Louis Magnus Division Finals - Pittsburgh AC (1) vs Portland Rosebuds (2)

[ResilientBeast]

Right.. I figured it would be tough. I wonder if there are any third party players they both played against in similar situations... Probably not

Once my teams are eliminated I'll try and and get my thirst for research back. Get back on the NHA - PCHA - WCHL positions project and then work on pre-NHA.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Also want to see the rosters Smith played on. While the talent had increased surely by 1912, 13, 14, etc, I can't imagine he was skating with the kind of low hanging fruit Bowie was for the Vics. Bowie was overwhelmingly the best player on all his teams and got little to zero support beyond Russell.

 

[ResilientBeast]

@ResilientBeast

I'm willing to move the needle on Smith up to Bowie as far as offensive value goes. I still think one overview from Ian Fyfe (that doesn't say anything about Smith being best in the world btw) can overrule or bridge the gap between what everyone already knows about Bowie and the many things I've read (eventually will compile all of it) over the past month. The number of mythical AS teams Bowie made long after he retired or the fact the HOF put him in with some of the greatest names in history to that point in history (1947) in its 2nd ever HOF class. Say what you want, but Smith not getting in for 16 years after that tells me he wasn't nearly highly regarded as Bowie.

But in the sake of trying to be fair, I do agree his scoring totals are more impressive given he was putting up those numbers 4, 5, 6 years after Bowie retired.

I didn't imply that Fyfe's quote would suggest he was the best in the world just that he was likely better than Malone on the Bulldogs.

Not nearly as famous.

 

[overpass]

The things about Bowie’s era was that hockey was still very local. Bowie was competing against English-speaking players from Montreal, Quebec, and Ottawa. Not a huge talent pool. No French-Canadians. No players from Toronto, Southern Ontario, Kingston, Sault Ste Marie, Northern Ontario, Kenora, Manitoba, Atlantic Canada...and of course there were many hockey areas that weren’t producing players yet, such Saskatchewan and further west (still sparsely settled), and pretty much every country other than Canada.

Let’s say hockey is still organized as it was in Bowie’s day. Who are the best Anglo Montreal-born players who would be playing for the Montreal Victorias? I don’t even know...Michael Matheson? (To be fair there have been great Anglo montrealers at times like Doug Harvey, Dickie Moore, and Mike Bossy...but there have also been times when there weren’t.)

Yes, Bowie was rated highly by the 1925 Macleans all star voting panel. But if you actually read the issue, what stands out the most is the wide variety of opinions and lack of consensus by the panelists. Before the professional leagues were consolidated, back when senior amateur hockey still had much of the top talent, the best players were really spread all around. I think you have to discount that era of hockey or treat it differently because it’s so different from other eras. The best players often rarely faced each other, and there was little opportunity for hockey fans to see all the best players without travelling around Canada.

I've made my position known.

McGee was on the scene by 1903. Ernie Russell showed up in 1905. Jordan was there as you mentioned. Also don't forget the defensemen that were in the league at the time. None of which were on his team. Moose Johnson, Harvey Pulford. Art Ross to name a few. The very early portion of Bowie's career was much less refined but you started seeing more prominent talent arriving in 1903 and then really taking off in 1905. At least that's what I see looking a the league rosters. And Bowie, despite being older than most of these guys was still leading or in the running for best scorer.....on a team that had zero help beyond Blair Russell.

I don't think ranking Bowie where I am, is outrageous or anything that hasn't been suggested numerous times before. I've taken off considerable % of his offensive value precisely because he played in the first decade of the 1900's. I'm not saying he should be drafted in the top 100. I certainly think he dropped too far this year.

At some point you need to draw the line in devaluing early era guys otherwise there is no point in even drafting them. Again, I'm not suggesting anything on Bowie that hasn't been done before. I'll let folks make up their own minds.

 

[ResilientBeast]

That's a good point @overpass the best players of the time are Bowie, Philips and Hod Stuart right?

Bowie is in the
CAHL from 99-05
ECAHA 05 - 08

Phillips
CAHL 02-03
ECAHA 07-08

Stuart
98-02 CAHL
ECAHA 06-07

So three greatest players of the time were never in the league together. Stuart and Bowie had the longest overlap in the CAHL. Phillips never played more than a single year in the same league as Bowie./

1907-08 Bowie lead the league with 31 goals in 10 game, Phillips had 26 in 10 games. Phillips teammate Walsh was on pace to tie Bowie but missed 1 game.

Edit: then there is Frank McGee

CAHL 02-04
ECAHA 05-06

 

[ImporterExporter]

I think Bowie's 1907-08 season is pretty telling. Playing on a very average team, as one of the older players in the league, still managed to outscore multiple, younger HOF forwards and lead the league in scoring.

My hunch is he would have had little issue putting up big numbers 4 and 5 years beyond the time he left the game, especially if he got off a crappy roster. Given what people were saying about him year after year and the fact at an older age (for that time period) he was still the best offensive player in the world says a lot.

 

[ResilientBeast]

I think Bowie's 1907-08 season is pretty telling. Playing on a very average team, as one of the older players in the league, still managed to outscore multiple, younger HOF forwards and lead the league in scoring.

My hunch is he would have had little issue putting up big numbers 4 and 5 years beyond the time he left the game, especially if he got off a crappy roster. Given what people were saying about him year after year and the fact at an older age (for that time period) he was still the best offensive player in the world says a lot.

But I guess the counterpoint is, maybe he only put up such gaudy offensive totals because his teams were so crappy. My memory is hazy but the reading I did back in 2017 maybe it seem like the team strategy was give Bowie the puck and get out of the way.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

That's a good point @overpass the best players of the time are Bowie, Philips and Hod Stuart right?

Bowie is in the
CAHL from 99-05
ECAHA 05 - 08

Phillips
CAHL 02-03
ECAHA 07-08

Stuart
98-02 CAHL
ECAHA 06-07

So three greatest players of the time were never in the league together. Stuart and Bowie had the longest overlap in the CAHL. Phillips never played more than a single year in the same league as Bowie./

1907-08 Bowie lead the league with 31 goals in 10 game, Phillips had 26 in 10 games. Phillips teammate Walsh was on pace to tie Bowie but missed 1 game.

Edit: then there is Frank McGee

CAHL 02-04
ECAHA 05-06

Frank McGee too

 

[ResilientBeast]

Frank McGee too

Added him via edit

 

[ImporterExporter]

The things about Bowie’s era was that hockey was still very local. Bowie was competing against English-speaking players from Montreal, Quebec, and Ottawa. Not a huge talent pool. No French-Canadians. No players from Toronto, Southern Ontario, Kingston, Sault Ste Marie, Northern Ontario, Kenora, Manitoba, Atlantic Canada...and of course there were many hockey areas that weren’t producing players yet, such Saskatchewan and further west (still sparsely settled), and pretty much every country other than Canada.

Let’s say hockey is still organized as it was in Bowie’s day. Who are the best Anglo Montreal-born players who would be playing for the Montreal Victorias? I don’t even know...Michael Matheson? (To be fair there have been great Anglo montrealers at times like Doug Harvey, Dickie Moore, and Mike Bossy...but there have also been times when there weren’t.)

Yes, Bowie was rated highly by the 1925 Macleans all star voting panel. But if you actually read the issue, what stands out the most is the wide variety of opinions and lack of consensus by the panelists. Before the professional leagues were consolidated, back when senior amateur hockey still had much of the top talent, the best players were really spread all around. I think you have to discount that era of hockey or treat it differently because it’s so different from other eras. The best players often rarely faced each other, and there was little opportunity for hockey fans to see all the best players without travelling around Canada.

Thanks for the addition sir.

I think I am discounting Bowie. Certainly not trying to put him on some unseen level. There is a reason why he gets drafted where he does and is given a general range of offensive value, which admittedly am on the higher end of. But given I was able to give him his real life winger in Russell and upgrade what he would have had at every point in his caerer at LW, I'd say my assertions are not extreme in anyway.

Chemistry was obviously a big theme for Pittsburgh. I think it is overlooked and have argue that for years here. People talk about fit and Pittsburgh's roster has loads of chemistry up and down the line up, a highly respected D pairing who played for Green for years and won multiple titles. A roster that is full of players who are way above the bar defensively, a checking line that can skate with anyone north south or play a neutral ice trap game like the 20's Senators. Green had the best offensive C's in the early years of Ottawa (like Pittsburgh has here) has a pure checker on a Selke level (Jarvis) and a very good 2 way, insanely tough, and HOF 4th line C in Westwick who Green would have known personally having trained him for years during the original Silver Seven days.

Chemistry/fit is something that Pittsburgh is extremely strong on this year. I made a very fine point to focus on that given my failures a few years ago.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Frank McGee too

So a prime Walsh and Phillips couldn't outscore the older Bowie who was on a far inferior squad? Massively inferior.

Again, context and who these guys were playing with matters.

 

[ResilientBeast]

But I guess the counterpoint is, maybe he only put up such gaudy offensive totals because his teams were so crappy. My memory is hazy but the reading I did back in 2017 maybe it seem like the team strategy was give Bowie the puck and get out of the way.

So a prime Walsh and Phillips couldn't outscore the older Bowie who was on a far inferior squad? Massively inferior.

Again, context and who these guys were playing with matters.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Yeah, that's not at all what happened based on game reports. Bowie was quite apt at working combination game, as his play making totals would only enhance his rep but that's a study for later.

And playing on crappy teams with no D to transition the puck and one good winger is not a help, it's a hindrance.

Every team knew Bowie and respected his dominance. And they still couldn't stop him.

 

[ResilientBeast]

Yeah, that's not at all what happened based on game reports. Bowie was quite apt at working combination game, as his play making totals would only enhance his rep but that's a study for later.

And playing on crappy teams with no D to transition the puck and one good winger is not a help, it's a hindrance.

Every team knew Bowie and respected his dominance. And they still couldn't stop him.

But given the rules of the time would defence to transition the puck really matter anyway?

 

[ImporterExporter]

Illustrations of how famous and respected Bowie was:

This is 1947, about the time he would have been inducted into the HOF:

4 Mar 1947, 17 - The Ottawa Citizen at Newspapers.com

"Bowie, who from 1905-09 was the Howie Morenz of his day"

"Bowie, feared by such greats as Frank McGee, Harvey Pulford, Rat Westwick, Alf and Harry Smith, Bouse Hutton and Bill Gilmour of the Famed Silver seven was, as recorded by the Montreal Star of 1916, "was known from ocean to ocean, and was even celebrated in the United State, as may be judged by teh fac that they call Hobie Baker, the star of the St. Nicholas Club, New York, the American Russell Bowie."

Taylor singles out Bowie and Patrick as players he's delighted to be going into the Hall with. Could have named a slew of folks that got in that year.

11 Oct 1947, 19 - The Gazette at Newspapers.com

DAL MacDonald , noted hockey writer from Montreal in the 40's, 50's and beyond noting that most old timers regarded Bowie as being without equal in stickhandling. This is noted too many times to count in the old game reports.

Offensive Accomplishments:
Goals - 1st(1901), 1st(1903), 1st(1904), 1st(1905), 1st(1908), 1st(1909*), 2nd(1900), 2nd(1902), 2nd(1906), 2nd(1907), 3rd(1899)

Reconstructed Assists: 1st(1904), 1st(1908), 2nd(1906), 3rd(1903), 7th(1907)
(not recorded in 1901, 1902, or 1905)

Rconstructed Points - 1st(1901), 1st(1903), 1st(1904), 1st(1905), 1st(1906), 1st(1907), 1st(1908), 1st(1909*), 2nd(1900), 2nd(1902), 3rd(1899)

 

[Dreakmur]

But given the rules of the time would defence to transition the puck really matter anyway?

Seems defensemen either carrier the puck or flipped it up over everyone’s heads and tried to land it where their team could get it.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Really fantastic article from The Hockey Writers who put out a lot of quality material and I believe our very own @seventieslord has published work for them:

https://thehockeywriters.com/russell-bowie-the-pre-nhl-wayne-gretzky/

I can't stress enough, the fact that Bowie destroyed a league in which he was generally on subpar teams, with very little support, is just mind boggling to me. Yes, we must keep in mind that this was the very early 1900's but if we judge people on what they did vs their peers, few players have ever dominated a league in hockey history, like Bowie did. While the F depth certainly wasn't anything to write home about in the early portion of his career, there were almost always at 2 other teams vastly superior loaded with HOF talent and by the final few seasons you saw a big influx of more notable players. I like the fact that Iain Fyffe points out that not once, but twice, Bowie outscored ENTIRE franchises.

In these ten seasons, Bowie led his league in goals five times, was second four times, and third once. To finish in the top three in goals in every season in which you played is an unreal accomplishment in and of itself. But when you dig even deeper into the numbers, you get a sense of the magnitude in which Bowie dominated every other player during the era. In these ten seasons, from 1899 to 1908, Bowie scored 239 goals in 80 games for a GPG average of 2.99. The next closest player was Blair Russel (a Hall of Famer himself), who scored 109 goals in 67 games for a GPG average of 1.62. For those that are mathematically challenged, that’s 119% more than the second place scorer on a raw basis and 84% more on a per-game basis.

In the five seasons in which Bowie led the league in goals, he led the second place scorer by a combined 41 goals. In two of these seasons, Bowie was the only member of his team (the Montreal Victorias) in the top 10 in the league in goals. The Victorias were far from the most talented team in the league.


From Turning Back Hockey’s Pages on April 5th, 1934:

The slight, almost frail rover of the Victorias played during what was probably the roughest era of hockey for he was a starred member of Victorias when the Silver Seven was in its heyday. It took more than ability to score goals to get by against such stalwarts as McGee, Pulford and the Smiths but even in this company, Bowie, over a period of ten years, was the leading scorer in the Eastern Canada Hockey Association. Bowie was probably the shiftiest player that ever carried a puck. He could nurse the disc between his skates and swing through the opposition, avoiding checks, with a deftness that beggars description. He was probably also one of the smartest players who ever handled a stick. And, though he was a marked man in every game he played, he led the E.C.H.A in scoring in practically every season from 1900 to 1909. When the National Hockey Association was formed, the amateur Vics dropped from competition and Bowie never played again except in exhibition matches.​

Hockey historian Iain Fyffe has attempted to quantify how impressive Bowie’s exploits are, and the results are interesting. He concludes that two of Bowie’s seasons, 1901 and 1903, were at a Wayne Gretzky/Bobby Orr level of dominance.

In 1901, Bowie led the league in goals with 24 (second place had 10). His 24 goals were more than the entire Quebec franchise scored that season (21). In 1903, he led the league in goals with 22 (second place had 14), and outscored the Montreal Shamrocks franchise (21 goals).

From the Calgary Daily Herald on January 15th, 1912:

I see Russell Bowie is up to his old tricks of making the goal-keeper look like a wooden Indian in front of a cigar store. There was one great player who could have filled in his own figures to the N.H.A. contract if he wanted to participate in the pro league. To my mind he was the greatest player that ever lived. He was fast and brainy. His stick was a magnet to the puck and he walked right in on the defence before he ever thought of shooting.
​

​

 

[ImporterExporter]

Seems defensemen either carrier the puck or flipped it up over everyone’s heads and tried to land it where their team could get it.

On the few teams that had people capable of carrying the puck, it was done fairly often. You see it mentioned many times in the game reports that I have been losing eyesight on haha but I don't think it became more universal until the latter part of the first decade. Pete Green always had players that were encouraged and great at skating or passing the puck from the back end and of course many players of that era are noted to have done as such, none better than Lester Patrick at that period of time IMO.

The biggest issue that the Vics had was they were basically Bowie and Russell from start to finish. They simply were over matched severely at D and G and they didn't have the F depth teams like Ottawa and Wanderers enjoyed.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Really fantastic article from The Hockey Writers who put out a lot of quality material and I believe our very own @seventieslord has published work for them:

https://thehockeywriters.com/russell-bowie-the-pre-nhl-wayne-gretzky/

I can't stress enough, the fact that Bowie destroyed a league in which he was generally on subpar teams, with very little support, is just mind boggling to me. Yes, we must keep in mind that this was the very early 1900's but if we judge people on what they did vs their peers, few players have ever dominated a league in hockey history, like Bowie did. While the F depth certainly wasn't anything to write home about in the early portion of his career, there were almost always at 2 other teams vastly superior loaded with HOF talent and by the final few seasons you saw a big influx of more notable players. I like the fact that Iain Fyffe points out that not once, but twice, Bowie outscored ENTIRE franchises.

​

That's @BillyShoe1721

 

[seventieslord]

That's @BillyShoe1721

Yep, not me.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Why Pittsburgh should win series:

• Big advantage among the F's

-I think the top line is a big advantage for Pittsburgh. Beliveau is far and away the best player on either line or team for that matter. We know his exploits especially in the postseason where he's pretty much a universally thought of top 5/10 player of all time. Balderis provides, IMO, as much offense as Nels Stewart who is playing his secondary position. I'd be shocked if Balderis ever played w/a better combo, but I'll certainly defer that to the hardcore Soviet historians. And his style is quite similar to Geoffrion/Cournoyer, two players Beliveau thrived with. Blake Wheeler is over his head on a top line.

The 2nd line is much closer but most people have Bowie rated slightly higher than MacKay all time, Smokey Harris gets a big jump based on the info I provided and given his additional AS nods, elite speed, defense, both of which are clearly improved over what we knew before this year, I don't see him THAT far behind Tommy Smith. Smith obviously provides better offense but Harris is miles better as an all around player and was capable of blowing up offensively, with or without stars around him. Playing with a pair like Bowie/Russell, we should see the absolute peak out of Harris.

Blair Russell gives Bowie (both of them) a big boost from a chemistry standpoint. Bertuzzi is only marginally better than Bowie as an offensive presence but loses A LOT of ground in terms of defensive impact. Plus Blair Russell is in the HOF to top it off. If we talk about Bowie being tough to build around, that isn't in question with Russell and Harris flanking him. Again, one thing that Pittsburgh managed to do well here was match/elevate most of the linemates of real life duos. Balderis is not terribly far behind Geoffrion and is equal to Cournoyer in my eyes. Smokey Harris is miles better than anything Bowie/Russell had in Montreal and the 3rd line is one of the best pure checking units ever put together in the ATD which gives Pitt, IMO, a decided advantage when looking at who our scoring lines will be going against vs the other team. Even when teams can match Pittsburgh's top line (which isn't often) you're dealing with Gainey-Jarvis-Westfall.

I'll gladly put up Pitt's 4th line with any in this league. You have a HOF C in Westwick who reads like a dominant/perfect 4th line option. Wasn't elite in any one thing but just did everything really well while being the toughest SOB in the league given his size and many citations. Cully Wilson was an AS caliber player in 2 leagues, in a very competitive league. And Kunitz has a resume and playing style that stacks up and beats many players drafted well above him for bottom 6 roles. Has anyone ever put together a 4th line that has 2 wingers that were postseason AS's with a HOF'er to cap it off? Maybe in a much smaller draft? I don't know.

• Playoff/Clutch performers

-Beliveau is a top 5 playoff performer of all time. Balderis has, based on everything I've read to date, a very strong international record in a time when hockey was quite developed not only in the USSR but other European nations as well. Harris had a monster performance in the 1915-16 finals, when George Kennedy called him the best all around hockey player that he'd seen that year. Bowie and Russell never really had a chance to shine in SC challenges given they were both on a subpar team relative to Ottawa and Montreal Wanderers. I have the game reports from their one run in with the Senators where they were vastly overmatched. Bowie and Russell literally being singled out as the only capable players on the Vics. Bowie in particular mentioned as having "no support".

Gainey is a Conn Smythe winner. Jarvis played very well for the Habs over the course of his time there. Westfall's point production increases form 0.51 PPG to 0.62 in the playoffs. He led the postseason in SHG's 4 different times. There are 11 SC winners on this line alone. So many big games for these guys to fall back on.

Kunitz won 4 SC's which is the most of the cap era i believe. He scored some massively important goals in his time in Pittsburgh, none more important than the Game 7, double OT winner in the ECF's against Ottawa a few years back (actually scored both goals in that game). Also chased down puck and got secondary assist on the Cup clinching goal that year against Nashville. He's a nice gamer to have on a 4th line. A lot of Westwick's exploits are in the bio I posted (which I still need to tidy up). He was a fantastic performer for Ottawa during the Silver Seven days in their many runs to glory, being mentioned along the likes of Harvey Pulford in terms of importance to Ottawa winning Cup challenges.

Duncan Keith is one of the best Dman all time in the postseason. Another Smythe winner and someone I trust explicitly in big game spots. I outlined a lot of his major bullet points already. Art Coulter managed to lead NY to a title after taking over the C from Bill Cook and was a key piece of the Blackhaws winning it all earlier in his career.

Shore and Lake's impact on the Senators under Green was massive, including the SC matches. They shut down players like Cyclone Taylor (the stacked Renfrew team as a whole) and gave Newsy Lalonde fits. You can see a lot of that in the bio I posted on them.

Vezina is every bit as good as Sawchuk in the postseason and I think Vezina's legendary calmness and consistency actually gives him a slight edge over the more volatile Sawshuk in a 7 game series, even though Vezina is a few spots behind Terry on the all time ranking chart among G's. Especially considering the defensive presences and shot blocking talents that are up and down Pittsburgh's lineup, whether talking about F's or the D corps. Vezina is already well above the bar as a playoff goalie. Add in I think Portland will struggle to produce offense in part because the F group, specifically the C's are below average offensively and facing extremely strong defensive F's, not to mention a pretty air tight D corps.

And Pete Green can absolutely hang with Lester Patrick as a postseason coach and isn't far behind him in an overall light now IMO.

• Chemistry/Fit

Real life duo's on the top 3 F lines. Lines that are all fantastic fits for the teammates/roles expected. Top pairing that is about as good a fit as you'll see anywhere and can transition the puck on both sides especially Keith, while also both being able to play well above the bar defense, especially Coulter who I'd classify as elite in his own end. Real life 2nd pairing that Pete Green coached through the back end of a dynasty in Ottawa. 3rd pairing that stylistically is fabulous.

Pittsburgh can play play a transition game like you saw in the first tenure of Green, given the many great to outright elite skaters on the AC's roster. You have numerous great to elite defensive F's (Harris, Russell, entire 3rd line) who can all replicate any of the defensive systems Green was using. Other F's who were certainly above average (Olmstead, Westwick and Beliveau) with both 4th line wingers being plenty responsible. The only F that you can classify as subpar as a back checker is Balderis but I'm confident the coach and leadership available in Pittsburgh will get Balderis to buy into playing harder going the other way.

As Sprague Cleghorn said about Green when he was in Montreal: (one of my favorite finds on Green as far as peer adulation goes)

I don't see Coffey having anything remotely close to the amount of support he enjoyed in real life. He always played with legendary offensive C's (Gretzky/Lemieux) or the more run of the mill superstar HOF'ers like Messier and Yzerman. Nels Stewart is out of his normal spot at C and with Hooley Smith being the only real defensive conscious on his line, will be forced to play a more passive role offensively which impacts the real life combination between he and Nels.

• Defensemen that are just as good as Portland w/less holes defensively

Coffey is going to be shouldering so much Portland's offensive load here I can see a lot of odd man rushes going back the other way, especially with the defensive acumen of Pitt's wingers and their great to elite skating, especially the 2nd and 3rd lines. I'm not sure Coffey will be very effective anyway, given what I outlined just above about his lack of support among F's and Pittsburgh's ability to skate with him and check him at a very high rate.

There isn't a single defender on Pitt you can classify as below average defensively. Keith is good, if not great in his own end. Coulter is elite. Lake was compared to Tommy Phillips as an AS F and was routinely cited as a very strong defender of his own net. Keith is a great skater. Coulter is above average. Shore is elite, Lake is great (read the bio if not sure). Ivanov is at least great based on what I read. Girardi being the only meh skater of the group but he's the #6 and playing a strictly defensive role anyway. Physicality? Coulter is elite, Keith is above average. Lake is great. Even Shore was capable of throwing some big checks. Ivanov was noted as being one of the most physically imposing defenders of his day. Girardi will block shots for days and threw over 2000 hits in his career.

• Special Teams

The only thing Portland has over Pittsburgh here are the point men on the top PP unit. I think it's pretty evident that Pittsburgh has superior F's on the PP, namely Beliveau and Bowie on the 1st unit and Balderis on the 2nd. I don't see any argument for Pitt not having vastly superior PK forwards. It's a legendary group which will help greatly against the Coffey/Duncan tandem up top. And I'll take Coulter who is the best PK defender in this series with Lake fitting the bill as a very solid option given his defensive reputation and heavy physicality. Keith/Orpik/Girardi is the best 2nd pairing on the kill that I can see anywhere. Let's not forget Larry Robinson gives the entire special teams a boost as well as the D corps across the board given his resume improving these things everywhere he went as a coach in real life.

I think teams, especially Portland are going to have a rough time scoring on these units.

• Keeping pace with Lester Patrick and Sawchuk

I've already beat this one to death but Green's win/loss resume is sterling. His contributions to hockey beyond that are many and extremely important. No two ways about it anymore. Tactics, conditioning, scouting, player development of numerous HOF'ers, pre and in game adjustments, etc, etc. Peer testimony both during his career and post death are numerous. I'm fine giving Patrick a nod here but it's a slight one in my book as I have Green in the top 10 certainly. His innovations all pre-date Patrick's as a coach/administrator and Patrick (along with Gorman) were vocal in their affection and appreciation for what Green did for them in their own professions after he died.

I've got Sawchuk 6th all time and Vezina 10th. Small gap and in a playoff series I'll got to bat all day with Vezina here especially with the skaters playing in front of him and the coaching staff/systems that will be used.

 

[Dreakmur]

Blair Russell gives Bowie (both of them) a big boost from a chemistry standpoint.

I've never understood the thinking that proven chemistry somehow makes both players better. They played together, and we know how that worked. Why would they be anything other than exactly what they were when they played?

For me, the only time playing together is an advantage is when it is two players who you otherwise wouldn't think could mesh.

 

[ImporterExporter]

I've never understood the thinking that proven chemistry somehow makes both players better. They played together, and we know how that worked. Why would they be anything other than exactly what they were when they played?

For me, the only time playing together is an advantage is when it is two players who you otherwise wouldn't think could mesh.

Too easy.

Because the teams I'm playing don't have proven chemistry. It's not about my team as much as it's about the other team not having PROVEN chemistry in their lineup. We can approximate what a line/d pairing will do if none of the folks have ever set foot on the same rink together.

Beliveau won his 1st Hart and only Art Ross with Olmstead at LW. Bowie is a tough player to build around. Giving him Russell only increases the odds he can maximize his offensive output. An entire career spent together and now recreated here doesn't matter? Sorry, don't see it. Espeically now that they have a player like Harris on the left side. Bowie/Russell never sniffed anyone of that caliber to run with. Gainey-Jarvis. That PROVEN defensive chemistry, knowing tenancies. Pitt doesn't have to worry about that. And speaking of those 2, how often were they skating with a Westfall when checking folks? Shore-Lake, playing for the coach who ran them for 4 years, winning multiple titles?

If you don't want to value that, no problemo. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. I've long argued this angle and will probably always try and build my teams with chemistry in mind because I think it is absolutely important in team sports, especially the NHL.

 

[Dreakmur]

Too easy.

Because the teams I'm playing don't have proven chemistry. It's not about my team as much as it's about the other team not having PROVEN chemistry in their lineup. We can approximate what a line/d pairing will do if none of the folks have ever set foot on the same rink together.

Beliveau won his 1st Hart and only Art Ross with Olmstead at LW. Bowie is a tough player to build around. Giving him Russell only increases the odds he can maximize his offensive output. An entire career spent together and now recreated here doesn't matter? Sorry, don't see it. Espeically now that they have a player like Harris on the left side. Bowie/Russell never sniffed anyone of that caliber to run with. Gainey-Jarvis. That PROVEN defensive chemistry, knowing tenancies. Pitt doesn't have to worry about that. And speaking of those 2, how often were they skating with a Westfall when checking folks? Shore-Lake, playing for the coach who ran them for 4 years, winning multiple titles?

If you don't want to value that, no problemo. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. I've long argued this angle and will probably always try and build my teams with chemistry in mind because I think it is absolutely important in team sports, especially the NHL.

So poor chemistry makes lines worse? Yeah, that’s obvious, but how many times do I have to read that chemistry gives a line some kind of magic boost?

If a team has a line that would likely work well, that’s the good chemistry too.

 

[ImporterExporter]

So poor chemistry makes lines worse? Yeah, that’s obvious, but how many times do I have to read that chemistry gives a line some kind of magic boost?

If a team has a line that would likely work well, that’s the good chemistry too.

I've never said "magic boost" sir. I simply happen to value, and always have, proven chemistry.

If you don't value it at all, fine. That's what makes us human beings, not robots. I can't win over everyone. It's not possible so therefor not worth worrying over.

But there is a difference between THINKING a line can work well, and KNOWING it can. Sure, I don't have a complete line (2nd pairing is complete though) reconstructed but I gave Beliveau/Olmstead a RW who, IMO, pretty closely resembles the RW they would have been skated with in real life. And that RW's offense is well above Cournoyer's and how far is Balderis below Geoffrion offensively? If at all?

So I already have 2/3 of a real life line on my top 3 lines. And on each line, I either matched or exceeded what the real life duo skated with, w/ Balderis/Harris/Westfall.

Defensive pairings are even more important in my eyes. They generally play heavier minutes than most forwards, there are, IMO more nuances to playing back there, especially playing 2 way hockey.

I think I've outlined pretty decisively my position on strong merits. If you think otherwise, I have zero issue. Just enjoying the ride sir.