Discussion in 'The History of Hockey' started by Kshahdoo, Oct 5, 2018.
Who would have a better chance to win?
Whichever won the first face-off.
Gretzky, Lemieux and Coffey hands down.
Lemieux and Gretzky are too good (and Coffey's speed helps) not to beat absolutely any combination you can come up with in OT.
Who are the goalies?
I'm very confident in the first group. The fewer players there are the less chemistry would matter. Tarasov even had a quote regarding a similar idea and Bobby Hull.
Whoever has the better goalie.
Obviously the first group has greater offensive talent, but the second is better defensively and more physical.
I don't think a goalie makes a big difference in a 3vs3 OT. At least not a good goalie.
Like a Roy or Hasek? They wouldn't add much more value than any other regular starter. Maybe if a team has a particularly bad goalie it could be a crutch - but so long as both sides have at least average starters, in a 3vs3 OT i don't expect it plays a huge role. It's more about the skaters and the opportunities they create
I wouldn't usually bet against Makarov, Krutov and Fetisov, but I guess in this case I would; in Gretzky you have the best playmaker of all-time and in Lemieux the best goal-scorer (and almost vice versa too). On the other hand, I think Makarov-Krutov-Fetisov have the edge defensively - they would do some serious scoring too.
Two centers on one team vs. two wingers on the other.
Oh, the lengths people go to to ignore the Professor.
Well, Makarov and Krutov would definitely scare me more than Makarov and Larionov.
And I'm not sure, but this thread might have been inspired by the 1987 Canada Cup, where Gretzky and Lemieux often played together (and did some serious damage of course) and where Makarov and Krutov were not far off in terms of impact (and Larionov stank).
If the Greztky-Lemieux side gains possession of the puck at all, it's very hard for me to imagine them failing to score. You're talking about two guys who are damn near impossible to strip of the puck, deadly in open space, both A++ level shooters and passers. Not sure how they can be defended in a 3x3 situation, other than just throwing yourself in front of the shot and hoping to deflect it.
I don't see any one beating the Canadian trio but it'd be fun to see Orr - Howe - Lafleur.
The Canadians win the faceoff in this showdown, so it really can't go any other way.
Take Coffey off of the ice and it might be even.
Sorry Gordie, but let's go all out speed... Lafleur, Bobby Hull, Bobby Orr.
Well, as far as, I remember, it was Krutov, who mostly did FOs on the KLM line...
And as to puck possession, Makarov, Krutov and Fetisov were as good, as anybody else, there were so many cases, when they destroyed any opposition, Greztky, Lemieux and Coffey included. If they had the puck, it was so hard to strip them off it. And they could pass and score as well.
Not 3 on 3 of course, but but but...
(Krutov assists on this one too.)
I think the first group had better score quickly because if the puck goes the other way I would not trust Coffey on a three on three defensively against the latter three.
My money would probably be on the Canadian group since I find it very hard to bet against the Gretzky-Lemieux duo. Still this is one scenario where they probably would be in some trouble because of the Soviet group having an advantage on the defensive side of the game.
While there is a major difference between playing shorthanded and playing 3-on-3 it is again worth noting that all of Makarov, Krutov and Fetisov throughout the 80's consistently excelled when killing penalties against the best that Canada could throw at them. In 10 games against Best-on-Best Team Canada and the NHL All-Stars between 1981 and 1987 Makarov averaged 2 minutes and 19 seconds of shorthanded ice time per game and was in on 3 goals forward and 5 goals against when for the most part going up against powerplay units such as Gretzky, Trottier, Bossy, Lafleur, Potvin or Gretzky, Lemieux, Messier, Bourque, Coffey. In those 10 games Krutov averaged 2 minutes and 26 seconds of shorthanded ice time per game and was in on 3 goals forward and 6 goals against.
With these strong numbers in mind I feel very comfortable saying that the Soviet group would be able to give the Canadian group a run for their money 3-on-3 as well.
When Coffey is considered the weak link, and is bracketed by these two iconic pillars of offensive creativity, ability, finish, and "clutchness", I just cannot go the other way. This duo is what saved Canada in '87.
Taking away two skaters from both sides would only amplify their "pond hockey" abilities.
And all kudos to the Soviet/Russian trio. You wouldn't expect the other side to have an answer to the likes of 66 and 99, but they made an incredible series of it. My favourite hockey of all time along with Lafleur's 70's Habs.
Two 200 point players on the same line in 3 on 3....
Who is the second 200 point player?
When it comes to an overtime, chemistry is a more important factor than ability to amass a huge pile of points over an 82-game run (although that ability points towards a lot of skill that may decide the overtime as well). Overtime is not about who scores more, it's about who scores first.
The two-hundred point guys may not dare do the things they usually do, because they know once they lose the puck deep up front, Paul (who is probably up there with them) is not gonna stop the counter. It's an altogether different game.
Lemieux is awesome one-on-one though, and that could prove to be a huge factor when so very few players are on the ice.
Separate names with a comma.