Jim Robson Division Finals (1) Pittsburgh AC vs (3) Arizona Coyotes

[ImporterExporter]

What a weird criticism to take on a player.....I'm sure a lot of players at the dawn of the professional hockey were like this....Why do you think a bunch of players played in the IHL when they started paying players?

They couldn't even challenge for the cup from that league

I dont see an issue with a player being a mercenary either- wanting more money doesn't have anything to do with not being willing to work hard or within a system.

It's easy for us to talk about "love-of-the-game", but when it is YOUR money and family being impacted... its a little different.

If a bunch of star players were like that, they'd all have extremely limited pro hockey resumes like Smith (you can count his NHA great seasons on one hand). Jumping from team to team, multiple teams. League to league. Most of the great stars didn't do this post 1910 once the NHA/PCHA was established.

The point is there was no loyalty around Smith. He doesn't read like a guy who would sell out for the team and that's EXACTLY they type of player Tarasov loved. That much I do know.

Maybe I'm the only one who saw this angle but even still, I think Smith a poor fit based on his lack of game away from the puck.

 

[ResilientBeast]

Your problem my friend is you take things way too personally. Like I used to.

yeah cool there’s no point wasting more time today on this.

edit: you just couldn’t resist making personal comments

 

[rmartin65]

If a bunch of star players were like that, they'd all have extremely limited pro hockey resumes like Smith (you can count his NHA great seasons on one hand). Jumping from team to team, multiple teams. League to league. Most of the great stars didn't do this post 1910 once the NHA/PCHA was established.

I don't think that's true, though. Does it hurt a player's legacy with each team? Sure, absolutely. But does it hurt the player's legacy overall? Not to me. He played how he played, his results were what they were. A player looking for money does not change how he played.

The point is there was no loyalty around Smith. He doesn't read like a guy who would sell out for the team and that's EXACTLY they type of player Tarasov loved. That much I do know.

No loyalty, sure. Would that be a problem in a one-season tournament with no in-season trades? I don't think so. I'm also not sure if I agree with the no loyalty=not selling out for the team angle (one could argue that a player looking to maximize his earnings may work harder in order to command a larger salary)... but this really isn't my fight.

Maybe I'm the only one who saw this angle but even still, I think Smith a poor fit based on his lack of game away from the puck.

I think this is a more defend-able position to take, but, again- not my fight.

Best of luck to the both of you!

 

[ImporterExporter]

Ok lets pick through the parts of this that matter in all the noise

1) You list Bobby Orr for all three of your lines.....you realize he can't be on the ice with them all of the time right? But I get it a nice and easy way to inflate your line's scores
2) Lemaire was good in transition sure....but he doesn't pile up the points without Lafleur being there to convert on them.
3) I won't be "kicking and screaming" about MacKay's score and I find the implications of that language a bit rude. Your score is reasonably accurate
4) Prentice's offence is low for a second line but he's a better checker than Bun Cook and didn't have the luxury of playing with Frank Boucher and Bill Cook
5) Again just because we misunderstood MacKay's career doesn't mean sweet f*** all. He was a RW and defensive conscience from the wing for the Millionaires in the 20s. I don't have all the time in the world to work on my PCHA project full time. But I have enough evidence that he was definitely a winger and 95% of the time the RWer and plenty of quotes as I just posted about his defence. His best offensive season was 1915 with Taylor & Nighbor up front. Then his next best was on the wing with Boucher, with all due respect you're incorrect and you're intentionally trying to muddy the waters.
6) Bucyk's VsX is bad and despite being corrected for playing with Bobby Orr during potentially the weakest era in NHL history it's still somehow inflated. Bucyk was a fine player before Orr but his numbers are juiced like Barry Bonds once Orr and Esposito show up. Despite having Orr he doesn't have Esposito and the quality of his opponents is much higher.

1. Bobby Orr plays 30 minutes a night minimum. That's half a hockey game.

Essentially half the shift's these guys take will have Orr on the ice, the scoring lines a bit more than that. So no, he can't play ALL their shifts, but he plays a significant amount and unlike a F can impact and inject insane offense into any unit.

Arizona doesn't have this ability. Anywhere.


2. Sigh.

I've already pointed out that Lemaire's best seasons came with Cournoyer. They played multiple seasons together (with subpar LW's) and enjoyed significant bullet points offensively and in the postseason (71 and 73 especially).

This was completely vetted and fleshed out by a man who watched their entire careers (Canadians1958) so bringing up Lafleur is irrelevant, especially w/Orr on the roster and Seibert in a supporting role behind him.


3. Not attempting to be rude. Apologies if you took it that way. Some of my numbers have been atttacked (by you to be fair) so I was anticipating a push back. That's on me. Can we agree to please leave anything that may be construed as such, at the door?


4. He's probably a better forechecker, I will agree to that, but based on what's written about both, no chance he's better defensively or on the PK. I went into more depth above, so people can read that if they'd like. And I agree, Prentice is in a better spot next to Lalone and MacKay, namely because of the big offensive gap between Lalone and Lemaire.


5. Fair enough. I absolutely trust your research sir. Your're on the Mount Rushmore of bio's, certainly in recent years! No need to get riled up. This is why I was asking the questions. For my understand as well as the voters.

If you don't object to a relative 80 score for Mickey then we're probably only disagreeing on defensive impact and usage in a Taasov system. And that's normal in these things.


6. This is just wrong. You can't play the context game with one guy and then not apply the same logic across the board. I've already pointed out numerous examples earlier.

The Orr fudge is what's used to deflate Bucyk's VsX. It's irrelevant here.

Malone is very much like Espo as a player and Martinec is miles better than any RW on those Boston squads. Scott Stevens and Laperriere and Seibert are insanely better 2-4 Dmen behind Bucyk, relative to his time in Boston.

 

[ImporterExporter]

yeah cool there’s no point wasting more time today on this.

edit: you just couldn’t resist making personal comments

What personal comments??? Please highlight them (infraction worth personal comments)

I simply said you are taking things personally. It's evident by your responses accusing me of misrepresentation.

YOU came into MY series last round and attempted to shit on my relative VsX scores. I haven't thrown my opinions in series I'm not involved in frankly because it's not my place.

If you think "kicking and screaming" and "you're taking things personally" is making personal comments then we're on 2 entirely different planes of existence of communication and critique.

The fact is you legitimately insulted me twice, one of which wasn't a series you were even involved with and I simply voiced my displeasure with the same tired routine. You do get easily worked up. I'm saying I can relate! I've made an ass out of myself because I took things too personally. I'm not hitting yo with an insult. It's called constructive criticism.

I'm not calling you names. I'm not accusing you of bending the narrative or misrepresenting information, even though you've done it more than once. Got nothing against anything you've said but that. I don't take any part of your arguments personally otherwise.

I've got to get going. Parenting duties call haha. I'll get the ST and G overview done this evening.

Hope for some last minute debating tonight sir. You're good at it. NOTHING I've said is meant to personally attack you. Let's agree to simply stick to the players.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

6) Bucyk's VsX is bad and despite being corrected for playing with Bobby Orr during potentially the weakest era in NHL history it's still somehow inflated. Bucyk was a fine player before Orr but his numbers are juiced like Barry Bonds once Orr and Esposito show up. Despite having Orr he doesn't have Esposito and the quality of his opponents is much higher.

The problem with all this is that the early 1970s Bruins basically broke the league scoring tables. 1971 was the most egregious example:

1.	Phil Esposito* • BOS	152
2.	Bobby Orr* • BOS	139
3.	John Bucyk* • BOS	116
4.	Ken Hodge • BOS	105
5.	Bobby Hull* • CBH	96
6.	Norm Ullman* • TOR	85
7.	Wayne Cashman • BOS	79
8.	John McKenzie • BOS	77
9.	Fred Stanfield • BOS	76
	Dave Keon* • TOR	76
	Jean Beliveau* • MTL	7

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Basically, if the early 1970s Bruins were included into standard VsX, every non-Bruins player in the early 1970s would look horrible. So Sturminator made a modification to the system, based on if a defenseman scores a certain amount, which resulted in making the scores of every non-Bruin much more realistic. But in doing so, the "high scoring defenseman/early 70s" mod greatly inflates the scores of the Bruins themselves.

In the HOH Top 200 project, I tried to create what I think is a more realistic way of looking at the offense of the Bruins themselves. My solution: "For 1969-70 to 1974-75, take Bucyk's percentage of Bobby Orr's point total instead of his standard VsX score (a fudge but IMO a reasonable one)"

Full post: Top-200 Hockey Players of All-Time - Round 2, Vote 8

This would result in Bucyk having the following scores:

Best 7 years: 79.3
Best 10 years: 76.7

IMO, these scores are a much more realistic element of his ability, much more consistent with what he did in the years before the Bruins became a super team.

 

[ImporterExporter]

The problem with all this is that the early 1970s Bruins basically broke the league scoring tables. 1971 was the most egregious example:

1.	Phil Esposito* • BOS	152
2.	Bobby Orr* • BOS	139
3.	John Bucyk* • BOS	116
4.	Ken Hodge • BOS	105
5.	Bobby Hull* • CBH	96
6.	Norm Ullman* • TOR	85
7.	Wayne Cashman • BOS	79
8.	John McKenzie • BOS	77
9.	Fred Stanfield • BOS	76
	Dave Keon* • TOR	76
	Jean Beliveau* • MTL	7

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Basically, if the early 1970s Bruins were included into standard VsX, every non-Bruins player in the early 1970s would look horrible. So Sturminator made a modification to the system, based on if a defenseman scores a certain amount, which resulted in making the scores of every non-Bruin much more realistic. But in doing so, the "high scoring defenseman/early 70s" mod greatly inflates the scores of the Bruins themselves.

In the HOH Top 200 project, I tried to create what I think is a more realistic way of looking at the offense of the Bruins themselves. My solution: "For 1969-70 to 1974-75, take Bucyk's percentage of Bobby Orr's point total instead of his standard VsX score (a fudge but IMO a reasonable one)"

Full post: Top-200 Hockey Players of All-Time - Round 2, Vote 8

This would result in Bucyk having the following scores:

Best 7 years: 79.3
Best 10 years: 76.7

IMO, these scores are a much more realistic element of his ability, much more consistent with what he did in the years before the Bruins became a super team.

True, however the easy counter to this is if he's an upper 70's player without Orr, than having Orr present enhances his ability. That's the entire point of Orr and why his impact is what it is. He lifts people up. Espo's scoring finishes pre-post Orr are not anything to write home about.

Orr is Gretzky from the blue line, except he doesn't suck defensively.

In fact his VsX7 score represents a bigger gap from 1st place to 2nd among D then Gretzky to Esposito.

Furthermore, you can apply "superteam" logic to the 50's Habs, the 70's Habs, the 80's Oilers, the 80's Isles, etc, etc.

Do you really think Boston of the late 60's/early 70's was more stacked than any number of dynastic teams?

Trying to diminish the score of Bucyk given the team I placed around him is an interesting conclusion but that's why we're humans and not robots haha.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

True, however the easy counter to this is if he's an upper 70's player without Orr, than having Orr present enhances his ability. That's the entire point of Orr and why his impact is what it is. He lifts people up. Espo's scoring finishes pre-post Orr are not anything to write home about.

Orr is Gretzky from the blue line, except he doesn't suck defensively.

In fact his VsX7 score represents a bigger gap from 1st place to 2nd among D then Gretzky to Esposito.

Furthermore, you can apply "superteam" logic to the 50's Habs, the 70's Habs, the 80's Oilers, the 80's Isles, etc, etc.

Do you really think Boston of the late 60's/early 70's was more stacked than any number of dynastic teams?

Trying to diminish the score of Bucyk given the team I placed around him is an interesting conclusion but that's why we're humans and not robots haha.

The 1970s Bruins are the only team to break the NHL scoring tables to the point where a different standard needs to be used for both Bruins and non-Bruins. Unless you think Bucyk's 3rd place in scoring on his own team in 1971 was really worth a VsX score of 128.9 (when a typical #2 in the entire NHL gets a score of 100).

 

[ImporterExporter]

The 1970s Bruins are the only team to break the NHL scoring tables to the point where a different standard needs to be used for both Bruins and non-Bruins. Unless you think Bucyk's 3rd place in scoring on his own team in 1971 was really worth a VsX score of 128.9 (when a typical #2 in the entire NHL gets a score of 100).

Not at all.

But the fact remains the line and team I have around him, is pretty damn close to the Boston teams you speak of. Orr. Malone being at least similar in style to Espo and a dominant goal scorer regardless of era. And Martinec is miles, miles better than Hodge/MacKenzie.

The back end of Pittsburgh only helps the case IMO.

If people disagree, fine. I'd wager the responses from the time I drafted him, to now, is that I'm not making any headway in pointing out the players surrounding him are superior collectively to Boston's of the late 60's/early 70's.

And again, the absolute fact remains that players ranked even higher than Bucyk have been in as/more advantageous positions over their careers.

This is why fuding numbers, beyond the war years, is a really tricky piece of business. If you're not going to apply the general logic, the narrative presented doesn't hold as much water for me.

 

[Dreakmur]

So I gave him an 80, for that, and playing out at RW, without a specific breakdowns, I'm not willing to move off that. If Malone's a 95 then what can MacKay be having inferior finishes? 90? 85? @Dreakmur

80.6

4) Prentice's offence is low for a second line but he's a better checker than Bun Cook and didn't have the luxury of playing with Frank Boucher and Bill Cook

I'm not sure Cook wasn't better defensively than Prentice, but I'm quite certain Prentice is a better scorer.

Hahahahahaha awarded a retro smythe by SIHR for his work on Morenz in 1925 and he's "quality"

He was an important player on 3 different Stanley Cup teams. His play-off scoring was actually very impressive.

 

[ImporterExporter]

80.6



I'm not sure Cook wasn't better defensively than Prentice, but I'm quite certain Prentice is a better scorer.



He was an important player on 3 different Stanley Cup teams. His play-off scoring was actually very impressive.

Thanks for the insight sir!

Just glad I'm not far off with most of these estimates.

I have Prentice and Cook = offensively in this series. I guess maybe a slight edge to Prentice since his 67 will rise with his line mates vs Cook's dropping from 76.4 due to not having 190 VsX next to him. But again, you're talking about a double digit swing so anything more than a very slight offensive edge to Prentice would seem excessive.

Appreciate the update on Walker as well!

I said he was a quality playoff performer. Above average, but I'll certainly not argue him being labeled as good outright.

 

[ResilientBeast]

Ok so here to vote for HOH, then I'll be back around sometime tomorrow to vote for the ATD.

Why Arizona should win succinctly
1) Pittsburgh's entire gameplan seems to hinge on Bobby Orr

• Forward's offence is terrible? Bobby Orr
• Inability to check Lalonde or Taylor with forwards up front? Bobby Orr
• Patrick Roy totally outclassing Johnny Bower? Bobby Orr

Besides that bonkers gimmick of a defense group they've assembled they are outclassed in almost every possible area. As overpass stated last round, teams do not succeed with such unorthodox balance and heavy reliance.

2) Their center depth is atrocious (the second most important position in hockey). Joe Malone is barely passable as 1C at 24 teams Hawerchuk is below average as a 2C and Lemaire is below average as a 3C. They're against 2 top 20 centers of all time and none of these three has any real credence as a checker. They can't manage to slow down Taylor and Lalonde who will be absolutely cooking out there during this series.

On Lemaire in the current HOH project.

As for Lemaire, he's a tough guy to get a good read on. Offensively he has a terrible - brutal, actually - case for induction. The point totals he managed while playing next to Guy Lafleur don't even compare well to what a player like Pete Mahovlich was able to do. In fact, a few rounds ago, when I showed that what Ron Francis had managed to do with a superstar winger was par for the course, Lemaire stood out as a strange outlier for being unable to score at a pace that came even remotely close to his superstar winger.

I know there's at least one participant who is going to jump to vote Lemaire 1st and will do so until he's on the list. The main reason is this idea that he was some kind of elite defensive player. It all seems to be hearsay, however. I haven't seen a great deal of contemporary sources (if any) that confirm that Lemaire was anything special defensively, let alone one of the few best in the league. Selke votes don't demonstrate this, though he only had three seasons to earn any. Scouting reports of the time only comment on his offensive game, not his defense. I have never come across any glowing references in books or in contemporary THN articles. Is there more to this than just hearsay? If so, great - we voted in Gilmour, Bergeron, Toews, Datsyuk and Kopitar well ahead of where their offensive records suggested they should go - because we know their defensive value was through the roof. So if Lemaire is like those guys, great, let's vote for him. But if we can't prove his defensive value, then let's pump the brakes pretty hard on the enthusiasm for him.

3) Mickey MacKay getting docked at the wing is non-sense. We simply mischaracterized his second stint with Vancouver when he came back once the rover was removed he was exclusively a winger and this includes some of his strongest offensive seasons. The quotes I pulled indicate his defensive value even from the wing, it was my understanding the 20s Vancouver teams played a system with MacKay checking back more heavily to liberate Cook and Duncan to play offensively. Similar to that of Pete Green with the 20s Senators, this allowed Duncan to win a PCHA scoring title. He was clearly just as effective from the "wing" filing this role being apart of the phalanx on defense with Cook and Duncan.

4) Between MacKay and Prentice my second line has the right type of personnel to harass Orr or Seibert in transition. Then our third line with Lepine and Walker is capable of doing the exact same thing. Even my 4th line with Roberts has someone on the LW who was used as a shadow for the speedy Pitre. The only line without someone on the LW who can harass Orr is my first line. But that line has Taylor, someone who shouldn't have any issue skating with Orr as the greatest skater of his day.

5) Goaltending, as I posted earlier my opponent went really hard at @rmartin65 in 2018 during their finals matchup with Roy vs Parent. Roy is the difference maker here once again and by his own logic should be enough to hand Arizona this series.

6) Bobby Orr's flaws as overpass pointed out. Instead of at C we've stacked out checkers on the LW to more directly manage the Orr assignment as a RD

I'll start by discussing Bobby Orr. He's the best player in the series and maybe the best ever at his peak. Pittsburgh has him paired with a better defence partner than he ever had, although he's also lacking a top-end forward to play with.

Here's why the Ottawa Senators are built to slow down Bobby Orr.

1. Coaching. Scotty Bowman is widely considered the greatest hockey coach of all time and gave his team an edge in every playoff series he coached. Bobby Orr did play against a Bowman team in one series and beat them, the 1970 St Louis Blues, but those Blues were completely outclassed on talent. Orr was slowed down by superior coaching in several playoff losses, including 1973 vs Emile Francis and the Rangers, 1974 vs Fred Shero and the Flyers, and whatever happened against Montreal in 1971.

2. Ottawa's centres are going to limit Bobby Orr's ability to skate the puck up the middle of the ice. Sergei Fedorov is almost the perfect centre for this matchup, with all-time skating, hockey IQ, and defensive play, and should be able to do what Henri Richard did to Orr in the 1971 playoffs. Jonathan Toews and Derek Sanderson were great forecheckers and backcheckers. Denis Savard was not a noted checker but at least has top-end skating ability.

3. Which Bobby Orr are you going to get? Orr had absolutely dominant stats in all situations, but those stats didn't always hold up against top teams. As you can see from the chart below, as his knee injuries piled up and limited his skating, he started to have problems against the best teams. From 69-70 through 71-72, Bobby Orr was +42 in 67 games against 0.600+ teams. Which is really impressive! But from 1972-73 through 1974-75, Orr was only +2 in 53 such games, with much higher goals against totals. Bobby Orr could be vulnerable defensively against top teams, especially when his knee injuries had started to limit him.

Bobby Orr vs 0.600+ teams (regular season)

Seasons	GP	G	A	P	+/-
1969-70 through 1971-72	67	26	58	84	42
1972-73 through 1974-75	53	19	56	75	2

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Bobby and the Bruins posted all-time dominant power play and penalty kill numbers, but those were built on running up the score against weaker teams. Against 0.600+ teams, Boston was barely positive at special teams. They were actually outscored in terms of power play goals, but their shorthanded scoring gave them a edge. This is not what all-time great special teams units look like.

Boston Bruins vs 0.600 teams (regular season)

Season	GP	PPGF	PPGA	SHGA	SHGF	Net Special teams goals
69-70	32	31	35	2	5	-1
70-71	18	11	17	2	7	-1
71-72	18	13	12	1	5	5
72-73	16	12	14	3	4	-1
73-74	21	19	14	0	1	6
74-75	20	22	19	4	1	0
Total	125	108	111	12	23	8

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Against everyone else

Season	GP	PPGF	PPGA	SHGF	SHGA	Net Special teams goals
69-70	44	50	45	8	2	11
70-71	60	69	36	18	2	49
71-72	60	61	39	13	1	34
72-73	62	55	29	11	2	35
73-74	57	46	34	11	2	21
74-75	60	64	40	13	6	31
Total	343	345	223	74	15	181

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

I'm not saying the Ottawa Senators are a 0.600+ team in the ATD and I'm not saying they aren't. I'm saying that 0.600+ teams are the closest thing to ATD teams that Bobby Orr faced in his career, and the results weren't always great.

7) The listing of line VsX with Orr factored in constantly to try and make up the staggering difference in offence is distasteful as Orr can't simultaneously play with each line for all of their even-strength TOI. And to expand again on why the VsX values are misleading for Pittsburgh overpass did a great job summarizing.

You can’t just throw VsX numbers out there as an argument. For many of these players those numbers were compiled in a completely different context from the current series. Remember that:

• Bucyk is playing on a first line here instead of a second line, and he didn’t score well against top teams even when playing with Bobby Orr
• Bun Cook isn’t playing with two of the very greatest pre-WWII players.
• Lemaire isn’t playing with Guy Lafleur

• Hawerchuk isn’t going to be double shifting and playing the whole power play to get his stats, like he did in his prime
• Anderson isn’t playing with Mark Messier

 

[ImporterExporter]

@ResilientBeast

The listing of line VsX with Orr factored in constantly to try and make up the staggering difference in offence is distasteful

I literally showed that the Top 9 is not at all staggering in your favor, AT FORWARD.

In fact, Pittsburgh comes out ahead at F, in VsX7 over the top 9 (see refresher below)

I even did a comparison for ES VsX, and considering the numbers have surely been looked at by Dreak/others by now, haven't seen a push back on any of my figures being distasteful.

And then you claim the offensive gap between our F groups is "staggering???

Refresher:

Top 6 Offensive Values: (VsX7 and ES VsX)

Pittsburgh's Top Line:

Malone = *95.0 VsX7 - *64 ES VsX
(Dreak calculated Malone at 95 or 96 IIRC and I took 95 x .33 to come up with estimated ES VsX)
Bucyk = 88.7 VsX7- 60 ES VsX
Martinec = *82.5 VsX7 - *56 ES VsX

Pittsburgh Top Line = 266.2 VsX7 - 180 ES VsX


Arizon's Top Line:

Taylor = *105.0 VsX7 - *70 ES VsX
Jackson = 89.5 - *59 ES VsX
(89.5 x .33 for ES VsX)
Alfredsson = 82.3 - 55 ES VsX

Arizona's Top Line = 276.8 VsX7 - 184 ES VsX


Pittsburgh 2nd Line:

Cook = 76.3 VsX7 - *51 ES VsX
(76.3 x .33 to represent 33% PP scoring which is probably high. Trying to be unbiased)
Lemaire = 77.9 VsX7 - 55 ES VsX
Cournoyer = 77.1 - 48 ES VsX

Pittsburgh's Second Line = 231.3 VsX7 - 154 ES VsX


Arizona's 2nd Line:

Lalonde = *100.0 VsX7 - *67 ESVsX
(pretty sure I saw Dreak come up with a 98 something but I’ll round Newsy up to an even Ben Franklin. 100 x .33 to represent PP scoring)

MacKay = *80.0 VsX7 - *54 ES VsX

Prentice = 67.0 VsX7 - 51 ES VsX

Arizona's Second Line = 247.0 VsX7 - 172 ES VsX

Arizona's Top 6 = 276.8 + 247.0 = 523.8 VsX7 - 356 ES VsX

Pittsburgh's Top 6 = 266.2 + 231.3 = 497.5 - 334 ES VsX


Top 9 Offensive Value (VsX7 and ES VsX):

Pittsburgh 3rd Line:

Tanguay = 73.4 VsX7 – 58 ES VsX
Hawerchuk = 86.0 VsX7 – 58 ES VsX
Anderson = 72.9 VsX7 – 55 ES VsX

Pittsburgh 3rd Line = 232.3 - 171 ES


Arizona's 3rd Line:

Walker = *60.0 VsX7 – 48 ES VsX
Lepine = 52.9 VsX7 – 47 ES VsX*
Oatman = *65.0 VsX7 – *52 ES VsX

Arizona's 3rd Line = 177.9 - 147 ES


Pittsburgh's Top 9 = 266.2 + 231.3 + 232.3 = 729.8 overall - 505 ES VsX

Arizona's Top 9 = 172.9 (3rd line) + 523.8 (Top 6) = 701.7 VsX7 - 503 ES VsX


And then to think I did the following:

Gave Cyclone Taylor a 105 which I'm guessing is very close to his official score.
Gave Lalonde a 100 which is 2 points above where Dreak had him.
Was 0.6 off on MacKay so the score below isn't altered negatively
Was Jack Walker really a 60 with those non consolidated finishes? That's what I gave him and I'm quite sure that is high given Smokey Harris's score only comes in at 67.2 and his finishes are much better @Dreakmur
Also gave your 3rd liners inflated ES scores as I reduced their PP%, again, in an attempt to be fair.


Orr Scores/Deployment:

And BTW, nowhere did I ever say Orr's offensive score being factored in was universal, 100% of every game. Not at all what I laid out and already explained as much.

But I did point out, correctly, he'll be on the ice 30 odd minutes.

That means half the game.

So naturally half (mainly focus on skating with top 9) means he'll be on the ice for half their shifts and given he's supported by one of the greatest defensive defensemen of all time, Stevens, and supported by a 4 forward lines that all have at least one plus defensive presence, we should expect him to do quite well.

Pete Green will go power on power in this series for a couple of reasons (Pittsburgh has home ice advantage)

1. Bucyk-Malone-Martinec is only marginally behind Jackson-Taylor-Alfredsson offensively (see above). Arizona can't be expected to dominate possession, especially considering the blue line support.

2. Arizona's top line features a very average defensive presence at LW (Jackson). Given Orr plays RD, I like his chances of exploiting this match up. And I also think Martinec, with his offensive wizardry will play well against Jackson, forcing him to skate A LOT without the puck. In fact he and Orr should be a treat to watch in transition in this series specifically since Arizona wants to play a north-south game.

3. This will help keep Pittsburgh's top line away from Walker-Lepine-Oatman and force them to generally pick the 2nd or 3rd line to deploy against at ES in Pittsburgh.

3. Alfredsson is the only real plus defensively on this unit (I'd lable him good at the ATD level) so I'm not at all worried about them presenting much of a defensive blockade.

4. This allows Pittsburgh to role out Crawford-Poulin-Metz primarily against the Lalonde line and supplement Steven-Orr with plenty of Laperriere-Seibert against them, a very big and very physical pairing that can skate, especially Seibert. They are strong defensively and can move the puck at a solid rate.

5. Seibert will be the policeman when it comes to Lalonde. Given the likes of Eddie Shore and Red Horner didn't test him says a lot. Newsy isn't the baddest man on the block here.

6. Poulin didn't play in the 1st series so he represents a rested, Selke level C, who could skate, was fearless physically so he fits the role of a check vs Lalonde well. How well will Lalonde handle the constant buzzing and checking from players who won't be pushed around by him? Coming off a 7 game series, Lalonde is certainly going to be taxed and now he's got a very strong defensive C, who plays a very physical brand of hockey, much more rested, to contend with.

7. Tanguay represents fresh legs as does Tsygankov on the 3rd pairing (less of a factor) so Pittsburgh definitely has some upside when it comes to endurance in this series.

 

[ResilientBeast]

You again chose to use Bucyk's highly inflated score adding ~10 points to your top lines VsX.

The problem with all this is that the early 1970s Bruins basically broke the league scoring tables. 1971 was the most egregious example:

1.	Phil Esposito* • BOS	152
2.	Bobby Orr* • BOS	139
3.	John Bucyk* • BOS	116
4.	Ken Hodge • BOS	105
5.	Bobby Hull* • CBH	96
6.	Norm Ullman* • TOR	85
7.	Wayne Cashman • BOS	79
8.	John McKenzie • BOS	77
9.	Fred Stanfield • BOS	76
	Dave Keon* • TOR	76
	Jean Beliveau* • MTL	7

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Basically, if the early 1970s Bruins were included into standard VsX, every non-Bruins player in the early 1970s would look horrible. So Sturminator made a modification to the system, based on if a defenseman scores a certain amount, which resulted in making the scores of every non-Bruin much more realistic. But in doing so, the "high scoring defenseman/early 70s" mod greatly inflates the scores of the Bruins themselves.

In the HOH Top 200 project, I tried to create what I think is a more realistic way of looking at the offense of the Bruins themselves. My solution: "For 1969-70 to 1974-75, take Bucyk's percentage of Bobby Orr's point total instead of his standard VsX score (a fudge but IMO a reasonable one)"

Full post: Top-200 Hockey Players of All-Time - Round 2, Vote 8

This would result in Bucyk having the following scores:

Best 7 years: 79.3
Best 10 years: 76.7

IMO, these scores are a much more realistic element of his ability, much more consistent with what he did in the years before the Bruins became a super team.

And saying it again

You can’t just throw VsX numbers out there as an argument. For many of these players those numbers were compiled in a completely different context from the current series. Remember that:

• Bucyk is playing on a first line here instead of a second line, and he didn’t score well against top teams even when playing with Bobby Orr
• Bun Cook isn’t playing with two of the very greatest pre-WWII players.
• Lemaire isn’t playing with Guy Lafleur

• Hawerchuk isn’t going to be double shifting and playing the whole power play to get his stats, like he did in his prime
• Anderson isn’t playing with Mark Messier

 

[ImporterExporter]

You again chose to use Bucyk's highly inflated score adding ~10 points to your top lines VsX.



And saying it again

1. Tarasov didn't coach the National Team solo. Does that not matter?

Your team has multiple players that are poor fits for Tarasov IMO, and Tarasov's only solo coaching bullet points are 40's, 50's and 60's domestic hockey, largely irrelevant, outside of early 60's onward. Not having Chernyshov to help handle bench duties completely runs contrary to how coaching was handled on the international stage. The international stage being more important certainly than domestic hockey pre 1960.

This is why TDMM has long questioned the value of Tarasov. How much did he really do for the National Team against the worlds best players (other than N/A of course). The fact that he enjoyed a career void of having to directly face N/A competition (beyond the 72 Summit series IIRC) only diminishes his win/losses in my mind. Unless we can get a better grasp on how much he was actually COACHING the national team, I think his value is probably overrated as a pure bench boss.

There are no more questions surrounding Pete Green. He dominated 2 completely different periods of pro hockey w/full control over rosters and coaching duties.

2. I could nitpick your team to death regarding VsX but frankly doesn't matter by now. I certainly inflated your values more than 10 points (Walker surely is inflated as a 60 and Taylor at 105 is probably a few points high) so bitching about Bucyk is just lame.

3. Bucyk has Orr. Period. I'm sorry that people are unwilling to acknowledge that his inflated number is directly tied to the #1 D on Pittsburgh. Despite this you and apparently everyone else won't budge on 78/79. His line mates are collectively better (fact) as are the blue liners supporting him. So Orr/Bucyk get punished for context, but nobody else does? Makes total sense.

4. Lemaire didn't have his best seasons with Lafleur. So overpass was wrong and you're wrong for highlighting it. He is paired with longtime running mate Cournoyer and combined they are the best F duo in the series as playoff performers.

5. Bun Cook's number is inflated. Haven't argued that. Drop him to a 67 to = Prentice if you like. The 9 points don't swing the scales (simple math done above).

6. Hawerchuk will be playing about 2nd line minutes. That's the nature of having a strong 3rd scoring line. Fact. And he'll be getting PP time with Orr, and Martinec, and Lemaire on the 2nd unit. By all means, please tell me how Hawershuk, who played for the 1980's Winnpipeg Jets, will suffer upgrading to the team he's on now???

7. Hawershuk is literaly worth 3 fewer points than Messier offensively. Nobody who watched these 2 would say Messier is a significantly better offensive player. One guy played on a stacked dynasty for his entire prime and the other was on a doormat with no help. Context.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Goalie Overview: Big Advantage for Arizona:

1. No other way to slice it. I've drafted Roy before and argued on his behalf. He's my 6th best player of all time (behind Harvey). He's the best playoff goalie all time and one could argue the best playoff player ever. I love Roy and would never sell him short in this environment.

But Patrick Roy AND Wayne Gretzky didn't win the 2018 ATD Cup being on the same roster. I should know, I was the losing GM.

And you know who Roy lost to in that series? Bernie Parent.

So Roy isn't a guarantee of anything first and foremost.

Two, I think Bower is the better goalie between he and Parent. I rank them 13 and 16 respectively.

Dishing the Dirt

And what does Bower do better than anything else on his resume? Win SC's and generally outplay better goalies all time.

Bower vs Hall in the 1962 SCF:

Bower had 98/104 = .942
Simmons had 64/72 = .889
Hall had 184/202 = .911

*Bower platooned this series

Bower was 37. Hall was 30.


Bower vs Sawchuk in the 1963 SCF?

Bower had 147/157 = .936
Sawchuk had 140/156 = .897

Bower was 38. Sawchuk 33.

Bower faced 1 more shot (we can throw the tired stereotype that Bower must have faced depressed volume and benefited mainly from the defensive teams. Sick of seeing it) and posted a vastly better SV% despite being 5 years older, well past the normal prime for a G.


Same Year, 1st Round vs Plante?

Bower had 152/158 = .962
Plante had 125/139 - .899

Bower was 38. Plante 34.

Bower faced more volume. Again. Came out way on top. Again.

He whipped 2 very strong teams, 2 of the top 6 goalies of all time head to head, looking like an easy Conn Smythe player. And again, Bower faced more volume, and performed far better than Plante/Sawchuk this title run.


Bower vs Charlie Hodge 1st Round 1964:

Bower had 198/211 = .938
Hodge had 201/217 = .926


Bower vs Sawchuk 1964 in the SCF

Bower had 233/250 = .932
Sawchuk had 215/237 = .907

Yet another dominant SCF performance for Bower. More volume again. Still came out way on top.

Shut out Detroit 4-0 in deciding game 7 to win Cup.

Bower was 39. Sawchuk 34.

Hell, maybe the most impressive thing he did was in 1967, when he got in 3 games in the SCF and saved 100/103 shots against the Habs. That's a .971 SV%. At age 42.

The vast majority of hockey players, ever, don't even play that long. And he was a brick wall, in a SCF. But hey, he platooned as if that is a surprise for a 42 year old human being??


Consider his regular season exploits both NHL and AHL are pretty good considering he didn't even become a full time NHL'er until Age 35

• Led NHL in save percentage SIX times (1960, 61, 64-67)

• 1st Team AS and best goaltender in world = 1961 (over Plante, Hall, Sawchuk)

• Hart = 2, 7, 7

• THREE Consecutive AHL MVP's (first G to win, never been duplicated in AHL history, and only 1 other player has 3)

• 6 Time AHL Postseason AS including unanimous choice over Harry Lumley in 57 and Gerry McNeil in 58 so hardly bums for comp and the players around the league of NHL quality, some even HOF'ers are not hard to find)

• The only player in hockey history to be both an AHL and NHL HOF'er

Those save percentage titles are talked about here, showing that he was wasn't winning them weakly either as people have long surmised. Also a ton of great discussion on Bower if you're so inclined. This is what really sold me on his NHL numbers and exploits and then I really took a dive into the AHL years. @MXD

Top-200 Hockey Players of All-Time - Round 2, Vote 2

Top-200 Hockey Players of All-Time - Round 2, Vote 3

Top-200 Hockey Players of All-Time - Round 2, Vote 3

@ContrarianGoaltender

For the record, I agree with you that none of Bower's save percentage titles were won based on weaker strength of schedule. He led the league by a lot in 1966 and even though he had a weaker than average schedule in 1965 and 1967, the Chicago goalies finishing 2nd and 3rd had an even easier time purely in terms of opposition (since they never had to face Hull/Mikita themselves). The primary point of debate with Bower's record is how much he was helped statistically by his strong team defence. But even with a healthy adjustment for that, there are certainly some good arguments for Bower going in this round

For those wondering about the quality of the 1950's/60's AHL?

It's easily the 2nd best league in the world, through the 50's and at least up until the late 60's in the Soviet Union.

And Bower managed a dominant HOF career there before ending up in the NHL for good and managing to put together a HOF career in the NHL, playing great hockey into his early 40's.

Are we underrating Johnny Bower and the AHL in the 06 era?


Who Do These Goalies Have In Front of Them?

Johnny Bower (Pittsburgh):

Bower played behind a very strong top 4 in Toronto during the 60's.

Stanley-Horton
Brewer-Baun

Bower now has the following:

Stevens - Orr
Laperriere - Seibert

Consider he was winning SV% titles with Tim Horton as his best Dman, and Baun as his worst and here his best is Orr and worst is Laperriere.

With Stevens and Seibert the other 2!


Patrick Roy (Arizona):

I think you can clearly see the insane drop off between the 2 teams. Johnny Bower is much, much better protected.

Again, I'm including the 3rd pairing for Arizona because they'll actually have to play meaningful minutes at ES.

Goodfellow - Clapper
Reardon - Crawford
Patrick - Svedberg

Let's not forget that Roy in 85-86 had a top pairing of Larry Robinson - Chris Chelios anchoring the blue line and wasn't exactly skating behind a porous D in Colorado (Blake, Foote, Ozolinch, even had the greybeard Bourque there for a brief spell)


What About Defensive Forwards?

Pittsburgh:

Poulin - Selke Caliber
Metz - Selke Caliber
Cook - Great/Selke Caliber
Crawford - Good/Great
Lemaire - Above Average/Good
Martinec - Above Average/Good
Anderson - Above Average
Hawerchuk - Average
Malone - Average
Bucyk - Average
Cournoyer - Below Average
Tanguay - Poor

*Selke Caliber means you're talked about as being one of the best of era/or having the modern Selke record to get there

As I've stated and pointed out before, Pittsburgh has 7 forwards that are above average order better IMO. We may not have a Bob Gainey level player, but Poulin and Metz are clearly Selke level players and Cook not far off that mark IMO with all the added info I found on him.

Pittsburgh can absolutely counter the Walker-Lepine-Oatman shutdown unit with Crawford-Poulin-Metz and not be giving up anything defensively.


Arizona:

Walker - Selke Caliber/Legendary
Lepine - Selke Caliber
MacKay - Selke Caliber
Prentice - Good/Great
Oatman - Good
Backes - Good (might be up a notch but pretty sure he played mostly C for St Louis when he had his 5 year run of top 7 Selke finishes. He's playing RW here. I could be corrected here to be sure)
Alfredsson - Above Average
Taylor - Average
Lalonde - Average
Roberts - Average
Jackson - Average/Below Average
Smith - Poor

Walker is the best defensive F in the series, slightly over Metz/Poulin/Lepine/MacKay.

Arizona, has 7 players that rank above average or better. Like Pittsburgh.

I still think Arizona has slightly more defensive ability at F overall, largely to a bit higher peak player, but the gap isn't remotely close to the difference in Dmen.


Overview:

No doubt Roy gives Arizona a big leg up in net. Bower is an overall average goalie in a 24 team league though in the playoffs, he's certainly good if not great. Roy has been beaten before here and real life and I do believe Bower is in a fantastic situation to make that happen.

Bower was not a stranger to facing far better all time goalies and besting them head to head.

He has a much, much stronger top 4 in front of him and more than enough support from his F's defensively.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Special Teams? The Hidden Edge for Western PA

Pittsburgh Special Teams:

PP1

Malone

Seibert - Cournoyer - Bucyk

Orr

*When Seibert retired in 45-46 he had the most PP goals by a defensemen ever with 18. That would stand until Red Kelly broke it in 53-54 season and he'd remain in 2nd until Gadsby passed him in 57-58. Had a blistering shot.

*When Seibert retired he had the most PP points overall with 51. That would stand until Jimmy Thompson in 1952.

From 1958-59 through 1975-76 Johnny Bucyk's PP Assist Figures:

267 PP Assists in 1266 games
Stan Mikita had 279 in 1181 over the same time period

*Joe Malone was a dominant goal scorer. The Phantom scored a lot of goals from in close. He'll play the Espo role here.

Mega Dominance of Orr

*Played essentially every second of the PP and tilted the ice like no other player post 1960. The TmPP+ is nuts. +39%

Then look who Orr's running with:

Bucyk, the long time and heavily used partner of Orr. +26%

Cournoyer did a ton of damage on the PP. Lethal shot. With the likes of Orr, Seibert, and Bucyk around I like his chances of potting some markers here. +22%

Speaking of the Roadrunner (and Bucyk) look at their PP goal scoring prowess over the length of Cournoyer's career (63-64 through 78-79)

Top 5 PP goal scorers

PP2

Martinec - Lemaire - Anderson/Hawerchuk
Hawerchuk/Orr - Laperriere

*Orr will rotate with Hawerchuk on the 2nd unit to keep him as fresh as possible for ES. If Orr comes on Hawerchuk will move up to replace Anderson. Regardless Hawerchuk will play on the unit w/Anderson out man out.

PK1

Cook - Metz
Stevens - Orr

*Cook was pretty cleary shown to be an elite PK'er. Compared to HOF'ers like Cylone Taylor in his ability to skate and rag the puck a man down, giving his team time to breathe and reset. This ability praised in multiple city papers over multiple years.

*Metz was an elite defensive winger. He mentored Joe Klukay and was extremely well regarded defensively. especially a man down.

*When leading by 1 or more, Laperriere will move up to 1st unit and Orr down to 2nd. Another way to manufacture Orr an extra shift at ES

Orr, once again clearly tiled the ice in a BIG way on the PK. Big usage. Best kill rates.

Stevens just another beast for Pittsburgh. No worries about chemistry here either.

PK2

Poulin - Crawford/Martinec
Laperriere - Morrow/Seibert

*Martinec will play on this unit if trailing

*Seibert will play on this unit if protecting lead in 3rd period. He, like Laperriere were called arguably the best shot blockers of their era.


Mega Dominance of Laperriere on PK. 76% usage

Top 10 Dmen on PK (1960-present)

Poulin was a FORCE on the PK. 50% usage and +20% kill rate!

See how he stacks up against some elite defensive forwards. Killed almost as much as Carbs w/better results. Used touch more than Marcotte, Pulford, Sanderson, Pandolfo w/ as good or better results.

vs

Arizona's Special Teams:

PP1: Jackson - Lalonde - Smith - Taylor - Goodfellow
PP2: Clapper - MacKay - Roberts - Patrick - Alfredsson


PK1: Lepine - Walker - Reardon - Clapper
PK2: MacKay - Prentice - Goodfellow - Crawford



*Arizona's top PP unit is very strong as well. The only real issue I see is they are light on playmaking up front w/3 goal slanted F's, Lalonde and Smith especially w/Jackson a stretch to consider a PP facilitator.

*The 2nd PP unit lags well behind Pittsburgh.

*Consider that unit vs Martinec, Lemaire, Hawerchuk, Orr, Laperriere, Pittsburgh's most often used 2nd unit.

Looking at the PK1, Lepine and Walker are slightly better up front vs Cook-Metz, namely out of respect for Walker.

*Pittsburgh blows the doors off the D comparison. Stevens-Orr is far superior to Reardon-Clapper and Laperriere - Morrow/Seibert is also superior though much less so when Morrow is on. Seibert on the unit and it's a big gap.

The 2nd PK unit F's are very close. Poulin and MacKay are in the same class as are Prentice/Crawford. Really splitting hairs between those units.

​

Overview:

Pittsburgh cannot be matched on the PK. They have 3 elite F's (Poulin, Metz, Cook) and one strong (Crawford) coupled with the most dominant crop of blue liners by a wide margin.

Their PP features the most impactful player ever on the man advantage (Orr) and 4 other players who were clearly shown above to be great PP presences (Seibert, Cournoyer, Bucyk, Malone) and the chemistry here between Orr and JB can't be denied.

The top unit features a high end goal scorer up front (Malone) on the point (Seibert) the best playmaker not named Gretzky and Bucyk, who's PP credentials are very strong and he's got his good friend Bobby.

The 2nd unit feature Lemaire, who like Cournoyer were fabulous up a man. Lemaire was said to have had the 2nd hardest shot in the league behind Bobby Hull. Vlad Martinec is a elite presence on a 2nd unit IMO. Great conductor. Then you'll have Hawerchuk-Laperriere on the point, unless Orr stays on, which would then see Hawerchuk move up to replace Anderson.

Pittsburgh has the greatest PP presence ever, a deeper group of PP players and Pittsburgh is well out in front on the PK, namely because of the Dmen.

 

[ResilientBeast]

Pittsburgh cannot be matched on the PK. They have 3 elite F's (Poulin, Metz, Cook) and one strong (Crawford) coupled with the most dominant crop of blue liners by a wide margin.

Seriously? Three of the strongest stick checking defensive players in Lepine/Walker/MacKay isn't a match for your group up front?

 

[ResilientBeast]

No doubt Roy gives Arizona a big leg up in net. Bower is an overall average goalie in a 24 team league though in the playoffs, he's certainly good if not great. Roy has been beaten before here and real life and I do believe Bower is in a fantastic situation to make that happen.

You were absolutely certain that Roy would outduel Bernie Parent in 2018 when you had Roy on your own team. Bower and Parent are of similar playoff quality. Replace Parent with Bower and everything you've said holds true.

All the nice stuff you said about him in 2018 with the tables is at the following link 2018 ATD Finals! Pittsburgh Bankers (1) vs New York Americans (2)

Goalies:

-To me this is where the series is truly decided. The Bankers have already faced and defeated Ken Dryden and Turk Broda. Both of whom are superior to Bernie Parent in regular and post season accolades (Dryden very much so).

Patrick Roy is the greatest goalie of all time in the minds of most. He combines a very good regular season resume with the greatest postseason career ever by any netminder and only Wayne Gretzky is definitively ahead of him when you bring skaters into the mix (and i personally don't think the gap is very large).

Roy's value (and goalies in general) has been underrated for years around here. In large part because we've never really addressed the fact that goalies are on the ice for 60 (or more) minutes a game. There value (positive or negative) goes well beyond simply stopping shots. No one position is on a bigger island than goalie. No one position can swing the momentum for his team like goalie. And here, Roy swings the pendulum greatly in Pittsburgh's favor. His presence, confidence and resume allows his skaters to be more relaxed in front of him and puts an added burden on the opposing team knowing they're facing an elite goalie, especially in a best of 7 type series.

The Bankers possess a massive advantage in net. That's not a knock on Parent, who was a fine netminder and obviously gets serious points for his 2 Conn Smythe runs but other than 1974 and 1975 his career is void of any real ATD value. That's not being harsh, it's simple reality. Parent in a 24 team draft is at best below average here. And Parent played for the broad street bullies. I don't see the Americans being able to play that style with their roster make up or with Tarasov

Roy blows him away no matter what area you look at. Better Hart record, better AS record, better Vezina record, his adjusted regular season SV% is elite (see graph below thank you Hockey Outsider and Q from HoH for these studies) and shows just how dominant he was beyond the postseason. He has elite longevity, his peak was longer and more sustained. And he carried multiple teams on his back to Stanley Cups in Montreal.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Why Pittsburgh Should Win:

Pretty sure a handful of people have voted already but here's my final overview:


1. The Gap on the Blueline is Massive.

Pittsburgh can counter Taylor and Lalonde with Stevens-Orr and Laperriere-Seibert. Essentially all game, all series.

Arizona doesn't have a true shutdown or game breaking player from the back end. Orr is that offensively at this level and Stevens certainly is defensively. As a #3, Seibert is an elite presence and Laperriere passes for a #2 in a draft this size so he's a big upgrade over the normal #4 type.

The impact of this is 2 lines that are going to legitimately threaten to score from Arizona will never get away from a incredibly tough pairing. There are no easy shifts against bottom feeder ATD Dmen.

Conversely, Pittsburgh will see Reardon-Crawford and Patrick-Svedberg for roughly 35 minutes of the hockey game. That bottom pairing especially is not exactly strong defensively speaking. And they'll need to eat up 14/15 minutes each.


2. Coaching Fit

Pete Green absolutely proved he could win with multiple styles of hockey. He preached defensive responsibility during his first tenure as HC and even showed the usage of holding a F back while the D (Taylor/Shore) rushed the puck from the back end.

Pittsburgh was careful to consider the defensive responsibility of the F's, hence grabbing Cook, Lemaire, Martinec, Anderson, Crawford, Poulin, Metz, etc, and limiting the liabilities to Tanguay and to a lesser degree Cournoyer.

The top scorer for Ottawa during Green's first run was a C and strong goalscorer Marty Walsh.

That matches up well with a team running Malone-Lemaire-Hawerchuk as those 3 are the best offensive players on each line (Lemaire/Cournoyer are essentially washes, i give the tie to the more complete player though)

You can see the offensive dominance Ottawa produced under Green here (from his bio last year):

COACHING RECORD - 1ST TIME WITH OTTAWA (1909-1913)

1909:
10-2 (1st in ECAHA - 4 teams)
117 Goals For - 1st in league, +35 ahead of 2nd
63 Goals Against -2nd in league, -2 behind 1st
SC CHAMPIONS

1910:
9-3 (2nd in NHA - 7 teams)
89 GF - 3rd in league, -7 behind 1st
66 GA - 3rd in league, -25 behind 1st
CO-SC CHAMPIONS
Def Gault 15-4 over 2 games during 1st SC challenge
Def Edmonton 21-11 over 2 games during 2nd SC challenge
Lost Cup to Wanderers who won NHA regular season title

1911:
13-3 (1st in NHA - 5 teams)
122 GF - 1st in league, +31 ahead of 2nd
69 GA - 2nd in league, -7 behind 2nd
O'BRIEN TROPHY (NHA TITLE)
SC CHAMPIONS

1912:
9-9 (T2nd in NHA - 4 teams)
99 GF - 1st in league, +4 ahead of 2nd
83 GA - 3rd in league, -17 behind 1st

1913:
9-11 (T3rd in NHA - 6 teams)
87 GF - 3rd in league, -25 behind 1st
81 GA - T2nd in league, -6 behind 1st


TOTALS:
50-28 - .641 W%
514 GF
362 GA
+152

Tarasov coached a very specific way with a very specific set of ideals as it pertained to tactics. I think Arizona's team can skate for Tarasov, they have the premium 1-2 punch down the middle at C, but players like Jackson and Smith are questions marks defensively, especially the latter. Outside of Lepine their defensive ability down the middle is pretty meh, which is where Pittsburgh's 2 best offensive players reside (Malone/Hawerchuk) and Malone will be deployed away from the Walker-Lepine-Oatman line on home ice.

I think the top pairing is redundant with 2 offensive slanted players together (Goodfellow/Clapper) leaving an average puck moving group to handle the 2nd team duties and finally I think Patrick-Svedberg is an exploitable bottom paring needing to play meaningful minutes. Those 2 read like offensive first players.

And finally, Tarasov didn't even coach the National Team on his own, which is where the Soviets would have faced the stiffest competition vs 1940's and 50's domestic hockey in the USSR.

He doesn't have his long time National Team partner on the bench in Arkady Chernyshov to bounce ideas off of or check the boxes that Tarasov himself might have been weak on.

You can see Theo confirm Tarasov not coaching the NT by himself on page 1.



3. Pittsburgh Forwards Can Generate As Much Offense as Arizona's:

It's fleshed out fully whether overall score or ES. The numbers are all verified post 1927 and the pre consolidation estimates were seen and confirmed by other parties besides myself.

Not only do the numbers bear it out, you then have to consider the obstacles each F unit will be facing all series, namely the huge disparity on the blue line.

Context can be applied everywhere in this field and VsX has long been used to give voters a good idea of where value falls. If you're going to start moving goalposts on Bucyk, then you should be doing it for other players that were on insanely good teams, posing as the 4th or 5th or 6th best player, benefitting from numerous HOF'er around them. We can do this throughout history.

I was generous in giving a bump to a few of Arizona's Fs on estimates, especially at ES and if you'd like to strip Bucyk and Cook of 10 odd points a piece be my guest. It doesn't title the overall figures back to Arizona as Pitt is up 30 in overall VsX across the top 9.

Even if you aren't going to compromise at all on Bucyk's VsX, I'd hope people are taking into account that he's surrounded by Orr and better players collectively. If there was a team he'd be able to hits that inflated 88, this might be it. That and he brings a whole lot to the table besides raw scoring.

Bucyk is clearly the 3rd wheel on the line and is not being asked to shoulder any load that he didn't in real life.

Cook's the one score that I'll definitely give on since he's downgraded linemates from real life. Even still, the fit is still very good and he checks the boxes off on the 2nd line very well.

Anderson has C who produced offense at a very near Messier rate and I'm 99% sure Tanguay represents more offense than whoever was at LW for Edmonton on the Messier-Anderson unit (before 86-87 not sure who it was, Tikkanen in 86-87 and 88 I think)

And that C, Hawerchuk wasn't skating on a dynasty like Messier. Those are cold hard facts. Anderson can do what he did best. Skate better than 99% of people, elite on the forecheck, elite pest, and ultra depth playoff ringer who will score dirty and clutch goals.

Hawerchuk especially made a carer driving a below average to shit franchise for the duration of the 80's, in the same division as the Oilers and Flames. Asking him to drive a 3rd unit with better wingers and vastly better Dmen shouldn't be an issue IMO.

Then factor in what Orr represents when he's on the ice for 30 minutes a night. He injects 114.8 level offense onto any F unit.


4. Special Teams:

Don't need to go into much depth as I just did the overview on that last night.

Pittsbrugh has vastly better PK Dmen. Our 4 F's are as good as Arizona's and Pittsburgh has the greatest PP weapon in Orr, and absolutely more scoring depth on the man advantage.

Pittsburgh IMO has the best PK in the ATD this year and if you include both PP units, is certainly above average there thanks to being able to deploy Orr and players like Martinec, Hawerchuk, and Lemaire on the second team. I didn't overload my top unit as others have.


5. Playoff Performers (Not Just Looking at G)

I outlined this well last night. Pittsburgh's F's scoring rates int he playoffs are fabulous. They drop far less than the Arizona counterparts.

I think Pittsburgh has better F's up front when it comes to the playoffs, and the gap on the blue line is quite significant.

Lemaire and Cournoyer were playoff beasts for the entirety of their careers. Cournoyer a Smythe winner.

Martinec's big game record on the international stage, especially vs the Soviets and NA players is fabulous. He was an offensive force in the 70's for the Czech team (all time leading scorer in the WC's) and played well often in the biggest games. Best RW over Mikhailov 4 straight years on the world stage is a big bullet point for Vlad IMO.

Anderson was a money player. So many huge goals scored for Edmonton and even a few w/NY. He lives for the playoffs.

Metz had a strong playoff career as a checking line player. His scoring rose more than a tick in the playoffs to boot which is pretty rare to see.

Bucyk has a very solid career, was integral on both SC winners and like the others, his scoring rate dips far less than other Arizona F's.

Bobby Orr, Scott Stevens and Earl Seibert combine for FOUR Conn Smuthes (3 regular/1 retro). Even Laperriere was solid in the playoffs, his real issue is having missed a few series that might have further helped this portion of his resume.

This is the greatest and most battle tested top 4 ever in the ATD.

Johnny Bower is certainly a downgrade from Roy, but he's far from a poor goalie in a 24 team league and his very best attribute was playoff performances. More than once he dominated better goalies head to head (Plante, Hall, Sawchuk) so he's not going to be intimidated facing Roy at the other end.

Bower has an insanely good top 4 protecting him, it miles better than the great one he had in Toronto in the 60's.


Matchups:

I already outlined the big advantage Pittsburgh's top 4 brings.

By going power on power (top line vs top line) we cancel out their offensive advantage and take advantage of a ? defensively in Jackson especially. At LW he'll have to check Martinec AND Orr and I think that is a CLEAR Pittsburgh win.

Orr is also kept away from Walker and Prentice by doing this on home ice meaning Jackson and Roberts will be seeing more of him than the other 2 certainly.

The goal here is to neutralize the top unit of Arizona by making them play much more D than normal and chase Orr/Martinec. Their top line has one good defensive player (Alfredsson) and 2 others that are nothing special. I'm not worried about them playing better defensively than Bucyk-Malone-Martinec.

Stevens-Orr lifts this 5 man unit clearly above Arizona's. Hockey is not played in sections.

This allows us to focus Crawford-Poulin-Metz on the Lalonde unit, and they'll be backed by what would be a strong top pairing in Lappy-Seibert. Those 2 bring elite size and great physicality, especially Seibert, who will also keep Lalonde in check from pulling any of the stupid chippy stuff (Stevens as well).

Poulin is fresher than Lalonde and a Selke caliber C who plays a buzzsaw game. He was great in the dot and not a black hole compared to some other defensive slanted C's.

As I stated above, outside of Lepine, Arizona doesn't really have any plus defensive C's. 2 average guys 1-2 and a poor defensive player in Smith on the 4th line and Pittsburgh's top scorer on the 1st and 3rd lines are C w/Lemaire being a playoff scoring demon.

Poulin is a Selke level C, Lemaire was good, and even Malone was shown by overpass to be at least a responsible backchecker with various quotes on the matter. Hawerchuk is going to be playing a titled offensive role here but again, Team Canada thought enough of him to roster 5 separate times and he always accepted a checking role with zero fuss and famously did very well in the 87 battle vs the KLM line.

 

[ResilientBeast]

3. Pittsburgh Forwards Can Generate As Much Offense as Arizona's:

Again nope they can't. Quote VsX all you like.

Playoff Performers (Not Just Looking at G)

But as you yourself said in that quote I keep using. You thought Roy was the most valuable playoff performer a team could have. So unless you've dramatically changed your mind, it seems your perspective changes based on your investment in said player.

And Malone is probably the worst top 6 center in the playoffs in this draft. A position and player you're counting heavily on to generate offence up front.

 

[ResilientBeast]

2. I could nitpick your team to death regarding VsX but frankly doesn't matter by now. I certainly inflated your values more than 10 points (Walker surely is inflated as a 60 and Taylor at 105 is probably a few points high) so bitching about Bucyk is just lame.

3. Bucyk has Orr. Period. I'm sorry that people are unwilling to acknowledge that his inflated number is directly tied to the #1 D on Pittsburgh. Despite this you and apparently everyone else won't budge on 78/79. His line mates are collectively better (fact) as are the blue liners supporting him. So Orr/Bucyk get punished for context, but nobody else does? Makes total sense.

Playing in perhaps the weakest period in NHL history where Bucyk was on the second line while Esposito's line was the top unit.

Edit: I haven't even touched on your estimations since there's no super reasonable way to compare the players across league. But your raw values are overrated since you have a collection of second unit players and third wheels with impressive scores because they played with better players (Cook/Lemaire), or were on the second unit (Bucyk/Cournoyer).