’re all knowledgeable here so we shouldn’t always have to be told WHY your team is great. Shouldn’t we already know, for the most part anyways? It just seems that we reward those that write novels about their teams, simply because they took the time to do so and because their opponent did not.

It’s almost as if you have no shot in winning or going far if you don’t have the time to debate. So why even join unless you know for sure that you’ll have that time? I guess we need to ask ourselves, is this a competition as to who can put together the best overall roster to compete? Or is it a debating contest to see who can write the longest paragraphs about their team? I feel like there were a few really well put together teams that were eliminated early, simply because they weren’t around as much. Is that fair? I guess there will be differing opinions, but I don’t believe so.

 

[Dreakmur]

One thing I noticed as a first-timer, is that once the draft ends, the ATD essentially turns into a contest in activity. Well I suppose I understand the concept in rewarding the real active GM’s, it seems others get penalized for not having the time to get into huge debates. Take roster A vs roster B. Is Roster A automatically better than roster B just because GM A had the time to write out massive paragraphs and GM B simply didn’t have the time to debate the matchup as much? It means they were more active, yes. But does it always mean they put together the better roster? Absolutely not. Letting us know HOW you’re going to use specific players and line combos in specific situations is nice, but we’re all knowledgeable here so we shouldn’t always have to be told WHY your team is great. Shouldn’t we already know, for the most part anyways? It just seems that we reward those that write novels about their teams, simply because they took the time to do so and because their opponent did not.

It’s almost as if you have no shot in winning or going far if you don’t have the time to debate. So why even join unless you know for sure that you’ll have that time? I guess we need to ask ourselves, is this a competition as to who can put together the best overall roster to compete? Or is it a debating contest to see who can write the longest paragraphs about their team? I feel like there were a few really well put together teams that were eliminated early, simply because they weren’t around as much. Is that fair? I guess there will be differing opinions, but I don’t believe so.

I'm not sure how you can come to this conclusion after this year's play-offs. In most series, the less active GM took the win... even when I thought the more active GM had the better team to begin with.

I absolutely reward a GM for making good arguments. Just like in real NHL hockey, the better team in paper doesn't always win. I treat GMs making good arguments as their team, playing well. I treat poor arguments or inactivity as a team playing poorly. Sometimes, the gap in talent is too great, but usually not.

 

[Habsfan18]

I'm not sure how you can come to this conclusion after this year's play-offs. In most series, the less active GM took the win... even when I thought the more active GM had the better team to begin with.

I absolutely reward a GM for making good arguments. Just like in real NHL hockey, the better team in paper doesn't always win. I treat GMs making good arguments as their team, playing well. I treat poor arguments or inactivity as a team playing poorly. Sometimes, the gap in talent is too great, but usually not.

But in an ATD, I was under the impression we’re looking to see who could put together the best overall roster and team to compete? Am I misunderstanding the concept? If so, that’s on me as a 1st timer. I understand rewarding GM’s for making good arguements, but I don’t agree with penalizing those who don’t have the time to debate.

 

[Sturminator]

Congrats, rmartin.

You built a hell of a team, following a classic model that just continues to work: excellent defense, strong up the middle, no obvious weaknesses, good coach, good enough goalie. I'll update the ATD champions post to include your team.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Congrats, rmartin.

You built a hell of a team, following a classic model that just continues to work: excellent defense, strong up the middle, no obvious weaknesses, good coach, good enough goalie. I'll update the ATD champions post to include your team.

Excellent defense compared to Toronto? Or Kenora? Two teams I smashed btw. Strong down the middle, except the fact Pitt had, easily the most dominant C's in the draft. No weaknessess? You mean like a coach that never once coached an NHL player. All teams have a weakness (or more than one). That's hyperbole in its finest.

I didn't even want to bring that up because I think it takes away from the team and overall point of the draft but since nobody is challenging that aspect I guess people must think it has some merit. I mean if we're going to champion integrity and real life happenings, how can people think Tarasov would just simply be able to coach North American players and people. Other Euro's went to train with the Soviets and couldn't keep up to the insane, robotic like training program Tarasov implemented. I'm sure Canadians and Americans would have just loved to play under those conditions. Or for a man that was brought up in Stalinist USSR....taught to loathe everything about the west.

And lastly, the biggest gap in the entire series was in net. And once again the far less talented and accomplished goalie bests the greatest one of all time.

If people are going to put the bolded up they better be able to flesh out the specifics. Because everything I just brought up matters and counters those generic statements.

 

[ImporterExporter]

@Habsfan18 It was great having you around this year.

The fact of the matter is this was a very tame year in terms of debates (half the GM's didn't even bother to post a narrative). If you think there was childish behavior, I suggest looking back when there were 30+ teams and much more post draft activity. I'm actually ashamed that the only thing people seem to care about is the actual draft. So many people just draft and then disappear. It wasn't always that way.

 

[rmartin65]

Congrats, rmartin.

You built a hell of a team, following a classic model that just continues to work: excellent defense, strong up the middle, no obvious weaknesses, good coach, good enough goalie. I'll update the ATD champions post to include your team.

I appreciate the kind words, @Sturminator . Thank you.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Intellectual integrity, which means you hold other to a higher standard than yourself. You over-inflated a lot of your roster - not because of dishonesty, but because of excitement. I've been there too, especially when we went on the old discovery missions through the old Google news archives. There are still guys in the draft that go higher than they should because I rode one quote though an entire draft. Smokey Harris is one - I found a quote about a Smokey Harris being one of the best fighters in the league..... but it was a different guy in a separate league! Now, I didn't realize that until a future draft, but that's the one that really made me more critical of my own way of selling players. I try to look at my own team in a critical way and be honest about the weaknesses, which is tough since I'm biased.... it's my team, and it's the best one dammit !

I think too many players get free passes - some due to cannon, some due to false reputations, some just get an easy ride out of luck.

I "over inflated" my roster in 2-3 areas according to.....your opinion. We literally disagreed on how good of forecheckers Frank Foyston and Punch Broadbent would be. That's not bordering on intellectual integrity (or lack thereof). It's simply a difference of opinion. Same thing in regards to ranking coaches.

And the burden of proof can't be held to an even level for every player. You can't expect to find as much about players who played 100 years ago vs those that play today or in the DPE. That doesn't mean we just make crap up. But when I have a handful of quotes talking glowingly about Foyston being a real asset on the fore check, and a brilliant all around player, I take that to heart. Calling him a great fore checker based on that isn't dishonest. Unless we're going to literally nitpick every single player, every single year and make sure there is a mountain of evidence to back up a position. We don't do that, for obvious reasons.

I don't think my team was perfect. Yes, 2-3 guys didn't fit Gorman like a glove. But like I said, Gorman coached NHL players. Tarasvo didn't. Ever. Giroux was "out of position", sure. But so is Sid Abel who's best years all came at C between the greatest pair of wingers any C has ever had. Nobody brings that up. Regardless is that enough to sink a superior roster? A roster that was literally built to win a 7 game series. A roster that had arguably the greatest collection of post season players ever in the ATD. The 2 best (money) players in the series and of all time (Gretzky and Roy). Real life chemistry on 2 pairings. Real life chemistry among 2 F groups.

You guys nitpicked fore checking and coaching style and meanwhile didn't spend one damn breath on NY. If you're going to bring up my areas of weakness or where I'm stretching the integrity of my roster, then do it for the other guy as well. Unless of course NY had as Sturm said, "no weaknesses". Otherwise it just seems like certain people have an axe to grind...

 

[Theokritos]

I know who voted against me

Just for the record: No, you don't know that. The only person who has that information is me and I'm not disclosing it.

What I can tell you is this: 8 of the 12 ballots were in favour of NY. If you think personal grudges were the difference maker, then you must assume a lot of people around here just don't like you – and yet many of them voted for you in earlier rounds, or else you wouldn't have made it to the finals. In fact there were both voters who voted for your opponent in the Conference Final and then for you in the ATD Final as well as voters who voted for you in the Conference Final and then for your opponent in the ATD Final.

There is no need to assume people who voted against you in the final just did so because they have an axe to grind. As you've said it yourself : Sometimes, people just don't agree with one another. It's that simple.

 

[ImporterExporter]

I never said grudges were the difference maker. Anywhere. I don't think people are that childish. I'll call Van out because he has sent some very immature PM's to me and posted absolute nonsense throughout but whatever....he apparently didn't even vote so.....

I thought I had built a team that was far superior down the middle, was facing a defense that simply wasn't good enough to slow down my offense, relative to other match ups I had prior....and the goalie matchup was far and away the biggest advantage in the entire series, in my favor....I guess folks just simply thought NY had a much better F and D group, which I don't see, but whatever. I think a handful of people absolutely voted against my roster because of the coaching style angle, without acknowledging the issues with Tarasov coaching North American players....The rest of the matchup didn't matter to them near as much. But I don't expect anyone to say as much.

 

[jarek]

I never said grudges were the difference maker. Anywhere. I don't think people are that childish. I'll call Van out because he has sent some very immature PM's to me and posted absolute nonsense throughout but whatever....he apparently didn't even vote so.....

I thought I had built a team that was far superior down the middle, was facing a defense that simply wasn't good enough to slow down my offense, relative to other match ups I had prior....and the goalie matchup was far and away the biggest advantage in the entire series, in my favor....I guess folks just simply thought NY had a much better F and D group, which I don't see, but whatever. I think a handful of people absolutely voted against my roster because of the coaching style angle, without acknowledging the issues with Tarasov coaching North American players....The rest of the matchup didn't matter to them near as much. But I don't expect anyone to say as much.

I think you're the only one here who is using that argument against Tarasov. I have never heard that argument before.. ever. From anyone. BRG used it against me and seventies in ATD11 or something but it was more directed at Tarasov training the asthmatic Jacques Plante into the ground, which pretty much nobody bought.

I understand why you're using the argument, and to be honest, maybe there's some merit to it. The problem is, if we are to buy that argument at all, Tarasov, one of the most accomplished coaches of all time, both as a winner and builder, doesn't get to be in the ATD at all. I guess it'll be up to everyone personally as to whether or not that's fair.

I will, however, fight you on the idea that the anti-Western rhetoric had much effect on Tarasov at all. He appreciated hockey and he didn't care where it came from. His desire to play against the Canadians wasn't to show them up, but it was rather to prove that Soviet hockey was at the level of Canadian hockey. I don't believe any of the anti-West propaganda affected him much at all.

 

[ImporterExporter]

I think you're the only one here who is using that argument against Tarasov. I have never heard that argument before.. ever. From anyone. BRG used it against me and seventies in ATD11 or something but it was more directed at Tarasov training the asthmatic Jacques Plante into the ground, which pretty much nobody bought.

I understand why you're using the argument, and to be honest, maybe there's some merit to it. The problem is, if we are to buy that argument at all, Tarasov, one of the most accomplished coaches of all time, both as a winner and builder, doesn't get to be in the ATD at all. I guess it'll be up to everyone personally as to whether or not that's fair.

I will, however, fight you on the idea that the anti-Western rhetoric had much effect on Tarasov at all. He appreciated hockey and he didn't care where it came from. His desire to play against the Canadians wasn't to show them up, but it was rather to prove that Soviet hockey was at the level of Canadian hockey. I don't believe any of the anti-West propaganda affected him much at all.

Fair enough....i respect your opinion.

But I would like to point out that Tarasov coaching NHL'ers AND having success with them is based entirely on speculation. Entirely. If that isn't a valid argument I don't know what else could be.

Dreakmur championed this push regarding making sure we have enough information on a player to accurately place their ability in a certain area. Speculation is part of evaluating players, at least to a small degree, when looking back on older players.

BUT we don't just accept reality if reality never once occurred. Tarasov never once, coached NHL players. That is reality. We have no idea how well it would go, or it wouldn't. So, I guess Dreak and others who ignored this angle and voted for NY largely on Gorman not fitting Gretzky/Stewart, are talking out both sides of their mouths, or legitimately think it's ok to simply assume a 1940's through 60's Soviet, who never once led a team full of North American players in hockey, would just be able to do it........but Gretzky and Stewart not fitting Gorman to a T is a big reason why they lost to inferior counterparts.

 

[Dreakmur]

Dreakmur championed this push regarding making sure we have enough information on a player to accurately place their ability in a certain area. Speculation is part of evaluating players, at least to a small degree, when looking back on older players.

Yes, I think it's important to completely research and flesh out each player and coach.

BUT we don't just accept reality if reality never once occurred. Tarasov never once, coached NHL players. That is reality. We have no idea how well it would go, or it wouldn't. So, I guess Dreak and others who ignored this angle and voted for NY largely on Gorman not fitting Gretzky/Stewart, are talking out both sides of their mouths, or legitimately think it's ok to simply assume a 1940's through 60's Soviet, who never once led a team full of North American players in hockey, would just be able to do it........but Gretzky and Stewart not fitting Gorman to a T is a big reason why they lost to inferior counterparts.

First thing's first. It doesn't matter to me if Tarasov coaches NHL players. The ATD is not the NHL. No coach here has coached ATD players.

As I stated in your series thread, if you're going to try to penalize Tarasov for not coaching NHL players, you should also penalize Gorman for not coaching modern players. Gorman didn't own a TV, so he couldn't watch game film, putting him at a serious disadvantage in the game-planning department

I didn't vote, though, if I did, I would have voted for Pittsburgh.

 

[BenchBrawl]

The drama wasn't that bad in this year's playoffs.I don't see what the big deal is honestly.Lack of participation and bizarre voting results are more worrying than any drama.Drama is usually good long-term, it means people are involved and take it to heart.Usually, not always.

This was probably my last ATD for a while, I'm taking a break after 8 years straight.Not because of any drama though.I just don't have the time nor the drive to go 100% any longer, this year convinced me.Maybe I'd consider taking a less experienced GM under my wing to give back like Sturminator brilliantly and generously did for me.

I hope the ATD survives, it's a damn great game and I have no regret for all the time I invested on it.More importantly, I hope the research continues.Still so much to find out there.

Maybe the community needs a break from the whole thing, I don't know.The participation trend is worrying.The migration and losing so much work didn't help the spirit neither.

 

[Namba 17]

I think a handful of people absolutely voted against my roster because of the coaching style angle, without acknowledging the issues with Tarasov coaching North American players....The rest of the matchup didn't matter to them near as much. But I don't expect anyone to say as much.

C'mon, IE... You've built a great team, went to the ATD final - it's a great result itself.
Every GM thinks, that he made the best team and should win the ATD.
The point is, though, that we NEVER know for sure, WHY people voted for or against our teams. You think, that it can be because you had debates with one GM about your coach and you think that every other GM agreed with your opponent, but in reality it can be absolutely not because of it.

 

[Namba 17]

I'm sure Canadians and Americans would have just loved to play under those conditions. Or for a man that was brought up in Stalinist USSR....taught to loathe everything about the west.

I don't know there did you get the idea, that Tarasov was taught to loathe everything about the west, but reality is much more complicated thing, as always.
Soviets weren't taught to loath everything, they were taught to loath capitalists. This is a big difference. Usually, we were told, that ordinary people on the west are like us, but bad factory's owners, politicians and generals depress them. Some western labor activists usually prized by Soviet media for their fight for worker's rights. For example, Ted Lindsey could've been the Soviet media hero . The same, BWT, was about any capitalistic country, not necessary western. Of course, as I said, reality was much more complicated, but the main idea was like this. That's why Tarasov would hardly had a problems with western players because of propaganda only.
Also, if you read what Tarasov wrote himself about Canadians, you'd see that he had great respect for Canadian players and coaches.

 

[VanIslander]

The Dusters select HHOFer Rogie Vachon, the 1976 Canada Cup Best Goaltender the year after losing the Hart trophy to Clarke by a 3% vote margin, though The Hockey News named Vachon the Player of the Year. Vachon again became a finalist for the Hart a couple of seasons later. He started his NHL career backstopping Montreal to the Stanley Cup Finals as a 21 year old, sharing ice time the following season with lGump, each recording 21 wins, the veteran starting most of the playoff games in the championship victory. The following postseason, Vachon got the majority of the starts and an unmatched .953 save percentage on way to another cup win.

...a superior position goalie that excelled at playing the angles, and matched it with one of the quickest glove hands ever seen in the NHL. What made Vachon so memorable was his unique style that was born out of necessity, and his everyman attitude that was related to by many fans.

 

[Thenameless]

I dunno how anyone can confidently say Tarasov is better than Tikhonov.

But wait: Maybe Bowman ain't better than Gorman.

How square you are (and how much you know) defines your answer here.

Well, obviously I never played for either of them, LOL, but when doing the research, Tarasov looks much more like the visionary which is usually what equates to some form of greatness. Tarasov is to Tikhonov, as Henry Ford is to Alfred Sloan (who some rate higher than Ford as an auto executive), or as Thomas Watson Jr. is to Bill Gates (again some have Gates as better here). In these cases, while the latter may have reached greater heights, the foundation was set by the former.

 

[Dreakmur]

I dunno how anyone can confidently say Tarasov is better than Tikhonov.

Depends what you value.

Did Tikhanov actually create any system or tactic? While Tikhanov was a more successful coach, he mostly benefited from what Tarasov built.

 

[ImporterExporter]

I'm most disapointed by lack of voting/discussion.

No offense, but Dreak, Jarek, Van, etc if you guys are showing up to put your .02 in for a matchup, why not vote? I mean it may not have made a difference in my favor but I know Dreak took plenty of time to debate me in the finals matchup....why not take 30 seconds to send a vote in? I went out of my way to make sure notices were sent out at the beginning and before the close of the voting periods.

There's no reason with 24 teams we should only get 12 ballots. Especially when 1-2 of them came from past GM's.

Maybe we should just do the draft itself and then leave it at that? If we can't even get 50% post draft participation, what is the point of the brackets?

 

[jarek]

I have no excuse. I just didn't do it. Like I said earlier almost as soon as the playoffs started my GAF level went down the toilet. I have no explanation as to why as I felt I had a very legitimate chance to win the whole thing.

 

[Dreakmur]

I'm most disapointed by lack of voting/discussion.

No offense, but Dreak, Jarek, Van, etc if you guys are showing up to put your .02 in for a matchup, why not vote? I mean it may not have made a difference in my favor but I know Dreak took plenty of time to debate me in the finals matchup....why not take 30 seconds to send a vote in? I went out of my way to make sure notices were sent out at the beginning and before the close of the voting periods.

There's no reason with 24 teams we should only get 12 ballots. Especially when 1-2 of them came from past GM's.

Maybe we should just do the draft itself and then leave it at that? If we can't even get 50% post draft participation, what is the point of the brackets?

I decided against running my own team because I didn't want to do all the work associated with running a team, especially in a draft that I feel has been so tainted by the trading aspect.

I don't think teams should get multiple votes, so I left the voting to the team's GM.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Fair enough, thanks for being transparent guys!

I'm guessing a year off may be best for the ATD on the whole. I personally think it's more than just being burned out but giving the ATD a pause until 2020 might rejuvenate some folks...

 

[jarek]

Fair enough, thanks for being transparent guys!

I'm guessing a year off may be best for the ATD on the whole. I personally think it's more than just being burned out but giving the ATD a pause until 2020 might rejuvenate some folks...

To be honest my apathy towards the ATD started after last year's draft. I wasn't going to participate this year until I decided to at the last minute.