MLD2011 Sir Montagu Allan Rnd 1: Montreal Bad Habits (3) vs No-Names (6)

[Dreakmur]

This is the laughable part , Jokinen and Vail comparable? Both Jokinen and Vail were good players on bad teams , but putting a center like Jokinen at left wing which is the hardest wing to play and pretend he's going be as good as a legit first line left wingers is laughable considering the fact Jokinen isn't that great of a ''hockey-sense'' player.His hockey IQ is adequate at best and he's the worst kind of center you could put at wing.Vail was a good powerforward while Jokinen was basically close to being a cancer on a team.I would take Vail ahead of Jokinen 100 times out of 100 to play on a first line LW.All you do is basically confront 1 player vs another but I think my chemistry is better.It's possible I put Vail-Spezza-Sykora and Liscombe-Zhamnov-Brunteau which gives me another edge of real chemistry with Liscombe and Bruneteau playign otgether.Vail will be the glue guy with some decent offensive touch with Spezza as a playmaking center + sykora scoring some goals and my 2nd line will just work like a charm.

You've got it backwards. Jokinen is exactly the type of center that would excell on the wing. You are right that he doesn't havw great hockey sense, but that is needed more at centre anyway. Moving to the wing would actually reduce the impact of that deficiency.

Vail is no better a glue guy than Jokinen. He's big, but he only uses it every once in a while... Just like Jokinen does. He's not good defensively... Just like Jokinen.
The difference is that Jokinen is much better offensively.

 

[Dreakmur]

I would probably agree that your blueline is better. I don't think it's overly impressive, but neither is mine.

Obviously, Dave Maloney is the best defenseman in the series. It's not really close either. Bladon is solidly ahead offensively, but behind everywhere else.

I did want Jason Smith from you, but it was to anchor my second pair. I think that's where he belongs. He's pretty similar to Bert Marshall on my team. I'd have to look at them both more closely, but it appears they were very similar.

Dale Tallon, in my view, is hurt by the fact that he player quite a lot of forward. We don't really know how much of his offense came from the blueline. He's probably better thab McEwen, but not by much.

Bob Rouse is decent defensively, but Bill Brydge is definately better.

Berard and Malakhov are similar, but I think Berard put up better numbers. I would have to look it up. Regardless, they are pretty similar.

Brewer was good enough to play for team Canada in two best of the best tourneys, so I think his peak is not getting due credit.

 

[seventieslord]

I would probably agree that your blueline is better. I don't think it's overly impressive, but neither is mine.

Obviously, Dave Maloney is the best defenseman in the series. It's not really close either. Bladon is solidly ahead offensively, but behind everywhere else.

The only reason Dave Maloney is so far ahead of others in this series is that appreciation for Eric Brewer hasn't caught up to his achievements as a player.

Maloney actually had 26 adjusted ESP per season to Bladon's 22. Bladon just outscored him 16-8 on the PP. he scored twice as much on the PP, but had just over twice the PP time.

I did want Jason Smith from you, but it was to anchor my second pair. I think that's where he belongs. He's pretty similar to Bert Marshall on my team. I'd have to look at them both more closely, but it appears they were very similar.

I agree I'd have Smith on a 2nd or 3rd, but I see him as an elite "niche" player.

The only thing similar to Marshall is that they're both defense-oriented. Based on how relied upon they were, and for which teams, Marshall is probably better in a vaccuum (much like Sillinger would be better than Yelle) but Smith is triple-tough, Marshall was just a solid guy. The gap in toughness is huge, I think, like it would be between Smith and most defensemen.

Berard and Malakhov are similar, but I think Berard put up better numbers. I would have to look it up. Regardless, they are pretty similar.

There should be no doubt that Malakhov is a better overall player:

- He played 100 more NHL games.
- Just from watching them, he was merely "bad" defensively, while they needed to create new words to describe Berard defensively
- Berard is slightly better offensively: 0.33 to 0.29 APPG at ES, and 0.31 to 0.25 on the PP. On the other hand, 38% of Malakhov's career was played after age 30, when Berard retired. As of the end of the 1999 season, Malakhov's averages were both .36 and .33. On the other hand those averages were based on 160 fewer games than Berard played, plus, he jumped right in at 24 and had no "feeling out period", Berard did, but put up points right away anyway. They are close but Berard has a slight edge there.
- Malakhov was surprisingly relied on for a lot of PK time: 39% as opposed to Berard's 16%
- Malakhov is in the top-250 all-time with an adjusted +87. Berard is in the bottom-250 all-time with an adjusted -61.
- Malakhov played an average of 22.28 minutes per game for teams that were pretty much average (1.01 GF/GA ratio). Berard averaged 21.27 for poor teams (0.91). At even strength, they averaged 16.01 and 15.97. (at first glance that makes them look close to even at even strength, but Malakhov did it for better teams, well into his 30s)
- 75 to 20 games playoff experience, plus a cup for Malakhov.
- Berard was big, Malakhov was even bigger (+2 inches, 10 lbs)

Brewer was good enough to play for team Canada in two best of the best tourneys, so I think his peak is not getting due credit.

You are absolutely right, and the only thing preventing Brewer from being your #1 D-man is probably MLD/AAA canon.

 

[Dreakmur]

The only reason Dave Maloney is so far ahead of others in this series is that appreciation for Eric Brewer hasn't caught up to his achievements as a player.

Maybe so....

You are absolutely right, and the only thing preventing Brewer from being your #1 D-man is probably MLD/AAA canon.

You think I should adjust my blueline?

Brewer-Brydge
Marshall - Bladon
McEwen - Higginbotham

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

God, it seriously scares me that Allison got Selke recognition with his skating.

His skating was never a strength, but it wasn't that terrible until his big injury in LA.

In the dead puck era especially, some lazy writers threw some Selke votes to anyone with a good faceoff percentage and halfway decent plus/minus. I assume Allison's votes were of that variety. Still shows that he wasn't considered a liability in his prime, like he was after his injury.

 

[Iain Fyffe]

God, it seriously scares me that Allison got Selke recognition with his skating.

Setting aside the issue of whether the votes Allison received were deserved, there's nothing that says a poor skater can't be good defensively. You just make up for the deficiency with other strengths. It's an example of missing the forest for the trees. I understand that Luc Robitaille was drafted so low because the scouts didn't like his skating, meaning they couldn't see past that to everything else he brings to the game.

Don't get too hung up of one aspect of a player's game, since there's more to hockey than that.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Maybe so....



You think I should adjust my blueline?

Brewer-Brydge
Marshall - Bladon
McEwen - Higginbotham

I, for one, like this blueline better. But then, I threw Brydge a low all-star vote, so...

 

[seventieslord]

Maybe so....

You think I should adjust my blueline?

Brewer-Brydge
Marshall - Bladon
McEwen - Higginbotham

I'm pretty convinced by now that those are your top-2 guys, although they needn't necessarily be on your top pairing together. I would personally make sure they're each playing in the top-4, though.

You lose a lot of PP power taking out Berard, but your PP would still be about even with Reen without him. I know you didn't want two specialist types together on the 3rd pairing. Maybe Brewer plays the more defensive role for McEwen on the 2nd? He's not redoubtable defensively, but he's decent enough.

Bladon-Brydge
Brewer-McEwen
Berard-Marshall

His skating was never a strength, but it wasn't that terrible until his big injury in LA.

In the dead puck era especially, some lazy writers threw some Selke votes to anyone with a good faceoff percentage and halfway decent plus/minus. I assume Allison's votes were of that variety. Still shows that he wasn't considered a liability in his prime, like he was after his injury.

this is true.

 

[Dreakmur]

Bill Brydge did play the left side with Red Dutton, so he could play on the left with Bladon.

Brydge - Bladon
McEwen - Brewer
Marshall - Berard

With Berard on the 3rd pair there, I might use him on both PPs. Berard - McEwen then Berard - Bladon would be pretty scary on the point.

I guess, with Marshall on the 3rd pair, he could take a bigger chunk of the PK.... maybe 2/3s.


People seem to like Murph Chamberlain more than Baldy Cotton. If that's the case, I should probably flip them in the line-up.

 

[seventieslord]

Yeah, Cotton's good, but I think we're pretty much sure now that Chamberlain is better.

 

[Dreakmur]

Can either 70s or TDMM change my roster in the OP please?

Here is what I'm changing:

No-Names from Nowhere


Coach: Terry Crisp

Olli Jokinen - Scott Gomez - Vincent Lukac
Geoff Sanderson - Jason Allison - Aleksander Kozhevnikov
Murph Chamberlain - Todd Marchant - Ken Schinkel
Baldy Cotton - Forbes Kennedy - Shorty Green

Bill Brydge - Tom Bladon
Mike McEwen - Eric Brewer
Bryan Berard - Bert Marshall

Kelly Hrudey
Brian Hayward

Spares: Oren Frood - LW/C, Fred Higginbotham - D, Dave Creighton - C/W, Bryan Watson - D/RW

PP#1
Olli Jokinen - Jason Allison - Vincent Lukac
Mike McEwen - Bryan Berard

PP#2
Aleksander Kozhevnikov - Scott Gomez - Geoff Sanderson
Bryan Berard - Tom Bladon

PK#1
Todd Marchant - Baldy Cotton
Bert Marshall - Bill Brydge

PK#2
Forbes Kennedy - Murph Chamberlain
Eric Brewer - Tom Bladon/Bert Marshall

PK#3
Scott Gomez - Ken Schinkel​

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I changed it.

 

[Dreakmur]

- Just from watching them, he was merely "bad" defensively, while they needed to create new words to describe Berard defensively

You're really overblowing Berard's defensive woes. He was below average, but he wasn't terrible.

 

[seventieslord]

You're really overblowing Berard's defensive woes. He was below average, but he wasn't terrible.

In 2006, he was the NHL's runaway leader in ESGA/minute. that's the only year I did stats that detailed on before. But I remember it was awful.

 

[Dreakmur]

In 2006, he was the NHL's runaway leader in ESGA/minute. that's the only year I did stats that detailed on before. But I remember it was awful.

That tells you as much about the team he played for as it does about his individual ability.

 

[seventieslord]

just did some more checking into Berard's defensive record:

1998: 3rd in NHL in ESGA/GP, behind Leetch and Lumme
1999: 49th, 34th among D-men
2002: 31st, 23rd among D-men
2004: 1st in the NHL with 1.53, next was Marc Savard at 1.37, then Fata at 1.27. next D-men to show up were Dan Focht & Deron Quint - 1.27 & 1.25. That's huge!
2006: 1st in the NHL with 1.39, next was Bryce Salvador at 1.28.

the seasons that I didn't mention were years where he was in the average/not significantly above average range. (97, 00, 03, 08). Also, remember that he often had pretty low ES TOI figures, so on a per-minute level he would score worse than this.

regardless, bottom-3 three times, is awful.

 

[seventieslord]

That tells you as much about the team he played for as it does about his individual ability.

then why weren't other defensemen on his team in the same range?

for example, 1998. Led the Isles with 1.29 ESGA/GP. Closest was Lachance with 0.94. McCabe and Jonsson got all the ES minutes and they were 0.94 and 0.83, respectively.

2004. Quint was well-known to be abysmal defensively. He played on Chicago wth Berard and though he was 3rd-worst in the NHL, his per-game average was significantly lower.

2006. Foote was 2nd-worst with 1.06, far below Berard's 1.39. And Foote was shutdown player, trying vainly to stop the oppositon's best.

 

[Dreakmur]

then why weren't other defensemen on his team in the same range?

We don't know that they weren't....

 

[seventieslord]

We don't know that they weren't....

see edit for three damning examples.

 

[Dreakmur]

see edit for three damning examples.

My point remains the same. Playing for bad teams, which Berard did most of his career, just about guarentees a poor +/-.

As I said already, he's below average but not terrible. You seem to forget that most people here watched him play just as much as you did. He wasn't nearly as bad as you are trying to paint him.

 

[seventieslord]

My point remains the same. Playing for bad teams, which Berard did most of his career, just about guarentees a poor +/-.

Who said anything about +/-?

And I compared him to other defensemen on his own team. those defensemen had the same team disadvantage he had... didn't they?

As I said already, he's below average but not terrible. You seem to forget that most people here watched him play just as much as you did. He wasn't nearly as bad as you are trying to paint him.

So, out of 180 #1-6 defensemen in the NHL, he's what, just a bit below average? 100th maybe? not a chance. He was among the very, very worst. I don't see anyone really defending his defensive ability, either.

You would have seen him in Toronto more than anywhere else. He was like a chicken with his head cut off most of the time there, and his stats only got a lot worse after he left.

 

[BenchBrawl]

What is terrible if bottom-3 three times isn't?

 

[seventieslord]

What is terrible if bottom-3 three times isn't?

top-3 in something three times would be excellent, I think. bottom-3 three times has to be the opposite, then.

ATD GMs have this disease where they just can't accept the faults of their players. Like seriously, just accept that he's awful defensively, put him on the 3rd pairing with a solid partner and double shift him on the PP (check), there, you've made the most of him as a player.

Having properly insulated Berard, attempting to say he was anything better than terrible in his end is pissing up a rope.

 

[Dreakmur]

Who said anything about +/-?

You did earlier.

Regardless, the same applies for ESGA. You play for a team that gets scored on a lot, and you'll get scored on more.

And I compared him to other defensemen on his own team. those defensemen had the same team disadvantage he had... didn't they?

That's why they had bad numbers too.....

You would have seen him in Toronto more than anywhere else. He was like a chicken with his head cut off most of the time there, and his stats only got a lot worse after he left.

I did see him in Toronto, and he wasn't that bad. Like McCabe people just remember the worst of Berard.



At the end of the day, he's my #6 defenseman, who will be getting the majority of his time on the PP. The fact that people seem to think he's worse defensively than he actually doesn't matter since it is his offensive skills that will be on display.

 

[Iain Fyffe]

That's why they had bad numbers too.....

...and he had the worst. Did you miss that part?