Foster Hewitt Divisional Quarterfinals: Australia vs. Kenora

[Velociraptor]

Australia Mighty Roos

General Manager: Velociraptor
Home Venue: Stadium Australia

Head Coach: Ken Hitchcock
Captain: George Armstrong
Assistant Captains: Ron Francis, Denis Potvin, Charlie Conacher

ROSTER


Steve Shutt - Ron Francis (A) - Charlie Conacher (A)
Herbie Lewis - Sergei Fedorov - Reggie Leach
Yvon Lambert - Bobby Holik - George Armstrong (C)
Louis Berlinguette - Derek Sanderson - Leo Labine

Denis Potvin (A) - Bob Baun
Doug Mohns - Randy Carlyle
Albert Leduc - Ken Morrow

Bernie Parent
Percy LeSueur

Spares:
Glen Wesley, D
Pierre Mondou, C/LW
Paul MacLean, RW
Normand Rochefort, D

POWERPLAY

PP1: Steve Shutt - Sergei Fedorov - Charlie Conacher - Denis Potvin - Randy Carlyle
PP2: Herbie Lewis - Ron Francis - Reggie Leach - Doug Mohns - Albert Leduc

PENALTY KILL

PK1: Derek Sanderson - George Armstrong - Denis Potvin - Ken Morrow
PK2: Ron Francis - Herbie Lewis - Doug Mohns - Bob Baun
PK3: Sergei Fedorov - Louis Berlinguette - Denis Potvin - Ken Morrow

Name|ES|PP|SH|Total
Shutt|15|4|0|19
Francis|15|2.5|3.5|21
Conacher|15|4|0|19
Lewis|13|2.5|3.5|19
Fedorov|13|4|2|19
Leach|13|3|0|16
Lambert|12|0|0|12
Holik|12|0|0|12
Armstrong|12|0|4|16
Berlinguette|7|0|2|9
Sanderson|7|0|4|11
Labine|7|0|0|7

Name|ES|PP|SH|Total
Potvin|18|5|4|27
Baun|18|0|3|21
Mohns|16|3|3|22
Carlyle|16|5|0|21
Morrow|12|0|4|16
Leduc|12|3|0|15

vs.

Kenora THISTLES
1907 Stanley Cup Champions

Home Rink: Thistle Rink (1920), Kenora, Ontario
GM's: papershoes
Coach: herb BROOKS
Assitant Coach: father david BAUER
Captain: jean BELIVEAU
Alternates: larry ROBINSON, butch BOUCHARD, kirk MULLER

#27 john TONELLI - #4 jean BELIVEAU (C) - #7 rod GILBERT
#7 bill BARBER - frank MCGEE - #22 dino CICCARELLI
#9 kirk MULLER (A) - #19 jonathan TOEWS - #12 ed LITZENBERGER
#10 dennis HULL - #33 kris DRAPER - bob NYSTROM
extra: saku KOIVU, mike ROGERS

#3 emile "butch" BOUCHARD (A) - #19 larry ROBINSON (A)
graham DRINKWATER - mike GRANT
doug BODGER - #17 craig LUDWIG
extra: rick LEY

#1 bill DURNAN
john "bouse" HUTTON

Powerplay:
PP1: john TONELLI - jean BELIVEAU - rod GILBERT - bill BARBER - larry ROBINSON
PP2: kirk MULLER - frank MCGEE - dino CICCARELLI - graham DRINKWATER - doug BODGER

Penalty Kill:
PK1: bill BARBER - kris DRAPER - butch BOUCHARD - craig LUDWIG
PK2: jonathan TOEWS - kirk MULLER - mike GRANT - larry ROBINSON​

Click to read more...

 

[Velociraptor]

Best of luck to you, papershoes!

I will add some initial comments later on, one thing I'd like to point out is that Bobby Holik cannot wait to shadow Jean Beliveau

 

[Velociraptor]

Goaltending

I don't know if it's worth comparing the starting goaltenders as they are both around middle of the pack, top-tier goaltenders. We're not entirely sure Durnan's 1st AST's are legit because of the era of his career, but newspaper articles suggest he was superior to his contemporaries. I'll buy Durnan as a goaltender in similar territory with Parent. No real advantage to either team with solid starting goaltenders.

I have a quote that may be a deciding factor for why Percy LeSueur is ultimately a better backup than John Bouse Hutton.

Smith's Falls is likely the least known of the Stanley Cup finalists, but the Ottawa Silver Seven certainly took note of goaltender Lesueur. Though the Silver Seven discarded the challenge of Smith's Falls with ease, Lesueur put on a show that impressed his opponents so much that they subsequently signed him, and used him almost immediately in replacing goalie John Bouse Hutton.

Ottawa immediately named Bouse Hutton's successor LeSueur after playing against Smith Falls. The Silver Seven won the game, but they still wanted LeSueur over Bouse Hutton. I'm not sure what else that determines who is superior, but I think there's an edge for Australia in backup goaltending. But I think with no clear advantage with the two legitimate starters, the advantage for LeSueur doesn't account for too much.

if any at all, Australia holds the advantage in goaltending.

 

[Velociraptor]

I'll begin my forward analysis with the first lines.

FORWARDS - First Lines:

John Tonelli - Jean Beliveau - Rod Gilbert vs. Steve Shutt - Ron Francis - Charlie Conacher

Kenora's first line features a good offensive trio, although John Tonelli serves as the primary physical presence it looks like, which isn't the greatest option. Beliveau was always able to hold his own, but he was never relied on to be a policeman or be a reputable physical guy. Gilbert was fairly one-dimensional. I'm not the biggest fan of John Tonelli on a first line, but it's passable, he's a decent corner guy and is not out of place offensively. I think this line will struggle defensively, Tonelli is an adequate first line two-way player. Up against a third line like Australia's (which I will add that it is our desired matchup), I think it will succumb to the cycle style the line offers, Bobby Holik vs. Jean Beliveau will be a HUGE point of discussion in this series. There are very few questions offensively with the Thistles' first line, but it's a situation defensively, that could prove to be very costly.

Australia's first line is based off the needs of both wingers, Charlie Conacher is a shoot-first, think later hockey player. Ron Francis draws similarities to Conacher's former centre, Joe Primeau, in which he had his most success with. Steve Shutt was never the primary goal scorer on his line, and was known for being a net presence and getting his stick on rebounds and getting the garbage goal. I think this line works very well, it could work as a cycle line as Ron Francis is the play maker, and a good puck possession guy. Francis is a very sufficient defensive player, although he wasn't a renown puck-winner, he'd sometimes be able to get in there and retrieve the puck. It lacks a real puck-winner, but the line is a big offensive threat, and sufficient defensively.

Australia holds the advantage for the first lines.

 

[Velociraptor]

Second Lines:

Bill Barber - Frank McGee - Dino Ciccarelli vs. Herbie Lewis - Sergei Fedorov - Reggie Leach

Frank McGee is a good two-way goal scoring centre, fits on a second line. Bill Barber is also pretty goal-biased, but he can pass the puck as well while being a passable two-way forward. Dino Ciccarelli was also a pretty renown goal scorer. With only one puck to go around, I see this line lacking a true play maker, and if one has to step up, I think it takes away from the talent of the line. They are all better goal scorers than set up men, which I see as the real issue on this line. It is a decent two-way line and perhaps the best defensive line on the Thistles'.

The Mighty Roos' second line is a very complete line, Herbie Lewis and Sergei Fedorov are very good defensive forwards and also abundant playmakers, which is perfect for Reggie Leach who is a prime goal scorer. The line lacks a true physical presence, but it is extremely defensive sufficient and also serves as a line with offensive firepower.

Australia holds the advantage on the second lines.

 

[Velociraptor]

Third Lines:

Kirk Muller - Jonathan Toews - Eddie Litzenberger vs. Yvon Lambert - Bobby Holik - George Armstrong

The Thistles' third line is not a traditional one, but is a pretty strong defensive line, but it also serves as an offensive line. I don't know if it's a shutdown line at all, but all three players can play responsible defensive hockey. I think Litzenberger is severely overrated, and he didn't play with an edge. Muller is really the only physical player on the line, which I think is an issue for a third line, especially if it is to be pitted against the oppositions top offensive lines.

The Roos' third line is capable of shutting the oppositons' top lines. The line offers physicality, corner work and forechecking. The lines' purpose is to cycle the opposition to death, while being very physical in doing so. It is not as strong offensively as the Thistles' third line, but I feel a lot more comfortable matching this line against a first line. The 'Bobby Holik Effect' is going to be a huge asset in this series, especially when a high-octane offensive player like Jean Beliveau in on the other side. Holik is a big time shutdown centre, and he will follow Beliveau everywhere on the ice and make it absolute hell for him. Whenever the Roos' get their desired matchup, every time 'Le Gros Bill' steps onto the ice, he will see the massive Holik ready to stick to him like super glue.

from a shutdown perspective, Australia holds the advantage for third lines.

 

[pappyline]

Third Lines:

I think Litzenberger is severely overrated, and he didn't play with an edge.

[/B]

lurking but this jumped out. An 11th round pick #326. I would say he is severely under-rated. But what do I know, I only watched him play. Not sure what you mean by "edge". Up with the best at his offensive peak. Used as a defensive role player at the end after his horrific car accident.

 

[Velociraptor]

lurking but this jumped out. An 11th round pick #326. I would say he is severely under-rated. But what do I know, I only watched him play. Not sure what you mean by "edge". Up with the best at his offensive peak. Used as a defensive role player at the end after his horrific car accident.

Maybe he is less overrated at 326, but I just see Litzenberger as a guy who is unspectacular, albeit being able to do several things.

 

[Velociraptor]

Fourth Lines:

Dennis Hull - Kris Draper - Bob Nystrom vs. Louis Berlinguette - Derek Sanderson - Leo Labine

I think this may be the Thistles' best bet for a shutdown line. Two thirds of a good defensive line with Draper and Nystrom, who's offense at this level is pretty subpar. Dennis Hull is a guy I have looked at the last three drafts, and I decided to check his best percentage seasons to determine how good offensively he really was. Here's what I got:

Dennis Hull best percentage season's: 89, 76, 63, 63, 62, 58

That's not terrible offense for a fourth liner, two pretty good offensive seasons. From what I can gather, he was an average defensive player. This line can play pretty good defense, but is not overly strong offensively. Draper and Nystrom have the post-season experience which is good. The line has pretty good intangibles.

Australia's fourth line is headlined by Derek Sanderson, one of the better defensive centres of all time. Sanderson serves as an elite faceoff man and a tenacious checker. Also happens to be not terrible offensively, and did play above his level sometimes in the post-season. Louis Berlinguette, although there is not much information on him, he was known to be very quick and is credited with three retro Selke trophies over a seven-year span which suggests he was a defensive cornerstone throughout the duration of his career. Leo Labine is a very physical player and could also score goals. The line isn't fabulous offensively, but should be capable of getting some pucks to the net.

There is no particular advantage on fourth lines, I think both teams bottom lines offer valuable intangibles.

 

[Sturminator]

I'm not the biggest fan of John Tonelli on a first line, but it's passable, he's a decent corner guy and is not out of place offensively. I think this line will struggle defensively, Tonelli is an adequate first line two-way player. Up against a third line like Australia's (which I will add that it is our desired matchup), I think it will succumb to the cycle style the line offers, Bobby Holik vs. Jean Beliveau will be a HUGE point of discussion in this series. There are very few questions offensively with the Thistles' first line, but it's a situation defensively, that could prove to be very costly.

You underrate Jean Beliveau's two-way game. He was a strong checker (see the post about him in the Dink Carroll thread) and was physically strong enough that I don't see Holik having any particular advantage here. Tonelli is more than a decent corner guy; he was probably the best of his generation. Offensively, he's no great shakes on a first line, but his intangibles are very good and shouldn't be questioned. The Holik line is well built to grind down soft scoringlines, but the Beliveau line is not soft, and Kenora's first pairing defensemen aren't either.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I can't think of a recent center Id want to go head to head against Believeu more than Holik. He made a career out of slowing down big, strong centers. No, he won't dominate Beliveau. But Holik is one of the few centers here that Beliveau won't physically dominate.

 

[Sturminator]

I still think he was underrating Beliveau, but you're right that Holik is a good matchup here.

 

[Velociraptor]

You underrate Jean Beliveau's two-way game. He was a strong checker (see the post about him in the Dink Carroll thread) and was physically strong enough that I don't see Holik having any particular advantage here. Tonelli is more than a decent corner guy; he was probably the best of his generation. Offensively, he's no great shakes on a first line, but his intangibles are very good and shouldn't be questioned. The Holik line is well built to grind down soft scoringlines, but the Beliveau line is not soft, and Kenora's first pairing defensemen aren't either.

Perhaps I am underrating Beliveau's two-way play, but when I had him two years ago, there wasn't much to suggest he was a reputable defensive forward. I know he can hold his own, but I won't buy him as a physical presence nor a policeman. And by decent corner guy I mean he is good at what he does at this level, and puck-winning will not be an issue for the line, I don't think it's a soft line, but it's not a very good defensive line for ATD standards.

I can't think of a recent center Id want to go head to head against Believeu more than Holik. He made a career out of slowing down big, strong centers. No, he won't dominate Beliveau. But Holik is one of the few centers here that Beliveau won't physically dominate.

I don't think Holik will dominate Beliveau (nor should he have the capability) but I think he is a perfect player to shadow him. Beliveau has no defensive edge over Bobby, and he will be slowed down tremendously and aggravating him to the point where it can result in retaliatory penalties.

 

[Velociraptor]

DEFENSEMEN - First Pairings:

Emile Bouchard - Larry Robinson vs. Denis Potvin - Bob Baun

Probably my favorite pairing in the draft, Bouchard allows Robinson to be more of an offensive threat while Butch can be a solid stay-at-home defenseman. Hard-nosed pairing featuring a pretty strong #1 and a decent #2.

There's no questions that Denis Potvin is the best defenseman of the four, Bob Baun is a bit of an underwhelming #2, but he serves a big purpose nonetheless, he's a tough customer and a legitimate stay-at-home defenseman. Meanwhile, Denis Potvin can be at his best offensively, and will be able to make flawless breakout passes and be able to go up on the rush. Potvin is the most lethal player on Australia, and with a mean, defensive defenseman on his right side, he'll be seen a lot more as an offensive weapon.

I think both units are strong first pairings, and I do not think there is a clear winner, yes the Thistles' have a good #1 and a decent #2, but I think the Roos' first pairing is a huge dark horse, featuring the best defenseman in the series.

 

[BillyShoe1721]

Even? I don't think so. Potvin is clearly a step up from Robinson, but Bouchard is a legitimate #2, whereas Baun is a clear average #3. I think Kenora definitely has the advantage on the first pairings.

 

[Velociraptor]

Second Pairings:

Graham Drinkwater - Mike Grant vs. Doug Mohns - Randy Carlyle

It appears Grant and Drinkwater had some pretty good chemistry, although there is nothing that suggests Drinkwater was good defensively which is more than likely due to lack of pre-consolidation era information. Which leaves me to no other solution but to see Drinkwater as more of a defensive liability. Grant was a very complete defenseman, but he'll be taking all the defensive duties on this line, unless someone can prove otherwise Drinkwater was sufficient defensively, I am not sold on his well-rounded game. Keep in mind the pairing also played against weaker competition as they were the on the best team of the era.

Doug Mohns was a complete defenseman and he can assume most of the defensive duties, while Randy Carlyle who wasn't terrible defensively is the offensive catalyst of the pairing. Occasionally Mohns, who can attribute the majority offensive success to his time as a forward, was still a decent offensive defenseman and can get his chances from time to time and use his lethal shot from the point.

I think Australia holds the advantage on the second pairing

 

[Velociraptor]

Third Pairings:

Doug Bodger - Craig Ludwig vs. Albert "Battleship" Leduc - Ken Morrow

Doug Bodger is a passable offensive bottom pairing defenseman, I also think he's more ATD-fringe (due to internet issues, papershoes was not given the best group of defensemen to choose from). Craig Ludwig was a fairly one-dimensional defensive defenseman, but he was pretty solid. Overall this is a good contrast pair, but both defensemen don't really offer each much in the category they don't specialize in.

I think Ken Morrow is a very good #5, and the best out of all four bottom-pairing defensemen, he is solid defensively and a good penalty killer. Battleship Leduc is solid defensively and able to be adequate offensively, the unit won't be overly offensive, Leduc will occasionally chip in, but they should be a very strong defensive bottom pairing.

Australia holds a slight advantage on bottom units.

 

[Velociraptor]

Coaching:

I think Ken Hitchcock is the perfect coach for a more-defensive minded team, the team is capable of getting offensive opportunities, but will focus on defensively shutting down the opposition.

Brooks' NHL's success wasn't overly great, but he himself was a great coach. He was hell to play for, but players wanted to play for him, and they really respected him.

Father David Bauer is a good assistant coach, he'll work on discipline among other things.

I think Herb Brooks doesn't really fit a particular style, but I think Hitchcock is a very good fit for Australia, therefore I will declare the advantage to the Roos'

 

[overpass]

Third Pairings:

Doug Bodger - Craig Ludwig vs. Albert "Battleship" Leduc - Ken Morrow

Doug Bodger is a passable offensive bottom pairing defenseman, I also think he's more ATD-fringe (due to internet issues, papershoes was not given the best group of defensemen to choose from). Craig Ludwig was a fairly one-dimensional defensive defenseman, but he was pretty solid. Overall this is a good contrast pair, but both defensemen don't really offer each much in the category they don't specialize in.

I think Ken Morrow is a very good #5, and the best out of all four bottom-pairing defensemen, he is solid defensively and a good penalty killer. Battleship Leduc is solid defensively and able to be adequate offensively, the unit won't be overly offensive, Leduc will occasionally chip in, but they should be a very strong defensive bottom pairing.

Australia holds a slight advantage on bottom units.

Does Morrow have the edge over Ludwig? Ludwig had similar strengths, and played over twice as many NHL games.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Just noticed this , but how is Potvin not your captain?

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Just noticed this , but how is Potvin not your captain?

Armstrong was captain longer than Potvin was, and also won 4 Cups. I don't think you can go wrong with either.

 

[Velociraptor]

Armstrong was captain longer than Potvin was, and also won 4 Cups. I don't think you can go wrong with either.

That's exactly the way I felt about it, they had very equal résumés as captains, and it came down to duration.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Yeah but at the same time it also come down to who's morei mportant to the team in that case , but oh well , doesn't change anything I guess.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Does Morrow have the edge over Ludwig? Ludwig had similar strengths, and played over twice as many NHL games.

Wasn't Morrow the #2 defenseman on a dynasty? I think support players on dynasties have traditionally been given too much credit here, but they have to be given SOME credit for it, right?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Yeah but at the same time it also come down to who's morei mportant to the team in that case , but oh well , doesn't change anything I guess.

I think it's strange that Potvin isn't captain myself, but I don't think it really matters