Double-A Semi-Final Playoffs: 2 Madison Ice Muskies vs. 3 Saskatoon Shieks
- Thread starter VanIslander
- Start date
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
I do plan on making some points in this series. If I am to have any chance of taking this series, I'll need to convice at least one voter that Saskatoon is better than Madison. Otherwise, the result will be the same - Madison on top. I think we have the better players but I realize I need to elaborate on that.
I'll do an analysis very similar to the one I did in the AAA draft vs. Hed, only this time I'll need to do a little more hair-splitting or I'll end up calling everyone equal.
I'll do an analysis very similar to the one I did in the AAA draft vs. Hed, only this time I'll need to do a little more hair-splitting or I'll end up calling everyone equal.
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
Coaching:
MacNeil and Wilson are two of the best coaches in the AA draft. I would put Wilson's cadre of accomplishments just slightly ahead of macNeil's:
Wilson: 1260 NHL games, .535, 95 playoff games, .495, 2-3-5 in Adams voting, 1 cup final
MacNeil: 306 NHL games, .541, 43 playoff games, .512, no adams votes, 1 cup, 603 other games, .635, 3 championships, 1 final, 2 coach of the year.
But when you add Dick Todd into the mix:
938 other games, .647, 4 championships, 3 finals, 1 coach of the year
and then consider that he's a successful cup-winning NHL assistant and not just another head coach thrown in for good measure, you should agree that his addition is a very positive one. Definite coaching edge for Regina.
Goaltending:
Hebert and Roloson actually have pretty similar Vezina voting records. The difference is that I think Hebert came across his a bit more "honestly". He really was Anaheim's saving grace for a few years there. Roloson was earning these votes by virtue of a very strong save percentage. Credit to the voters for looking at the right stat if they're choosing only one, however, there is more context behind it. Minnesota is a team whose style of play has consistently limited shot quality and boosted sv% ratings of their goalies. Manny Fernandez appeared just as good as Roloson in these seasons, and we all know where he's playing now. However, Hebert has no playoff record to speak of, and although Roloson has played mostly for middling teams, he dragged (along with pronger) the 8th-seeded Oilers to the finals so he has a playoff edge. Overall, history should remember Hebert better, but it's not a major series-deciding edge by any means. I think Fowler and Winkler are very similar, but they played at the same time and Winkler appears to have a small edge on him as well.
MacNeil and Wilson are two of the best coaches in the AA draft. I would put Wilson's cadre of accomplishments just slightly ahead of macNeil's:
Wilson: 1260 NHL games, .535, 95 playoff games, .495, 2-3-5 in Adams voting, 1 cup final
MacNeil: 306 NHL games, .541, 43 playoff games, .512, no adams votes, 1 cup, 603 other games, .635, 3 championships, 1 final, 2 coach of the year.
But when you add Dick Todd into the mix:
938 other games, .647, 4 championships, 3 finals, 1 coach of the year
and then consider that he's a successful cup-winning NHL assistant and not just another head coach thrown in for good measure, you should agree that his addition is a very positive one. Definite coaching edge for Regina.
Goaltending:
Hebert and Roloson actually have pretty similar Vezina voting records. The difference is that I think Hebert came across his a bit more "honestly". He really was Anaheim's saving grace for a few years there. Roloson was earning these votes by virtue of a very strong save percentage. Credit to the voters for looking at the right stat if they're choosing only one, however, there is more context behind it. Minnesota is a team whose style of play has consistently limited shot quality and boosted sv% ratings of their goalies. Manny Fernandez appeared just as good as Roloson in these seasons, and we all know where he's playing now. However, Hebert has no playoff record to speak of, and although Roloson has played mostly for middling teams, he dragged (along with pronger) the 8th-seeded Oilers to the finals so he has a playoff edge. Overall, history should remember Hebert better, but it's not a major series-deciding edge by any means. I think Fowler and Winkler are very similar, but they played at the same time and Winkler appears to have a small edge on him as well.
As for coaching, maybe if Madison fans throw waffles, it will distract Wilson 
Wilson is far from a favourite of mine, but there's little doubt Saskatoon has a coaching edge.
Wilson is far from a favourite of mine, but there's little doubt Saskatoon has a coaching edge.
The two biggest things I notice when looking at the rosters:
1. This would be an interesting series to watch as there's not a lot of offense coming from the back-end. It definitely seems like the steady defencemen is prefered over the offensive, but one-dimensional defenceman like Woolley
2. The biggest battle probably comes in the differing philosophies of the bottom 6. Saskatoon seems like much more of a grinding team in the bottom lines than Madison (despite Madison having the worst offensive player in the series in McCormack).
1. This would be an interesting series to watch as there's not a lot of offense coming from the back-end. It definitely seems like the steady defencemen is prefered over the offensive, but one-dimensional defenceman like Woolley
2. The biggest battle probably comes in the differing philosophies of the bottom 6. Saskatoon seems like much more of a grinding team in the bottom lines than Madison (despite Madison having the worst offensive player in the series in McCormack).
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
Agree that there's not much in the way of offense, or in particular, offensive specialists, on either defense corps. McEwen was definitely a specialist and, among the modern players, stands out as the best offensively:
Name - ESPPG - PPPPG
McEwen - 0.30 - 0.22
Cavallini - 0.29 - 0.09
Rolfe - 0.27 - 0.04
Hart: 0.21 - 0.01
White: 0.19 - 0.02
Hannan: 0.24 - 0.04
Spacek - 0.26 - 0.22
Also agree that there is a difference in the makeups of the top-6. Ours definitely has a lot more battle. But I don't think we give up anything in the way of offense, either:
I think ESPPG makes the most sense as these aren't going to be our PP guys.
Name - ESPPG
Berry: 0.50 (541 GP)
G.Malone: 0.49 (704 GP)
R.Malone: 0.48 (438 GP)
Schock: 0.48 (781 GP)
Hrdina: 0.39 (250 GP)
Grier: 0.39 (987 GP)
Boutette: 0.37 (756 GP)
Fonteyne 0.27 (820 GP)
With GP taken into consideration, the most established modern offensive players would go as follows: Schock, G.Malone, Berry, R.Malone, Grier, Boutette, Hrdina, Fonteyne.
That leaves Tureanu, McCormack, Couture and Babando.
Tureanu, I have no idea how to place. I am all for giving credit to international players, but Tureanu played in the A-pool of the worlds just one time. And while he easily led his team in goals and points, he was nowhere near the leaders. Available stats show him with 52 points in 37 games in the B and C pools over the years, but Kuhnhackl and Kiessling are the only drafted players he ever encountered in those pools. I am lost, at least he played at a time when we know the best Europeans could compete with North Americans, but he was the best player of a second or third tier nation. I give him a rating of incomplete.
We both agree McCormack would be last on this list.
Babando and Couture have adjusted PPG of 0.47 and 0.52, respectively. In 473 and 414 adjusted games. That was based on a quick, elementary calculation. But considering they are both guys who hit the bottom of the leaderboard a couple of times in otherwise undistinguished careers, I think it makes sense. I would put them in the Grier/Boutette tier. Leaving us with this:
Schock, G.Malone, Berry, R.Malone
Babando, Couture, Grier, Boutette
Hrdina, Fonteyne, McCormack
Tureanu (???)
So yeah, I think my bottom-6 can be much more effective overall because it has the better offensive ability (by a bit) and the better compete level (by a lot). I would also argue that thanks to Grier, Schock and Fonteyne in particular, it has the three best defensive players in either bottom-6.
Name - ESPPG - PPPPG
McEwen - 0.30 - 0.22
Cavallini - 0.29 - 0.09
Rolfe - 0.27 - 0.04
Hart: 0.21 - 0.01
White: 0.19 - 0.02
Hannan: 0.24 - 0.04
Spacek - 0.26 - 0.22
Also agree that there is a difference in the makeups of the top-6. Ours definitely has a lot more battle. But I don't think we give up anything in the way of offense, either:
I think ESPPG makes the most sense as these aren't going to be our PP guys.
Name - ESPPG
Berry: 0.50 (541 GP)
G.Malone: 0.49 (704 GP)
R.Malone: 0.48 (438 GP)
Schock: 0.48 (781 GP)
Hrdina: 0.39 (250 GP)
Grier: 0.39 (987 GP)
Boutette: 0.37 (756 GP)
Fonteyne 0.27 (820 GP)
With GP taken into consideration, the most established modern offensive players would go as follows: Schock, G.Malone, Berry, R.Malone, Grier, Boutette, Hrdina, Fonteyne.
That leaves Tureanu, McCormack, Couture and Babando.
Tureanu, I have no idea how to place. I am all for giving credit to international players, but Tureanu played in the A-pool of the worlds just one time. And while he easily led his team in goals and points, he was nowhere near the leaders. Available stats show him with 52 points in 37 games in the B and C pools over the years, but Kuhnhackl and Kiessling are the only drafted players he ever encountered in those pools. I am lost, at least he played at a time when we know the best Europeans could compete with North Americans, but he was the best player of a second or third tier nation. I give him a rating of incomplete.
We both agree McCormack would be last on this list.
Babando and Couture have adjusted PPG of 0.47 and 0.52, respectively. In 473 and 414 adjusted games. That was based on a quick, elementary calculation. But considering they are both guys who hit the bottom of the leaderboard a couple of times in otherwise undistinguished careers, I think it makes sense. I would put them in the Grier/Boutette tier. Leaving us with this:
Schock, G.Malone, Berry, R.Malone
Babando, Couture, Grier, Boutette
Hrdina, Fonteyne, McCormack
Tureanu (???)
So yeah, I think my bottom-6 can be much more effective overall because it has the better offensive ability (by a bit) and the better compete level (by a lot). I would also argue that thanks to Grier, Schock and Fonteyne in particular, it has the three best defensive players in either bottom-6.
VanIslander
A 19-year ATDer on HfBoards
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
He's a mystery to me as well. I picked him hoping I could find more stuff, but he's very enigmatic. Tikhonov loved him, but Tikhonov seems to love a lot of guys. How do his stats compare to Kuhnhackl's?
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
Good question. Meant to reply to this earlier.
Kuhnhackl spent some time in both A and B pools so he provides a good springboard for comparison.
I was able to determine that, thanks to a defeat at the hands of Poland in a qualifier, Germany was a B pool team in 1972. In 1976 they did not face any easier competition than anyone else, and in 1984 it was the same thing. Kuhnhackl led the 1984 Olympics in scoring, but it was like a B pool title considering the Germans scored just two goals in two games against good competition (USA & Sweden) and 26 in three games against Poland, France, & Yugoslavia, so those games are where all his points came from. However, other teams got the chance to play those nations too.
Anyway, here are Kuhnhackl's pool A stats:
86 GP, 99 points. (1.15)
In pool B:
19 GP, 30 points. (1.58)
I was able to find out a bit more about Tureanu that the SIHR database couldn't tell me. In the 1976 Olympics he was actually the leading scorer of the B pool with 10 points in 6 games. In the 1971 worlds, all I can tell you for sure is that a Romanian teammate led the C pool with 22 points in 7 games, so Doru had less than that. In 1972, a Pole led the B pool in scoring with 13 points in 6 games, so Doru had less than that. In 1973, it was a German with 16 points. In 1974, a Yugoslavian led with 15. The 1980 Olympics have to count as A pool as well, as he played the same schedule as every other team, and faced USA and Sweden.
So with all that said, here's what I can tell you for sure:
Pool A: 15 GP, 14 points (0.93)
Pool B: 26 GP, 38 points (1.46)
Pool C: 7 GP, 17 points (2.43)
With the C pool stats disgregarded, it looks like he was able to score at almost a Kuhnhackl level, just with one sixth as many pool A games.
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
Post-Series Talk: Boston Bruins Defeat Toronto Maple Leafs (win 4-3)
- Latest: thaman8765678
