Jim Robson Division Second Round #2 Seattle Metropolitans vs. #3 Vancouver Blazers

Discussion in 'All Time Draft' started by Frightened Inmate #2, Nov 27, 2006.

View Users: View Users
  1. Frightened Inmate #2

    Frightened Inmate #2 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    4,385
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Calgary
    Home Page:
    [​IMG] vs.[​IMG]

    The Seattle Metropolitans and the Vancouver Blazers/Calgary Cowboys who will be playing out of Vancouver for this epic cross border matchup in which two of the ugliest logos will face off against each other in a battle to determine which pacific coastal city will reign supreme – and now the starting lineups.

    Seattle Metropolitans

    Coach: Roger Neilson
    Captain:Bobby Clarke
    Alternate Captains: Dave Taylor, Larry Robinson

    Alex Yakushev - Howie Morenz - Bill Cook
    Cy Denneny - Bobby Clarke - Tim Kerr
    Wendel Clark - Alexander Maltsev - Brian Bellows
    Peter McNab - Dave Taylor - Mike Foligno
    Bob Probert

    Larry Robinson - Doug Wilson
    Kevin Lowe - Craig Ludwig
    Ken Morrow - Ron Greschner
    Dion Phaneuf

    Clint Benedict
    Gerry Cheevers
    Dave Kerr

    Vancouver Blazers

    Coach: Punch Imlach
    Captain: Messier
    Alternate Captains: Larionov, Hlinka

    Krutov - Larionov - Makarov
    Tkachuk - Messier - Fleury
    LeClair - Lindros - St. Louis
    J. Holik - Hlinka - Linseman
    McGee

    Pospisil - Blake
    Smith - Chara
    Ozolinch - Samuelsson
    Gonchar

    Plante
    Esposito
    McLean
     
  2. John Flyers Fan

    John Flyers Fan Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    22,416
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    I can't see Seattle winning this series. If they're going to win they'll have to win on the strength of Clarke and their defensive defenseman and win a bunch of low scoring games.

    The problem with that theory is that they don't have one of the ultra elite goaltenders to play that game.

    Seattle certainly gets the edge on defense, especially defensive minded defenseman.

    Vancouver however has three dominant scoring lines. The Robinson - Wilson pairong will have to play against the Lindros-LeClair line, otherwise they will physically dominate the other defenseman.

    None of the defensive pairs has the foot speed to keep with the KLM line. Then factor in the great combo of size, speed and nastiness of the Tkachuk-Messier-Fleury line.

    Offensive fire power and the goaltending of Plante win out in the end.

    Vancouver in 5 games.
     
  3. Frightened Inmate #2

    Frightened Inmate #2 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    4,385
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Calgary
    Home Page:
    Keys to Victory for the Vancouver Blazers
    1 Goaltending: Plante – Esposito is a vastly superior combination relative to that of the Benedict – Cheevers in my opinion. Plante has the NHL record 6 Stanley Cups for a goaltender and was the player who backstopped some of the best teams of all time in Montreal. Esposito on the other hand was the best Canadian goaltender in 1972 and in my opinion is one of the key reasons that the Canadian team was able to win the series (and outplayed Dryden in the process). I have my doubts regarding the Seattle teams goaltending and it is in my opinion significantly worse than that of the Blazers
    2 The Messier factor – having the individual labelled as the greatest leader in hockey history on a team is bound to have an impact – especially given Messier’s history with turning teams wet behind the ears from very good teams into great teams (Edmonton). I think that this will be enough to propel some players with questionable playoff records towards greater heights.
    3 Chemistry – the KLM line will be counted on in order to achieve the same heights as they did during the 1980’s and at the same time it is hoped that the legion of doom will be reunited with LeClair and Lindros being well complimented by Martin St. Louis who will use his speed and skill to get into the open areas of the ice to pot a few goals and will also act as the most defensively responsible member of the line.
    4 Grit – I think that the team I have assembled displays a great deal of grit which compliments the skill on the team quite well. This is best seen on the backend which is filled with defence-first players who will have no problems clearing the front of the net – something that will be very important when you consider some of the bigger bodies in the Metropolitans lineup.
    5. Offense - I see the offensive potential from the Blazers top three lines being a significant advantage over those of the Metropolitans. The top three lines all feature an offensive force, something that is needed in order to counteract the depth that some defenses are able to stockpile.
     
    Last edited: Nov 27, 2006
  4. Frightened Inmate #2

    Frightened Inmate #2 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    4,385
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Calgary
    Home Page:
    Keys to Victory for the Seattle Metropolitans
    1. Defense - It is no secret that the Seattle defence has an advantage over that of the Blazers - especially with regards to Robinson as the #1 defenseman. In order to win this series the Metros will need to take advantage of this and shut down the top three lines of the Blazers.
    2. Stay out of the penalty box - I see the Blazers having the offensive advantage and that could prove to be a problem if the Metros get into penalty trouble. A couple of the big bodies on the powerplay in front of the net could prove to be to much for the Metros defense.
    3. Leadership in Clarke - I will not make any qualms about saying the Blazers don't have a heck of a lot of playoff experience in terms of winning on the team (I think something like 28 Cups total). At the same time it can't be denied that there are a number of question marks on the Metros side of things from a winning standpoint (Kerr, Clark, McNab, Taylor, Foligno, Wilson, Greschner, Phaneuf and Probert are all players who could win a cup in their careers but never did *I don't count Soviet/Czechoslovakian players due to their primes being cut short for political reasons). In order to make up for this Clarke will have to be a significant leader in the dressing room.
     
  5. John Flyers Fan

    John Flyers Fan Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    22,416
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:

    I think that Seattle easily trumps Vancouver in terms of leadership:

    1. Clarke
    2. Messier
    3. Robinson
    4. Lowe

    Vancouver gets the big edge behind the bench and in net, and has a clear firepower advantage.
     
  6. Frightened Inmate #2

    Frightened Inmate #2 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    4,385
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Calgary
    Home Page:
    I see it a bit differently

    1. Messier
    2. Clarke
    3/4. Larionov/Robinson
    5. Lowe
     
  7. Murphy

    Murphy Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2005
    Messages:
    2,104
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Edmonton
    I think Seattle might quite possibly be a slower team than mine, that said they're still a formidable group and the team that was scaring me the most as the draft was taking place.

    The Blazers have a ton of speed throughout the lineup though and there's no denying the chemistry. Seattle's defense is definitely superior but I think they'll have there hands full with the like of the KLM line, 2/3 of the legion of doom line and Messier coming at them constantly.

    If the goaltending was reversed I could see Seattle pulling it off but as it's not I think they're in pretty tough.

    The Clarke/Messier matchup would be legendary. One of them is going to be hurting come next round.
     
  8. kruezer

    kruezer Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2002
    Messages:
    6,431
    Likes Received:
    38
    Trophy Points:
    146
    Location:
    Toronto
    I don't know, I can't see the Lindros line being able to physically dominate any of the Metro's defenseman besides Greschner, who was no small fry. Infact I think that the Cowboy's size advantage is neutralized playing against the Metro's D.

    That said, I can't see any of the Cowboy's defensive pairings that could handle either of the top two lines of the Metro's, they may not be the speediest lines out there, but I don't think the Blake/Smith/Chara triumvirate is exactly speed demons, and Ozolinsh, Samuelsson and Gonchar just don't have the defensive ability to handle either of those two lines.

    The biggest question mark for the Metro's is how they handle the KLM line. None of the Metro's lines match up well against them, though I think Robinson/Wilson could definitely handle them from the backend. I think Neilson would match top lines, Morenz/Cook are old school but they are both severely underrated all time, Cook was dynamic and by far the best RW in this series, Krutov would be in serious trouble against him, same with Larionov against Morenz, Morenz is a top fifteen player all time for a reason, Larionov is a nice player both ways, but just doesn't have Morenz's kind of ability, Makarov against Yakushev would be interesting, but I can see that as a saw off because Makarov's linemates are overmatched.

    The Clarke/Messier matchup would have to then follow, that would be a battle. Fleury against Denneny would be an interesting matchup, and as much as I love Theo, Cy would certainly win that battle. Tkachuk vs. Kerr is interesting but I think a saw off or leaning toward Kerr is not unreasonable.
     
  9. Frightened Inmate #2

    Frightened Inmate #2 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    4,385
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Calgary
    Home Page:
    First, I have no idea how you can lump Samuelsson in with Ozolinsh and Gonchar, he is one of the toughest meanest defensemen and in my opinion one of the most underrated from a pure defense standpoint. I will make no qualms about it - your defense is better than mine is but at the same time to discount the Blazers/Cowboys defense as a bunch of players who can't take care of their own zone is only setting yourself up for disappointment.

    With regards to matchups.
    I would much rather have both Makarov as well as Krutov from an individual standpoint (with Morenz being obviously better than Larionov) although from a cohesive unit standpoint I would take the KLM line over your top line every day of the week. You have pieced together three players and I don't know how well they will mesh together.

    One the second line it is one of the slowest in the draft and I question how well Denneny a slow player would do against a tough, speedy player in Fleury. Kerr and Tkachuk are two players who are very similar although Tkachuk has an increased versitility that Kerr doesn't have and I think he is an all-round better player.

    On the third line is where the offensive domination begins. LeClair - Lindros - St. Louis is in my opinion what will make your defense's lives miserable and the line that will pot a large number of goals. Clark - Maltsev - Bellows is nice and all but in terms of peak production I would take my trio every day of the week (LeClair>Clark, Lindros>Maltsev, Bellows=St. Louis)

    From an offensive perspective I have no doubt that the Cowboys Blazers are significantly better than the Metros
     
  10. Murphy

    Murphy Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2005
    Messages:
    2,104
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Edmonton
    You make a good point about the first line Kruezer. As a unit the KLM line is held in high esteem but break them down and they don't quite stack up head to head. You have by far, the best player going up against them in the Stratford Streak.

    I'd have to take your word about Bill Cook, he's one I've never read up much on. The Tank was my favourite Russian though, he seemed to me to be the Russian version of Ted Lindsay but faster. Its to bad he mailed it in as a Vancouver Canuck though, I think that has alot to do of people's opinions of him.
     
  11. Frightened Inmate #2

    Frightened Inmate #2 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    4,385
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Calgary
    Home Page:
    I guess it is a good thing then that hockey is a team game defined by how well units are able to interact with each other - sometimes you can put the best players together and they just don't perform. I have built a team that save for the second line is one which puts chemistry at the forfront while not sacrificing talent.

    I would agree that the Metropolitans have the best player in Morenz but after that I can't help but think that Makarov, Larionov and possibly Krutov are better than Cook, and if not Cook then definantly better than Yakushev.

    I see speed playing a significant role in the offensive advantage held by the Blazers as well as the Metros are at least in my opinion the slowest team in the draft further limiting their offensive potential.
     
  12. kruezer

    kruezer Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2002
    Messages:
    6,431
    Likes Received:
    38
    Trophy Points:
    146
    Location:
    Toronto

    :D, I like this rivalry already, I was not quite done my analysis but got interrupted, I still needed to say, I think Plante is obviously the best goalie, though Espo's effect is pretty limited in a 7 game series. And I do believe that Clint Benedict is horribly underrated, I'd take him over Hainsworth.

    Anyway, as for Samuelsson, consider me not a fan, I think he is really overrated and that his stature in the game was overblown by Don Cherry of all people, I think Cherry really played up his battles with Neely, which Neely routinely won and gave him more of a name than he deserved, but thats just me.

    As for the KLM line, I think Krutov is definetaly the weak link compared to Bill Cook, Cook was stellar, 11 times he was top 10 in goals over a 15 year pro career, 4 times lead his league, 3 times finished second he was among the top 2 goal scorers in the league for essentially half his career. I don't think Krutov had that kind of ability. I'll give you Makarov over Yakushev, but even with bonuses for chemistry, I don't think I'd take the KLM line over the Metro's top line not a chance.

    I think Denneny's speed is also overblown, I think writting off his effectiveness and saying Theo could deal with him because he is speedy and tough is wrong, Denneny was top 3 in goal scoring 7 times in 12 years and in the top 8 nine times over 12 years, those are outstanding numbers, against all the greats of the games earliest times, I just can't see Theo being in his class skill wise.

    About Tkachuk being better all around than Kerr, fair enough, I don't think Tkachuk has the top end talent that Kerr does however, Kerr's peak value as a goal scorer is something Tkachuk couldn't touch, though I love Tkachuk and think he is very undervalued all time.

    As for Messier/Clarke, I would take Clarke for leadership personally, Mess is clearly the better player and the matchup should be judged according, I don't know if there are many players I would take over Clarke for leadership purposes however (only cats like Beliveau, Orr, maybe Espo, a select few others) and Mess isn't one of those guys, despite his famed skills at it. Add to that Clarke is far and away the best two way player on either team and Mess's skills may be neutralized a touch.

    With the third line, I agree, the Lindros line is clearly better offensively than the Maltsev line, but considering they will be facing mostly the Robinson/Wilson and Lowe/Ludwig pairings, I don't think they will be able to dominate down low like they planned.

    Anyway, I still think the Metro's top two lines would have their way with the Cowboy's defense, Pospisil is solid, but not a top pairing guy, Blake is solid, somewhere around Wilson all time I think, though he had more longevity, I don't see that as a legit top pairing that could handle a top line. I don't think Smith is a legit top 4 guy either, I'd consider him more on par with Ken Morrow than with Kevin Lowe in an all time draft, Chara is tough to gauge, but would have to carry that pairing IMO. I don't think the Ozo/Sammy/Gonchar triumvarite could handle anything but the Metro's 4th line personally, they would have to be sheltered and I think that would just put more strain on the already overmatched top 4 guys. I think Plante would have to stand on his head, and that is certainly possible, but as I said earlier, Benedict is no slouch.

    Anyway, that was a lot of writing, I like this playoff format already :D, I will leave this one to the voters. Best of luck.
     
  13. Nalyd Psycho

    Nalyd Psycho Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    24,415
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    No Bandwagon
    Home Page:
    I strongly disagree there. Benedict put up a 0.75 gaa in the finals when he won the cup with the Maroons. On a team that wasn't particularly great. Nels Stewart and Clint Benedict carried that team to the cup. Benedict owned the legendarily clutch play of Hap Holmes.

    Four cups on teams that weren't nearly as stacked as Plante's Habs. With the exception of 1914-15 cup finals and the 18-19 playoffs, he was a consistently strong playoff performer. And with the exception 1917-18, he was clearly the best goalie in the East from 1912 until 1925. And even then, maybe for a few more years as Connell's Senators and Hainsworth's Canadiens were superior teams to Benedict's Maroons.

    Benedict is the first star goalie in the history of the sport. He stepped up big when it mattered and was consistantly top notch for almost 20 years, and even then, he only slowed down because of too many pucks to the face, given todays equipment, he'd have much more longevity.

    And remember, Benedict was the only goalie to play low before the advent of masks, so, it's same to say, he's bloody fearless.

    Plante may just be the greatest of all time, but even that isn't a huge advantage over Benedict.
     
  14. Frightened Inmate #2

    Frightened Inmate #2 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    4,385
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Calgary
    Home Page:
    THe problem is when Benidict played the game it was a completely different game would his style of just flopping on the ice be as effective today as it was 80 years ago when he was in his prime? How would the advent of forward pass? In the 1929-30 season his GAA ballooned to twice of what it was before. I understand that he was old and past his prime and there were events that year that were out of his control but to use Benedict's statistics as a reference for how good he was is a bit foolish - as it is with any player from that era in my view... but I will touch on that later.

    You say that he might be overrated? I don't see how he was a towering defenseman who provided the defense that this team is going to need and was one of the best defensive-defenseman from 1990-1995 in my opinion and was a key part to the Penguins Championships. Are his battles with Neely overrated - I guess so, but at the same time that shouldn't discount his positioning in the defensive end and the brute nastyness factor to his game which is needed from a teams defense.

    Krutov in the Soviet Union was able to be the top goal scorer three times in his 11 year career. Was voted the best player in the Soviet Union once and the best forward at the World Championships in the 1980s two times. The difference between Cook and Krutov are not as great as you make them out to be and I would take Makarov over Cook everyday of the week (with both of them being the right wingers I figure it apt to compare them). With regards to Morenz the more I read about him the more I wonder if his reputation isn't built in part on the romantic nature of his death - now I know that might sound stupid but the more I look at him the more that thought crosses my mind. Great? Yes. But his peak was a very short one and then it was gone as quick as it came. The real difficulty is judging players from these eras as really all there is to rely on is statistics and quotes. I don't think that Larionov is that far off of what Morenz brings to the table - especially when it comes to leadership offered.

    Denneny's speed would most definantly be an issue and to just say that it would be overblown is setting yourself up for failure in my opinion. He was a known slow player in a league that wasn't anywhere near as fast as it is today due to the rules. The lack of the forward pass in the offensive zone would slow the game down playing well to Denneny's weakness. That is the big problem with players from the early eras.. how well would they adjust? In Denneny's case I don't think it is even much of a discussion, look at Allison he is a very tallented player but his lack of footspeed is what at the end of the day is what is keeping him from being an elite player.

    Offensively I don't really see much of a difference when you take the difference in scoring in the 80s and 90s into account. The only difference is that Tkachuk has lead the league in goals scored whereas Kerr has not done so. I have to have it the other way around with regards to peak value - look at him relative to his peers and not just at the numbers and then you have your answer.

    This one is hard to judge - putting two of the best leaders of the past 50 years head to head. I think what it boils down to though are cups and Messier has more cups. Captained two different teams to cups actually (think he is the only one to do that). I love Clarke and all but I have to hand this one to Messier from the leadership aspect. I think all that is known about this matchup is that one of the two will be in the hospital at one point or another.

    I hope you do throw the Lowe/Ludwig pairing out as Lindros will just bowl over them. The best way to contain Lindros is finess. Lidstrom in 1998 for isntance. Trying to knock down a bull is only going to lead to having horns implanted in your ***.

    The defense is the weakness on my team although from a physical standpoint your main offense is going to have to come from standing in front of the net and getting the garbage goals and that is what my defense excels at preventing as there will be no easy rides in front of the net. I just see your team as a whole as being to slow to knock off the Blazers. You have some tallent there is no doubt about that but it seems as though your team is lacking footspeed throughout the lineup and that is what limits your offensive capabilities.

    I think that this matchup could go either way but at the end of the day the superior goaltending of Plante will be the difference in deciding the close games.
     
  15. Frightened Inmate #2

    Frightened Inmate #2 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    4,385
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Calgary
    Home Page:
    That is nice and all but the game as a whole was much different - especially from an offensive standpoint as outlined in the previous post and the GAA average arguement is flawed in that regard. As soon as offensive forward passes were allowed Benedicts GAA skyrocketed not just in the NHL with the Maroons but if you look at his numbers in the IHL that year as well you will find a common trend. Yes past his prime but those numbers say alot in my opinion.
     
  16. God Bless Canada

    God Bless Canada Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2004
    Messages:
    11,793
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Newspaper reporter
    Location:
    Bentley reunion
    Definitely give the edge in goal to the Blazers/Cowboys/whatever they want to be called in this series. Possibly the best 1-2 punch in the draft with Plante and Esposito. (Rivaled by Murphy2's Sawchuk-Brimsek and #66's Hall-Thompson).

    The one thing that Seattle has going for them is the presence of Gerry Cheevers. This is Cheevers' favourite time of the year. He is one of the best clutch goalies ever. It's what he built his career, legacy and reputation on. He didn't care about GAA or save percentage, just wins. And when you needed that big save late in a game, he got it. It wouldn't surprise me to see Cheevers in this series at some point. I'd take Cheevers ahead of Esposito in the playoffs, but Plante is still the best of the bunch in this series.

    Give the edge to Seattle on defence, although I wouldn't characterize it as a big edge. Transition game could be a struggle for both teams. They have a lot of defencemen whose preferred puck-moving strategy is to chip the puck off the glass or boards and out. (Even Rob Blake struggled with the long-bomb pass in the last two Olympics). I give the edge to Seattle simply because of the presence of Larry Robinson. He's the one true stud defenceman in this series. He's still the standard for combining size and mobility among defencemen. And he's going to have his hands full against Lindros or Messier.

    Elvi, I'll definitely disagree with your Makarov over Cook assessment. I think Cook is one of the top 10 right wingers of all-time, and he and Conacher were clearly the two best of the pre-Original 6 era. He's nearly as dangerous as Makarov offensively, his goal scoring instincts are every bit as good, but what sets him apart is grit. Cook was double-tough. One of the first power forwards. And he'll open up a lot of room for Morenz and Yakushev with his physical play.

    Seattle also has the best 1-2 centre punch in the draft. kruezer definitely made good use of his trade with Hamilton that sent Hull to murray - kruezer landed Morenz, Clarke and Cook. Morenz was labelled as hockey's first superstar. He had a flair, both on and off the ice, that drew people to the game. He was a true joy to watch. His peak was about six years - no less than LaFleur's. If people overrate Morenz, I'd say it's more likely due to his charisma, his ability to draw people to the game, than his death.

    You could argue that Seattle has a slight edge in terms of top-end talent, but I'll give Elvi the edge in terms of depth. Elvi can trott out four well-balanced lines that can score. Okay, the KLM line won't hit or backcheck much, but they're potent, and Larionov is very playoff-proven. The bottom three lines have a good blend of skill and toughness. I love Elvi's second line - one of the best in the draft. Tkachuk isn't the finest playoff player, but even he should be able to deliver on a line with Messier and Fleury. Ken Linseman is one of the biggest steals in the draft.

    kruezer's third line wingers are weak, and I've never been a big fan of that fourth line he keeps trotting out. Taylor could get eaten alive by either Messier or Lindros.

    Neither team has that dominant shut down line (which could be really detrimental should one of them face Burnaby in the conference final).

    Even though he waited until the last round to pick his coach, I'll give Elvi the edge here. Only concern is how will Imlach get along with the KLM Line. Larionov hated Tikhanov, and Imlach is in Tikhanov's league as far as demanding, totalitarian coaches go.
     
  17. kruezer

    kruezer Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2002
    Messages:
    6,431
    Likes Received:
    38
    Trophy Points:
    146
    Location:
    Toronto
    I think the important point about Benedict is not the numbers, but relative dominance, as Nalyd pointed out, I think he was the best goalie of the early years, and while Plante is certainly dominant and right now might be my pick for best ever, Benedict is an all time elite level goalie.

    With Ulf, its JMO, and disagreeing with that is certainly legit. With Krutov vs. Cook, I think I explained Cook's dominance, he simply had more skill than Krutov, who I do agree was an awesome player in his prime. I tend to compare LW with RW as they will be lining up against each other, and I really can't say more than I completely disagree with you about Makarov and Cook, Makarov was sick, but I don't think its crazy to take Cook over Mak, They are very comparable all time IMO.

    I started to think the same thing about Morenz a couple drafts ago, but after looking at it further, I came to realize just how dominant his peak was, he was the best forward in the league from 27-32, I don't know that anybody on the Cowboy's can claim a 5 year window of dominance like that.

    I see that people do not feel that the guys from the early era's could compete nowadays (though I don't understand why, in an all time draft, it has to be assumed we are playing in today rules, it seems to me everyone should be judged on talent and relative dominance, not disregarded because of the way the game was played) but I think Denneny's skill level is way out of the league of a guy like Jason Allison, skill can certainly make up for speed defecencies.

    With regards to Kerr/Tkachuk too be fair, if not for Wayne Gretzky, Kerr would have had the 86/87 goal scoring crown. Kerr went 3/6/3/2 in goal scoring over a four year period, Tkachuk on the other hand, won one goal scoring crown and then never finished higher than 6th, relatively speaking, I don't think Tkachuk was nearly as dominant a goal scorer as Kerr. And I with a dominant setup man like Clarke he would be getting the puck a tonne.

    I think people are looking at the slowness of the second line and overreacting, the rest of the team is not all that slow, and the skill on the second line can make up for their speed deficencies.

    With regard to Lindros only being contained by finesse, I think Scott Stevens would disagree ;) :D.
     
  18. Wisent

    Wisent Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2003
    Messages:
    3,667
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    Mannheim
    Home Page:
    Or Kasparaitis.
     
  19. Frightened Inmate #2

    Frightened Inmate #2 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    4,385
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Calgary
    Home Page:
    Look at Lindros in 1998 before injuries ruined his career (I am doing the same for Morenz) he dominated every round of the playoffs leading up to the finals - no matter what defenseman was matched up against Lindros he just physically dominated them. That was until the finals where Bowman was able to match up Lidstrom against Lindros and that paid significant dividends in neutralizing Lindros.

    I am not trying to take away from Cook as I know he is great but after watching the 87 Canada Cup I just can't imagine how much better Cook could have been relative to Makarov and even with that difference would that be enough to make up for the obvious chemistry that he had with the other members of the line? That is the question that needs to be answered.

    And GBC under which type of coach was Larionov able to achieve his greatest heights? I don't see a problem between Imlach and the KLM line in terms of production. I don't know if I would put Imlach on the same level as Tikhanov a man who stole the medal of Khabibulin at the Olympics I believe. I have actually read that while Imlach was a hardass at the same time his players knew that he gave a damn about them as people as well...
     
  20. Nalyd Psycho

    Nalyd Psycho Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    24,415
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    No Bandwagon
    Home Page:
    What you fail to realize is that the 29-30 season is the one where Benedict attempted to utilized a goalie mask. (Ironic that this is a duel of the 1st two goalies to wear a mask in the NHL.) Benedict's mask designs were horribly flawed and seriously hurt his game. So in the games he wore masks (Usually a different mask each game) he let in significantly more goals. This led to the change in GAA way more than the rule changes did.

    And really, saying a poor season at 36 years old after getting hit in the face with pucks for the past 16 years is proof that he isn't a good goalie is beyond absurd.

    One, I can think of one flopper who has been very successful in modern NHL. Two, he didn't flop, he'd go down on his knees, it's perfectly logical that with modern training and technology, he'd adapt a very strong butterfly style as his style is essentially the proto-butterfly.

    Two. His strong playoff performance and fearlessness in facing the puck prove he has the mental game down to be a great goalie in any era.

    Three. Like Plante, great old time goalies relied more on strong fundamentals rather than strong technique. And fundamentals translate to any era.
     
  21. Frightened Inmate #2

    Frightened Inmate #2 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    4,385
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Calgary
    Home Page:
    While I do appreciate your opinion on the matter of Clint Benedict your constant running around the issue of the forward pass leads myself to question the value of your opinion on the matter. Mr. Benedict wore a mask for how many games before he gave it up? I know he played one game with the mask that everyone knows about in the piece of leather before throwing it away. The score of that game, 2-1 for the Chicago Black Hawks. Now unless I am not fully understanding this, the game that he played actually served to lower his goals against average thus completely throwing your arguement out of the window. The forward pass is what lead to his extremely low numbers increasing dramatically, it had nothing to do with him using a mask for two or three games.

    Second flopping down to his knees in order to save pucks? He was nothing like Hasek, I really hate to burst your bubble but Hasek was a generational tallent and one who I still don't know how he did it. For every Hasek I will point out twice as many Cechmanek's. The fact of the matter is no matter how much you promote Benedict who is a very good goaltender he does not even begin to compare to the true great in Plante giving the Blazers a distinct advantage in that area of the game.

    From my perspective the Blazers are superior on offensive potential, in goal and behind the bench. It would take a miracle for the Metropolitans to overcome these advantages especially when you factor in the defense while better is not significantly better in terms of depth.
     
  22. Nalyd Psycho

    Nalyd Psycho Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    24,415
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    No Bandwagon
    Home Page:
    I'm not avoiding the issue of the forward pass. I'm pointing out that he was a 36 year old. (Which, playing good hockey for 17 seasons in that era is a huge accomplishment. Remember, the 3 year waiting period for the HHoF was waived for Dit Clapper largely because of his 20 years as an NHLer. Goalies traditionally don't last as long and Benedict played 18 pro seasons. Only Hugh Lehman tops Benedict for longevity until Sawchuck.) And could his body couldn't stand getting hit in the face with pucks any more. He wore multiple different masks in different games. There is no concrete evidence how many masks he wore but there is concrete eveidence of 2 and circumstantial evidence of a few more. And even then, the fact that he felt he needed a mask says alot.

    Basically what you are saying is that Brett Hull's 05-06 season prooves that he couldn't be effective in the modern NHL.

    And lets not forget the fact that in the 29-30 season, the forward pass rule was changed to allow forward passing in the defensive and neutral zones, not the offensive zone. The effect on scoring was minimal until the forward pass was allowed in the offensive zone.

    All evidence points to the problem being Benedict's age, health and experiments to compensate for age and health.

    Did you miss my point about how between 1912 and 1925 he was the best goalie in Eastern hockey and likely the best goalie in the world. (He never lost to Hap Holmes or Hugh Lehman the top Western goalies, so it's reasonable to say he was the superior goalie.) 12 of 13 years he was head and shoulders above his pears. That is a generational talent.

    My comparison to Hasek was more to say that odd technique doesn't mean it can't be effective. And Benedict performance clearly prooves his ability to make the technique work.

    Is Plante better? Yes. Is Plante significantly better? No.
     
  23. Frightened Inmate #2

    Frightened Inmate #2 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    4,385
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Calgary
    Home Page:
    But look at the facts his statistics remained pretty much at the same level until the advent of the forward pass in the offensive zone - you wouldhave to be ignoring a lot to just say that was the result of him getting that much older in a single year. Was he older and did that have an impact. I am sure that it did. Was that impact as large as the impact of a new rule designed to increase the offensive output of NHL teams? I highly doubt it. goal totals the next season skyrocketed for players across the board. Did every single goaltender in the NHL start to suffer from age at the same time? Look at the statistics from the Maroons own team
    • Nels Stewart went from 21 goals to 39.
    • Smith from 10 to 21.
    From the entire league
    • Ralph Weiland went from 11 goals to 43

    Time and time again the evidence points to the fact that the offensive forward pass lead to a dramatic increase in goals which in turn explains the seeminly mindboggling GAA averages put up by players such as Benedict.

    No because he has shown he could play the same game and succeed like it or not hockey likely underwent it's most dramatic change in 1929-30 and the game was turned on it's head.

    I was always under the impression that it was the forward pass in the offensive zone that was changed in the 1929-30 season which would explain the inflated numbers which have been documented above.. and in turn the extremely low numbers which have been recorded by Benedict.

    All evidence points towards Benedict being an aging goaltender thrown out of his element and his numbers suffering as a result - you can tell yourself all day that Benedict would be able to put up similar numbers but at the end of the day the only person you are going to convince is yourself.

    He may have been the best goaltender but the problem is the game changed so much that to stick him in net in 2006 would be a poor coaching move. He benifited greatly from the era in which he played. That is undenyable.


    He has never proven his ability to make it work in the modern game and for that reason alone Plante is not only better he is significantly better.
     
  24. Nalyd Psycho

    Nalyd Psycho Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    24,415
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    No Bandwagon
    Home Page:
    I'm going to leave it here. I should try to be unbiassed. I just wish to insure that voters have sufficient information, and I believe there is enough that voters can make an informed vote.
     
  25. kruezer

    kruezer Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2002
    Messages:
    6,431
    Likes Received:
    38
    Trophy Points:
    146
    Location:
    Toronto
    I can agree about Lindros, he was certainly dominant before his injuries, and I think the Cowboys have the advantage on the third line for sure, but I don't see that as making up for the disadvantage they have on defense and that the top two lines matching up head to head is going to come out in favour of the Metro's, they just have too much skill for the Cowboy's D to handle.

    I agree that Makarov is dominant, but writing off Cook because he played in the past and we have no tapes seems ridiculous, a good case could be made for him being the best goal scorer of his generation, to say that Makarov would have been clearly better than that seems pretty unbelievable, I'd call that a saw off comparison at best.

    I don't understand the point you are trying to make with regards to Benedict though, Benedict's numbers fluctuated pretty widely throughout his career from what I can tell, the game underwent quite a few changes over the early years, but I don't see how that changes Nalyd point that he outperformed all his peers between '12 and '25, in terms of relative dominance, he was the best, for a prolonged period of time, to say he didn't prove he could handle the new game seems ridiculous when goal scoring was up league wide, of course his GAA went up, everyone's did. I don't see how his performance over a very long career can be discredited on the basis of that.

    His stats benefitted from certain era's he played in for sure, they also struggled because of it at times, but hey, I am sure Hasek's GAA would have been worse in the '80s, but if he was still the best goalie then he would still be remembered the same way right?

    As for the changes in the game, I think you and I differ a lot on how we look at players from the early era, it seems to me you are writing off an entire generation of players based on the differences in the game, and that seems to defeat the purpose of an all time draft. But that is just a matter of opinion in the end, however people want to look at it :D.
     

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"