Bob Cole Division Finals New Jersey Swamp Devils (1) vs New York Americans (3)

[rmartin65]

Here is just a little bit more on how the Americans plan to constrain Beliveau;


Bob Pulford had some real-life success against Beliveau-

From his bio:

His value to his teams couldn't be measured in stats. He reached the 20 goal plateau only four times and the 50 point plateau three times. Bob was considered one of the best fore-checkers in the NHL with a knack of scoring important goals. He thrived under pressure and was especially valuable during the playoffs when the checking got tougher.

Legendary Montreal coach Toe Blake was once asked who he would pick from the Toronto team if he could. Toe didn't pick Frank Mahovlich, Dave Keon or Tim Horton, but he chose Bob, and when asked why, his simple explanation was, "He's the heart of that hockey club."

Many wonder why Bob Pulford is in the Hockey Hall of Fame as a player. Well his 1964 playoff performance undoubtedly has a lot to do with it. The Pulford [Line] held the vaunted Jean Beliveau - Boom Boom Geoffrion - XXXX XXXXXXXX line of the first place Canadiens to only three goals in seven games in round one. In round two he put an end to the brilliant scoring run by Norm Ullman of Detroit, whose line had four goals in the seven games against the Leafs. Pulford was the Leafs star in a 3-2 loss to Montreal, scoring both goals including one shorthanded. He was mentioned as one of the Leafs best players in three of the other games against Montreal for his hard checking and brilliant penalty-killing. In addition to his game one heroics he had two goals and one assist as Toronto won 4-3 in overtime in game six. He had his third short-handed marker in that one and set up the famous overtime marker to take game six.

As did Horton-

From overpass in last year’s playoffs-

Pittsburgh AC really depends on their first line to carry the scoring load. The Ice Rays are loaded and ready to limit Pittsburgh's top end scoring. It starts with Victor Hedman and Tim Horton, an extremely mobile and physically imposing pair who are both great defensively. Tim Horton is no stranger to facing Jean Beliveau in the playoffs. In 6 playoff series against each other, each came out on top 3 times. Beliveau's playoff scoring line against Horton was 17-9-26 in 30 games. That includes a 12-2-14 line at EV and 5-7-12 on the PP. So while Beliveau had success scoring goals against Horton and the Leafs, he didn't have much success setting up his linemates, and his EV scoring was pretty low. In fact, Horton had a scoring line of 3-8-11, all at EV, in those same games, so he only had 3 fewer EV points than Beliveau in their head to head playoff matchup. Horton's defence partner for those series was Allan Stanley, a big defensive defenceman who made the HHOF, but wasn't much of a skater. (Stanley was injured for one of the series that Montreal won, if you remove that series Beliveau had 15 goals, 6 assists, 21 points in 26 playoff games against Stanley-Horton.) Hedman has even more size than Stanley and far better skating, adding another dimension to the pairing.

And I'll say a little more about the Horton-Beliveau matchup. Jean Beliveau scored 1219 points in 1125 regular season games in his NHL career (1.08 Pts/G). Against the Maple Leafs (and Horton played in almost all of these games) he scored 186 points in 201 regular season games, a 15% drop in scoring. Beliveau scored 1.09 Pts/G in his playoff career, and only 26 points in 30 playoff games against Toronto, or 0.87 Pts/G, a 20% drop in scoring. The Ice Rays are extremely pleased to have Tim Horton to match up against Jean Beliveau and Bert Olmstead.

I think Chara is a pretty clear upgrade on Stanley, which makes the pairing even more successful.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Here is just a little bit more on how the Americans plan to constrain Beliveau;


Bob Pulford had some real-life success against Beliveau-

From his bio:



As did Horton-

From overpass in last year’s playoffs-






I think Chara is a pretty clear upgrade on Stanley, which makes the pairing even more successful.

Question - if Tommy Ivan wants to use Bob Pulford head to head against Beliveau, that means you'd have him play C in this series? What would your bottom 6 look like in that case?

_____

Toe Blake will obviously try to get Beliveau out against your lower pairings, something made easier with home ice advantage. While NY's 1st pairing is an excellent shut down pair, I think the 2nd pairing is a bit of a weakness. To me, Harvey Pulford reads like a Derian Hatcher type, and I don't particularly love a slow skater like that next to someone like Burns, who is an adventure in his own zone.

______

Personally, I find Art Ross's overall game to be an improvement on Harvey Pulford, but there's no way to "prove" that. The 1925 MacLean's all-time all-star list does favor Ross, though as I said before, using that list to compare players between generations is somewhat problematic:

1st Team: Sprague Cleghorn, Hod Stuart
2nd Team: George Boucher, Eddie Gerard
3rd Team: Bullet Joe Simpson, Lester Patrick, Art Ross

It really is a shame there were no yearly all-star teams in the NHA. We have a number of indicators that Ross was considered among the best of the best in the NHA, but concrete AS teams would really help hone in.

 

[rmartin65]

Question - if Tommy Ivan wants to use Bob Pulford head to head against Beliveau, that means you'd have him play C in this series? What would your bottom 6 look like in that case?

Hmm... that's a good point. Do we know if Pulford actually played C in that series/playoffs, or was it more of a shadow situation? I checked hockey reference (hardly perfect), and it has Pulford at LW that season, so I am inclined to believe he was either shadowing Beliveau or assumed center responsibilities in the defensive zone, but I could be wrong.

Toe Blake will obviously try to get Beliveau out against your lower pairings, something made easier with home ice advantage. While NY's 1st pairing is an excellent shut down pair, I think the 2nd pairing is a bit of a weakness. To me, Harvey Pulford reads like a Derian Hatcher type, and I don't particularly love a slow skater like that next to someone like Burns, who is an adventure in his own zone.

I admittedly don't watch the Western teams as much as I do Eastern teams, but I didn't really get the sense that Burns is a mess in his own zone- his defensive struggles are more due to him getting caught up ice trying to do too much offensively. That's by no means ideal, but it's better than being a mess.

Personally, I find Art Ross's overall game to be an improvement on Harvey Pulford, but there's no way to "prove" that. The 1925 MacLean's all-time all-star list does favor Ross, though as I said before, using that list to compare players between generations is somewhat problematic:

1st Team: Sprague Cleghorn, Hod Stuart
2nd Team: George Boucher, Eddie Gerard
3rd Team: Bullet Joe Simpson, Lester Patrick, Art Ross

It really is a shame there were no yearly all-star teams in the NHA. We have a number of indicators that Ross was considered among the best of the best in the NHA, but concrete AS teams would really help hone in.

That is a single list, and, frankly, one that seems pretty biased in favor of offensive defensemen. As a counter-argument to this list, I would submit that Pulford was admitted to the HHoF two years before Ross was. To be fair, I don't have a firm grasp of how they decided in what order players were inducted for those first classes; common sense lends me to believe it was merit, but looking at the names... I'm not so sure.

I concur that having AS teams would help... perhaps the idea of us creating pre-consolidation season all-star teams would help with that. It sounds like a lot of work, but the payoffs could be huge.

I don't see anything more than passing comments about Ross' defensive play, not enough to make me think he is anything more than passable at D. I have seen quotes about Pulford having some good offensive moments, but I don't think that makes him anything more than a defense first, second, and third type of player.

 

[rmartin65]

We’ve spent a lot of time talking matchups and player styles, so let’s also just add a quick glance at the numbers- VsX and Finishes/Awards. To be clear, I think these are to supplement the previous discussion, not to replace it.

Abel/Beliveau/Geoffrion vs Blake/Stamkos/Howe

7 year VsX
New Jersey- 282.9
New York- 302

Its a pretty sizeable advantage, especially when you add in that Abel is playing at a secondary position (not that I think he would be poor at LW, but because I do think he would score less at W versus at C simply because, traditionally, offense runs through the center more than the wingers… I imagine that won’t change on a line with Beliveau.

Awards
Hart- New Jersey: 4 vs. New York: 7
Art Ross- New Jersey: 3 vs. New York: 7
Richard- New Jersey: 5 vs. New York: 7
AS1- New Jersey: 9 vs. New York: 15
AS2- New Jersey: 7 vs. New York: 13

Sizable advantage to New York. Both Beliveau and Howe had numerous other top 3 finishes for the Hart. Stamkos had a runner-up as well.


Finishes
Top 3 Points- New Jersey: 11 vs. New York: 17
Top 5 points- New Jersey: 15 vs. New York: 27
Top 10 points- New Jersey: 24 vs. New York: 32
Top 3 goals- New Jersey: 11 vs. New York: 20
Top 5 goals- New Jersey: 15 vs. New York: 23
Top 10 goals- New Jersey: 21 vs. New York: 30
Top 3 assists- New Jersey: 8 vs. New York: 11
Top 5 assists- New Jersey: 13 vs. New York: 18
Top 10 assists- New Jersey: 24 vs. New York: 30

Again, it is a noticeable advantage for New York, and at every metric listed here.

Now, @BenchBrawl brought up the point that these metrics are an advantage to my team because of Howe… and I agree with that. But I don’t think it means that they are bad metrics, it just goes on to show that Howe was so good for so long. We don’t cap Gretzky after 5 Ross or Harts awards. We don’t cap Orr at a handful of Norris wins. Why are we punishing Howe for playing at the top of the league for that long? If it was so easy, why didn’t every star player? Heck, Beliveau played for 20 years- why didn’t he do it?

I would do the second lines, but TDMMs line consists of three non-NHL players, which makes such a comparison impossible.

I think it is close, but the advantage goes to New York. Breaking it out by position

LW: Heatley (NYA) over Harris (NJSD)
C: Lach (NYA) over Bowie (NJSD)
RW: Maltsev (NJSD) over Aurie (NYA)

I think the lines mostly work, but that Harris is going to have to do a lot of work for that line to function properly.

Third lines- I am not crazy about doing VsX for bottom sixes; I’m assuming New Jersey has the advantage (largely due to Kopitar).

LW: Pulford (NYA) over Pavelich (NJSD)
C: Kopitar (NJSD) over Tkaczuk (NYA)
RW: Leswick (NYA) over Amonte (NJSD)

Despite the Americans having the upper-hand in two positions (in my opinion), I think the lines are pretty equal, probably even a slight advantage for New Jersey. Why? I am a huge fan of Kopitar. He’s one of the best two-way centers in history, and I don’t think he would look out of place on a second line here. The dude is a horse.

Fourth lines- Again, VsX doesn’t make a lot of sense. Nor does any real comparison. Your line is clearly superior defensively, mine is clearly superior offensively. Different intended usages, for sure.

Defense: I am a little bit at a loss for how to compare these, since TDMM is mixing up the pairings for half of the games.

1D- Pilote (NJSD) over Horton (NYA)
In a vacuum, Pilote is better than Horton. I think Horton is superior physically and defensively, but Pilote brings more offense without being particularly weak defensively.

2D- Chara (NYA) over Savard (NJSD)

3D- Burns (NYA) greater than/equal to Flaman (NJSD)
It might be personal preference, but I think Burns is the better player. He’s not perfect or anything, but he was arguably the best defenseman for a league for a couple seasons. Short peak, though. Flaman’s propensity for penalties works against him. In any case, it is pretty close.

4D- Pulford (NYA) greater than/equal to Ross (NJSD)
Pulford is the stalwart physically and on D, Ross (obviously) the bigger offensive threat. Like the 3D comparison, it is close.

5D- Hall (NYA) over Beck (NJSD)
Hall is a legit four here, but I concede that his penalties are a concern.

6D- Davydov (NYA) over Griffis (NJSD)
Maybe this is just a personal opinion, but Davydov has always impressed me.

It all breaks down to advantages at 2, 5, and 6 for the Americans, and at 1 for New Jersey. While I think that I have the advantage at 3 and four, I can definitely see how others would disagree, so it is not something I am interested in arguing too much. I don’t think it is too crazy to call the second pairing a wash.

Stylistically, I have already voiced my issues with the Savard-Flaman and Ross/Pilote set up. The Savard-Pilote and Ross-Flaman line-up looks better, but, as I have said, I see why TDMM is making the switch.

As it pertains to my team, I wish I had more offense from the blue line- that is something that I think TDMM’s team definitely has over mine. Burns and Hall bring quality offense, but that is on my second and third pairings. Chara-Horton is definitely below-average offensively for a first pairing.

Goalie- I’m already on record stating that I think Vezina is a tick or two above Benedict (though I certainly won’t argue against those arguing on behalf of Benedict, haha). But, similar to the comparison of our second pairings, I don’t think the difference is enough to make a notable impact on the series.

Special teams look good for both sides.

All in all-

Coaching- Advantage New Jersey
Top 6- Advantage New York
Bottom 6- Advantage New Jersey
Defense- Advantage New York
Goalie- Advantage New Jersey

In my opinion, New York’s advantages at top 6 and defense are greater/more valuable than New Jersey’s advantages at coaching/bottom 6/goaltending, which is why New York should get the win after a hard-fought series.

This was probably my last post for the series- thanks for the debate, @TheDevilMadeMe

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

IF New York has a better top line, it's only because of Howe... because Beliveau's support players are a step up from Howe's in this case.

The stars:
Howe > Beliveau of course.

The sniper:
Geoffrion > Stamkos

The support players:
LW Abel = Blake. I really don't see a point in taking off much from Abel at LW, since he played 1/3 of his career there and had the best playoffs of his career there (13 points in 10 games on the 1943 Cup winner). If Abel was playing C, I'd say he was slightly better than Blake, but at LW, they are damn close here.

So it really boils down to whether the gap between Howe and Beliveau is bigger than the gap between Stamkos and Geoffrion.

We’ve spent a lot of time talking matchups and player styles, so let’s also just add a quick glance at the numbers- VsX and Finishes/Awards. To be clear, I think these are to supplement the previous discussion, not to replace it.

Abel/Beliveau/Geoffrion vs Blake/Stamkos/Howe

7 year VsX
New Jersey- 282.9
New York- 302

Its a pretty sizeable advantage, especially when you add in that Abel is playing at a secondary position (not that I think he would be poor at LW, but because I do think he would score less at W versus at C simply because, traditionally, offense runs through the center more than the wingers… I imagine that won’t change on a line with Beliveau.

Man, if you want to make a line centered by Steven Stamkos to look as good as possible, you'd sure want to use 7-year VsX, because the man doesn't have much longevity beyond his best years, and more importantly, he did nothing in the playoffs.

If there was ever an offense-only player underrated by VsX, it was Bernie Geoffrion

I'll just summarize this argument that I made more in depth in Geoffrion's profile: ATD2021 Bio Thread

I. Bernard Geoffrion regularly missed small parts of the regular season due to various minor injuries, but it didn’t matter at all because Montreal was basically guaranteed to make the playoffs

In my opinion, given Geoffrion’s team situation, his per-game numbers are a greater indicator of just how good he was. Here’s a quick and dirty measure showing Geoffrion’s per-game numbers were significantly better than his seasonal numbers:

Top 10 Finishes

Goals: 1, 1, 3, 3, 5, 5, 8, 9
Assists: 6, 6, 6, 7, 10
Points: 1, 1, 4, 6, 6, 7, 7

Goals-Per-Game: 1, 1, 1, 2, 4, 4, 4, 5, 6, 6, 8
Assists-Per-Game: 2, 2, 4, 7, 8, 9
Points-Per-Game: 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 10

Geoffrion's Points-per-game finishes are nearly identical to Bathgate's (details in profile)

Bathgate's 7 year average is 101.1 by the way, much higher than Geoffrion's 89.9. VsX is, by design, brutal towards players who don't play full seasons.

II. In the playoffs, Geoffrion was generally healthy, and he brought it big time

A. Geoffrion was the leading playoff scorer of the dynasty that won 5 Cups in a row from 1956-1960

Leading playoff scorers 1956-1960, sorted by points, points-per-game also listed

68 Bernie Geoffrion 1.39
57 Dickie Moore 1.16
55 Jean Beliveau 1.34
47 Henri Richard 0.96
44 Maurice Richard 1.07
40 Doug Harvey 0.82
39 Bert Olmstead 0.76

In terms of individual seasons, Geoffrion led the playoffs in goals and points in 1957 (11 goals in 10 games!!!!) and in assists and points in 1960.

B. Geoffrion was among the leaders in playoff scoring in the 3 years before the dynasty (Montreal won 1 Cup, Detroit won 2)

Leading playoff scorers 1953-1955, sorted by points, points-per-game also listed

36 Gordie Howe 1.24
35 Ted Lindsay 1.21
34 Bernie Geoffrion 0.97
30 Alex Delvecchio 1.03
24 Dickie Moore 0.69
23 Jean Beliveau 1.05

(M Richard had an uncharacteristically weak playoffs in 1954 and was suspended for 1955).

C. Overall, Geoffrion scored 10+ points in the playoffs for 8 straight seasons from 1953-1960, back when the playoffs were only two rounds long (his team went to the finals in every year of this time frame). He scored 3 points in 4 playoff games in 1961 (not great, but not terrible) after winning his only Hart Trophy, then declined rapidly in both the regular season and the playoffs.

D. In every season from 52-53 to 59-60, which is a span of 8 consecutive seasons including 6 championships, Bernard Geoffrion was Top 3 in playoff scoring on his team (details in the profile linked above)

______________

In conclusion, VsX only looks at one thing: Regular season points accumulated over a season. And that's important.

But in this case, Geoffrion scored at a very high rate during the regular season but regularly missed games, AND maintained that rate into the playoffs where he no longer missed games.

 

[VanIslander]

I'm starting to change my mind.

Food for thought.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Top 10 all-time in seventieslord's 5-year playoffs VsX formula:

#	|	Name	|	VsX5P
1	|	Wayne Gretzky	|	685
2	|	Gordie Howe	|	583
3	|	Maurice Richard	|	575
4	|	Jean Beliveau	|	559
5	|	Bernie Geoffrion	|	550
6	|	Phil Esposito	|	549
7	|	Joe Sakic	|	543
8	|	Guy Lafleur	|	528
9	|	Mario Lemieux	|	518
10	|	Ted Kennedy	|	517

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

So no, I don't think Stamkos and Geoffrion can be expected to score at similar rates here, as regular season 7-year VsX would say.

Don't get me wrong - I don't think we should ignore regular season when we make these comparisons! I always say that the regular season is a better metric of how good a player is; the playoffs show more how he plays under playoff conditions.

But again, Geoffrion is in a fairly unique class of player (along with Mark Messier; also Mario Lemieux a few seasons actually). He actually did score at a very high rate in both the regular season and playoffs. But he regularly missed games in the regular season, while maintaining his health in the playoffs.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I think it is close, but the advantage goes to New York. Breaking it out by position

LW: Heatley (NYA) over Harris (NJSD)
C: Lach (NYA) over Bowie (NJSD)
RW: Maltsev (NJSD) over Aurie (NYA)

I think the lines mostly work, but that Harris is going to have to do a lot of work for that line to function properly.

Best player: Lach > Maltsev (advantage NY)
Sniper: Bowie > Heatley (advantage NJ)
Gritty guy: Harris = Aurie. Maybe I"m overrating Harris, but I think his dominating physical game makes up the small advantage in offense that Aurie has.

Aurie's 7-year VsX is only 71.6, a bit below Tony Amonte's 73.0 actually.

Third lines- I am not crazy about doing VsX for bottom sixes; I’m assuming New Jersey has the advantage (largely due to Kopitar).

LW: Pulford (NYA) over Pavelich (NJSD)
C: Kopitar (NJSD) over Tkaczuk (NYA)
RW: Leswick (NYA) over Amonte (NJSD)

Despite the Americans having the upper-hand in two positions (in my opinion), I think the lines are pretty equal, probably even a slight advantage for New Jersey. Why? I am a huge fan of Kopitar. He’s one of the best two-way centers in history, and I don’t think he would look out of place on a second line here. The dude is a horse.

If Leswick > Amonte, it really isn't by much. Amonte was a significantly better scorer.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

In terms of defense, my main disagreement with rmartin is on the second pairing - I like Flaman better than Burns and Ross better than Pulford.

Ross vs Pulford is impossible to know for sure; we've already said our pieces. I prefer Ross, but it's not a strong preference.

I do however, strongly favor Flaman to Burns

Flaman Norris record: 3, 3, 3, 5, 5
Burns Norris record: 1, 2, 2, 8, 12

Flaman's 3rd place finishes were behind Harvey/Kelly, Harvey/Kelly, Harvey/Gadsby.

Flaman Norris record Harvey removed: 2, 2, 2, 4, 4
Flman Norris record Harvey/Kelly removed: 1, 1, 2, 3, 4

Flaman also should get something of a playoff boost, as the best player on the Bruins team that went to the Stanley Cup finals in back-to-back years in 1957 and 1958 (only to get destroyed by the Montreal dynasty of course).

As for Burns... He just doesn't impress me beyond the point totals. Unlike Erik Karlsson, I don't think Burns' possession numbers have ever been that great - he really did get his Norris votes for his point production alone. When you consider Burns' really short peak, I personally don't see what makes him any better than a Sergei Gonchar, who didn't quite have the peak, but who had many more strong scoring seasons. But we've all seen Burns play, so I know we all have our own opinions of him, and I know not everyone would agree with my assessment.

 

[rmartin65]

Congratulations,@TheDevilMadeMe ! You built a strong team (as always), best of luck moving forward.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Not at all surprised this one was close!