MLD 2011 Assassination Thread

seventieslord

Student Of The Game
Mar 16, 2006
36,080
7,132
Regina, SK
alright Billy, you've received the most (tied with five other guys) but you've given by far the most and you gave me the list I asked for :)

so you will get my first review, whenever that is.

I hope you and everyone else can focus on making sure every team gets at least one review, even those that didn't post a roster here. (or in the roster thread! :yikes:)
 

Velociraptor

Registered User
May 12, 2007
10,953
19
Big Smoke
Twins, Shamrocks, Bulls and Red Wings are the four teams yet to receive any sort of assassination seventies, just for instant reference.
 

BillyShoe1721

Terriers
Mar 29, 2007
17,252
6
Philadelphia, PA
Belleville Bulls

updated_high-res_inverted_logo-298x300.png


Head Coach: Bobby Kromm
Assistant Coach: Brian Kilrea

Jimmy Gardner (C) - Skene Ronan - Dave Christian
Dutch Hiller - Vyacheslav Anisin - Bud Poile
Jörgen Pettersson - Billy Barlow - Mac Colville
Rob Zamuner - Stu Barnes - George Ferguson
Loui Eriksson - Erik Cole

Doug Crossman - Arthur Moore
Uwe Krupp - Bob Plager (A)
Jack Ruttan - Frank Eddolls (A)
Keith Carney

Kirk McLean
Ilya Bryzgalov

Special Teams Units
PP1: Jimmy Gardner-Billy Barlow-Skene Ronan-Doug Crossman-Arthur Moore
PP2: Jorgen Pettersson-Vyacheslav Anisin-Bud Poile-Uwe Krupp-Dutch Hiller
PK1: Dutch Hiller-Rob Zamuner-Bob Plager-Arthur Moore
PK2: Mac Colville-Stu Barnes-Frank Eddolls-Uwe Krupp

Team Strategies
* First Line - This line has a nice mixture of a glue guy with offensive ability, a scoring force and one of the fastest players ever to hit the ice. Ronan is the guy to watch as he has led the NHA in scoring before and with a good corner man in Gardner who can get the puck to him, and speed on the other wing, Skene may just light some defenses up.

* Second Line - I almost wanted to call this my first line..mainly because I think it may be my best. Dutch Hiller had some offensive capabilities but he was a defense first, corner guy with insane speed..in the middle we have the center of the famous Soviet "kid line"..Vyacheslav Anisin who is known for his brilliant passing and great skating ability, and finally..Bud Poile has a deadly shot and some good finishes including being recognized as a second team all-star.

* Third Line - Think of this as another line that can provide offense but also play great defense. Pettersson was a two-way winger capable of playing in all situations. He was fast, a great puck-handler, responsible defensively and had three 35+ goal seasons. On the other side, I have Mac Colville. Mac will be the "glue guy" to this line as he was a tireless worker who was excellent at creating turnovers and battling in the corners. Finally, in between them was the guy I had as my second line center, but moved down to the third line to add some more speed to this line. Billy Barlow was as good a skater as you could ever be, was 4th on the all-time goals list at the end of the 1899 season (ahead of Routh and Drinkwater) and was a hero in multiple playoff runs.

* Fourth Line - I'm sure you guys are wondering what I wanted to accomplish with this line. Think a defense-only line who could be physical as well. Rob Zamuner was one of the NHL's best defensive forwards over at least a five year span. He worked his tail off and while he was shafted in the Selke voting due to his lack of offense, anyone who saw him play realized how good he was in his own end. Stu Barnes is a personal favourite of mine. Great leader, gritty and a dependable two-way forward. If I could have another assistant captain it would be Stu, but alas he will continue to lead by example for my squad. Finally, George Ferguson made one of the biggest jumps in the draft, and deservingly so. He has excellent defensive play, was very physical, had longevity, playoff experience and great speed. He even put up some respectable offensive numbers over the years.

* First Pairing - Doug Crossman was an excellent puck-mover and a dependable player and leader. He had tremendous offensive instincts and could pass the puck as good as anyone from the back-end. On the other side, I made sure I paired him up with someone who would allow Crossman to play his free-flowing offensive style. Therefore, I have Arthur Moore alongside him. Moore was a tremendous skater, that was a punisher and a very good stay-at-home defender.

* Second Pairing - I love this pairing. Uwe Krupp is a personal favourite of mine as well, and I believe I have had him in the MLD on three occasions now. He was known for his defense and could move the puck..liked to be physical and even had a stanley cup clinching goal. Sounds like a nice all-around player for my second pairing no? With him is a guy I wanted from the beginning of the draft. Bob Plager, the brother of Barclay, was an excellent shutdown defenseman who was as physical as they come. He was dirty, punishing and hard to get by.

* Third Pairing - The ultimate mystery..Jack Ruttan. I understand there is little on him, but in my opinion, he deserves a spot in the MLD if he is in the HOF..to not have him just seems wrong. He clearly did something right other then leading by example, in order to be elected. However, he may not be permanent in my lineup if I need to go with someone who has a more proven track record in Keith Carney. Alongside Ruttan is Frank Eddolls. Like Plager, Frank was another guy I wanted from the beginning of the draft. A terrific leader, who frustrated the hell out of Maurice Richard as he was excellent in shutting him down.

* Goalkeeping Tandem - Bryzgalov is my back-up to relieve the pressure off of McLean once in a while. He has had some excellent finishes and good playoff success. However, my main man is Kirk McLean. He is one of the best goalies in this draft for a number of reasons. First off, two times he was in the top-3 in Vezina voting. Both times he lost to Patrick Roy..pretty damn strong results considering the winner. He also has had some other good years with a poor Canucks squad, earning him a lot of respect across the league. He was great inside the locker-room and was a calming presence. His greatest asset? He was clutch as hell. His playoff numbers are absurd considering the era he played in. He is a work-horse goalie, which is good as it means I can use him often..with a better team in front of him.

* Coaching - Brian Kilrea is my assistant coach..and I'm sure you all know him. The all-time winningest coach in CHL history with over 1200 wins..his team only finished under .500 five times in over thirty seasons. In Junior Hockey, that is simply incredible. Add on to the resume being named coach of the year five times, winning two memorial cups and three OHL championships..and you simply have one of the best assistant coaches in the draft. Our head coach was another excellent coach who won on basically every level imaginable. He was the coach of the year in the CHL, WHA and NHL..making the finals in 8 out of 10 seasons as a coach in the WHA and CHL..before moving to the NHL and taking a horrendous Wings team to the second round. He was known for his defensive style of play while always wanting hard workers and great skaters..you couldn't ask for a better fit..that is our team in a nutshell.

Eras of Each Player
1916 or earlier – Jimmy Gardner, Skene Ronan, Billy Barlow, Arthur Moore, Jack Ruttan
1917-1942 – Bud Poile, Dutch Hiller, Mac Colville
1943-1965 – Bob Plager, Frank Eddolls
1966-1979 – Jorgen Pettersson, Vyacheslav Anisin, George Ferguson
1980-1994 – Dave Christian, Rob Zamuner, Stu Barnes, Doug Crossman, Uwe Krupp, Kirk McLean, Keith Carney
1995-2004 - Erik Cole, Ilya Bryzgalov
in 2011 - Loui Eriksson​



** Credit to VanIslander, TDMM, Seventieslord and any other GM who helped contribute to the bio's for each player.​

1st Line

Like every chaos team, the 1st line is going to be good defensively and will have intangibles. Gardner brings toughness and some scoring ability, Christian brings intangibles. Christian's adjusted +/- is a bit concerning. My question about this line would be, who's the playmaker? There is goal scoring, grittiness, and defensive play, but I don't see much of a playmaker.

2nd Line

Hiller is an adequate glue guy on this line, but doesn't bring much offense. Anisin brings playmaking and Poile finishes. This group doesn't really wow you, but all of the parts are there and it should be effective.

3rd Line

A good two-way line. Your wings both brings two-way play and a little bit of offense. They are centered by a speedy early era scorer. Should be effective at both sides of the rink. Not spectacular in any area, but not weak in any area.

4th Line

A grinding 4th line that will provide good defensive play. In terms of offense they are not going to provide that much, but should be able to be an effective group if placed in the right role.

Forwards Overall

A forward group laden with two-way ability and intangibles, just what I'd expect from a chaos team. They lack offensive firepower, but should be in almost every game.

1st Pairing

Crossman is a guy that brings a little bit of everything, and Moore brings some physicality. I don't think either is really a #1 defenseman, neither stands out to me for some reason.

2nd Pairing

Krupp is a solid but unspectacular defenseman, and Plager brings a lot of physicality and a little bit of puck moving ability. Should be an effective pair that will be difficult to play against.

3rd Pairing

A decent 3rd pairing, nothing great. Unfortunately, you weren't able to uncover much about Ruttan.

Defense Overall

A solid but unspectacular group, just like your forwards.

Goalies

McLean is a pretty good goalie, and Bryz is a personal favorite of mine, and is probably a bit above average.

PP

Due to the significant amount of two-way ability in your lineup, your PPs suffer a bit. They lack a dynamic offensive talent and are kind of lacking in firepower in general.

PK

On the other hand, your PK units look quite good.

Spares

I don't think Eriksson is ready for the MLD yet, but I'd definitely have taken him in the AAA draft as the defensive presence on a 2nd line with some scoring ability and speed. Cole is a power forward with intangibles, and Carney will fit right in with your other defensemen.

Coach

Kromm and Kilrea should form a pretty good pair, but nothing mind blowing.
 

chaosrevolver

Snubbed Again
Sponsor
Nov 24, 2006
16,876
1,072
Ontario
1st Line

Like every chaos team, the 1st line is going to be good defensively and will have intangibles. Gardner brings toughness and some scoring ability, Christian brings intangibles. Christian's adjusted +/- is a bit concerning. My question about this line would be, who's the playmaker? There is goal scoring, grittiness, and defensive play, but I don't see much of a playmaker.

Christian is good in his own end..theres a reason he was the consensus choice to move to defense for the US squad.

I'm surprised to not see Ronan mentioned. We are talking about a scoring leader in the NHA who had some other very good finishes with great competition as well. He once scored an incredible 35 goals in 18 games..

As for the passing..it will be a combined effort. Gardner was known for his corner play where he could get the puck in a battle and feed it to others. Christian has the speed to get to the puck before anyone, and Ronan will be used for his scoring ability which is excellent as noted.

2nd Line

Hiller is an adequate glue guy on this line, but doesn't bring much offense. Anisin brings playmaking and Poile finishes. This group doesn't really wow you, but all of the parts are there and it should be effective.

I think it's one of the best 2nd lines in the draft. All of them can skate, with Hiller and Anisin being among the fastest players in the draft. Hiller is basically known for his corner play and defense, but did have some okay finishes. He certainly is good enough to be a glue guy for a line featuring an excellent goal scorer at this level, and a crisp playmaker.

3rd Line

A good two-way line. Your wings both brings two-way play and a little bit of offense. They are centered by a speedy early era scorer. Should be effective at both sides of the rink. Not spectacular in any area, but not weak in any area.

I'll give you an area where they are spectacular in..skating. Barlow may be the best skater in the draft and was a very good goal scorer. Pettersson brings some offense, some defense and once again, tremendous speed. Finally, Mac Colville is the glue guy I count on to feed these speedsters.

4th Line

A grinding 4th line that will provide good defensive play. In terms of offense they are not going to provide that much, but should be able to be an effective group if placed in the right role.

I'd say it's one of the better pure defensive lines in the draft. They will be counted on to stop other teams scorers but will also be kept to about a 10-12 minute clip per game, as I do have other lines who can shut opponents down.

Forwards Overall

A forward group laden with two-way ability and intangibles, just what I'd expect from a chaos team. They lack offensive firepower, but should be in almost every game.

1st Pairing

Crossman is a guy that brings a little bit of everything, and Moore brings some physicality. I don't think either is really a #1 defenseman, neither stands out to me for some reason.

I think that as a pairing they really work well though. Crossman was an elite puckmover with elite vision and a good shot. Moore was a stay-at-home guy who could move the puck, was a punishing checker and could skate like the wind.

2nd Pairing

Krupp is a solid but unspectacular defenseman, and Plager brings a lot of physicality and a little bit of puck moving ability. Should be an effective pair that will be difficult to play against.

3rd Pairing

A decent 3rd pairing, nothing great. Unfortunately, you weren't able to uncover much about Ruttan.

Underrating Eddolls. At one time he was one of the best of his time and Richard's nemesis..so good in his own end and a terrific leader. I am also seriously considering moving Carney in, rather then having Ruttan there.

Defense Overall

A solid but unspectacular group, just like your forwards.

Goalies

McLean is a pretty good goalie, and Bryz is a personal favorite of mine, and is probably a bit above average.

Pretty good? It it wasn't for Patrick Roy, you could argue he may have had two vezina's to his name, along with being one of the better playoff goaltenders of his time.

PP

Due to the significant amount of two-way ability in your lineup, your PPs suffer a bit. They lack a dynamic offensive talent and are kind of lacking in firepower in general.
Skene Ronan..

PK

On the other hand, your PK units look quite good.

Spares

I don't think Eriksson is ready for the MLD yet, but I'd definitely have taken him in the AAA draft as the defensive presence on a 2nd line with some scoring ability and speed. Cole is a power forward with intangibles, and Carney will fit right in with your other defensemen.

Coach

Kromm and Kilrea should form a pretty good pair, but nothing mind blowing.
Is there supposed to be a mind blowing pair in the MLD? Truly? These two fit my team perfectly and anyone who knows the way these two coach, would realize that.
 

Iain Fyffe

Hockey fact-checker
BRANDON SHAMROCKS

GM: Iain Fyffe

Coaches: Bob Pulford, Steamer Maxwell


Spares: Hugh Currie (RD), Aaron Broten (C/LW), Frank Mathers (LD/RD)

Notes on why Glover and Fielder didn't "make it".

A lengthy post about why pre-1893 hockey should be considered on par with post-1893 hockey. AKA, "why Tom Paton was the best goalie available".


PP1: Breen - Power - Hergesheimer - Hucul - Siltanen
PP2A: Ahlberg - Fielder - Cammalleri - Newell - Laflamme
PP2B: Russell - Herbert - Glover - Newell - Laflamme
PK1: Sharp - Howard - Stewart - Traub
PK2: Herbert - Russell - Laflamme - Newell

Era requirements:

<1916: Paton, Breen, Stewart, Winkler, Howard
1917-1942: Herbert, Traub, Newell
1943-1965: Hergesheimer, Fielder, Glover, Hucul, Currie
1966-1979: Crowder, Siltanen, Ahlberg
1980-1994: Broten
1995-2004: Cammalleri
in 2011: Sharp


Comments on lineup construction:

The first line should score lots of goals. Each of these players was among the best of their time offensively.

The second line is a Legion of Doom-type line. They all bring offence but also a significant physical edge. Matched up against a smaller line if possible to maximize the physical domination.

The third line provides yet more scoring, with Fielder the playmaker for his wings.

The fourth line is the most defensive-minded, though relying on speed rather than physical play to do so. Late in games when checking is needed, Crowder moves to this line and Cammalleri to the third.

Among the defence, the first pairing is pure shut-down. When there is a particularly dangerous individual or line, they match up against them. If more balance is needed, Stewart plays with Siltanen and Traub with Newell.

Tom Paton is the greatest goaltender of the 1880s and early 1890s, and Hal Winkler is underrated in his time.
 

Iain Fyffe

Hockey fact-checker
Thunder Bay Twins

220px-Thunder_bay_twins_1972.png


Coach: Dave Tippett
Asst: Floyd Smith

Jack McDonald - Ivan Boldirev - Mikael Renberg
Steve Payne - Dave Gagner (A) - Mark Napier
Dan Maloney (C) - Patrik Sundstrom - Scott Young
Scott Hartnell - Brendan Morrison - Colin Patterson
Tim Hunter, Jim McFadden

Al Hamilton (A) - Marcus Ragnarsson
Dave Hutchison - Randy Manery
Mark Streit - Ted Graham
Pierre Bouchard

Pelle Lindbergh
Roman Cechmanek

PP1: Jack McDonald - Ivan Boldirev - Mark Napier - Mark Streit - Al Hamilton
PP2: Steve Payne - Dave Gagner - Mikael Renberg - Randy Manery - Scott Young
PK1: Patrik Sundstrom - Colin Patterson - Marcus Ragnarsson - Ted Graham
PK2: Brendan Morrison - Scott Young - Dave Hutchison - Randy Manery
You've clearly gone for two-forwards above all else, and have done an excellent good job at it. I don't think you have a single sub-par defensive forward in your bottom six, and you still have some good checkers on the first two lines as well.

However you've paid the price in terms of top-flight scoring. You have lots of pretty good scoring at this level, but no great scoring. Jack McDonald might be your best, and he's quite good, but players like Payne and Gagner all benefit from the era they played in, though Boldirev's no slouch.

On the blueline you've got a bunch of conscientious defenders, but will again struggle for offence, with Streit the only significant threat. I wonder if you might wind up letting the opponents come to you too much, having too many stay-at-home types, and not enough puck-movers?

I'm not sure abaout your goaltending. Lindbergh had one really big year but wasn't that impressive otherwise, and of course his career was quite short. Cechmanek's NHL career was also short, only four seasons, and though he put up some good numbers in Philadelphia I always felt he was quite sheltered there, and when he moved to the Kings he dropped off considerably. That's probably not entirely fair to him, but I'd say at this level he's a good enough backup.

I guess it depends on how good one thinks Lindbergh was: the First All-Star of 1985, or the .860 save percentage of 1984? With such a short career, it's a tough call.
 

seventieslord

Student Of The Game
Mar 16, 2006
36,080
7,132
Regina, SK
A couple of responses to the above:

- Al Hamilton is definitely a puck-moving defenseman, as evidenced by his five seasons of 44-61 points in the WHA.

- I definitely understand Lindbergh is tough to judge. TheJudge got him later than he's ever gone before, and who knows, maybe it's still not late enough. The .860 sv% sounds brutal, but it wasn't by those standards. It was 13 points below the league average in 1984. In his other two full NHL seasons, Lindbergh was 1st in sv% (24 points above average) and 6th (15 points above) . Since goalies are so notoriously up-and-down I'd prefer to look at his sustained performance. His weighted career average is 12 points above average, which would be an awesome full-career average, but it was just over three seasons. Further exacerbating matters is the fact that Philly seemed to have a habit throughout the 80s of making a few goalies look better than they were, even from a sv% (which is the most individual stat) standpoint.

- You're also right that the top-6 isn't overwhelming there. I give him credit for grabbing Napier as late as he did, though. That was a good stopgap/bargain basement pick for that line.
 

TheJudge

Registered User
Mar 11, 2007
859
92
Thanks for the review Iain!

You've clearly gone for two-forwards above all else, and have done an excellent good job at it. I don't think you have a single sub-par defensive forward in your bottom six, and you still have some good checkers on the first two lines as well.

However you've paid the price in terms of top-flight scoring. You have lots of pretty good scoring at this level, but no great scoring. Jack McDonald might be your best, and he's quite good, but players like Payne and Gagner all benefit from the era they played in, though Boldirev's no slouch.

The team identity I went for is balance. I see my team putting forth scoring by committee while playing a physical, strong defensive game. I think the depth of my lineup will overcome having offensive stars, rather than offensive superstars, leading the way. Sundstrom, Morrison and Young are all notable offensive threats in my bottom six (in addition to their defensive prowess). Tippett's coaching style also matches perfectly with this sort of lineup.


On the blueline you've got a bunch of conscientious defenders, but will again struggle for offence, with Streit the only significant threat. I wonder if you might wind up letting the opponents come to you too much, having too many stay-at-home types, and not enough puck-movers?

Each pairing is a puck mover with a defensive conscience. Al Hamilton was one of the elite puckmovers of the WHA, as evidenced by his numbers and subsequent retired number. Manery was a consistent 30-40 point threat while playing very solidly in the defensive zone. Streit is obviously the best of the bunch offensively.

I'm not sure abaout your goaltending. Lindbergh had one really big year but wasn't that impressive otherwise, and of course his career was quite short. Cechmanek's NHL career was also short, only four seasons, and though he put up some good numbers in Philadelphia I always felt he was quite sheltered there, and when he moved to the Kings he dropped off considerably. That's probably not entirely fair to him, but I'd say at this level he's a good enough backup.

I guess it depends on how good one thinks Lindbergh was: the First All-Star of 1985, or the .860 save percentage of 1984? With such a short career, it's a tough call.

Lindbergh's career was short. However the years he did play average out to some very very solid numbers. I understand favoring longevity, but it is important to note that Lindbergh's career was not cut short for being injury prone, or unable to cut it. I guess we need to decide if he was the type of goalie who would maintain his play, or decline. Philadelphia's brass believed in him, giving a 6 year contract just before his death.

Cechmanek came to the NHL late in his playing career, by the time he reached LA he was ready for retirement. With him he brought a very impressive Czech league resume, including 5 championships, which should not be ignored. In philly he played for a strong team, thats true. Yet his numbers were considerably better than any other goalie who played for that same strong philly team

Thanks again for the review!
 

seventieslord

Student Of The Game
Mar 16, 2006
36,080
7,132
Regina, SK
Philadelphia's brass believed in him, giving a 6 year contract just before his death.

Good point! I did not know this.

Also, about Cechmanek, the thing about his stats being better than the other Philly goalies of the time is very important. I always suspected as much but never verified it until this draft. Not that it was a list of luminaries, but they were mainly guys considered solid NHL starters and he performed significantly better than they did (for whatever reason, those tables are turned in the playoffs though). You're also right about his Czech league play. Not the greatest league, but his degree of dominance there is what makes it a resume-builder. He's nearly as accomplished in the Czech league, as Hasek was. I hate the guy, but I always find myself fighting to get him the begrudging respect he deserves in these things.
 

Iain Fyffe

Hockey fact-checker
Lindbergh's career was short. However the years he did play average out to some very very solid numbers. I understand favoring longevity, but it is important to note that Lindbergh's career was not cut short for being injury prone, or unable to cut it. I guess we need to decide if he was the type of goalie who would maintain his play, or decline. Philadelphia's brass believed in him, giving a 6 year contract just before his death.
I realize the circumstances that led to his short career, but we need to go on what he did, not what we think he might have done. He had one monster season, another very good one (but only 40 GP), and one bad season (36 GP). In eight games before his death he had an .884 save percentage, 15 points lower than the year before. Big sample size issue there, but since goalies are notoriously up and down I believe his big year was not likely to be repeated.

Cechmanek came to the NHL late in his playing career, by the time he reached LA he was ready for retirement. With him he brought a very impressive Czech league resume, including 5 championships, which should not be ignored. In philly he played for a strong team, thats true. Yet his numbers were considerably better than any other goalie who played for that same strong philly team
Yes, his Czech years should be given some credit. He did outperform his backups significantly, although I notice that Boucher had a .918 season the year before Cechmanek arrived, and Esche had a .915 season the year after he left. However, they did not sustain that performance for any length of time, while Cechmanek did. I think he's better than I originally gave him credit for.
 

TheJudge

Registered User
Mar 11, 2007
859
92
I'll give your line up a shot a bit later today Iain; need to run a few errands.

However, I must warn you my knowledge of early era hockey is sorely lacking (although I'm getting better). I may end up with more questions than answers ;)
 

TheJudge

Registered User
Mar 11, 2007
859
92
BRANDON SHAMROCKS

GM: Iain Fyffe

Coaches: Bob Pulford, Steamer Maxwell


Spares: Hugh Currie (RD), Aaron Broten (C/LW), Frank Mathers (LD/RD)

Notes on why Glover and Fielder didn't "make it".

A lengthy post about why pre-1893 hockey should be considered on par with post-1893 hockey. AKA, "why Tom Paton was the best goalie available".


PP1: Breen - Power - Hergesheimer - Hucul - Siltanen
PP2A: Ahlberg - Fielder - Cammalleri - Newell - Laflamme
PP2B: Russell - Herbert - Glover - Newell - Laflamme
PK1: Sharp - Howard - Stewart - Traub
PK2: Herbert - Russell - Laflamme - Newell

Era requirements:

<1916: Paton, Breen, Stewart, Winkler, Howard
1917-1942: Herbert, Traub, Newell
1943-1965: Hergesheimer, Fielder, Glover, Hucul, Currie
1966-1979: Crowder, Siltanen, Ahlberg
1980-1994: Broten
1995-2004: Cammalleri
in 2011: Sharp


Comments on lineup construction:

The first line should score lots of goals. Each of these players was among the best of their time offensively.

The second line is a Legion of Doom-type line. They all bring offence but also a significant physical edge. Matched up against a smaller line if possible to maximize the physical domination.

The third line provides yet more scoring, with Fielder the playmaker for his wings.

The fourth line is the most defensive-minded, though relying on speed rather than physical play to do so. Late in games when checking is needed, Crowder moves to this line and Cammalleri to the third.

Among the defence, the first pairing is pure shut-down. When there is a particularly dangerous individual or line, they match up against them. If more balance is needed, Stewart plays with Siltanen and Traub with Newell.

Tom Paton is the greatest goaltender of the 1880s and early 1890s, and Hal Winkler is underrated in his time.


Forward Impressions

From what I can tell Power is a quality two-way player for your top line. He had the intellegence to effectively play multiple positions during his career - always a plus in my books. Breen had some solid offensive numbers, although I question the competition level. His peak was undoubtedly solid, but his best years were as an amateur, and his career was quite short. Wally Hergesheimer is a potent goal scorer at this level, although I could see some bigger and stronger defenses posing problems for him due to his size. Overall, this line should be effective offensively, with power providing the defensive conscience.

It seems to me that for his time Russell was an effective power forward. He should be able to provide the same for your lineup. Again your LW provides a defensive conscience. Herberts will take alot of penalties, so I hope you're confident in your penalty kill. From what I understand he was effective as both a playmaker and a scorer, while adding some edge. I would be worried about the briefness of his peak, because he fell off quite drastically after that. Glover is about as big of a star as you can find in the AHL. It is tough to project how he would have fared in the NHL if his relationships with detroit / chicago management had not been so rocky.

Ahlberg is playing out of position, but should perform acceptably. He was very consistent in Sweden. I wish he had come over to the NHL, because it is always difficult to say how a player will perform on smaller ice. Some are able to adapt and thrive, others are not. His international resume is also impressive, which leads me to give him the benefit of the doubt. I know very little about Fielder, although he does have impressive playmaking numbers in the WHL and will serve as the pivot for this line. I am concerned about his lack of performance at the top level. Crowder is a very effective third liner, and will provide solid defense and physical play for your bottom six. To be honest, I wanted him on my team.

I don't know enough about Howard to comment on him. Cammalleri is definitely a shooter first, as is Sharp. This line should generate good energy and lots of shots.

Each line has at least one defensive player to insulate your offensive players. Throughout your lineup you have some players with impressive resumes, although many of those resumes were created outside of the NHL. This isn't a knock, just something to be noted.

Defense impressions

Your top pairing of Stewart and Traub should have good chemistry. They will be very strong defensively, although I question their ability to initiate much of a transition game.

Your second pairing is probably my favorite. Hucul has an impressive WHL resume as a puck mover, and is matched with your heart and soul Laflamme. If matched with a quick-strike forward line, they could give opposing teams fits.

Your third pairing also appears geared towards offense. They should prove effective in that regard. I'd be concerned about them getting pinned in their zone.

Overall, your defense boasts a good balance of offense and defense.

Goaltending

I'm not touching the Paton argument. I'll leave that to people with more knowledge of historical hockey than myself.

Conclusions

I like your team build. None of your lines can be seen as defensively weak, and all of them provide offense. Much of your teams strength hinges on how players from leagues outside of the NHL would perform. They have impressive resumes, but how would they transfer over? There are many examples of players who were stars outside of the NHL, and relatively ineffective within it. There are just as many examples of players who were stars in both leagues. It'll be up to you to prove that your guys would do just as well against a higher caliber of competition.
 

Iain Fyffe

Hockey fact-checker
I like your team build. None of your lines can be seen as defensively weak, and all of them provide offense. Much of your teams strength hinges on how players from leagues outside of the NHL would perform. They have impressive resumes, but how would they transfer over? There are many examples of players who were stars outside of the NHL, and relatively ineffective within it. There are just as many examples of players who were stars in both leagues. It'll be up to you to prove that your guys would do just as well against a higher caliber of competition.
Note that many of the non-NHL players I drafted are such because the pre-dated the NHL. They couldn't have played in the NHL, because it didn't exist. Power and Russell both played at the highest level of competition available in their day, as did Paton and James Stewart. I've only got two career minor-leaguers in the starting lineup, and they're two of the best ever in the O6-era minors.

I'd also worry a bit about Stewart and Traub being too stay-at-home, which is part of the reason they'll be mixed up with Newell and Siltanen at times.

Those who question Billy Breen's quality of competition probably don't realize the quality of hockey in Manitoba in his era. I can't blame them, since the media has never paid much attention to Manitoba despite the enormous amount of talent that was developed there. To reiterate Breen's offensive highlights:

In 1904/05, the top goal-scorers in the MHL were Tommy Phillips with 29, Billy McGimsie with 28 and Breen with 25. The fourth-best player had 14.

In 1905/06, the top goal-scorers in the MHL were Phillips and Breen with 24 each and McGimsie with 21. The fourth-best player had 10.

There was no one close to these three; some of the players who could not approach their goal totals include Si Griffis, Tom Hooper and Joe Hall (who was an offensive forward early in his career).

In 1997/08, the MHL was now a pro league and Breen led the circuit with 2.92 points per game, well ahead of Hamby Shore (2.40) and Lorne Campbell (2.25), both of whom played in the NHA.

Other players in the MHL that year who later played in the NHA: Fred Lake, Don Smith, Skinner Poulin, Barney Holden, Ernie Dubeau, Jack Fraser, Grindy Forrester, Tommy Dunderdale, Walter Bellamy, Bert Boulton and Newsy Lalonde. A young Lalonde played only one game, not being good enough to stick full-time. Tom Hooper and Charlie Tobin also played in this league. This was a league with some serious contemporary talent, but until recently it wasn't even recognized that it was Canada's first fully pro league, much less given the credit it deserves for the calibre of hockey it possessed.
 

seventieslord

Student Of The Game
Mar 16, 2006
36,080
7,132
Regina, SK
Iain, it looks clear to me that the Manitoba league is very underrated historically. I started to wake up to this after researching Gingras more myself. I didn't give the Winnipeg Vics the respect they deserved after two cup wins and two other hard-fought challenges at the turn of the century.
 

BillyShoe1721

Terriers
Mar 29, 2007
17,252
6
Philadelphia, PA
Christian is good in his own end..theres a reason he was the consensus choice to move to defense for the US squad.

I'm surprised to not see Ronan mentioned. We are talking about a scoring leader in the NHA who had some other very good finishes with great competition as well. He once scored an incredible 35 goals in 18 games..

As for the passing..it will be a combined effort. Gardner was known for his corner play where he could get the puck in a battle and feed it to others. Christian has the speed to get to the puck before anyone, and Ronan will be used for his scoring ability which is excellent as noted.

Christian is definitely a plus in the defensive zone, I was just pointing out that his adjusted +/- was rather concerning/scary. I probably underrated Ronan a bit, but as a goalscoring center, he's difficult to build around. You say that passing will be a combined effort, but I'm not buying it. Gardner's playmaking record is underwhelming to say the least. I'm just not seeing it.
I'll give you an area where they are spectacular in..skating. Barlow may be the best skater in the draft and was a very good goal scorer. Pettersson brings some offense, some defense and once again, tremendous speed. Finally, Mac Colville is the glue guy I count on to feed these speedsters.

They are good skaters. I don't know if I'd call Barlow the best skater in the draft, that might be a bit much.
I think that as a pairing they really work well though. Crossman was an elite puckmover with elite vision and a good shot. Moore was a stay-at-home guy who could move the puck, was a punishing checker and could skate like the wind.

Elite puckmovers with elite vision and good shots don't have their top 4 highest point finishes among defensemen be 16, 10, 26, and 27. I don't care what era. He's a good puck moving defenseman, but elite is a stretch.

Underrating Eddolls. At one time he was one of the best of his time and Richard's nemesis..so good in his own end and a terrific leader. I am also seriously considering moving Carney in, rather then having Ruttan there.

One of the best of his time? I'm not convinced. One quote saying that doesn't validate it. Are there any all star voting records to back up this claim? He also played in an extremely weak era.

Pretty good? It it wasn't for Patrick Roy, you could argue he may have had two vezina's to his name, along with being one of the better playoff goaltenders of his time.

May. He finished 2nd and 3rd, does logic not say if Roy didn't exist that Vernon would have won?

Skene Ronan..

As I said, I underrated Ronan. But, as I said, you still lack a passer that can get him the puck. Gardner isn't that guy, and I don't think Barlow is either.

Is there supposed to be a mind blowing pair in the MLD? Truly? These two fit my team perfectly and anyone who knows the way these two coach, would realize that.

No. That was just my way of saying I'm not overly impressed by either of them.
 

seventieslord

Student Of The Game
Mar 16, 2006
36,080
7,132
Regina, SK
Christian is definitely a plus in the defensive zone, I was just pointing out that his adjusted +/- was rather concerning/scary.

I agree, he played on scoring lines most often (which always helps adjusted +/-, and if he was good defensively on top of that, then it would be really difficult to understand a bad adjusted +/-.

Elite puckmovers with elite vision and good shots don't have their top 4 highest point finishes among defensemen be 16, 10, 26, and 27. I don't care what era. He's a good puck moving defenseman, but elite is a stretch.

His 10th and 16th are both pretty good. He had 53 when the pack started at 75, and 50 when the pack started at 84. From an MLD standpoint, pretty decent.

I'd actually like to see which defensemen have the best points percentage seasons in this MLD. percentages for defensemen are not something I have readily available. I only have eight 50%s on my team (Roberts 2, Gibbs 2, Kampman 1, Sargent 3) but I doubt that is the most. just on this page I see chaos has 4 (Eddolls 1, Crossman 3), and TDMM has 6 (O'Connell 3, Ehrhoff 2, Buswell 1). Berard has five alone.

two caveats:
- it should be mentioned again, that in addition to the defenseman's own skill level, the amount of time they spend on the PP has a great impact on their production within a season.
- Orr and Coffey would definitely need to be removed as outliers.
 

BillyShoe1721

Terriers
Mar 29, 2007
17,252
6
Philadelphia, PA
I'll offer some quick comments on the teams that haven't received any yet so they at least have something.

Halifax Sleepwatchers
GMs: markrander87 & Stoneberg

Coach: Brian Sutter

Don Smith - Gus Bodnar - Tom Hooper
Nick Libett - Bill Carson - Joe Carveth
Murray Craven - Mike Bullard (A) - Howie Meeker
Randy Burridge - Steve Rucchin (A) - Mark Hunter

Spares: Niklas Sundstrom-W, Danny Lewicki-LW, Ron Schock-C

Jim McKenney - Bob Murdoch
Curt Giles (C) - Richard Matvichuk
Dan Hamhuis - Marek Zidlicky

Spares: Brendan Witt

Don Beaupre
Niklas Backstrom

PP:

Don Smith - Gus Bodnar - Tom Hooper
Jim Mckenney - Marek Zidlicky

Murray Craven - Mike Bullard - Joe Carveth
Curt Giles - Bob Murdoch

PK:

Steve Rucchin - Randy Burridge
Dan Hamhuis - Richard Matvichuk

Murray Craven - Nick Libbet
Curt Giles - Bob Murdoch​
<1916: Hooper, Smith
1917-1942: Carveth, Carson
1943-1965: Bodnar, Meeker, Lewicki, Schock
1966-1979: Murdoch, Libett, Giles, McKenny
1980-1994: Bullard, Craven, Burridge, Rucchin, Hunter, Matvichuk, Beaupre, Sutter (coach)
1995-2004: Sundstrom, Witt
in 2011: Backstrom, Zidlicky, Hamhuis

Smith looks like a good scorer who will be complimented well by Bodnar's playmaking ability. He has a good amount of top 10s, but did it in a very weak era. Not sure what kind of player Hooper is, is there are defensive presence/gritty player on this line? I don't see it.

Libett works as a glue guy, Carson is a goal scoring center, and Carveth provides goalscoring and playmaking. Is there enough playmaking between the wings to make Carson as effective as possible? Not sure.

A different kind of 3rd line, should be very strong offensively with Craven feeding Bullard. Not that good defensively compared to other 3rd lines though.

Grinding, defensive 4th line.

Defense looks decent, McKenny is one of the best puck movers in the draft and is well complimented, good physical 2nd pair, and decent modern 3rd pairing.

Beaupre is a very good starter in this, I like him.

1st PP unit looks talented but it doesn't have much grit, 2nd PP pointmen look very weak. PK units look pretty good.

Detroit Red Wings (preliminary, havent spoken to Reds yet)

Coach: Jimmy Skinner

Andrew Brunette - Earl Reibel - Robert Reichel
Cory Stillman - Thomas Gradin - Doug Brown
Ulf Sterner - Vlad Golikov - Alex Golikov
Danis Zaripov - Sergei Zinoviev - Alexey Morozov
Ronnie Stern - Vladimir Ruzicka

Sergei Babinov - Antonin Stavjana
Frantisek Kaberle - Jaro Spacek
Rod Flett - Magnus Flett
Alex Motter - Larry Zeidel

Honken Holmqvist
Goran Hogosta

PP1: Brunette - Reibel - Reichel, Rod Flett - Babinov
PP2: Stillman - Gradin - Morozov, Kaberle - Stavjana

PK1: Reibel - Doug Brown, Flett - Flett
PK2: Gradin - Sterner - Kaberle - Babinov

Reibel is a good 1st line guy to build around, Brunette provides some grit and front of the net presence. How much RW has Reichel actually played? This line will be able to put up points, but defensively could struggle.

Gradin and Brown both bring good two-way ability and Stillman is a playmaker from the wing. This line probably won't score all that much, but can play an effective role as a two-way line.

I really don't know much about any of the guys on your 3rd line, so I won't comment. Russian 4th line looks talented and good with the puck, but don't know much about their intangibles and how they fit chemistry wise.

Babinov is a good top pairing guy, know nothing about the guy he's with. Not sure about Frantisek Kaberle Sr., I'd need to know more about him to make a judgement. Not really a fan of Spacek on a 2nd pairing. Don't know anything about your 3rd pair. Don't know anything about the goalies either.

1st PP forwards look good, but not sold on Babinov or Flett as a 1st unit PPQB. 2nd unit PP doesn't really look that impressive. Reibel on a 1st unit PK? Don't know if the Fletts are good enough to be 1st unit PK guys, 2nd unit PK looks to be adequate.

seventies is next...
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->