1. Pittsburgh's first line is better for a multitude of reasons.
First off, there is a real life chemistry aspect that is significant. In a fantasy draft where you are placing, 99% of the time, players from all eras, all leagues, who never played together, on the same roster, means getting real life line mates/pairings matters. I've done this in previous drafts (not to the extent of Pittsburgh which is honestly my proudest accomplishment in a 40 team draft with no trading) so it's not like I'm just now pimping the chemistry angle either. Some will downplay it but there is no way to deny having real life chemistry gives a line or pairing an inherent advantage over guys who may have played 100 years a part.
Olmstead-Beliveau
Bowie-Russell
Gainey-Jarvis
Shore-Lake
That's a lot of chemistry Pittsburgh doesn't have to worry about.
I posted the bullet points of Olmstead and Beliveau's time together. They were a great duo that won a lot of hockey games and dominated in the postseason together. Clearly a pair that was in sync often.
- Olmstead is a clear notch above Cashman.
- Olmstead is in the HOF, Cashman isn't.
- Olmstead was a postseason AS twice. Cashman once.
- Olmstead has 5th and 6th place Hart finishes to his name. Cashman has none.
- Olmstead led the league in assists, twice, in back to back seasons and has the C he accomplished that with here. Cashman has a pair of 5th place finishes. He doesn't have Bobby Orr or a goal scoring C (Mikita is a heavy play maker) to pass to from the corners, unless he's trying to throw cross ice passes through Gainey-Jarvis-Westfall-Keith-Coulter.
- Olmstead won 5 titles (4 that he was a key secondary piece of). Cashman was on 2 Cup winners, playing well himself to be sure.
- Olmstead was as good or better than Cashman in both physicality and defensive acumen
Mikita certainly has an argument as an offensive equal to Beliveau, no doubt.
However, I like the fact Beliveau has multiple goals scoring and assist titles vs Mikita who is much more of a play maker. Beliveau is simply a more balanced offensive threat. While I think they both peaked at the same height in terms of accomplishment (MVP's) one has to remember Beliveau peaked during prime Gordie Howe.
Plus, on top of that, Mikita was mostly finished as an elite player by the time he was 30/31. Beliveau has one of the best (if not outright) post 30 careers in hockey history. MVP with 2 other finalist nods, Smythe, 3 AS's, 5 titles and a slew of big playoff performances. Longevity clearly favors Beliveau here.
Where Stan gets trounced by Mr. Beliveau, and why there IS a gap, happens to be directly tied to the fact this is a playoff series.
Mikita is a good, and sometimes great playoff performer. But he's still WELL behind Beliveau who you can argue as high as #3 all time in the playoffs and not many people put him outside of the top 5, let alone top 10.
Beliveau won 10 Cups
Over those 10 Cup runs Beliveau scored 129 points in 98 games.
Beliveau and Mikita actually met a few times in the SCF’s:
In 1965 Montreal won a 7 game series vs Chicago
-Beliveau had 10 points in 7 games and ws a -1
-Mikita had 3 points in 7 games, was a +1 while contributing 35 minutes of PIMs which essentially doubled Beliveau's 18.
In 1971 Montreal won another 7 game series vs Chicago
-A 39 year old Beliveau had 4 points in 7 games and was +2
-Mikita had 5 points in 7 games and was -1
Totals:
14 points in 14 games at age 33 and 39 for Beliveau
8 points in 14 games at age 24 and 30 for Mikita
There really is not much of a comparison to be made as far as postseason play goes. Mikita was a good and sometimes great playoff performer. Beliveau was legendary.
Hull is better than Balderis. Won't argue that. But we're not talking some sort of miles wide gap. Balderis made the top 60 HoH list 5 years ago and I’d wager he’d still be on it today and probably higher with more information and better understanding of how darn good he was as a scorer.
But people should brush up on Balderis because, like most Euro only players, he tends to get overlooked. Fantastic bio’s by seventies and Sturm.
Helmuts Balderis bio
Helmuts Balderis bio
First off, his scoring prowess is quite strong. I have to chuckle at this notion Pittsburgh has limited scoring the wings. Balderis led the Soviet top league in scoring. Twice. He finished top 5 on 8 occasion. IIRC he is 5th all-time in scoring across the USSR (please correct me if I’m wrong). Certainly not a secondary scorer. Balderis was a league MVP in 1977. Hardly a small feat. He was an elite offensive talent. His scoring finishes show as much.
Here is a comparison to Maltsev who peaked in the early/mid 70's rather than the late 70's/early 80's which would have seen a deeper and overall stronger domestic league, not to mention internationally. Balderis was an outsider among Soviets being Latvian. He would have had a much more difficult time assimilating to the coaching methods and lifestyle of the Communists. He clashed with Tikhonov multiple times, in spectacular fashion in one instance IIRC.
Maltsev:
1969: 8th (65 - Starshinov)*
1970: 9th (80 - Mikhailov)*
1971: 1st (112 - Kharlamov)
1972: 6th (79 - Vikulov)
1973: 6th (90 - undrafted)
1974: 2nd (100 - 1st is undrafted)
1975: 11th (67 - Mikhailov)
1976: 3rd (92 - Yakushev)
1977: 3rd (94 - Petrov)
1978: xxx (56 - Mikhailov)
1979: xxx *injured*
1980: xxx (64 - Balderis)
1981: 11th (69 - undrafted)
1982: xxx (58 - undrafted)
Best seasons sequentially: 112, 100, 94, 92, 90, 80, 79, 69, 67, 65, 64, 58, 56
Balderis:
1975: 3rd (94 - Mikhailov)
1976: 4th (88 - Yakushev)
1977: 1st (102 - Petrov)
1978: 9th (65 - Mikhailov)
1979: 5th (77 - undrafted)
1980: 2nd (100 - 1st is Makarov)
1981: 7th (82 - undrafted)
1982: 10th (61 - undrafted)
1983: 1st (111 - undrafted)
1984: xxx (68 - Krutov)
1985: 3rd (96 - Krutov)
Best seasons sequentially: 111, 102, 100, 96, 94, 88, 82, 77, 68, 65, 61
That gives you a pretty good idea of how good Balderis was offensively. He outscored Maltsev head to head routinely in the mid to late 70’s.
Hull has a 7 year VsX of 88.
How much lower is Balderis really? It’s not like the mid to late 70’s and early 80’s USSR was a 2nd rate league. The best players from that country were playing and beating the best the NHL had to offer at the time. Now, certainly the depth of the NHL would be the tipping point but let’s not pretend that Balderis doesn’t have very impressive offensive credentials from a strong league. I mean Ken Hodge is worth an 83.2 and Kessel 82.1, neither of whom are even remotely close to the offensive talent Balderis was. One of the reasons I can’t stand VsX beyond a general overview when talking ATD.
So I don’t think Balderis is that far behind Hull in overall scoring impact. Hull can’t skate like Balderis. It’s night and day. Balderis was a more balanced offensive artist with the ceiling of a league MVP and scoring champion in late 70’s USSR which was an incredible time for talent there. Hull is an elite goal scorer but he’s more reliant on others to facilitate offense in his direction than Helmuts.
The thing that sold me on Balderis, beyond I thought he was the best winger on the board when I picked him, was his willingness to play a teamwork and combination game thanks to those bios above. He could carry a line or play a supportive role. But make no mistake, his offensive acumen is quite strong and bunks the notion that Pittsburgh has such little ability on the flanks.
And again, Pittsburgh’s top line is going to feast on Kilera-Couturier-Davidson head to head. I’ve seen Sid abuse Couturier more than once in real life. Nobody Couts has faced or fared well against can prepare him for Beliveau. It’s just a massive mismatch on any level. Ability/Stats/peak/longevity/playoffs/accolades/etc.
I wish good luck to the top line of Cashman-Mikita-Hull because they be covered up most of the game by the best shutdown line in a 40 team league, Gainey-Jarvis-Westfall.
2. Corpus Christi is going to get blown out of the building in terms of skating and defensive ability, especially among F’s. Another big advantage Pittsburgh is going to have over a lot of rosters btw, and it wasn’t an accident when I constructed the team.
For as potent as the top 6 wingers are for CC, they are horrifically slow across the board.
Hull is in the same boat as Balderis defensively speaking, but at least Balderis had elite wheels. Cashman and Hull are going to get checked into oblivion by Westfall and Gainey.
Robitaille and Perry are so slow here.
On home ice, which Pittsburgh has the advantage of, going 2nd line vs 2nd line., Harris and Russell are going to skate circles around those 2 while checking them at a very high level.
Smokey Harris wasn’t just a noted hook checker, he was literally called without peer as a back checker, multiple times at basically the beginning and end of his career. Not to mention the many other instances highlighting his defensive ability plus all world speed.
These aren’t the days when somebody finds 2 or 3 blips from a newspaper and we somehow overvalue the impact for years on end. I’ve argued this for years here. I understand recency bias always rears its ugly head with new info dumps on players but the volume of information on Harris’ defensive ability and impact is very large, especially compared to just about anyone of the entire pre consolidation era sans a Nighbor or Jack Walker/Tommy Phillips, both of whom are significantly weaker offensively than Harris, who btw, lead the PCHA in assists, twice, and overall scoring once (t-1st), again while playing high end defensive hockey.
I can’t stress enough how much I think defense is left in the dark compared to offense when it comes to evaluating forwards. It’s something I’ve matured on as I’ve aged and watched more and more hockey. Sure, it’s harder to quantify defense relative to offense because the latter is more numbers based and we have fancy (sometimes lazy) stats/projects like VsX to ballpark meaning.
But make no mistake, the only winger (out of 8) who is subpar defensively on Pittsburgh is Balderis.
Harris and Russell are Selke level wingers. Had a defensive award existed both would have been winners/in the running during their careers.
That’s not outlandish considering the reputation of both and what we have on them in comparison to others of the time period. Harris literally made the 1912 AS team as a rookie/reserve in the PCHA because of his back checking alone. The following year he was called without equal in the entire league with many other in game reports to illustrate how darn good he was across a decade worth of hockey. The fact he was so highly regarded defensively as a young player speaks volumes and that reputation continued all the way until the end of his career. There are a lot of early era players who get by on limited data. Harris isn’t in that camp anymore.
We’ve already hashed out the defensive/ability impact of Pittsburgh’s entire 3rd line. It’s insanely good.
Kunitz and Wilson are responsible defensive players which is perfectly fine given they are better than average offensive 4th line presences and bring high end fore-checking/pest ability.
You mention Kunitz’s lack of ES goal scoring. I’m fine with that. It’s not why he’s on the roster. One of the dumb stereotypes that gets tossed on him by outside fans was he was just a goal scoring winger taking advantage of Crosby. Kuntiz was always a better passer than shooter at least in Pittsburgh which makes up most of career/resume. He played the role of complimentary glue guy who got the puck regularly to better players. He was notorious for being too passive with the biscuit.
Arnott will benefit as he was more of a goal scorer. A huge, heavy body who will love the work from Kunitz and Wilson in the corners, hammering people senseless, creating turnovers and goal scoring opportunities, especially on the cycle. Kunitz was also fantastic in this role. Arnott wasn't picked for team Canada because they had better options. In an ATD you don't have those luxuries especially very late in a 40 team draft. And given the 3rd line C doesn't bring much offensive impact, Arnott is a valuable body to have on the 4th unit. He was also drafted for his ability to play the point on the PP with a howitzer of a shot.
Titles/AS's
2 x Stanley Cup Champion (1914, 1917)
PCHA Champion (1919)
WCHL Champion (1924)
PCHA First Team All-Star (1919)
WCHL Second Team All-Star (1924)
Scoring:
NHA Points – 6th(1915)
NHA Goals – 4th(1915)
NHA Assists – 4th(1915)
PCHA Points – 6th(1916), 5th(1918)
PCHA Goals – 6th(1916), 5th(1918)
PCHA Assists – 5th(1916), 3rd(1918)
NHL Points – 7th(1920), 9th(1923)
NHL Goals – 8th(1920), 7th(1923)
NHL Assists – 9th(1922)
WCHL Points – 7th(1924), 7th(1925)
WCHL Goals – 6th(1924), 8th(1925)
WCHL Assists – 8th(1924), 9th(1925)
He was also a great play-off performer:
- Led Toronto with 3 goals in the 1914 Finals
- Led Seattle with 4 assists in the 1917 Finals
- Led Calgary with 5 goals in the 1924 Finals
Those are Cully Wilson’s career highlights. IMO he has no business being on a 4th line. He has great goal scoring and points finishes across 4 different leagues, spanning a decade. His longevity, especially given how he played the game, is elite.
He was an AS in multiple leagues.
Clutch playoff performer, on top of being one of the great pests and agitators of all time. Sure he’s going to be in the box but one, he’ll often be taking someone better with him and two, isn’t a factor on the kill where Pittsburgh also happens to have the best set of PK forwards in the ATD w/Westfall, Gainey, Jarvis and Russell/Harris.
Again, defensively Pittsburgh is so far out in front of CC, especially at F.
Beliveau and Bowie get Couturier and Richards as checks.
CC’s wingers are SLOW and at best SUBPAR defensively.
My top 6 wingers are going against Kilera/Davidson/Secord/Pominville
CC’s top 6 wingers will be seeing Gainey/Westfall/Harris/Russell
It’s literally night and day. Maybe I’m biased but I know where I’d be putting my money.
3. Scotty Davidson is in the HOF because he died serving his nation in WWI. Not because he did enough as a hockey player. He literally played 2 years in the NHA. Tragic, because those 2 years were very good but it’s nowhere near enough to warrant a HOF nod.
4. The transition game of Pittsburgh is much better from the back end.
Duncan Keith is the best puck mover on either blue line. His skating, vision and passing are all very, very strong. I don’t think Hedman is near as good in this role, especially playing top minutes in the ATD. I don’t see CC’s top paring as particularly strong in this regard. Hedman on a top pairing is putting a guy with a relatively limited career centered on a 3 year peak (regular season only btw) and telling him to play a lot of minutes against the Beliveau’s of the world.
I don’t think for one second Horton was a better puck carrier than Coulter and even if he was the gap is minimal with Keith a more natural transition player than Hedman with a better peak, better longevity and much, much better postseason credentials which is pretty important here.
I think Coulter is every bit in Horton’s class defensively and Keith is better than Hedman in that regard. To be frank Shore/Lake is vastly superior to Engblom/Ramage neither of whom should be anywhere near top 4 minutes in the ATD.
Take what you knew about Shore (you did a nice bio on him a few years back) and then add the mountain of information I dug up and he’s easily the best player on either side.
Again, great transition ability here for Pittsburgh. Major, major skating advantage. Hamby was noted to be as fast as Cyclone Taylor with many instances of his elite speed available. Lake was routinely mentioned as a great skater, though not quite on the level of Shore.
Shore and Lake both played extensively at F earlier in their careers so they bring versatility and a trusted pair for Green.
Even though CC has a better 3rd pairing, Ivanov is pretty clearly the best puck moving Dman of the 4.
5. Special Teams:
CC and Pitt are very evenly matched on the PP. Very strong F groups all around. Top pairing D are both average though I like Arnott-Keith more than Richards-Ramage.
But Pitt has a big advantage on the PK. Ridiculous top end forwards on both units and Dan Girardi is a better PK’er than 3 of the 4 D the Rays have. Coulter and Horton, to me are in the same class. Keith/Orpik are both superior to Hedman.
That’s SHTOI #’s since Hedman broke into the league in 09-10 and the shot blocking statistics since it was tracked in 05-06.
Girardi's killed 52% of his team’s penalties over his career at 16% above the league average. Girardi is 7th in the past decade in terms of SHTOI. Hedman is 34th btw, 33 seconds below Girardi. DG is 2nd all time in shot blocks since it started being traced in 05-06.
As I said when I drafted him, Girardi is one of the very best PK’ers of the cap era. He’s arguably the best shot blocker of the last 15 years as well. I think it was an astute pick given he’s the #6 and brings 2 pivotal skills to the table here.
Anyone else notice that 3 of the top 6 shot blockers of the cap era are on Pittsburgh's roster here? (Keith, Girardi, Orpik). That's coupled with Ivanov who was noted as strong in this area for the Soviets. Vezina is going to be pleased with so much rubber not finding its way to the net.
These are the little attention to details that make the difference between success and failure.
6. Where did offense come from during first dynasty?
1909 Senators:
Scoring came down the middle.
1910:
Again, top scorer was Walsh by a big margin. C.
1911:
Again top scorer was the C.
1912:
Ronan played C/rover.
