Mickey Ion divisional quarterfinals: Philadelphia Phantoms vs. Boston Olympics
- Thread starter VanIslander
- Start date
VanIslander
A 19-year ATDer on HfBoards
Post your special teams, any of your extra skaters you might want to sub-in in this series, or any other information.
The format of the first post is standardized for easy, clean, equal comparison, both teams viewable without having to scroll down.
The third seed versus sixth seed.
Have a good series!
The format of the first post is standardized for easy, clean, equal comparison, both teams viewable without having to scroll down.
The third seed versus sixth seed.
Have a good series!
BubbaBoot
Registered User
Head Coach: Darryl Sutter
Cory Stillman - Herb Jordanhttp://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=68403679&postcount=6 - Scott Mellanby (A)http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=68880887&postcount=15
Josef Cerny - Robert Reichel - Petr Sykora
Butch Keeling - David Krejcihttp://hfboards.mandatory.com/showpost.php?p=69144937&postcount=24 - Mikael Renberg (A)
Eddie Shack - Kelly Kisio (C) - Bill Collins
Gordie Roberts - Mike O'Connell (A)
Dennis Seidenberg - Rudolf Potsch
Jim Morrison - Alex Levinsky
Reggie Lemelin
Vladimir Myshkin
[spares]
Mike Knuble [RW/LW]
Jim McKenny [D/W]
Bryan Smolinski [C/LW/RW]
Clarence Jamieson [D]
PP1
Cerny - Jordan - Mellanby
Roberts - Potsch
PP2
Stillman - Reichel - Sykora
Morrison - O'Connell
[SPOT DUTY PP FORWARDS]
Keeling - Kisio - Krejci - Renberg
SH1
Kisio - Collins
Seidenberg - O'Connell
SH2
Stillman - Jordan
Roberts- Levinsky
[SPOT DUTY PK FORWARDS]
Krejci - Reichel
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
Philadelphia Phantoms
Coach: Jan Starsi & Jaroslav Pitner
Captain: Don Lever
Assistant Captains: Dave Babych, Daymond Langkow
Don Lever-Barry Pederson-Eddie Wiseman
Vaclav Prospal-Dave Gagner-Steve Sullivan
Jeff Friesen-Daymond Langkow-Bill Fairbairn
Dave Tippett-Mike Fisher-Rich Preston
Billy McGimsie
Andre Pronovost
Dave Babych-Bingo Kampman
Joe Watson-Bruce Driver
Mark Streit-Larry Hillman
Percy Traub
Don Edwards
Dan Bouchard
PP1
Jeff Friesen-Barry Pederson-Eddie Wiseman
Dave Babych-Bruce Driver
PP2
Vaclav Prospal-Dave Gagner-Steve Sullivan
Mark Streit-Larry Hillman
PK1
Dave Tippett-Don Lever
Joe Watson-Bingo Kampman
PK2
Barry Pederson-Bill Fairbairn
Dave Babych-Larry Hillman
Coach: Jan Starsi & Jaroslav Pitner
Captain: Don Lever
Assistant Captains: Dave Babych, Daymond Langkow
Don Lever-Barry Pederson-Eddie Wiseman
Vaclav Prospal-Dave Gagner-Steve Sullivan
Jeff Friesen-Daymond Langkow-Bill Fairbairn
Dave Tippett-Mike Fisher-Rich Preston
Billy McGimsie
Andre Pronovost
Dave Babych-Bingo Kampman
Joe Watson-Bruce Driver
Mark Streit-Larry Hillman
Percy Traub
Don Edwards
Dan Bouchard
PP1
Jeff Friesen-Barry Pederson-Eddie Wiseman
Dave Babych-Bruce Driver
PP2
Vaclav Prospal-Dave Gagner-Steve Sullivan
Mark Streit-Larry Hillman
PK1
Dave Tippett-Don Lever
Joe Watson-Bingo Kampman
PK2
Barry Pederson-Bill Fairbairn
Dave Babych-Larry Hillman
Looking forward to a good series. Looking at things quickly, important advantages I see for Philadelphia exist on defense, the penalty kill, and scoring on the wings.
BubbaBoot
Registered User
PHilly was one of my favorites, put together very well......lots of grit without the stupid penalties too.
I've got a real dogfight.
I've got a real dogfight.
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
First Lines:
Stillman and Wiseman are similar playmaking wingers, but Wiseman is the better offensive player, so he gets the advantage there. Stillman has good offense for a first line winger here, but Wiseman is arguably the best in the draft. At center, it's tough to get a good gauge on Herb Jordan compared to Pederson. My gut tells me Jordan is slightly better offensively, whereas Pederson brings a valued two-way game. In terms of glue guys, their offense is very close. VsX Scores:
Lever: 45, 54, 55, 54, 45, 57, 42, 47, 43(total 442)
Mellanby: 43, 50, 58, 51, 43, 42, 49, 46, 55(total 437)
They both have 9 finishes >40 and it's tough to call anything from that. Here is where they rank in terms of team-leading(top 5s only):
Lever: 3, 2, 2, 3, 4, 3, 3, 1, 2(9 season avg. 2.556)
Mellanby: 5, 4, 1, 3, 1, 2, 4, 4, 5, 5, 4(11 season avg. 3.454)
Lever figured more prominently into the offensive picture for teams he played for compared to Mellanby. Mellanby got 32.7% of his points on the power play, whereas Lever scored only 23.2% on the power play. I think Lever is the better offensive player, but it's not by a big margin. Defensively, Lever is definitely the superior player. Mellanby is slightly above average here. In terms of toughness, Mellanby gets a definite advantage.
Overall, I think the lines are an advantage for Philadelphia. Offensively, Wiseman and Lever beat their Boston counterparts, and Pederson/Jordan is tough to call. Defensively, Philadelphia has an advantage with Lever and Pederson being noted two-way players, whereas Mellanby is the only Boston player with any defensive reputation. Both lines fit and make sense stylistically. Mellanby alone gives Boston a tougher line.
Stillman and Wiseman are similar playmaking wingers, but Wiseman is the better offensive player, so he gets the advantage there. Stillman has good offense for a first line winger here, but Wiseman is arguably the best in the draft. At center, it's tough to get a good gauge on Herb Jordan compared to Pederson. My gut tells me Jordan is slightly better offensively, whereas Pederson brings a valued two-way game. In terms of glue guys, their offense is very close. VsX Scores:
Lever: 45, 54, 55, 54, 45, 57, 42, 47, 43(total 442)
Mellanby: 43, 50, 58, 51, 43, 42, 49, 46, 55(total 437)
They both have 9 finishes >40 and it's tough to call anything from that. Here is where they rank in terms of team-leading(top 5s only):
Lever: 3, 2, 2, 3, 4, 3, 3, 1, 2(9 season avg. 2.556)
Mellanby: 5, 4, 1, 3, 1, 2, 4, 4, 5, 5, 4(11 season avg. 3.454)
Lever figured more prominently into the offensive picture for teams he played for compared to Mellanby. Mellanby got 32.7% of his points on the power play, whereas Lever scored only 23.2% on the power play. I think Lever is the better offensive player, but it's not by a big margin. Defensively, Lever is definitely the superior player. Mellanby is slightly above average here. In terms of toughness, Mellanby gets a definite advantage.
Overall, I think the lines are an advantage for Philadelphia. Offensively, Wiseman and Lever beat their Boston counterparts, and Pederson/Jordan is tough to call. Defensively, Philadelphia has an advantage with Lever and Pederson being noted two-way players, whereas Mellanby is the only Boston player with any defensive reputation. Both lines fit and make sense stylistically. Mellanby alone gives Boston a tougher line.
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
Second Lines:
I like your decision to move Reichel to the second line, he definitely improves the line offensively. Sullivan and Sykora are the best offensive players on either line, and both are an embarrassment of riches for 2nd lines, being 4th and 9th in the VsX study that Rob Scuderi did. Prospal also came up as 11th in those numbers. I like Cerny, but I can't envision him being the 11th best offensive winger in the draft. I think Philadelphia holds an offensive advantage on both wings. Both Sullivan and Sykora have received a little Selke recognition, a testament to their two-way play. At center, Reichel holds an offensive advantage over Gagner. His 6 year score was 65.3 to Gagner's 61.08. Reichel doesn't bring too many intangibles, and Gagner was a strong two-way player that was gritty as well.
I think the second lines are an advantage to Philadelphia as well. We've got an offensive advantage on the wings, which is bigger than Reichel's advantage at center. Other than a little bit of two-way play by Sykora, I don't see much in terms of intangibles from Boston's second line. Not really any physicality, and not much defense. I think this could be something that holds Boston's line back. They've got the offensive chops, but will they do the little things to get the goals? And how will Darryl Sutter like this line? Gagner, while small, brought physicality to the table, and was a good two-way player, in addition to Sullivan's above average(but nothing special) defense.
I like your decision to move Reichel to the second line, he definitely improves the line offensively. Sullivan and Sykora are the best offensive players on either line, and both are an embarrassment of riches for 2nd lines, being 4th and 9th in the VsX study that Rob Scuderi did. Prospal also came up as 11th in those numbers. I like Cerny, but I can't envision him being the 11th best offensive winger in the draft. I think Philadelphia holds an offensive advantage on both wings. Both Sullivan and Sykora have received a little Selke recognition, a testament to their two-way play. At center, Reichel holds an offensive advantage over Gagner. His 6 year score was 65.3 to Gagner's 61.08. Reichel doesn't bring too many intangibles, and Gagner was a strong two-way player that was gritty as well.
I think the second lines are an advantage to Philadelphia as well. We've got an offensive advantage on the wings, which is bigger than Reichel's advantage at center. Other than a little bit of two-way play by Sykora, I don't see much in terms of intangibles from Boston's second line. Not really any physicality, and not much defense. I think this could be something that holds Boston's line back. They've got the offensive chops, but will they do the little things to get the goals? And how will Darryl Sutter like this line? Gagner, while small, brought physicality to the table, and was a good two-way player, in addition to Sullivan's above average(but nothing special) defense.
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
BubbaBoot
Registered User
Early in his career Stillman played on the PK and twice was top 10 (7th and 8th) in SH goals. He has very few SH assists so it appears to me he was a breakout forward, taking off whenever the Flames got possession. Either way it keeps opponents on their heels.
Herb Jordan was known for his poke check, which he used to his advantage, creating turnovers and using his speed and stickhandling skills for breakaways, so it appears that he was a good forechecker before the term was coined.
Were they 2-way players as we know the term? I don't know, but at least they were responsible in the defensive aspects of the game. Stillman was also known as a character guy who was seen as an on-ice coach and positive influence with rookies in the locker room and the game itself by his head coaches.....he also once played through a playoff series with a torn MCL, showing probably more grit that people usually associate for him.
---------------------------------------------------------
Pederson was well on his way to being a big star when a tumor in his shoulder severely cut down his effectiveness and his game took a spiral downward starting at the age of 25/26, hampering his two-way ability and making him essentially a part-time PP specialist when he wasn't out injured. For all his numbers though, he was top 10 in assists and points only twice before becoming MOR, essentially having a productive 6 yrs before his fall. Herb Jordan on the other hand, from 1901 to 1909 finished 1st / 3rd / 2nd / 3rd / 9th / 4th / 2nd in scoring and is highly regarded around these parts as one of the best offensive threats in the draft.....it is in your own bio from a few years ago that you quote "Herb Jordan, a gifted scorer and likely one of the best players not in the Hall of Fame" and in SIHR he "wasn't afraid to battle in front of the goal either, making it difficult for opposing defensemen to stop him."
Despite his VsX numbers, Wiseman was top 10 in scoring once (8th), goals once (10th) and assists 3 times (10th, 10th and 6th). Stillman, known as a "complimentary" player, was top 10 in scoring once (7th), and top 10 once in assists (3rd). Stillman's goals, assists and points per game were also better than Wiseman, although I do acknowledge that historically Wiseman's era was "tougher" and more defensive oriented. Wiseman also led the Bruins to a Stanley Cup, leading the playoffs with goals scored in 1941...but take away his stats from that year, he had only 4 goals and 8 assists in 32 playoff games. That being said, his adjusted numbers are through the roof, if you believe in that formula.
Lever is definitely one that slips in under the radar and I admit that despite knowing his name I didn;t see him to much when he played....I'd love to see the head-to-head battles between him and Mellanby, I'm thinking they would be a joy to watch this game within the game jousting. Mellanby also was captain for two different teams. Overall I agree with your assessment about these two....I'll also add though, Mellanby was known to thrive defensively under 'Iron" Mike Keenan and his system, he'd be perfect under Sutter too.
Last edited:
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
You're right, Europeans and early NHLers need to be accounted for as well. The guys on the list that have significant accomplishments outside the NHL that could close the gap are Kamensky, Loob, A. Stastny, M. Stastny, and Kozlov(he doesn't have much). Then the guys not included in the study at all that are possibly in the conversation with Prospal: Drozdetsky, Lala, Cloutier, Tardif, MacDougall, Alexandrov, and Loktev. If he was worse than all of them, that would put him 24th, or as one of the worst first line wingers in a 12 team draft. He's better than some of them, and worse than some of them. Which ones fit into which category? Your guess is as good as mine trying to account for the WHA/Soviet competition/1890s, and the tweeners who spent time in the NHL and Europe in the 80s and 90s. My guess is he's somewhere in the middle of those guys, putting him ~18th in the draft, and I'll take that all day on my second line, especially alongside Steve Sullivan. Prospal was also a pretty good scorer for the teams he played for, his rankings among teammates: 4, 2, 1, 2, 2, 5, 3, 4, 2, 2
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
From scanning the rosters, Art Gagne too.
Also, don't forget that the Vs2/VsX method tends to favor post-expansion players once we get into this calibre of guys (my semi-mission this MLD is to keep harping on that point).
BubbaBoot
Registered User
I actually love your 2nd line and see it as one of the best in this draft and normally I would go in this direction. Instead I went in a different direction and without trying ended up with an all-Czech line with good offensive skills.
That being said, Reichel was captain for the Czech National team and isn't given enough due for getting his nose dirty, although he was a bit inconsistent in this department in the NHL.....get him in an international tournament however....3 World Championships golds (with 2 all-star selections) to go with an Olympic gold medal (as well as a silver and 5 bronze medals in other international competitions) is nothing to sneeze at. Gagner is a steal also, my kind of guy but with everything except defensive play, the advantage goes to Reichel.
Sykora can be lethal with his shot. He'll be matched up with Prospal, who's known more as a playmaker. They have similar numbers but Sykora has a huge advantage in goals / PP goals / plus-minus and a slight advantage on the SH and points per game. Prospal is better in assists / EV goals and toughness. The big difference is the post-season and the advantage clearly goes to Sykora in every category, (as well as 2 Cups).
Sullivan v Cerny.....this is where it gets interesting. I do like Sullivan, he has everything you need to be as good a 2nd line winger there is but Cerny has a very impressive resume offensively, both domestically and internationally. It's very hard to rate these two, from different eras and different continents. Sullivan was 9th once in assists and 1st in SH goals one year. Cerny, stacked teams or otherwise, led the Czech Extraliga in goals 3 times, points once, assists once and has the all-time record for goals scored in that league. He also has 6 Domestic Championships, 5 silver medals and 6 bronze medals in international competitions. He was twice on Olympic all-star teams and once on a World Championships all-star team....and he didn't get those for defensive play.
To say that the Philly wings have the offensive advantage is just wrong. Defensively yes, but offensively no. The skill set of the Czechs is great. They are fast and have good passing and stickhandling skills. They have a winning pedigree. Despite whatever odds they face, they just produce. Philly is gritty but not overwhelming physical in a crash and burn way, which is probably the only way to stop the Czechs.
This match-up could go either way, dependant and probably influenced on other variables, (ie...the defensive pairings, man advantages, ice conditions, etc.....). A short series, I say Boston. A long series, probably Philly.
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
That's pretty weak evidence for being good defensive players. IIRC, forechecking was not a thing at all when Jordan played because of the rules against forward passing. The line will be adequate defensively, but it won't be good.
Using scoring rankings is a very crude, and ineffective way of comparing these guys. We used that back 3-4 years ago, and have since moved on to more accurate methods that provide more context and information. Pederson flamed out fast and has 6 good offensive years that are good enough to place him 7th in that VsX study. Jordan has 7 relevant offensive seasons, so it's not like he's a longevity machine. Here's a look at him:
01-02:
Your bio has him with 15 goals, which would be first in the league, and that is not true. Art Hooper had 17 goals that season, so he definitely wasn't first, and according to Wikipedia, did not have that number of goals either. He's not listed among the top scorers here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1902_CAHL_season
Iain has him playing 1903-1911, and I trust him on that. So...
02-03:
3rd in goals(54.5% of first and 85.7% of second)
03-04:
2nd in goals(70.3% of first and 100% of second)
04-05:
t-8th in goals(33.3% of first and 47.4% of second)
05-06:
8th in goals(51.6% of first and 53.3% of second)
07-08:
5th in goals(71% of first and 78.6% of second)
08-09:
2nd in goals(76.3% of first and 100% of second)
This was during the split league era, so I think Vs1 is more appropriate, but let's see how both shake out.
Vs1: 357 total(avg. 59.5)
Vs2: 465 total(avg. 77.5)
Using Vs2 is very, very generous to Jordan considering the era he played in, and a 77.5 Vs2 over 6 years means much less than it does than if you did it in the 80s like Pederson did. In the 80s, Pederson's VsX over 6 years was 454 total(avg. 75.67). Pederson was also a monster in the playoffs, and I don't believe Jordan ever played in the playoffs. While you can't knock him for not having the resume, you have to acknowledge that Pederson was an established playoff warrior. Pederson also brings an established two-way game and penalty killing experience on PKs that were very good for the Bruins.
Again, I think rankings is a very poor way of looking at things, and so is points per game without adjustment. Wiseman is the better offensive option, and basically all these two bring is offense.
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
Yes, Jordan was 1st in the league in 1902, but it was a junior league. Irrelevant.
His % scores in points for the rest of his seasons (vs. #1
64%
83%
74%
58%
75%
66%
Total: 420%
However: You're dreaming if you think that can just be compared straight up with a post-expansion player. What TDMM keeps saying is absolutely true, and beyond that, I've seen the same kind of discrepancy exist between pre- and post-merger players too.
At a bare minimum, I would adjust Jordan's scores up by 15% like I tend to do for pre-expansion guys, but in all likelihood it deserves more than a 50% bump.
When you're 2nd in the best league in the world and your score is 66%, taking that at face value means that you're saying that by 1967 there were 22 times as many players worthy of that score as there were in 1909, and by 1974, 44 times as many. Just to take two random seasons.
I don't think even Hardyvan would make that assertion.
His % scores in points for the rest of his seasons (vs. #1
64%
83%
74%
58%
75%
66%
Total: 420%
However: You're dreaming if you think that can just be compared straight up with a post-expansion player. What TDMM keeps saying is absolutely true, and beyond that, I've seen the same kind of discrepancy exist between pre- and post-merger players too.
At a bare minimum, I would adjust Jordan's scores up by 15% like I tend to do for pre-expansion guys, but in all likelihood it deserves more than a 50% bump.
When you're 2nd in the best league in the world and your score is 66%, taking that at face value means that you're saying that by 1967 there were 22 times as many players worthy of that score as there were in 1909, and by 1974, 44 times as many. Just to take two random seasons.
I don't think even Hardyvan would make that assertion.
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
Yes, Jordan was 1st in the league in 1902, but it was a junior league. Irrelevant.
His % scores in points for the rest of his seasons (vs. #1
64%
83%
74%
58%
75%
66%
Total: 420%
However: You're dreaming if you think that can just be compared straight up with a post-expansion player. What TDMM keeps saying is absolutely true, and beyond that, I've seen the same kind of discrepancy exist between pre- and post-merger players too.
At a bare minimum, I would adjust Jordan's scores up by 15% like I tend to do for pre-expansion guys, but in all likelihood it deserves more than a 50% bump.
If you bumped Jordan's scores up by 15%, you'd have to do the same to contemporary Russell Bowie. And then Bowie has what, 6 seasons at 115%? 6 seasons at 115% would make Bowie compete with Jagr and Esposito for the best regular season offensive player in the ATD not named Wayne, Mario or Gordie.
I have no idea how to convert pre-NHL percentages to NHL percentages, but I actually think Billy did a good job of showing that Jordan's offense might be overrated. I was under the impression that he had a very short peak but was at least close to Russell Bowie a few years (the years he was 2nd, 2nd, and 3rd in goals). But that doesn't seem to be the case.
I mean, to believe Jordan is one of the best offensive players in the MLD, you pretty much have to believe that Russell Bowie (and to a lesser extent Frank McGee) continue to be underrated, since Jordan basically scored 75% of Bowie's offense in Jordan's BEST seasons.
Last edited:
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
I don't understand why you want to adjust his numbers up at all, to be honest.
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
Reichel has a nice international resume, but the World Championships all star selections don't mean much considering those tournaments were not best-on-best, instead they were the best of teams that didn't make the playoffs and Europeans. Offensively, Reichel is the better player than Gagner(which I already admitted). Gagner doesn't have defensive play? He received Selke votes(although not many) in three different years, and has quotes calling him a two-way player.
VsX:
Reichel: 47, 59, 82, 50, 52, 60, 76, 48, 45(9 year total 519)
Gagner: 71, 61, 60, 60, 56, 55, 51, 51, 53(9 year total 518)
I didn't realize they were that close. Looking at team-leading(top 5s only):
Reichel: 2, 1, 4, 2, 2, 1, 5(2.43 over 7 years)
Gagner: 1, 3, 1, 3, 3, 3, 1, 2, 2(2.11 over 9 years)
So Gagner figured more prominently into his team's scoring than Reichel. With Gagner's intangibles, I'm not so sure he's not a better player than Reichel with their offense being this close.
You're cherrypicking Sykora vs. Prospal instead of Sullivan, compare the best winger on each line to the best winger, and they're both right wingers. Saying each guy is better in individual components of offense isn't worth much IMO. They're both playmaking wingers, just look at points.
Sykora: 67, 72, 84, 53, 57, 60, 48, 46, 59(9 year total 546)
Sullivan: 84, 78, 69, 67, 64, 59, 53, 49, 46(9 year total 569)
I won't deny that Sykora has the advantage in playoff production, but in the regular season, Sullivan is the better offensive player. Overall in terms of offense, I'll still take Sullivan.
As far as I know, the Czech Extraliga was not that great of a league when Cerny was playing in the 60s. Once the 70s hit, the Czechs caught up to the Soviets and were able to beat them in some best on best tournaments, which they never really did in the 60s. It's hard to compare Prospal and Cerny because I can't figure out what to make of Cerny's domestic resume. Internationally, they pretty much beat every team, and would lose to the Soviets every time. They beat the amateurs, but basically never able to beat the best. His competition for Czech finishes was Jaroslav Jirik, Jiri Holik, Jozef Golonka and Jaroslav Holik as far as I know. I'm not seeing what makes him better than Prospal. I'm seeing a domestic resume where you can argue he belongs on a second line here(he did play on a stacked team), but I'm not seeing a resume where you can say is better than Prospal. Vinny was decent in terms of leading his teams(4, 2, 1, 2, 2, 5, 3, 5, 2, 2, 1), and has a strong VsX resume.
I just disagree. I think Philadelphia's wings have the edge. I'm not seeing anything concrete that shows Boston's are better.
BubbaBoot
Registered User
Gagne looked like he had some serious PK time in his heyday with the North Stars. After that, not so much......why?
And you aren't going to poopoo the Worlds are you? Hell, in 2000 alone, while Reichel was captain for his Czech team that won a Gold, some of the other international players included Satan, Dopita, Bertuzzi, Vyborny, Smyth, Rozenthal, Adrian Aucoin, Varada, Nylander, Visnovsky, Pavel Bure, Huselius, the Sedins, Lumme, Frantisek Kaberle, Phil Housley, Kharitonov, Matvichuk, Handzus, Modin, Kovalev, Kozlov, Axelsson, Sillinger, Brendan Morrison, Gionta, Tikkanen, Konawalchuk, Stepanek, Ninimaa, Havlat, Esche, Irbe, Gerber, Byzgalov....and oh yeah, Vinny Prospal AND Steve Sullivan and neither of these two have any all-star selections for international competition.
No I didn't. We're supposed to be going head-to-head in a competition. Sykora would be lining up against Prospal, not Sullivan. I thought that was the whole point. Taking the facts at hand and use conjecture towards game scenarios....otherwise this would just be a stat geek-fest.
Cerny would be going up against Sullivan, not Prospal. In fact, if anything I'd try to put my 1st or 4th line up against this 2nd line whenever possible.
I have nothing against Prospal's resume, he was a damn good player and I actually had him high on my list. Domestically he was good and was also a hitter. Internationally he was good also, in fact he played well with his captain Robert Reichel in 2000....when they played against the non-playoff teams players and Euros.
Cerny played against the Russians, true, but are you going to say that 5 silvers and 6 bronzes, going up against arguably the best team in all Europe, and quite possibly the world aren't worthy? (I would like to see how the 60's NHL teams differed front the 70's NHL teams, who were shocked by the Russian style, something the Czechs also used.....it would be something to see the 60's Soviets vs. the 60's NHL play, eh?).
In his 20's Cerny burned up the league. By the time he hit his 30's, parity was taking hold in his league, yet from the age of 30 on he came in high on his team in scoring, (1st, over Jirik / 1st, 2nd in the league / T1st / 1st / 2nd / 2nd / 3rd / 4th / and at age 37 he was 3rd). Pretty good if you want to compare against Prospal. Cerny is in the Czech and IIHF Hall of Fame.....Prospal, a Czech, does he make any Hall of Fame? Or are you going to trash those Hall of Fames as meh also?
And I too disagree, if anything it's even....on any given night.
Last edited:
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
That was only for a total of two years. I never claimed Gagner was anything of a penalty killer, he wasn't. They were the year before his breakout offensive season, and his breakout offensive season. Seems likely that the team realized he was better suited playing more at ES and on the PP to score goals, putting 3rd and 4th liners on PK duty and saving your best players for offensive situations.
When you have to list Robert Esche as a notable player in an international competition, it's clearly not something that is that impressive. On the all star teams Reichel made, he was joined by Kim Johnsson, Martin Rucinsky, Sami Kapanen, Petteri Nummelin, Milan Hnilicka, Roman Turek, Michael Sykora, Alexei Zhitnik, Paul Kariya, and Otakar Vejvoda.
The Czechs were able to beat Canadian teams that consistent of basically non-NHLers and maybe one or two guys that ended up being an NHL player one day. They also beat Finnish and Swedish teams fairly regularly. They lost a couple and tied Finland/Sweden/Canada throughout Cerny's international career. They beat guys that for the most part aren't on the radar in these drafts, and basically always lost to the guys that are.
I don't know anything about the Czech Hockey Hall of Fame, but if they induct the best Czech players of all time Prospal will certainly be included. If it's the best Czech players to play in the Czech Republic, he won't. The IIHF Hall of Fame is a nice feather in his cap, but Prospal played in an era where circumstances are very different so he wouldn't have a chance to make it.
BubbaBoot
Registered User
Yet Prospal and Sullivan couldn't make them at all...
So this means Cerny sucks?
At 21 he was 4th on the Czech team in scoring during the 1960 Olympics.
At 24 he was 6th for the team in the Worlds, 2 points behind Jirik.
At 25 he tied for 2nd overall in the Olympics with teammates Vlach and Dolana.
At 26 he was 3rd / tied 4th overall at the Worlds....teammates Golonka and Jirik were #1 and #2 overall. He was 1 point behind Firsov, Alexandrov and Starshinov.
At 27 he had only 2 points in 2 games at the Worlds.
At 28, terrible Worlds, only 2 points in 7 games, the same as Kuzkin and Okssanen. Nedomansky had only 3.
At 29, tied at 4th on the team in the 1968 Olympics with Jirik and Alexandrov, 1 point behind Nedomansky.
At 30, tied with Jirik at 6th on the team at the Worlds.
At 31, 1 point in 2 games at the Worlds.
At 32, 5th at the Worlds, tied with Stastny and Mishakov, 1 point behind Nedomansky and Shadrin, 2 points behind Starshinov.
At 33, his last international games, tied at 5th on the team in the Worlds.
He had a pts/game average of .62 in the Worlds and 1.00 in the Olympics. 87 total games combined. He skated with and against some damn good players and scored right along with them.
Straka, Lang, Demitra, Nedved, Sykora, Palffy, Gaborik, Satan, Hossa, Hejduk, Elias, and Hossa are contemporaries of him and all have more goals than him in fewer NHL games. Reichel had 3 fewer goals in 278 fewer games.
Prospal is 8th overall among Czechs in NHL total points but among his contemporaries he's 19th in points per game, 22nd overall (500+ NHL games played). Sykora (1017 games / 0.71 /16th and 20th) and Reichel (830 games / 0.76 / 9th and 12th) have better ppg averages....yet Reichel is barely over Gagner, Sullivan is better than Sykora and Cerny just ain't worthy of Prospal, despite the numbers, the medals, the all-star teams and accolades?
BillyShoe1721
Terriers
I really don't care much about post-Soviet collapse World Championships all star teams.
1960: being 4th on the team really isn't good, Jirik is the only player I can think of that is even on that team that has been drafted in these parts(may be missing a random lower level draft guy)
At 24: again, being 6th on the team really isn't that impressive considering the esteem to which the rest of the team was held.
At 25: there's a good season that means something.
At 26: another good season that means something.
At 27 and 28: doesn't add much to his resume, Oksanen is an AA/AAA winger and Kuzkin is a defenseman.
At 29: Czech team started to get better depth to the point where 4th is decent.
At 30: but 6th really isn't that impressive.
At 31, 32, 33: doesn't add anything, impressive addition to his resume, and another meh season.
He didn't score right along with them. Nedomansky's PPG in WC And Olympics was 1.28 over 93 games. Jirik's was 1.0625. Venjamin Alexandrov's was 1.31. Jaroslav Holik's was .903. Jiri Holik's was .84. Loktev's GPG was .734(can't find assists on him) in international team appearances. Ulf Sterner's was .99. Golonka's was 1.18.
Prospal is a playmaker, exactly 2/3 of his points are assists. This is a terrible way to evaluate a player. Claude Giroux as a similar ratio with 68% assists. David Booth has more goals in less games than Giroux over Giroux's career. By your logic David Booth is a better offensive player than Claude Giroux.
That's a fine bit of statistical manipulation and smoke right there. Using points per game this way is unfair to players of different eras, and as I've said before, a poor way to evaluate players. Reichel had the benefit if playing in the firewagon early 90s that severely skew his point per game totals, where by far his two highest raw point totals occurred. Why do I care where Vinny Prospal stands among Czech players? That doesn't mean anything. I care where he finished when he competed against the best, and that's the entire NHL, not just among countrymen. It's the same reason I don't care much for Reichel, or anyone's WC accolades after the Soviet collapse, or European players before 1960, and non-Soviets before 1970. If you want to make an argument based on points per game, at least use adjusted points per game, and you can probably make some actual conclusions about the numbers. The methods we've been using more and more lately like VsX, Vs2, modified Vs2, rankings among teammates, etc. are much more valuable.
BubbaBoot
Registered User
Which I guess is why you've totally ignored the omission of international play and/or all-star teams for Sullivan and Prospal....which are even less worthy than these. Gagner has decent numbers, Fisher and Lever too, but I guess they weren't worthy either.....just crap competition....yet you include quotes for Tippett from his Olympic days, who played on the same team as Gagner, who was 1st for the Canadian team in scoring that year....just crap competition though....unless this is the window that fits your criteria?
.75 as the 2nd liner internationally? Occasionally in the upper echelons? Domestically one of the best ever in the Czech leagues. Yeah, he blows....sounds like a Czech version of Dave Andreychuk or something....good but not great and doesn't deserve to be a 2nd liner in the MLD.....
No, that's why added the other stats too, you know, total points and ppg to add the overall relevance and perspective.
Okay, how about this...lets take the time periods when the two of them played at the same time. 1997-2004, so as not to skew the numbers.
Prospal - 531 games / 102 goals / 231 assists / 333 points / -17 / 67 EV / 35 PP / 0 SH / .19 gag / .44 apg / .63 ppg - Playing for Philly / Ottawa / Tampa Bay
Reichel - 393 games (2 yrs in Czech League because of his desire to be close to his daughter and family) / 94 goals / 163 assists / 257 points / -8 / 72 EV / 20 PP / 2 SH / .24 gpg / .41 apg / .65 ppg - Playing for a crappy Islanders team and Toronto.
Because you said that he was should go into the Czech HoF ("I don't know anything about the Czech Hockey Hall of Fame, but if they induct the best Czech players of all time Prospal will certainly be included."). I presented the facts with him among his peers, during the same time frame, give or take a couple or few years.
So essentially, the WC's and Olympics ain't worth a damn at all? Or is the window about 4 years and 3 months or something? That's when it was "excellent"? Jeez, talk about cherry picking.
And yet there is always some new formula that pops up and debunks an older formula....
Reichel's NHL team rankings 8/7/2/1/4/2/1/5/6/9, (hard to quantify his seasons where he was traded midway through a couple of times). I won't include his Euro or International numbers as they aren't worthy in your eyes, (which is your argument of dismissing Cerny). So whether Reichel was in the highflying early 80's isn't an argument to use here either.
Also, Reichel's adjusted numbers are higher than his actual numbers, by 28 points....the same adjusted point total as Prospal....but in fewer games.
Last edited:
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
This thread seems to indicate that 1965-66 is when Czechoslovakia started being able to compete with the Soviets again.
