MLD 2014 Finals: Idaho Steelheads vs. Pittsburgh Yellow Jackets

[seventieslord]

Herb Cain - Andre Lacroix - Grant Warwick
Nick Mickoski - Buddy O'Connor - Mickey Redmond
Rabbit McVeigh - Syl Apps Jr - Barney Stanley
Magnus Arvedson - Mike Ricci (A) - Jimmy Peters
Bobby Carpenter - Bronco Horvath

Adrian Aucoin (A) - Clem Loughlin (C)
Dan Hamhuis - Steve Chiasson
Dick Redmond - Hy Buller
Joe Jerwa - Jim Morrison

Ryan Miller
Billy Nicholson

Coach: Rudy Pilous

PP1: Mickoski - O'Connor - M. Redmond - D. Redmond - Aucoin
PP2: Cain - Lacroix - Warwick - Chiasson - Loughlin
PK1: Ricci - Arvedson - Hamhuis - Aucoin
PK2: McVeigh - Mickoski - Loughlin - Buller
PK3: Lacroix - Stanley - Chiasson - Aucoin

VS

Pittsburgh Yellow Jackets

Coach: Emile Francis

Brian Bellows - Harry Smith - Eddie Wiseman
Nikolai Drozdetsky - Billy Taylor - Mush March
Pud Glass (A) - Jaroslav Holik - Jason Pominville
Nick Libett (A) - Pete Stemkowski - Bill Fairbairn
Spares: Johnny Gagnon, Buzz Boll

Paul Shmyr (C) - Bingo Kampman
Doug Jarrett - Lubomir Visnovsky
Joe Watson - Bob Murray
Spares:Gordie Roberts, Udo Kiessling

Roger Crozier
Tomas Vokoun

PP 1: Bellows-Smith-Wiseman-Visnovsky-Murray
PP 2: Drozdetsky-Taylor-March-Shmyr-Pominville

PK 1: Glass-Fairbairn-Watson-Kampman
PK 2: Stemkowski-Libett-Jarrett-Shmyr

​

Click to read more...

 

[seventieslord]

Thanks for adding the rosters for me, HT18!

 

[BubbaBoot]

Adrian Aucoin (A) - Clem Loughlin (C)
​

Aucoin shoots right, Loughlin shoots left.....shouldn't they be flipped or do you go with skill ability first?

 

[tony d]

Where are Hedberg and BBS? Be nice to see a debate here.

 

[Hedberg]

Where are Hedberg and BBS? Be nice to see a debate here.

I'm going to post stuff on the weekend. Sorry about the delay.

 

[Rob Scuderi]

Good luck Hedberg, I won't be around this weekend so if you start us off I'll respond when I can.

Really quick comments:

- Tough to call our top six centers. Lacroix and Smith played in much different settings. Lacroix was excellent in the WHA, and Smith was very good in the best leagues of his era when he played there.
- I do think Wiseman and Bellows have an advantage over Cain and Warwick.
- Again I struggle with our 2nd line centers. I think Taylor clearly had the better prime, but if you took O'Connor on the basis of longevity I couldn't disagree.
- I like my bottom six centers, but your bottom six wings are excellent.
- I like your top pair, but I prefer my second and third pairs.
- Is goaltending the biggest difference in the series?

 

[seventieslord]

Good luck Hedberg, I won't be around this weekend so if you start us off I'll respond when I can.

Really quick comments:

- Tough to call our top six centers. Lacroix and Smith played in much different settings. Lacroix was excellent in the WHA, and Smith was very good in the best leagues of his era when he played there.
- I do think Wiseman and Bellows have an advantage over Cain and Warwick.
- Again I struggle with our 2nd line centers. I think Taylor clearly had the better prime, but if you took O'Connor on the basis of longevity I couldn't disagree.
- I like my bottom six centers, but your bottom six wings are excellent.
- I like your top pair, but I prefer my second and third pairs.
- Is goaltending the biggest difference in the series?

I think you may be too generous on this point. Taylor is still ahead offensively if you're looking at best 6 or 7 seasons, so where does O'Connor get the longevity edge?

 

[Hedberg]

Aucoin shoots right, Loughlin shoots left.....shouldn't they be flipped or do you go with skill ability first?

Yeah, they should be on their normal sides

- Tough to call our top six centers. Lacroix and Smith played in much different settings. Lacroix was excellent in the WHA, and Smith was very good in the best leagues of his era when he played there.

- It's true - but Smith may be a bit riskier with his penalty prone-ness

- I do think Wiseman and Bellows have an advantage over Cain and Warwick.

Probably, yes

- Again I struggle with our 2nd line centers. I think Taylor clearly had the better prime, but if you took O'Connor on the basis of longevity I couldn't disagree.

O'Connor doesn't really have a longevity edge.

- I like my bottom six centers, but your bottom six wings are excellent.

- I really like Apps here. Looking at Seventies' summed up best-6 scores chart, his offense is up there with Janney, Kessel, and Wiseman, which is a luxury in the bottom six. App's wingers are better offensively than what Pittsburgh can bring and also are better checkers. 4th lines are similar

- I like your top pair, but I prefer my second and third pairs.

Hamhuis and Jarrett are pretty similar. Visnovsky does bring more offense than Chiasson

- Is goaltending the biggest difference in the series?

I think the offensive potential of Idaho's third line while still being defensively responsible on the wings also is a big difference. Miller certainly has the potential to match anyone, but is less of a sure thing.

This is going to be close - I'm very glad Idaho has home ice.

 

[seventieslord]

Is that all, guys? Do you want me to open voting, or do want to keep this going?

 

[Rob Scuderi]

I think you may be too generous on this point. Taylor is still ahead offensively if you're looking at best 6 or 7 seasons, so where does O'Connor get the longevity edge?

O'Connor doesn't really have a longevity edge.

I guess O'Connor really has a longevity edge in terms of playing the league with around 10 seasons to Taylor with around 6. I thought O'Connor had more seasons with VsX scores about 50, but he only has six to Taylor's five (using war year adjustments for both guys).

- I really like Apps here. Looking at Seventies' summed up best-6 scores chart, his offense is up there with Janney, Kessel, and Wiseman, which is a luxury in the bottom six. App's wingers are better offensively than what Pittsburgh can bring and also are better checkers. 4th lines are similar

I agree Apps's offense is excellent in the MLD, but he seems pretty light on "bottom-six skills". You have one quote from Red Kelly who says Apps can hit, but that's it. I have 5 Complete Handbooks of Pro Hockey from 1972-1980, and they don't mention anything about App's defensive or physical game.

Bottom six skills are where Holik is a real standout, and I think he definitely has a physical and defensive edge over Apps.

I'm not sure I buy McVeigh being on Stanley and Glass's level defensively either. Glass was basically a plug who started for a dynasty because he was so good defensively.

Peters may be the best player on either 4th line, but I think Arvedson is clearly the worst overall.

Hamhuis and Jarrett are pretty similar. Visnovsky does bring more offense than Chiasson

I can agree with Hamhuis and Jarrett, but the advantage of Visnovsky over Chiasson pushes my pair ahead.

 

[seventieslord]

You have one quote from Red Kelly who says Apps can hit, but that's it. I have 5 Complete Handbooks of Pro Hockey from 1972-1980, and they don't mention anything about App's defensive or physical game.

I said the same earlier.

I would have gladly taken Apps in this draft if there was any evidence he was more than offense, but there's not, from what I can tell.

I can agree with Hamhuis and Jarrett, but the advantage of Visnovsky over Chiasson pushes my pair ahead.

Eh, Chiasson was a bit of an offenseman, but was much more rounded than Visnovsky and played more minutes for better teams over just as long a period.

 

[Hedberg]

I agree Apps's offense is excellent in the MLD, but he seems pretty light on "bottom-six skills". You have one quote from Red Kelly who says Apps can hit, but that's it. I have 5 Complete Handbooks of Pro Hockey from 1972-1980, and they don't mention anything about App's defensive or physical game.

Bottom six skills are where Holik is a real standout, and I think he definitely has a physical and defensive edge over Apps.

I'm not pretending he has any significant bottom six skills (although I doubt he's a soft, Ribeiro type player). He is in 5th place on the Penguin's short handed goal list, so he obviously killed penalties. I did find a few more things:

The Pittsburgh Press - Dec 3, 1971 quotes Red Kelly:

"He's a big cog in there. He was getting almost a point per game, so that's some important scoring you're losing, plus his checking and all that goes with it...

"Apps is a goer. He's constantly going. He's in there belting, giving checks, taking checks, digging. He makes things happen."

The Pittsburgh Press - Oct 1, 1972:

In fact, opposing teams could get along very well without Apps on the ice since he's good at checking and scoring.

On the flipside though, there is a Pittsburgh Post-Gazette - Jan 24, 1976 article claiming that during Apps' slump, he "doesn't check", "doesn't forecheck", "doesn't hustle", etc.

Overall, my reading of him is as an average defensive player who had the strength and speed to be a good checker, but used it intermittently .

I'm not sure I buy McVeigh being on Stanley and Glass's level defensively either. Glass was basically a plug who started for a dynasty because he was so good defensively.

Maybe not Glass and Stanley, but Ultimate Hockey was pretty high on defensive abilities to give him a Retro Selke - unfortunately I can't find any other significant information other than generic two way player stuff and that he was the "the league's best ragger" in this video:

 

[seventieslord]

nice find with that video.

glad to see this has picked up some.

 

[jkrx]

I can agree with Hamhuis and Jarrett, but the advantage of Visnovsky over Chiasson pushes my pair ahead.

Visnovsky peaked higher offensively but he will cost you a lot more goals than Chiasson will while Chiasson will still produce a decent amount of goals. I think over a career they have a similar production rate.

 

[Rob Scuderi]

I'm not pretending he has any significant bottom six skills (although I doubt he's a soft, Ribeiro type player). He is in 5th place on the Penguin's short handed goal list, so he obviously killed penalties. I did find a few more things:

The Pittsburgh Press - Dec 3, 1971 quotes Red Kelly:


The Pittsburgh Press - Oct 1, 1972:


On the flipside though, there is a Pittsburgh Post-Gazette - Jan 24, 1976 article claiming that during Apps' slump, he "doesn't check", "doesn't forecheck", "doesn't hustle", etc.

Overall, my reading of him is as an average defensive player who had the strength and speed to be a good checker, but used it intermittently .



Maybe not Glass and Stanley, but Ultimate Hockey was pretty high on defensive abilities to give him a Retro Selke - unfortunately I can't find any other significant information other than generic two way player stuff and that he was the "the league's best ragger" in this video:

Nice find with that video. I can agree with your stance on Apps overall, but is his inconsistent defensive and physical game above Pominville's soft but reliable defensively game?

If we had to rank our third liners in terms of defensive skills, here's my rough look
1. Glass
2. Stanley
3. Holik
4. McVeigh
5. Pominville
6. Apps

I'd like to rank their physical games but it's tough to say with Stanley and Glass. Holik is clearly the toughest and Pominville clearly the softest. McVeigh may be second, but I'm not sure how to rank 3-5.

 

[Rob Scuderi]

Eh, Chiasson was a bit of an offenseman, but was much more rounded than Visnovsky and played more minutes for better teams over just as long a period.

Visnovsky peaked higher offensively but he will cost you a lot more goals than Chiasson will while Chiasson will still produce a decent amount of goals. I think over a career they have a similar production rate.

It's fair that Chiasson was better defensively, but they're still both prized for their offense no?

Chiasson never cracked top 10 in defensemen scoring and Visnovsky did three times. I think it was more than just his peak season that makes Visnovsky solidly ahead of Chiasson in terms of offensive production.

 

[jkrx]

It's fair that Chiasson was better defensively, but they're still both prized for their offense no?

Chiasson never cracked top 10 in defensemen scoring and Visnovsky did three times. I think it was more than just his peak season that makes Visnovsky solidly ahead of Chiasson in terms of offensive production.

You are right about that. That's what I meant with that Visnovsky peaked higher. He has those peak seasons of offense to lean on compared to Chiasson.

 

[seventieslord]

You are right about that. That's what I meant with that Visnovsky peaked higher. He has those peak seasons of offense to lean on compared to Chiasson.

I think it's obvious that he peaked higher offensively, but, it's definitely arguable that Chiasson peaked higher overall.

(I'm notoriously tough on offense-only defensemen whose icetime is more telling than their point totals)

 

[Hedberg]

nice find with that video.

I found it on an old VI bio

If we had to rank our third liners in terms of defensive skills, here's my rough look
1. Glass
2. Stanley
3. Holik
4. McVeigh
5. Pominville
6. Apps

What evidence is there Holik is better defensively than McVeigh? I see a lot in the bio about toughness and being a tireless worker, but he seems like a physical forechecking force more than a shutdown centre. The only defensive thing is about blocking shots (I know McVeigh doesn't have much either, but what there is is a bit more defensive specific).

I'd like to rank their physical games but it's tough to say with Stanley and Glass. Holik is clearly the toughest and Pominville clearly the softest. McVeigh may be second, but I'm not sure how to rank 3-5.

There's not much I can find on Glass and Stanley's physicality. Stanley took a decent amount of penalties (not a great indicator I know, but better than nothing) while Glass played before those stats existed. They're probably similar

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I think the evidence for McVeigh's defense is much better than the evidence for Holik's. Every McVeigh bio speaks about his two-way game, while for Holik, it's more about his grittiness, with some evidence that he was also responsible defensively. I honestly don't see what makes him better defensively than Pominville - can you show me where I might be wrong here?

IMO, Glass, Stanley, and McVeigh (pick your order) are a class above the rest of the 3rd liners defensively

 

[Rob Scuderi]

I found it on an old VI bio

What evidence is there Holik is better defensively than McVeigh? I see a lot in the bio about toughness and being a tireless worker, but he seems like a physical forechecking force more than a shutdown centre. The only defensive thing is about blocking shots (I know McVeigh doesn't have much either, but what there is is a bit more defensive specific).

I think the evidence for McVeigh's defense is much better than the evidence for Holik's. Every McVeigh bio speaks about his two-way game, while for Holik, it's more about his grittiness, with some evidence that he was also responsible defensively. I honestly don't see what makes him better defensively than Pominville - can you show me where I might be wrong here?

IMO, Glass, Stanley, and McVeigh (pick your order) are a class above the rest of the 3rd liners defensively

There is this quote from Kings of the Ice I get hung up on

Holik was mostly a defenceman, a tireless worker who inspired the other players because he never considered a match to be lost.

I've never read anything about Holik actually playing on defense, let alone most of his career. I read this as talking about his defensive ability as a forward.

Was famous for his emotional and agressive style in both ends of the ice, often reached top results in both scoring and penalty minutes.

This is less, but it shows he was at worst a Messier-lite player who would bully players all over the ice.

I've never been able to find anything else. McVeigh has lots of secondary sources praising his two-way game, and a mention of being an elite puck-ragger but that's more of a PK skill, right?

Maybe I'm overshooting with Holik here and McVeigh is better, but I think Glass and Stanley are a rung up from the rest defensively.

 

[Rob Scuderi]

I think it's obvious that he peaked higher offensively, but, it's definitely arguable that Chiasson peaked higher overall.

(I'm notoriously tough on offense-only defensemen whose icetime is more telling than their point totals)

You sure are, but I don't see it here at all.

If we're talking about just one season there's no question Visnovsky peaked higher. Again Chiasson was an offensive guy who was better defensively, but still a solid defensive guy in the big picture. This came with much less offensive production.

Visnovsky led all defensemen in scoring and finished 4th in AST and Norris voting in 2011. Additionally, I found a fluff piece on him during this season. Of interest here is the claim that he plays the hardest matchups on a team that made the playoffs, and he had the second highest +/- on the team.

"Well, he's had the type of year that people would have to take notice, not only from a goal-scoring standpoint, but the number of minutes he plays, the matchups he plays -- both him and [Toni] Lydman play against the other teams' top lines consistently," Ducks coach Randy Carlyle told ESPN.com Thursday.

[Lupul:] "And, you know, defensively he reminds me of a guy like Kimmo Timonen in Philly. He doesn't get as much recognition because he's a smaller D, but I've seen him shut down guys like Crosby and Ovechkin and play head to head with them all night."

Verifying those claims with Corsi QoC, I see that Lydman led the Ducks defense with a rating of 1.467 and Visnovsky was second with a 1.313 rating. The third highest Ducks defender was PTD champion Francois Beauchemin with a 0.666 rating.

Taking it all in, I don't see how Chiasson can be viewed as the player with the higher peak.

 

[seventieslord]

All done, guys? Open up voting?

 

[VanIslander]

When will this end?

 

[seventieslord]

When will this end?

Just waiting on results from ht18.