Jim Coleman Conference - Round 1 - Roanoke Rail Yard Dawgs (3) vs Winnipeg Victorias (6)

[ImporterExporter]

BEST OF 7 FORMAT:


Roanoke Rail Yard Dawgs (3 Seed)

COACH: Tommy Gorman

CAPTAIN: Milt Schmidt
ASSISTANT: Nicklas Lidstrom
ASSISTANT: Charlie Gardiner

Cy Denneny - Milt Schmidt (C) - Guy Lafleur
Tommy Phillips - Max Bentley - Yvan Cournoyer
Herbie Lewis - Frank Frederickson - Larry Aurie
Bun Cook - Ralph Backstrom - Ed Litzenberger

Nicklas Lidstrom (A) - Jack Stewart
Ken Reardon - Earl Seibert
Lester Patrick - Adam Foote

Charlie Gardiner (A)
Henrik Lundquist

ex: Tim Kerr, Ryan McDonagh, Vincent Lecavalier

PP1: Denneny - Schmidt - Lafleur - Bentley - Lidstrom
PP2: Phillips - Frederickson - Cournoyer - Reardon - Seibert

PK1: Frederickson - Phillips - Lidstrom - Stewart
PK2: Lewis - Schmidt - Reardon - Seibert


VS


Winnipeg Victorias (6 Seed)

Coach: Fred Shero

Doug Bentley --- Sidney Crosby (C) --- Jaromir Jagr
Baldy Northcott --- Evgeni Malkin --- Bill Mosienko
Alexander Yakushev --- Gilbert Perreault --- Ziggy Palffy
Murray Murdoch --- Butch Goring --- Frank Finnigan
Steve Shutt - Peter Bondra

Borje Salming - Art Coulter (A)
Scott Niedermayer (A) - Sylvio Mantha
Hap Day - Bullet Joe Simpson
Sandis Ozolinsh

Terry Sawchuk
Pekka Rinne

PP1: Simpson --- Bentley --- Malkin --- Crosby --- Jagr
PP2: Niedermeyer --- Palffy --- Mosienko --- Perreault --- Yakushev

PK1: Salming --- Coulter --- Northcott --- Murdoch
PK2: Day --- Mantha --- Goring --- Finnigan

Click to read more...

 

[The Macho King]

My first time as a favorite!

Good luck.

 

[The Macho King]

Alright - let's get into this for real.

Broad strokes, I do think I have the stronger team here, and it's one that I think matches up well. At the very top, Fred Shero doesn't seem like a great fit as a coach of this team. He's a very tactical, defensive coach, but your team's strength is its star power up front. I could see this being a source of frustration on all sides.

Also - while your top line is talented (and maybe the most talented line of the entire draft), I am not convinced of its chemistry. Jagr and Crosby are both famously *very* puck dominant players, and Crosby doesn't work with every winger. Add in Bentley being more of a speedster, while Jagr is anything but and Crosby plays a slower game as well... the fit is a big question.

It also feels like you spent probably 5 of your top 6 picks on either forwards or goalie, which leaves your D on the lower end. That in itself isn't insurmountable, but your forward group isn't exactly filled with two-way players and you don't have any line I would consider a "checking line". So who is your matchup pair? Niedermayer/Mantha? You're going to be asking Sawchuk to be at his very best to keep anything out of your net.

When it comes to matchups, the lack of strong D is going to let my second line have a field day, and generally my speedy wingers are going to cause headaches. Every pair can move the puck up, and every pair is comfortable in tough matchups. And I think that is where I win this series. Playoff series are won and lost on your star players being stars, and the rest of your team not making mistakes that end up in the back of your net. My D is *not* going to make mistakes, and even if I want to avoid having the third pair out against the Crosby unit, I'm comfortable with either of the top 2 pairs out there.

If the Victorias win, it's because Sawchuk played the best series of his life, but I feel that while I'm giving up a *bit* in talent at forward, I make it up with stronger chemistry, and I have by far the more talented and balanced defense.

Good luck @nabby12 and I hope to hear your response!

 

[nabby12]

Good luck to my opponent! @The Macho King

I think Macho is a little overzealous with his opinion on this series. A lot of times a good regular season result, doesn't equal to playoff success. But I guess everyone is going to say that their team is better, so I guess I will do the same!

Anyways, this is certainly a fun matchup. I will do some quick comparisons to get things started here.

Coaching: Tommy Gorman vs Fred Shero = Wash
Leadership: Schmidt - Lidstrom, Gardiner vs Crosby - Coulter, Niedermeyer = Wash

First Line: Denenny-Schmidt-Lafleur vs Bentley-Crosby-Jagr = Big Advantage Winnipeg
One of my most important edges in this series is the contrast in first lines, as my trio works better offensively and defensively here. You can say whatever you want about Crosby not working with Jagr, but that's just nonsense. This line will be lighting up goaltenders in this ATD all night long.

Second Line: Phillips-Bentley-Cournoyer vs Northcott-Malkin-Mosienko = Slight Advantage Winnipeg
Malkin is arguably the top 2C in this field. Bentley is very strong too, no doubt. However, paired with Northcott who is a two-way whiz, Winnipeg has the advantage here.

Third Line: Lewis-Fredrickson-Aurie vs Yakuskev-Perreault-Palffy = Wash
Both are very strong third lines in this 16-team field.

Fourth Line: Cook-Backstrom-Litzenberger vs Murdoch-Goring-Finnigan = Wash
See above.

First Defensive Pairing: Lidstrom-Stewart vs Salming-Coulter = Advantage Roanoke
Lidstrom is elite, no question and is paired with a great shutdown man in Stewart. Salming and Coulter is a fine first pairing here, but I'll give you the advantage.

Second Defensive Pairing: Reardon-Seibert vs Niedermeyer-Mantha = Wash
Reardon should get exposed in a 16-team draft as being weak. Niedermeyer is the game breaker here, but I'll leave this one as a wash to be nice.

Third Defensive Pairing: Patrick-Foote vs Day-Simpson = Advantage Montreal
Experience and knowing your role will play a big part in this series with these third defensive pairings. Hard to find more experience out there then with Day and Simpson, and a distinct advantage for Winnipeg here.

Special Teams: Wash
Not a lot to choose from on either side. Should be a Wash there with no significant advantage to either side.

Goaltending: Charlie Gardiner vs Terry Sawchuk. = Big Advantage Winnipeg
Finally, we have the important goaltending matchup. Gardiner, while a stellar Hall of Fame netminder in his own right, is only a mid-to-low range goalie in the competition. Sawchuk on the other hand is considered by most a Top 5 goaltender of all time and by some the GOAT himself.

We all know that Gardiner was a decent playoff goalie, but let's face facts, if Sawchuk plays anywhere near the 1951-1955 prime Sawchuk that we all know is there, this series will not last long. Regardless of who you could get anywhere near his net to score.

Why Roanoke Will Win
First Defensive Pairing Edge
Puck Luck

Why Winnipeg Will Win
Big First Line Advantage
Big Goalie Advantage - Sawchuk>Gardiner
Third Defensive Pairing

With the advantages I pointed out to both teams, it's going to be a terrific old-school-type hockey series. As we get to the end of this post, I see more Advantage Winnipeg than Roanoke in my findings. I'm sure Roanoke might squeak out a win or two, but in the end, I think Winnipeg gets this done in six games.

 

[The Macho King]

Good luck to my opponent! @The Macho King

I think Macho is a little overzealous with his opinion on this series. A lot of times a good regular season result, doesn't equal to playoff success. But I guess everyone is going to say that their team is better, so I guess I will do the same!

Anyways, this is certainly a fun matchup. I will do some quick comparisons to get things started here.

Coaching: Tommy Gorman vs Fred Shero = Wash
Leadership: Schmidt - Lidstrom, Gardiner vs Crosby - Coulter, Niedermeyer = Wash

First Line: Denenny-Schmidt-Lafleur vs Bentley-Crosby-Jagr = Big Advantage Winnipeg
One of my most important edges in this series is the contrast in first lines, as my trio works better offensively and defensively here. You can say whatever you want about Crosby not working with Jagr, but that's just nonsense. This line will be lighting up goaltenders in this ATD all night long.

Second Line: Phillips-Bentley-Cournoyer vs Northcott-Malkin-Mosienko = Slight Advantage Winnipeg
Malkin is arguably the top 2C in this field. Bentley is very strong too, no doubt. However, paired with Northcott who is a two-way whiz, Winnipeg has the advantage here.

Third Line: Lewis-Fredrickson-Aurie vs Yakuskev-Perreault-Palffy = Wash
Both are very strong third lines in this 16-team field.

Fourth Line: Cook-Backstrom-Litzenberger vs Murdoch-Goring-Finnigan = Wash
See above.

First Defensive Pairing: Lidstrom-Stewart vs Salming-Coulter = Advantage Roanoke
Lidstrom is elite, no question and is paired with a great shutdown man in Stewart. Salming and Coulter is a fine first pairing here, but I'll give you the advantage.

Second Defensive Pairing: Reardon-Seibert vs Niedermeyer-Mantha = Wash
Reardon should get exposed in a 16-team draft as being weak. Niedermeyer is the game breaker here, but I'll leave this one as a wash to be nice.

Third Defensive Pairing: Patrick-Foote vs Day-Simpson = Advantage Montreal
Experience and knowing your role will play a big part in this series with these third defensive pairings. Hard to find more experience out there then with Day and Simpson, and a distinct advantage for Winnipeg here.

Special Teams: Wash
Not a lot to choose from on either side. Should be a Wash there with no significant advantage to either side.

Goaltending: Charlie Gardiner vs Terry Sawchuk. = Big Advantage Winnipeg
Finally, we have the important goaltending matchup. Gardiner, while a stellar Hall of Fame netminder in his own right, is only a mid-to-low range goalie in the competition. Sawchuk on the other hand is considered by most a Top 5 goaltender of all time and by some the GOAT himself.

We all know that Gardiner was a decent playoff goalie, but let's face facts, if Sawchuk plays anywhere near the 1951-1955 prime Sawchuk that we all know is there, this series will not last long. Regardless of who you could get anywhere near his net to score.

Why Roanoke Will Win
First Defensive Pairing Edge
Puck Luck

Why Winnipeg Will Win
Big First Line Advantage
Big Goalie Advantage - Sawchuk>Gardiner
Third Defensive Pairing

With the advantages I pointed out to both teams, it's going to be a terrific old-school-type hockey series. As we get to the end of this post, I see more Advantage Winnipeg than Roanoke in my findings. I'm sure Roanoke might squeak out a win or two, but in the end, I think Winnipeg gets this done in six games.

I fail to see how you can reasonably call the second pairing an advantage for Winnipeg. Earl Seibert is a legit #1 D in this format playing on the second pairing. Reardon is at worst a solid #3 option, playing as a #4.

Also I think you're overstating the degree of an edge Sawchuk gives. Sawchuk is a ~top 5ish starter in this. Gardiner is at worse a ~top 10. Now there's a tier difference there, but acting like it is massive is an overstatement.

Finally - you're vastly overstating the first line advantage. I built a line with great chemistry and the best winger in the series with Lafleur. Schmidt is probably a poor-man's Crosby with a bit more of an edge. Denneny is an elite goal scorer. That line isn't at a massive disadvantage to *any top line in this league*.

And I also fail to see how you can argue the third pairing is an advantage to Winnipeg. Is there a better #5 than Patrick in this whole thing? And Foote provides the stay at home element to let Patrick play his game.

Finally - I would say that the second line is probably advantage to Roanoke if anything. Malkin slightly over Bentley, but Cournoyer over Mosienko and Phillips over Northcott pretty comfortably. Phillips also brings tremendous defense.

One of the unspoken things to now has been the physical aspect. With Stewart, Seibert, and Reardon especially (not to mention Foote), your forwards are going to pay in front of the net and along the boards. Malkin is an injury-prone player, Crosby has had issues, and Doug Bentley and Mosienko (along with Max) famously had issues dealing with physical defenders. Lidstrom obviously doesn't bring that element, but other than him, I have that in spades.

One thing I expected you to do that you didn't do was join up Bentley and Mosienko on the second line. I think you would probably get the most from Mosienko in that situation, but the wings on that second line are a tier below so that would at least spread your offense a bit.

 

[Sturminator]

My thoughts on what looks like a very interesting series:

1. I think Mantha and Reardon are pretty much in the same tier of defenseman, so that leaves Seibert vs. Niedermayer, which is an obvious advantage to Roanoke.

2. Roanoke has an obvious talent advantage on the 1st pairing, but I think Lidstrom - Stewart is actually less than the sum of its parts at even strength due to lack of offense. They'll move the puck just fine, but I tend to think Lidstrom could use a more offensive partner at even strength.

3. How well will the Winnipeg 1st line gel offensively? It's an important question because, on talent, it is probably the best line in the draft. Jagr is a tough player to build around...both of his linemates need to be good without the puck. But, of course, he's got that here. There may be a bit of an "only one puck" problem, but that is mitigated by the fact that Doug Bentley was such a good defensive player that he can give up some offensive touches covering for his linemates and not lose value. Both Crosby and Jagr have experience playing with defensive LWs, so I think the fit here is maybe better than it appears at first glance. This is a frightening line. I don't think the fit is perfect, but it's very difficult to pack a lot of talent around Jagr, and Ive never seen it done better.

4. Roanoke's 2nd line is an uneasy fit in a Tommy Gorman forechecking system. The guy who I'd take to be the best forechecker is Phillips, but he's got a huge amount of defensive responsibilities on this unit and it's hard to be in two places at once.

5. The chemistry of Roanoke's 3rd line is excellent. Frederickson is a good substitute for Barry, and I think the unit will be something more than the sum of its parts. Yakushev - Perreault may also be an imperfect combination due to Perreault being forehand-dominant.

 

[The Macho King]

4. Roanoke's 2nd line is an uneasy fit in a Tommy Gorman forechecking system. The guy who I'd take to be the best forechecker is Phillips, but he's got a huge amount of defensive responsibilities on this unit and it's hard to be in two places at once.

Thanks Sturm. On this point - I think the fit with Gorman is better than it appears. This line is one you would prefer to be skating forward. While Bentley especially but Cournoyer as well weren't defensive stalwarts, I think the flaw is a bit overstated. Bentley played well (especially in the playoffs) in a defensive Toronto system, and Cournoyer wore a C under Scotty Bowman. Additionally, their speed if nothing else will make them effective forecheckers.

Look - it isn't a shutdown line, but all three can skate and all three were effective under defensive coaches. They'll be fine with Gorman.

Also I'm a little confused with the first pairing knock. Lidstrom has won Norris trophies no matter who his partner is - from Chelios to Rafalski to Kronwall. And he was the best offensive defender of his generation. Obviously Lidstrom will be relied on for most of the offense on that pairing, but he is more than capable of carrying that load.

That being said, there will be situations where Seibert plays with him, especially when trailing late.

 

[Sturminator]

And he was the best offensive defender of his generation.

Eh...just sticking to within two years of Lidstrom's birth date, I'd take Brian Leetch over him offensively, but Nick was certainly among the best for a long time.

 

[nabby12]

New story on my gamebreaker Baldy Northcott, who scored all of the big goals in the Maroons 1935 Cup win.

Baldy Northcott's Pinnacle

 

[The Macho King]

Eh...just sticking to within two years of Lidstrom's birth date, I'd take Brian Leetch over him offensively, but Nick was certainly among the best for a long time.

I generally don't think of generations as "age cohort" as much as "coinciding peaks/primes", but that's a quibble.

 

[The Macho King]

One of the interesting matchups here is Borje Salming (#1 D for the Victorias) versus Guy Lafleur. I point that out specifically because they were contemporaries who peaked at the same time. So how did they do?

Stats taken from 1974-5 season to 1979-80 season. Their peaks literally do coincide perfectly. Salming's 6 AS nods happened in those years, as did Lafleur's.

In 75, Lafleur has 5 points in 5 games.

76 - 6 points in 5 games.

77 - 9 points in 5 games

78 - 8 points in 5 games

79 - 9 points in 4 games

80 - 8 points in 4 games.

Total - 45 points in 28 games, or 1.61 points per game. That's a 129 point pace over an 80 game season, which is higher than Lafleur's scoring rate against the whole league at the time (for those seasons he scored at a rate of 1.59 points per game).

Here was Salming's total. I think it's less instructive because Lafleur isn't really tasked with defending Salming back then or anything, but I am including it for completeness.

75 - 3 points in 5 games (+2)
76 - 2 points in 5 games (-3)
77 - 3 points in 5 games (+2)
78 - 0 points in 5 games (-1)
79 - 4 points in 4 games (+2)
80 - 2 points in 3 games (-6)

For a total of 14 points in 27 games with a -4.

That .52 points per game is significantly less than his .88 per game normally.

The two only met once in the playoffs (Salming was injured for the 78 series). Lafleur had, in 79, 8 points in 4 games. Salming had 1 point total in the series (a secondary assist).

 

[Sturminator]

One of the interesting matchups here is Borje Salming (#1 D for the Victorias) versus Guy Lafleur. I point that out specifically because they were contemporaries who peaked at the same time. So how did they do?

I've never found these sorts of comparisons all that useful. When looking at [player X vs. team Y] scoring numbers, there is more noise than signal for any individual player on the "team Y" side, even a goaltender or a #1 defenseman.

 

[The Macho King]

I've never found these sorts of comparisons all that useful. When looking at [player X vs. team Y] scoring numbers, there is more noise than signal for any individual player on the "team Y" side, even a goaltender or a #1 defenseman.

There's a lot of confounding factors - maybe Montreal kept Lafleur away from Salming, for instance. But I also think it has more value in this instance considering how their peaks perfectly overlapped. Still - your point is noted.

But I think it also knocks down one of the key criticisms of Lafleur - which is that he feasted on expansion teams. Clearly he put up points against them, but at least until 79-80, the Leafs were not pushovers, and he still performed at an incredible rate.

I also think it has a bit more relevance this time because the Victorias defensive unit as a whole is not that strong. So the question - how will they stop Lafleur - becomes a bigger issue. And the answer of "put my #1 D out against him at all times" suddenly has a big question mark as to its effectiveness.

Conversely, how will Roanoke stop Crosby? Well, we have two data points on that. Crosby famously struggled against Lidstrom in 08 and 09. Call it anti-chemistry if you will. Now I'm not going to argue that Crosby will only walk away with only 3 points in the series against these two teams because of 09, but it does show that my top pairing - which is (no matter what @TheDevilMadeMe says to the contrary!) the best pure defensive pairing in the league - is able to slow him down.

 

[Dreakmur]

Broad strokes, I do think I have the stronger team here, and it's one that I think matches up well. At the very top, Fred Shero doesn't seem like a great fit as a coach of this team. He's a very tactical, defensive coach, but your team's strength is its star power up front. I could see this being a source of frustration on all sides.

I'm not sure exactly how much he actually applied to his NHL coaching, but didn't Shero run coaching seminars with Anatoli Tarasov? I remember my dad using a Shero book for his coaching, and there were a lot of Soviet style ideas held within.

 

[nabby12]

I think my defence is being vastly underrated here just because I didn't take a dman with one of my first picks.

To whoever that needs to hear it, Salming-Coulter is a fine first pairing in this competition, as I really think that Art Coulter is perhaps the most underrated player in this whole draft.

We're talking about the CAPTAIN of the 1940 Stanley Cup champion New York Rangers and Hall of Famer here. Let's show some respect to one of the top shutdown defenseman of his time.

“He was a superb ice general,” said his Rangers coach and teammate Frank Boucher. “He lent strength to our smaller players, always on the spot if opposing players tried to intimidate them, responding beautifully to new responsibilities. He was a well set up fellow, quite tall, very muscular without an ounce of fat.”

“Art Coulter was our best player,” Rangers teammate Clint Smith recalled. “He was a leader, like what the Rangers later had in Mark Messier. He could really carry the puck, but he had to head-man the puck. That’s the way we played.”

In regards to his strong leadership, prior to a game against the Boston Bruins in the 1939 Stanley Cup semis, Art put a message in every player’s dressing room stall: “Determination was the predominating factor in last year’s Stanley Cup Champions. We have it too. Let’s Go. Art Coulter (Trapper).”

Years later, Lynn Patrick penned a letter from his old friend that said:

 

[nabby12]

I'm not sure exactly how much he actually applied to his NHL coaching, but didn't Shero run coaching seminars with Anatoli Tarasov? I remember my dad using a Shero book for his coaching, and there were a lot of Soviet style ideas held within.

Correct, Shero was the first North American coach to go over to Russia to study their game, and utilized it into his coaching in the NHL.

Shero's parents were immigrants from Russia and he had learned some of the language growing up.

 

[The Macho King]

If you're going to argue Coulter is underrated, do a bio showing that.

 

[VanIslander]

3 vs. 6?

Dang. I see equivalent teams!

I think the Victorias top pairing is the worst in the draft but they have Sawchuk.

The Dawgs have the least puck-savvy blueline in this draft! Ugh. But they invested early and heavy in forwards.

I am beside myself.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Great series guys.

 

[The Macho King]

3 vs. 6?

Dang. I see equivalent teams!

I think the Victorias top pairing is the worst in the draft but they have Sawchuk.

The Dawgs have the least puck-savvy blueline in this draft! Ugh. But they invested early and heavy in forwards.

I am beside myself.

I don't see how Lidstrom, Seibert, Reardon, and Patrick make my D the "least puck savvy". And Stewart wasn't offensive but he didn't handle the puck like a grenade or anything.

 

[The Macho King]

Alright - here's my closing arguments as to why the Roanoke Rail Yard Dawgs win this series.

Coach Fit - Advantage Roanoke.

Shero and Gorman are roughly equivalent coaches in this thing. But Shero's success came with stellar goaltending (which my opponent has), and arguably the best defensive forward in history as the backbone of his team (which my opponent lacks). Those Flyers teams were tough, they were physical, and they played a tactical game. Winnipeg is not crafted with that in mind. Can they adapt? Maybe - talent is talent and Winnipeg has some talent. But Jagr and Malkin are both disinterested defenders at the best of times, and they're going to be seeing a lot of ice time.

Some discussion has been had on my team's second line (specifically) fit with Gorman. I've addressed it, but I feel like it's worth pointing out again. Hap Day was a strict defensive coach. He was able to get the most out of Max Bentley - leading to two more Cups. Bentley can adapt to a defensive coach and has proven success in doing so. Additionally - while not a shut down line by any stretch, the line is *fast*. They will be able to implement Gorman's forechecking system just by virtue of getting on top of the D quickly. The fit here is better than it looks if you narrow your analysis to "Defensive coach + offensive player = bad".

Leadership - Wash. Crosby is a legit Captain. Niedermayer didn't have a long time wearing a C, but I don't think he's out of place with an A on his sweater. Roanoke basically has leadership all the way down. Lidstrom, Cournoyer, Schmidt, Seibert, and even our goalie has legit leadership bona fides. But leadership is only an issue when it's an issue, and I don't think it's an issue for either club here.

First Line - Wash

While I'll freely acknowledge that Winnipeg built a more talented line, I don't think they built a better line. I question the fit of Crosby and Jagr - both notoriously picky about linemates who play a similar puck-heavy game. Bentley is a fine fit, but he's another guy whose offense came with the puck on his stick - but just generally I think he's easier to build around. Definitely a "one puck" problem.

Roanoke's line is more well balanced. Lafleur will be asked to do what he does. Denneny is going to be asked to put the puck in the net - which he excels at. And Schmidt is going to be asked to do the hard work - and he'll do the hard work. It's a bit of a "traditional" line. Definitely not rocking the boat. But it's traditional because it works. And relative to each of the teams, I think my line is going to perform *better* than Winnipeg's. I'll get to it more when discussing the D, but ultimately Winnipeg does not have the back end (or checking forwards) to slow this line down.

Second Line - Advantage Roanoke

There will be teams where Roanoke is going to have some difficulty matching this line with. Teams where I will have to get creative to avoid certain matchups - either in the D zone or forward line. Winnipeg is not one of those teams. This line is fast, it has can move the puck, and every guy is a threat to score. Phillips is going to be asked to do a lot of the backchecking, but a strong back end will lessen the pressure this line is put under.

Malkin is a great player. Northcott and Mosienko are both miscast as top 6 players. Mosienko's claim to fame - outside of a fast hat trick - is being third wheel on a line with Bentley and Bentley. And he's not even put with Bentley to get a "chemistry" bump. Northcott could conceivably be a "glue guy" on a talented line, but as it is he is going to be asked to do all the defending, and brings limited offense himself. Malkin is a talent and can create some offense himself, but his playmaking is going to be completely wasted here.

Third Line - Advantage Roanoke

Lewis - Frederickson - Aurie is a two-way line that Gorman is going to love. They're all solid scorers (who can do it at even strength), and are tough to play against in the defensive zone. It's not a pure checking line - my personal philosophy is if you don't have one of the few true elite talents defensively you're better off building a line that can score too - but it's certainly no slouch in that department.

Yakushev - Perrault - Palffy is... a curious build. Perrault's reputation as a checker is his latter career, where he didn't have the offense. That's my struggle with players with two distinct eras - which one are you getting, or how do you factor that in? Yakushev never struck me as anything more than an indifferent defensive player, but that's fine. Palffy is one of those guys that seems to get drafted pretty high and every year I sit there and wonder why. He was at best fine defensively, no AS nods although decent per game rates, and no postseason exploits to speak of. I'm sure he'll be fine, but I look at this line and try to imagine how they'd play and I come away with no freaking clue.

Fourth Line - Wash

I feel like mine will chip in more offense, while yours is made up of PK specialists who will be better defensively. Both are pains in the ass to play against and can spell the more talented players while not embarassing themselves as they take regular shifts.

First Pair - Advantage Roanoke

Really nothing to say here. Lidstrom is a massive upgrade over Salming. Stewart is a massive edge over Coulter. I think the fit on Winnipeg is *fine*, but talent-wise this is one of the worst top pairings in the entire league, up against one of the better ones. Also note - when down a goal late, Seibert will move up to play with Lidstrom, further increasing the talent game.

Second Pair - Advantage Roanoke

The second pair is what sets Roanoke apart from almost every other team (except for one who built a similar second pair). Earl Seibert is the second best defenseman in this series and a bona fide #1 both in historical ranking and in playstyle. And he's playing on the second pair. That's beyond luxury casting. For 50 minutes a game you're going to have one of Lidstrom and Seibert on the ice, shutting down your best players. Reardon is a solid fit, and an incredibly physical defenseman, which gives the second pair a distinct flavor from the first. Your forwards are going to get punished against this pair.

Niedermayer is fine as a #3 - totally capable of leading a pairing. Honestly he's probably a low-end two so he's a bit luxury-cast here. And Mantha is honestly good in his role too. I like your second pair. But mine is better.

Third Pair - Wash

I invested in defense. Patrick is the best third pairing defenseman in this entire draft. Foote is a good compliment to him. That being said - I *really* like your third pair. I could easily be convinced this is a slight advantage to you, because I really dig it.

Goaltending - Advantage Winnipeg

Not much to say here. Sawchuk is a top tier goalie. Gardiner is very good and an average starter. He's certainly not going to be embarrassed, but he's also never going to be the reason my team wins a series. Sawchuk very well could be.

Power Play - Advantage Roanoke

My issue with your power play is two-fold. First - Simpson is a low-tier PPQB. Very low for this. Also - you have Bentley on the point (which he was good at), but doesn't Malkin also play the point for Pitt? Talent is talent though, and you certainly have that, but Simpson brings down the whole unit. Second unit is whatever - I generally don't grade second units because the first is what matters.

My PP mirrors the even strength advantages of my construction. It's balanced and everyone is well fit for their role. Max Bentley is an elite pointman, Lafleur can distribute and score from the half-wall. Denneny is an elite goal scorer and Schmidt can do everything. What sets my PP apart from yours is Nicklas Lidstrom. An elite PPQB no matter what generation you're talking about. Great shot from the point. Great pass. And if we get to play at Joe Lewis he can take advantage of those funky boards.

Penalty Kill - Advantage Roanoke

I was tempted to put this as a wash, but two things changed my mind. First - my defense is elite at defense, and that goes for the PK. Yours lacks a bit there. The second question I had is - who is taking the PK draw for the first unit? Do either of those guys have experience at C? I would have less of an issue with that if it was your PK2, since they will presumably be mostly coming over the boards on the fly, but PK1 is tasked with taking the draw, and losing the draw means the PK is forced to defend instead of denying entry.

Overall - Advantage Roanoke

I think the one thing that really sets my team apart is a cohesive vision. Everyone has their role, and they excel at that role. I also built a backend which - in my humble opinion - is the best defense in the draft. Only one other team can boast two #1 Dmen on their squad, but my top Dmen are both two-way studs. They can play the entire game.

Conversely, Winnipeg built a team with zero #1 Dmen. That can work, but generally you compensate with a strong advantage up front and in goal. While I do think they succeeded at taking an elite goalie, the forwards are not strong enough defensively to make up for the lackluster defense. Shero succeeded before without an elite Dman, but he did it with Bobby Clarke. I don't see a Bobby Clarke here.

So that's my last ramble. Good luck.

 

[ResilientBeast]

I think the one thing that really sets my team apart is a cohesive vision. Everyone has their role, and they excel at that role. I also built a backend which - in my humble opinion - is the best defense in the draft. Only one other team can boast two #1 Dmen on their squad, but my top Dmen are both two-way studs. They can play the entire game.

 

[The Macho King]

View attachment 526400

I stand by my statement.

 

[ResilientBeast]

I stand by my statement.

So if they're playing the entire game, when is Lester Patrick on the ice? lol

 

[The Macho King]

So if they're playing the entire game, when is Lester Patrick on the ice? lol

As a lefty he can slide up and take the occasional shift with Seibert. But I didn't say they did - I said they can. Was referring to having two #1Ds who can both log heavy minutes in all situations - not a factual "they are literally always on the ice".

Also Reardon is going to take a few fighting majors I'm sure, which will give Patrick some chances to get ice time.

I don't love the practice of having TOI charts. Hockey is a dynamic game and something about the practice seems so... clinical in a way that I don't love. Just a modern example - there were a few games last playoffs that due to penalties plus matchups, the Coleman-Gourde-Goodrow line for Tampa probably led the team in ToI. Didn't make them a first line though.