Montreal Dream Team vs. Team Russia Dream Team

[BenchBrawl]

Bonus Question: Does Andrei Markov make both teams?

Huge Markov fan but I don't think he would make the Montreal B team.

Edit: I see this is an old thread, anyway... Montreal is easily better.Not only Montreal has more talent, but their talent is more all-around.All are proven winners as well given Montreal's history.

 

[tinyzombies]

I think Montreal would be better.. especially at D.

Even an all-timer like Tretiak is < Roy so Montreal is just plain stronger on the back end.

At forward Montreal is better and deeper everywhere except LW.. even then Montreal's LW is strong..

Having a much longer history certainly works in Montreal's ...

Set a time period from the mid 60s onward? They do get a whole country to choose from ... but it's still fun. Mtl loses Rocket, Harvey, Plante, Moore, Boom Boom , maybe Henri doesnt make the team anymore, Beliveau is older, Morenz, Lalonde, Malone, Joliat...takes the era arguments out of the equation to a large extent. then the argument is Mtl gets more modern players and maybe "better."

Moving them around for chemistry... Beliveau is obviously still 1A and the captain as he was 34 in 1965 but also won the Conn Smythe and won another 5 Cups from 65 onward.

Went with a checking line, but that could be a huge mistake the way these teams would play. I think Bowman would go checking line, but with that defense and goaltending maybe not, or maybe he doubles down on d. Leclair was still developing as a Hab. Gainey was a monster against the Soviets, so building around him makes sense.

Shutt - Lemaire - Lafleur
F. Mahovlich - Beliveau (C) - Cournoyer
Gainey (A) - Carbonneau - Muller
Pacioretty - Turgeon - Naslund/Damphousse

Robinson - Savard (A)
Lapointe - Subban
Laperriere - Chelios
JC Tremblay

Roy/Price
Dryden

Also 10 of these guys were/are captain(s).

 

[tinyzombies]

Roy totally utilized new techniques. He freaking invented or at least inspired most of what became the current style of goaltending.

Plus 1986, 1993.... Price has 23 career playoff wins (27 losses). Roy is pretty much unanimously considered the best playoff goalie ever. Two Conn Smythe's... Three finals in Montreal.

I like Price a lot. Considered him probably the best goalie in the league even before last season. But he can not touch Roy... (Let alone Plante or Dryden).

It's peak talent versus peak results and career. An old argument. I can see your side of it.

 

[tinyzombies]

Roy totally utilized new techniques. He freaking invented or at least inspired most of what became the current style of goaltending.

Plus 1986, 1993.... Price has 23 career playoff wins (27 losses). Roy is pretty much unanimously considered the best playoff goalie ever. Two Conn Smythe's... Three finals in Montreal.

I like Price a lot. Considered him probably the best goalie in the league even before last season. But he can not touch Roy... (Let alone Plante or Dryden).

Roy is the first goalie i can remember talking about game to game adjustments. I still think Price is the better talent, and that's part of the argument too as we know. Put Price in nets back in 93 and 86, does he win the Cups? Hard to say, but his style is a lot quieter and there would have been a lot less rebounds and less need for flashy saves. Roy was a step up from his hero Espo (tho really it's Hall who was the master of that style first and probably head and shoulders above Espo), and Price is next gen too.

Dryden was pulled in 72 and 79 and overlooked in 76 i think. So i think he rides the pine.

 

[Sentinel]

What exactly did Price win other than the Olympics where his team was head and shoulders above their opponents? Did his Habs win anything? Did he even make it to the Finals? Comparing him to Roy is crazy.

 

[bobholly39]

What exactly did Price win other than the Olympics where his team was head and shoulders above their opponents? Did his Habs win anything? Did he even make it to the Finals? Comparing him to Roy is crazy.

He's arguing technique and Price being "phsyically" better. Which is probably true, just like Crosby is probably a way better athlete than Gretzky or Lemieux were.

But it also doesn't mean much. Roy, for his time, was better and accomplished more.

 

[Sens Rule]

He's arguing technique and Price being "phsyically" better. Which is probably true, just like Crosby is probably a way better athlete than Gretzky or Lemieux were.

But it also doesn't mean much. Roy, for his time, was better and accomplished more.

You win ten OT playoff games on the way to winning the Cup and there is a lot more to your game then technique and being physically better. Just like the Rocket, Roy in the playoffs is just on another level. In the regular season Roy and Rocket are all-timers... But in the playoffs they challenge Gretzky for all-time best.

Price has a losing record in the playoffs. Despite being on a team that finishes pretty high in the regular season. Price has to make a final before he even gets talked about as an all-time top goalie. Just to be worth a mere mention with Roy, Plante and Dryden. And I like Price a lot.

 

[Iain Fyffe]

You win ten OT playoff games on the way to winning the Cup and there is a lot more to your game then technique and being physically better.

That's true, you do need more. You also need an awful lot of luck. The '93 Habs were a very good team who got lucky in the playoffs. A bounce or three different and they're not champions. A great team would have won in regulation more, not leaving so much to chance in OT. And I say this as a Habs fan who watched every minute of those playoffs and holds them as a dear memory. The fact is that Roy always turned up his game in the playoffs, except when he didn't, like in 1988, 1991, 1992, 1998, 2002 and 2003.

 

[Sentinel]

That's true, you do need more. You also need an awful lot of luck. The '93 Habs were a very good team who got lucky in the playoffs. A bounce or three different and they're not champions. A great team would have won in regulation more, not leaving so much to chance in OT. And I say this as a Habs fan who watched every minute of those playoffs and holds them as a dear memory. The fact is that Roy always turned up his game in the playoffs, except when he didn't, like in 1988, 1991, 1992, 1998, 2002 and 2003.

This is true for a lot of SC champions.

And in 2002 Roy (and Forsberg) is the main reason his team even got as far as it did. He only yielded to the only goaltender who was better than him on a team that was better than his.

 

[tinyzombies]

This is true for a lot of SC champions.

And in 2002 Roy (and Forsberg) is the main reason his team even got as far as it did. He only yielded to the only goaltender who was better than him on a team that was better than his.

The other point is if Bowman is coaching this all-time team, he was notorious for switching around goalies. Famously it was Larocque not Dryden who was supposed to start in the key games of the finals against the Rangers in 1979, but was injured in the warmup. So, both Roy and Price would probably see time (unless it's a one game championship), and Carey is so consistent that he'd probably never let go of the crease once he got there. Only a Roy hot streak would change that. And he was not known for his international play. Carey is a gold medalist, and he had about 10 game saving stops off of transition in that USA game, so he did play a big part, and we remember the big save in the shootout at the World Juniors.

Roy was an excellent goalie who had a few magical runs, but I think he was overrated like Brodeur was (tho Brodeur had the mental strength when he was slumping in the finals to correct himself and win). Remember, the Oilers and Penguins were upset those years, and the Flames were supposed to win in 86 but Montreal came up with a huge team effort in the finals. This argument doesn't belong here, but my feeling has always been that Hasek is the greatest goalie I've ever seen. I think Price one day will challenge that as far as career achievements go, but he'll need to replicate last year 3-4 more times.

 

[Iain Fyffe]

This is true for a lot of SC champions.

That's absolutely true, and I certainly didn't mean to imply otherwise. But many people fall into the trap of thinking that if a thing happened, it must have been destined to happen, that it couldn't have happened any differently. This is not true in hockey, especially not in the playoffs.

 

[Fantomas]

I'll have ashot at it

KLM
KPM
Bure-Maltsev-Yakushev
Bobrov-(Dats or Fedorov)-Balderis
Firsov


Fetisov-Kasatonov
Vasiliev-Ragulin
Bil-Lutchenko
Sologubov

Tretyak
Konovalenko

This is as good as it gets.

 

[double5son10]

Roy is the first goalie i can remember talking about game to game adjustments. I still think Price is the better talent, and that's part of the argument too as we know. Put Price in nets back in 93 and 86, does he win the Cups? Hard to say, but his style is a lot quieter and there would have been a lot less rebounds and less need for flashy saves. Roy was a step up from his hero Espo (tho really it's Hall who was the master of that style first and probably head and shoulders above Espo), and Price is next gen too.

Dryden was pulled in 72 and 79 and overlooked in 76 i think. So i think he rides the pine.

Roy's hero is Richard Brodeur. Patrick's from Quebec City, not Chicago.
http://ecolehockeycapitale.com/en/exclusive-interview-with-patrick-roy/

"EHC : What do you remember about EHC?
PR : Being able to meet Richard Brodeur, the Nordiques’ goaltender, and getting a picture with him: that’s one of my favourite memories. I still have the photo. Michel Ouellet’s in it too, by the way. When you’re young and you meet your idol, it’s a big moment. I was just beaming and so happy to be there."


Dryden wasn't pulled in '72. He was quite good against the Rangers but the Canadiens were badly outplayed for much of that series.

 

[Sentinel]

This is as good as it gets.

No it's not. Picking Balderis over Ovechkin is indefensible (as good as Helmut was, he was no Ovy).

Also, Larionov is very high in terms of career (the longest ever), but in a short series I squarely pick Malkin and Datsyuk over him. Datsyuk can do everything Larionov can and more. And more. And more.

 

[Theokritos]

No it's not. Picking Balderis over Ovechkin is indefensible (as good as Helmut was, he was no Ovy).

Also, Larionov is very high in terms of career (the longest ever), but in a short series I squarely pick Malkin and Datsyuk over him. Datsyuk can do everything Larionov can and more. And more. And more.

Agreed.

Restricting the team to players whose prime was not already over by 1969 (when the IIHF allowed body checking in all areas of the ice):

Tretyak

Fetisov – Kasatonov
Vasilyev – Konstantinov
Pervukhin - Lutchenko

Ovechkin – Fyodorov – Makarov
Kharlamov – Datsyuk – Bure
Krutov – Malkin – Mikhailov
Yakushev – Firsov – Maltsev

 

[Iain Fyffe]

Ovechkin – Fyodorov – Makarov

Now that is a scary line.

 

[Sentinel]

I would still include Ragulin. He could withstand any hit.

Ovechkin – Fyodorov – Makarov
Kharlamov – Datsyuk – Bure
Krutov – Malkin – Mikhailov
Yakushev – Firsov – Maltsev

Now, I presume you mean "Yakushev-Maltsev-Firsov." I think Petrov was all around better than Maltsev, especially in tightly played games. Also I wouldn't put Kharlamov on the same line as Bure. Both were puckhogs.

Krutov-Feds-Makarov
Ovy-Dats-Firsov
Kh-P-M
Yak-Malkin-Bure

Now these would be scary lines in their prime. I actually think they could match Canadiens lines. Defense is where Habs would have the distinct advantage.

 

[Theokritos]

Now, I presume you mean "Yakushev-Maltsev-Firsov."

Firsov never played RW, but he showed he could handle the center position at the Olympics in Sapporo. Maltsev on the other hand played both C and RW with the Soviet NT, so Yakushev - Firsov - Maltsev is indeed the line I propose.

 

[tinyzombies]

Agreed.

Restricting the team to players whose prime was not already over by 1969 (when the IIHF allowed body checking in all areas of the ice):

Tretyak

Fetisov – Kasatonov
Vasilyev – Konstantinov
Pervukhin - Lutchenko

Ovechkin – Fyodorov – Makarov
Kharlamov – Datsyuk – Bure
Krutov – Malkin – Mikhailov
Yakushev – Firsov – Maltsev

A 1969 cutoff makes Montreal even weaker. Beliveau was 38 in 69. Might have to shift to a more defensive style (meaning puck possession instead of firewagon, can't sit back against that team, so gotta go bigger ... Leclair, etc.).

Now i want to see a comparison of the pool of players over time that was available to both fictitious teams. If it's lopsided for Russia, then u can even the rules by allowing mtl to have the prime years of short term players like Denis Savard, and pre 69 prime years for Beliveau, Big M, etc.

 

[VMBM]

This is as good as it gets.

I wouldn't use Firsov as a spare, though. He deserves a bigger role than that.

Now, I presume you mean "Yakushev-Maltsev-Firsov." I think Petrov was all around better than Maltsev, especially in tightly played games. Also I wouldn't put Kharlamov on the same line as Bure. Both were puckhogs.

Petrov was certainly a more defensive-minded player than Maltsev. And he had much better stats vs. Czechoslovakia, for example. But Petrov did play on the top Soviet line of the decade and Maltsev mostly on the 3rd line, so their 'fortunes' were a little bit different. When Maltsev played with Firsov or Kharlamov (and Vikulov) in 1970-72, he was terrific and got a lot of recognition/awards.

 

[Theokritos]

Now, I presume you mean "Yakushev-Maltsev-Firsov." I think Petrov was all around better than Maltsev, especially in tightly played games. Also I wouldn't put Kharlamov on the same line as Bure. Both were puckhogs.

Krutov-Feds-Makarov
Ovy-Dats-Firsov
Kh-P-M
Yak-Malkin-Bure

Firsov never played RW, but he showed he could handle the center position at the Olympics in Sapporo. Maltsev on the other hand played both C and RW with the Soviet NT, so Yakushev - Firsov - Maltsev is indeed the line I propose.

My new formations:

Ovechkin - Fyodorov - Makarov
Kharlamov - Datsyuk - Mikhailov
Krutov - Malkin - Maltsev
Yakushev - Firsov - Bure

 

[Slapstick]

Would not even be close, a all star soviet/russian team would dominate in a 8 game series. This is even more true if the game would be played with the current NHL rules, the more skilled and technically gifted soviet players would shine.

 

[tinyzombies]

Would not even be close, a all star soviet/russian team would dominate in a 8 game series. This is even more true if the game would be played with the current NHL rules, the more skilled and technically gifted soviet players would shine.

I don't think any team would dominate that Montreal defense with Bowman coaching.

 

[double5son10]

Would not even be close, a all star soviet/russian team would dominate in a 8 game series. This is even more true if the game would be played with the current NHL rules, the more skilled and technically gifted soviet players would shine.

So Beliveau, Lafleur, Robinson, Savard, Tremblay, et al were not skilled or technically gifted? Ummm, OOKAAAAYYYY

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

At this point, I guess Price is a little bit ahead of Jose Theodore