ATD2019 FINALS - New Jersey Swamp Devils vs. Chicago Shamrocks

[Hawkey Town 18]

Apologies for my delayed reply. As I don't have a lot of time to post, I'll try to comment on some of the topics that have already been addressed, and give some general comments of my own. I'll do these in separate posts to make it easier on the reader and just in case I run out of time...

Shero and Kelly
Here is what I posted when I drafted Shero as coach, which conveniently also has some comments about NJ's coach, Joel Quenneville:

Agree with the comments on Hap Day as a coach (also was a good choice on D), but wanted to add that I think he's a particularly bad coach for a rushing defenseman, there's a quote in his bio that's something like get the puck out of the zone first and then worry about offense. As was said, you can get away with a few all offense forwards with Day, but I'm doubtful about Dmen. With Red Kelly as a key piece of our team, Day was not a good fit.

This was also the reason I decided against Quenneville as a coach, while he's all about defensemen joining in on the offense, he does not like them to rush the puck, he wants a quick transition up to the forwards. When Q got replaced this year there were two major changes as far as how the defense was to play, the biggest was defensively switching from Q's zone defense to a man-to-man style, and the other was that the defensemen were told to hold on to the puck longer/carry it up when possible. A lot of people incorrectly call Duncan Keith a rushing Dman, he's really a quick transition guy that uses his speed to join in the play. There's also examples of rushing Dmen not working out under Q and then having success elsewhere (see Trevor Daley). I think Red Kelly could play this way and be fine, but didn't want to handcuff him.

So I ended up selecting Fred Shero, who I feel is one of the more flexible coaches in the draft in terms of team strategy...he had great success with a team built around a two-way center in Clarke, and then was able to exceed expectations with a team built around Phil Esposito (basically the complete opposite of Clarke) and make it to the Finals. I think the main key to a Shero team is having players that will buy into a system. He's extremely creative and a great innovator, so I'm confident he can find something that works given the right pieces.

So, Shero is strict about sticking to a system, but I see no reason why that system can't involve defensemen rushing the puck. Shero's innovation and adoption of some Soviet techniques show that he's not afraid to try different things. Chicago had a rushing type of Dman on each pair (Kelly/Boucher/Subban), which I will admit the insertion of Red Dutton eliminates on the 3rd pairing, but I think the benefits of that lineup change are worth it, those two have enough skill to move the puck "by committee", and in a Finals series the top-4 will get the lion's share of the minutes, especially Red Kelly.


A quick side-note on NJ's D: Considering the above mentioned issues Quenneville has with rushing Dmen, will there be some conflict with Harry Cameron?

 

[Dreakmur]

I think NJ's 3rd line is at least as good defensively as Chicago's because Mickey MacKay - something of a Nighbor-lite player - is the best defensive forward on either team in open ice. Provost was one of the best shadows of all-time (though according to Provost himself, his defensive ability took a dive when he was given a bigger offensive role), but who is he shadowing here? Basically, MacKay was quite a bit better than Colville at both ends of the ice. In a situation where there isn't a LW for Provost to shadow, I would take NJ's 3rd line at both ends of the ice, but it is quite close.

Provost is the best defensive player on either line, but you are right that his talent will be somewhat wasted shadowing New Jersey's LWs.

Depending on how you view the missed war time, Neil Colville might actually be a better offensive player than Mickey MacKay.

 

[Dreakmur]

I'm actually a little surprised that this is the first time I've had to defend the weird way I set up NJ's top 6 forwards. Richard is the best winger in the series, and Lalonde is the best center in the series. But they are both goal-heavy, so I had to split them up.

NJ is a very star-heavy team, with complimentary players drafted to make best use of those stars.

I do think as a whole, NJ's top 6 is a little better than Chicago's.

Yes, Chicago has an excellent top pair, but a relatively weak 2nd and 3rd pairs.

 

[ImporterExporter]

A car crash that was Lafleur's own damn fault for partying and driving drunk all the time. For whatever that's worth.

I mean, I don't think we should overly punish Lafleur for that, but I don't think we should use the crash to excuse his shortcomings, either.



7 game series = let's only use 7 year VsX! is one of the goofiest uses of statistics I've seen here in awhile. And it's not at all how the VsX formula was intended to be used.



I think NJ's 3rd line is at least as good defensively as Chicago's because Mickey MacKay - something of a Nighbor-lite player - is the best defensive forward on either team in open ice. Provost was one of the best shadows of all-time (though according to Provost himself, his defensive ability took a dive when he was given a bigger offensive role), but who is he shadowing here? Basically, MacKay was quite a bit better than Colville at both ends of the ice. In a situation where there isn't a LW for Provost to shadow, I would take NJ's 3rd line at both ends of the ice, but it is quite close.

Yes, Lafleur is to blame for the accident. No, he's not getting punished or given excuses for "shortcomings". But context exists. A player of his caliber doesn't just "fall off a cliff" at 29, especially considering where the league was going scoring wise (into the 80's). The very fact he's still a 90+ player in the 10 year version is pretty striking considering his timeline. 8 points difference isn't even a 10% gap. The gap is marginal, and that's just one version.

And nobody is saying we're "only" going to use 7 year VsX because it's a 7 game series. It's asinine to suggest that's what I'm saying. But the fact remains that Lafleur is better in a 7 year version while Richard is better in the 10 year version. I personally am more inclined to value peak/prime over longevity (which is where Richard really wins on the flower) because of the format we use. These are 7 game series which means, IMO, we should put more emphasis on peak/prime and postseason resume because that correlates with a best of 7 structure. Richard is the better player, obviously, but from a pure offensive profile, he's simply not lapping Lafleur.

And quite frankly, I'm not sure I would trust the NJ second line to defend much of anything at this level either. Cowley is literally worthless as a defensive player (at the most important F position), Richard is passable at best. Noble is obviously a good defensive winger, but is it enough to cover the other 2? Eh.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Provost is the best defensive player on either line, but you are right that his talent will be somewhat wasted shadowing New Jersey's LWs.

Depending on how you view the missed war time, Neil Colville might actually be a better offensive player than Mickey MacKay.

Which is why I think Chicago has a clear advantage, as far as 3rd lines goes. They easily have the best defensive player and a ton of ES scoring across the board. It's a line that absolutely can defend at a high level but still produce depth scoring at a better than average rate.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Claims that Chicago’s 2nd Line is soft because of Joe Malone and Sweeney Schriner

Joe Malone
Malone has plenty of support of playing through rough play/going to tough areas. He’s certainly not running people over, that’s not his game, but he definitely doesn’t shy away from rough play, defensive style is definitely more of a pick-pocket type than a rub a guy off the puck type.

Scoring marks were not the only records Malone that left behind him for future hockey stars to shoot at. In the days of rowdy hockey, when butchery was too often the means towards victory, Malone was a Frankie Boucher type of centre. It is significant that in 1919-20, when penalties records were kept for the first time, Malone served only 12 minutes on the side-lines, though scoring 39 tallies.

Tall, rugged and a great stickhandler, he was also a potent defensive unit. He had a fine poke-check, and like Nighbor, used a long stick to break up opposing attacks. He and Odie Cleghorn were probably the outstanding stickhandlers of their day. But unlike Odie, who used a short stick and nursed the puck along almost between his skates, Malone swept through the opposition with long, swinging strides. He was a left hand shot.

Many respected observers regard Joe Malone as the greatest all-around scorer of the early NHL year. “He might have been the most prolific scorer of all time if they had played more games in those days,” said Frank J. Selke, the former Canadiens managing director who remembered Malone as a young professional. “It was amazing the way Joe used to get himself in position to score. In that respect his style was similar to Gordie Howe’s. Joe was no Howie Morenz as far as speed was concerned. But he was a clean player like Dave Keon and Frank Boucher. On the other hand, though, Joe never took a backwards step from anybody.”

One thing Joe could do was put the puck in the net. As we recall him he skated with his feet fairly wide apart, was hard to knock off balance, was always in the right place at the right time and had a hard and accurate shot.

TDMM made a comparison to Brett Hull citing Malone’s Phantom/Ghost nickname, but here is the quote from the NY Times article which gave him that name, which was not given due to a Brett Hull like ability to appear in open scoring space, but instead was in reference to Malone’s defensive ability. (This quote also mentions rough play not having an effect on Malone)

Joe Malone, the Quebec centre, was the headline attraction last night, for he scored all of the goals for his team, his net shooting being really fine art.

Joe Malone was lightning fast. He glided over the ice phantom-like in the heavy mist. His ghost-like figure seemed to be in front of every Wanderer skater and never did he fail to steal the rubber from an opponent. His hockey stick was like a thing alive, for it poked its way between skates and under falling players in a way which brought Malone the puck every time. He wiggled his way through the roughest scrimmages and always brought up in front of the Wanderers net. Then he ripped the puck in. Sometimes it didn’t go in and hit Cadotte so hard on the chest that it almost knocked him over.

Sweeney Schriner
Schriner does not play an overly physical game, but he’s a bigger player. I couldn’t find any mention of him being intimidated by rough/physical play.

Rarely does a recruit to the major league hockey in his first year among the big-time battlers steal the goal scoring thunder of veterans. That, however, is just what David Schriner, New York Americans' stellar rookie, is doing. Schriner is a big, husky, aggressive lad, standing over six feet high and weighs 183 pounds, and so far has been a standout among the season's rookies.

Sweeney was a big man, a fast skater and very nimble in his play. He played hard and his penalty record is surprisingly low considering his size.

It should also be noted that both Malone and Schriner did not take a lot of penalties. I get the impression that they are the type of guys who “just play.” An overly aggressive opponent isn’t going to throw them off their game or goad them into taking a dumb penalty.


1st PP Unit
I acknowledge that this unit does not have a strong corner-man type, but all PP’s don’t need to be set up like that, especially when a player like Red Kelly is rushing the puck. With the speed and elusiveness of Chicago’s forwards (particularly Lafleur and Malone), even if opponents focus on Kelly, he has the option to give it to one of the forwards. In other words, I don’t see Chicago being forced to do any dumping and chasing in order to gain the zone. Considering the above quotes, I also don’t see an issue with Malone playing in front of the net on the PP.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Chicago having a game-breaking forward (Lafleur vs. Richard)

Not going to go into much detail here, we all know these players well, I see no reason why Guy Lafleur shouldn't be considered a game-breaking offensive threat, that was his exact role in real life as the best offensive player on his team by a mile, and was also an excellent playoff performer. It's not unreasonable to assume Lafleur (and all Chicago forwards) will get some kind of offensive boost by playing with Red Kelly.

All that being said, Richard was better than Lafleur, and offensively is the most dangerous forward in the series.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

3rd Lines

Offense (using 7yr ES Vs.X)

Marchand: 55
Colville: 53*
Cook: 53**
***MacKay
Provost: 52
Bailey: 47

*Neil Colville does not have an ES vs. X score available, and his 7 yr Vs.X score of 72.1 underrates him due to time lost to War and him switching to D after coming back. Colville does have 6 full seasons at forward though. If you take his 6th best season score of 61, and use that for his 7th season score instead of the 32 he got playing defense, his 7yr Vs.X increases to 76.1. Someone please check me on this, but I think a very rough way to try to determine ES Vs.X is to multiply by 70%, which would give a score of about 53.

**Also using the 70% of Vs.X method. However, as was mentioned previously, it should be noted that Bun Cook was the 3rd wheel on a line with 2 of the best players in the league (Frank Boucher and Bill Cook), one of whom was his brother, which I think is fair to assume he had more natural chemistry than the average player. Due to this, I believe Vs.X likely overstates Bun Cook's offensive ability.

***I'm not sure where MacKay would rank here. Dreakmur mentioned he may actually be a worse offensive player than Colville. Unforunately, I don't have the time to take a deeper look at this.


Defensive ability

I have them in the following tiers with gaps intentional

Provost*


Colville/MacKay**
Marchand/Bailey
Cook

*Provost is an elite defensive player. If he's getting dinged for losing defensive ability when concentrating on offense, he may be bumped down from where I have him, but I still think he's the best of the bunch.

**I have MacKay and Colville in the same tier, but I think MacKay is likely better defensively at ES.

 

[Dreakmur]

3rd Lines

Offense (using 7yr ES Vs.X)

Marchand: 55
Colville: 53*
Cook: 53**
***MacKay
Provost: 52
Bailey: 47

*Neil Colville does not have an ES vs. X score available, and his 7 yr Vs.X score of 72.1 underrates him due to time lost to War and him switching to D after coming back. Colville does have 6 full seasons at forward though. If you take his 6th best season score of 61, and use that for his 7th season score instead of the 32 he got playing defense, his 7yr Vs.X increases to 76.1. Someone please check me on this, but I think a very rough way to try to determine ES Vs.X is to multiply by 70%, which would give a score of about 53.

**Also using the 70% of Vs.X method. However, as was mentioned previously, it should be noted that Bun Cook was the 3rd wheel on a line with 2 of the best players in the league (Frank Boucher and Bill Cook), one of whom was his brother, which I think is fair to assume he had more natural chemistry than the average player. Due to this, I believe Vs.X likely overstates Bun Cook's offensive ability.

***I'm not sure where MacKay would rank here. Dreakmur mentioned he may actually be a worse offensive player than Colville. Unforunately, I don't have the time to take a deeper look at this.

I've got Mickey MacKay with a 7 season score of 78.7, and a 10 season score of 72.4. I said that Colville might be better, depending on how much credit you give him for the years he missed during the war.

Doing the 70% thing, MacKay would have the same ES score as Brad Marchand.

Defensive ability

I have them in the following tiers with gaps intentional

Provost*


Colville/MacKay**
Marchand/Bailey
Cook

*Provost is an elite defensive player. If he's getting dinged for losing defensive ability when concentrating on offense, he may be bumped down from where I have him, but I still think he's the best of the bunch.

**I have MacKay and Colville in the same tier, but I think MacKay is likely better defensively at ES.

MacKay is really good defensively. He's definitely better than everyone not named Provost, and I don't think he's much behind him.

Bailey was probably better than Colville too, though his short career may take something away from his ability there.

Marchand isn't great defensively. He's a great player, and a good agitator, but a defensive stalwart he is not.

 

[BenchBrawl]

An interesting battle in this series will be the unexpected D-RW combos of Red Kelly-Guy Lafleur and Harry Cameron-Maurice Richard, both of which can rise and take over the flow of the game and the game itself.

Cameron is not far from Kelly offensively; certainly one of the best offensive D of all-time.Defense and discipline is another matter though.

I disagree that Lafleur is not a game-breaking talent at the ATD level; he clearly is.I see peak as a good way to determine who has game-breaking attributes.Offensively, Lafleur was a prodigy.His lack of longevity should also be taken into account, and I expect him to be more ''inconsistent'' than Richard in the series due to this; meaning to have fewer game-breaking performances.

Richard's goalscoring prowess in the playoffs cannot be overstated.I expect at minimum 3 goals out of him if this goes to 7 games, but more likely 4 or 5 goals, if not 6 if things go his way.I expect most of these to be big goals.This is especially true with NJ splitting Lalonde and Rocket, which means he'll face some inferior Ds here and there.I also expect clutch goals and plays from Lafleur though, but like I said, perhaps one or two fewer than Richard as a penalty for his lack of longevity.

To wrap this up, both Kelly and Cameron were also clutch players, which is why I think this battle is so interesting.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I'm glad both GMs showed up for some debating, cheers to both.

Random thoughts at first glance checking the lineups:

- Hasek is an advantage, but Tretiak makes the gap reasonable and not a total disaster.

- NJ have a game-breaking talent on their 1st and 2nd line, with Cowley arguably being a 3rd player in the Top-6 with some game-breaking potential.Chicago has Lafleur, Schmidt and arguably Malone, but overall it's not as impressive as NJ's.Malone possibly has untapped potential here.

- NJ is weak defensively in their Top-6, and where they are good is only at LW, which sucks.

- Mackay on NJ's 3rd line is a solid strenght.

- Chicago's 1st pairing is a major advantage.Then they have Georges Boucher on the 2nd pairing to back this up, which gives them a dynasty-proven Big Three on the defense.OTOH, NJ's 2nd pairing is very strong, with both Siebert and Cameron being legit #3Ds, and Cameron being a high-risk / high-reward player.

- Schriner is really a piece of shit, always makes his line soft and is only good as a comparative advantage when its time for the same tedious VsX comparisons.I say that not to crap on Chicago, but because I still regret picking him some years ago LOL.What a useless he is.

- M.Richard vs Lafleur is a great RW battle between two great playoff performers.Even though Richard has the edge, who knows what happens in one series.Chicago did good to insert Bob Davidson in the lineup.This closes the gap between Richard and Lafleur a little bit in my eyes, as a chess move type of extra point that I give to Chicago.

- Guy Carbonneau is an ace in the hole for NJ.

- Good decision by Chicago to take out P.K. Subban in favor of Red Dutton.

 

[ImporterExporter]

People also are forgetting the impact Scott Stevens has physically, but psychologically even more so. Marchand has become an elite all time pest. He defends at a good level and often takes the game to edge and even beyond. How much will those 2 impact the game physically speaking?

A RW like Richard is going to have to be on alert given the LD is on his side. That means every time Richard is on the ice, you have Stevens lurking (I'd wager he'll be on the ice most of the time Richard is), with Gardiner probably seeing some head to head stuff when NJ has home ice. Those are some big time thumpers with the ability to "remove" stars from their comfort zone, and even the game/series.

I don't see Cowley as a game breaking player in this series. Especially given the defensive acumen of Chicago, not to mention their physical nature. Cowley was a one way (meaning shit defensive player), soft target. Brilliant offensive mind and player but I just don't see him being effective in the trenches when you have folks like Stevens, Gardiner and Dutton roaming. Can he adjust? Can he be effective as a more perimeter player?

I think NJ really needs Hasek, one, to stand on his head, which absolutely could happen. No goalie in history can compete with Hasek when it comes to single handedly winning games for his team. And two, you need to really hope Carbs and MacKay can slow Schmidt and Malone, again something that certainly could happen. NJ's 3rd and 4th lines really need to be counter lines, with a heavy slant towards defending.

 

[Dreakmur]

- Hasek is an advantage, but Tretiak makes the gap reasonable and not a total disaster.

Hasek is either the best or second best goalie in the draft. Tretiak is around 10th, which makes him about an average starter. I think that's a pretty wide advantage.

- NJ have a game-breaking talent on their 1st and 2nd line, with Cowley arguably being a 3rd player in the Top-6 with some game-breaking potential.Chicago has Lafleur, Schmidt and arguably Malone, but overall it's not as impressive as NJ's.Malone possibly has untapped potential here.

I've got Joe Malone as equal to Bill Cowley as an offensive player.

- NJ is weak defensively in their Top-6, and where they are good is only at LW, which sucks.

Weak defensively and lacking much physicality. Great offensively, but that's their clear focus.

- Chicago's 1st pairing is a major advantage.Then they have Georges Boucher on the 2nd pairing to back this up, which gives them a dynasty-proven Big Three on the defense.OTOH, NJ's 2nd pairing is very strong, with both Siebert and Cameron being legit #3Ds, and Cameron being a high-risk / high-reward player.

Not a fan of either Boucher or Gardiner.

Cameron > Boucher and Siebert > Gardiner in my books.

- M.Richard vs Lafleur is a great RW battle between two great playoff performers.Even though Richard has the edge, who knows what happens in one series.Chicago did good to insert Bob Davidson in the lineup.This closes the gap between Richard and Lafleur a little bit in my eyes, as a chess move type of extra point that I give to Chicago.

Honestly, Bob Davidson sucks. He shouldn't even get drafted, let alone be used to shut down Maurice Richard.

I don't care that he was successful against him a few times during his career. The ATD is a whole different ballgame.

 

[seventieslord]

But Lafleur does beat Richard head to head in a 7 year study. And 8 points over 10 years is not "Richard killing" GL either for multiple reasons, IMO.

It's not 8 points over 10 years, it's like 8 points a year for 10 years.

 

[ImporterExporter]

It's not 8 points over 10 years, it's like 8 points a year for 10 years.

I'm aware of how it works. This stems from NJ claiming that 8 points in a singular study somehow equates to Richard "killing" the other guy (Lafleur) offensively. As I pointed out, that's not even a 10% difference. Again, in one study.

I suggested that NJ didn't have the better scoring (at the top or depth wise) and that Lafleur is absolutely in the same class as Richard as an overall offensive force. Different paths to getting there but peak Lafleur was every bit as game breaking as any version of Richard. Richard simply did it longer and won more Cups, hence why he's rated higher.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Hasek is either the best or second best goalie in the draft. Tretiak is around 10th, which makes him about an average starter. I think that's a pretty wide advantage.

I disagree, but whatever.Hasek can be as low as 3rd or 4th, and Tretiak as high as 8th.Hasek can be as high as 1st, Tretiak as low as... 10th I guess? Regardless, this is not a total disaster.Tretiak won't lose any game.Hasek might win one or two.I'm not disagreeing this is a wide advantage in any case, my point was that it could have been worst.Chicago's goaltending is still reasonable.

I've got Joe Malone as equal to Bill Cowley as an offensive player.

Fair enough for me.

Weak defensively and lacking much physicality. Great offensively, but that's their clear focus.

Why lacking physicality? Lalonde was a pretty physical player wasn't he? Richard wasn't soft, and Noble was a physical player as far as I know.How is that not enough? Am I misreading Noble?

Not a fan of either Boucher or Gardiner.

Cameron > Boucher and Siebert > Gardiner in my books.

I don't care if you want to rank Cameron over Boucher; Cameron is a diamond in the rough and can be ranked very high or very low.But you not being a fan of Boucher is complete nonesense.There is literally nothing not to like about George Boucher, as I have extensively documented.He was a great playoff performer; very great.He was strong offensively and defensively, a good leader, adapted his style as age and injuries caught up to him, physical and feisty, mentored young players and maintained the tradition established by Eddie Gerard after his departure.What is your problem with Boucher exactly?

Honestly, Bob Davidson sucks. He shouldn't even get drafted, let alone be used to shut down Maurice Richard.

I don't care that he was successful against him a few times during his career. The ATD is a whole different ballgame.

As you wish, but I still give him some points on a purely ''ATD game'' standpoint.

 

[Dreakmur]

Why lacking physicality? Lalonde was a pretty physical player wasn't he? Richard wasn't soft, and Noble was a physical player as far as I know.How is that not enough? Am I misreading Noble?

I miss read and thought you said Chicago.

I don't care if you want to rank Cameron over Boucher; Cameron is a diamond in the rough and can be ranked very high or very low.But you not being a fan of Boucher is complete nonesense.There is literally nothing not to like about George Boucher, as I have extensively documented.He was a great playoff performer; very great.He was strong offensively and defensively, a good leader, adapted his style as age and injuries caught up to him, physical and feisty, mentored young players and maintained the tradition established by Eddie Gerard after his departure.What is your problem with Boucher exactly?

I think you over rate him because you researched him. You read a lot of positive stuff, but forgot to put it all in a proper context.

Where did Boucher rank in his own time? You’re acting like he was the best if his era, but he wasn’t even close to that. Even during his prime, he was probably the 5th or 6th defenseman. He was certainly behind Cleghorn, Johnson, Gerard, and Cameron. Both the Patricks might have been better, though Frank seemed more interested in managing than playing.

 

[seventieslord]

I'm aware of how it works. This stems from NJ claiming that 8 points in a singular study somehow equates to Richard "killing" the other guy (Lafleur) offensively. As I pointed out, that's not even a 10% difference. Again, in one study.

I suggested that NJ didn't have the better scoring (at the top or depth wise) and that Lafleur is absolutely in the same class as Richard as an overall offensive force. Different paths to getting there but peak Lafleur was every bit as game breaking as any version of Richard. Richard simply did it longer and won more Cups, hence why he's rated higher.

How can you sit there with a straight face and say that a 10% difference isn't large in VsX? You know damn well that it is.

 

[ImporterExporter]

How can you sit there with a straight face and say that a 10% difference isn't large in VsX? You know damn well that it is.

Um, no. It's not.

First off, the ATD is NOT the top 100 rankings. I don't evaluate teams and players the same way I would for say a recently completed major HOH project.

This is based on a 7 game series.

That leads me to value peak/playoff/big games more than longevity.

Secondly, it's not even a 10% gap so let's throw that number out.

Thirdly, if you think an extra 8 points a year (in one damn study) equates to Richard killing Lafleur we have nothing to talk about.

And lastly, based on the 7 year version, Lafleur shows he's very slightly better than Richard. Does that not matter? Does that not factor into the comparison?

There is no way you can look at Richard and then Lafleur and conclude Richard was a much better offensive player. There is no basis for it.

As I correctly keep pouring out, Richard's value over Lafleur is almost entirely tied to longevity and Cup counting, with a slight edge in postseason play.

Having TDMM (or anyone for that matter) act like it was a travesty to compare the two or utter them in the same breath sits wrong with me because the numbers and context of their careers shows them very similar in overall offensive impact.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I miss read and thought you said Chicago.



I think you over rate him because you researched him. You read a lot of positive stuff, but forgot to put it all in a proper context.

Where did Boucher rank in his own time? You’re acting like he was the best if his era, but he wasn’t even close to that. Even during his prime, he was probably the 5th or 6th defenseman. He was certainly behind Cleghorn, Johnson, Gerard, and Cameron. Both the Patricks might have been better, though Frank seemed more interested in managing than playing.

I disagree but to make a strong case would requires 50 hours of work at minimum, so I'll leave it at that.Boucher outplayed Cleghorn everytime they played together in the playoffs.He probably outplayed Gerard too, but that's harder to determine.Moose Johnson barely played during Boucher's career.Cameron would require an essay.

You also forgot to mention Joe Simpson, who is a much better contender during Boucher's prime (than Johnson or Cameron, who were past it), and Art Duncan.This plays in favor of your point admittedly.This was a really strong era for defensemen, and Boucher came out as a big time player on the biggest stage multiple time.Also noteworthy that he was a great player out west on the road.

I read a lot of positive stuff, but Boucher is not the only player I've researched.I know the ''average feel'' of going from game to game for a player, and Boucher was abnormally consistent and well-rounded, and abnormally consistently strong as a playoff performer.

Anyway, I keep an open mind, but to get to the bottom I would need to research all of those players in depth, which sounds like fun.Maybe one day if I find the time.

 

[BenchBrawl]

And really, the point about Boucher in the ATD is not where he would rank on an all-time list, but the fact that he is the perfect #3 defenseman because he brings everything to the table except speed.He is a much more useful #3 than Moose Johnson or Harry Cameron, because he enables you to pick any sort of #4.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Also Tretiak being called the 10th beat goalie is laughable.

His standing all time is underrated to say the least.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Also, George Boucher is now part of the very exclusive four time ATD champions, every time as a #3 defenseman.Only two other players were part of four championship squads.

 

[Dreakmur]

Also Tretiak being called the 10th beat goalie is laughable.

His standing all time is underrated to say the least.

I have Roy, Hasek, Plante, Hall, Brodeur, Sawchuk, Dryden, Brimsek, and Vezina ahead of him, then he's in the conversation for the next spot.

 

[ImporterExporter]

I have Roy, Hasek, Plante, Hall, Brodeur, Sawchuk, Dryden, Brimsek, and Vezina ahead of him, then he's in the conversation for the next spot.

Fair enough. We're all going to have different opinions.

I think the only net minders I'd definitively put ahead of him are Roy, Dom, Plante, Brodeur, and Hall.