Red Fisher Conference Prelim Round - Montreal Canadiens vs Dawson City Nuggets

[TheDevilMadeMe]

MONTREAL CANADIENS

GMs: Jafar / Sturminator
Captain: Mikhailov
Assistant: Bourque
Assistant: Coulter

HEAD COACH

Tommy Gorman

ROSTER

#9 Busher Jackson - #7 Frank Boucher - #13 Boris Mikhailov
#91 Shane Doan - #27 Jeremy Roenick - #19 Helmut Balderis
#17 Joe Klukay - #14 Don Luce - #10 Tony Amonte
#8 Sergei Kapustin - #33 Troy Murray - #41 Mario Tremblay

#77 Raymond Bourque - #2 Art Coulter
#3 Gus Mortson - #5 Jimmy Thomson
#4 Bobby Rowe - #18 Mathieu Schneider

#1 Georges Vézina
#23 Al Rollins

#39 Jason Spezza, #26 Rick Ley, #12 Steve Thomas, #71 Patrik Sundstrom

PP1: Jackson - Boucher - Mikhailov
Schneider - Bourque

PP2: Kapustin - Roenick - Balderis
Thomson - Mortson

PK1: Klukay - Luce
Bourque - Coulter

PK2: Murray - Boucher
Mortson - Thomson

PK3: Roenick - Mikhailov
Rowe

VS

Dawson City Nuggets

General Manager: Modo

Head Coach: Herb Brooks
Assistant Coach: Don Cherry

Captain: Derian Hatcher
Assistant Captain: Henri Richard
Assistant Captain: Bobby Orr


Dickie Moore - Henri Richard - Babe Dye
Charlie Simmer - Joe Nieuwendyk - Punch Broadbent
Brenden Morrow - Kirk Muller - Pat Verbeek
Wendel Clark - Metro Prystai - Reggie Leach
x - Alex Tanguay, Gary Dornhoefer

Hap Day - Bobby Orr
Derian Hatcher - Clarence "Taffy" Abel
Al Iafrate - Kenny Jonsson
x - Andre "Moose" Dupont

Bernie Parent
Dave Kerr

PP1: Moore - Richard - Dye - Iafrate - Orr

PP2: Nieuwendyk - Morrow - Leach - Broadbent - Day

PK1: Muller - Morrow - Hatcher - Orr

PK2: Richard - Broadbent - Abel - Day​

Click to read more...

 

[Sturminator]

To anyone reading this thread: if you click on a single link associated with the Montreal team, please let it be the link to Tommy Gorman's profile. Between overpass, Reen, Dreak and myself, there has been a ton of research done on Gorman since the last draft, and I think he has emerged as a genuinely transformative figure in the early history of hockey, and one of the greatest coaches of all time. The bio is long, but I think quite interesting, as it fills in a lot of the blind spots we'd previously had about the transition from 1920's era to modern hockey.

Looking forward to a good series, Modo. Facing a team led by Bobby Orr is never easy. Good luck to you.

 

[Sturminator]

Minutes breakdown for the Montreal Canadiens:

Forward Minutes

Player | ES | PP | PK | Total
Jackson | 14.5 | 4 | 0 | 18.5
Boucher | 14.5 | 4 | 2.5 | 21
Mikhailov | 14.5 | 4 | 1 | 19.5
Doan | 12.5 | 0 | 0 | 12.5
Roenick | 12.5 | 3 | 1 | 16.5
Balderis | 12.5 | 3 | 0 | 15.5
Klukay | 10.5 | 0 | 3.5 | 14
Luce | 10.5 | 0 | 3.5 | 14
Amonte | 10.5 | 0 | 0 | 10.5
Kapustin | 8.5 | 3 | 0 | 11.5
Murray | 8.5 | 0 | 2.5 | 11
Tremblay | 8.5 | 0 | 0 | 8.5
TOTAL | 138 | 21 | 14 | 173

Defense Minutes

Player | ES | PP | PK | Total
Bourque | 19 | 5 | 4 | 28
Coulter | 19 | 0 | 4 | 23
Thomson | 17 | 2 | 3 | 22
Mortson | 17 | 2 | 2 | 21
Rowe | 15 | 0 | 1 | 16
Schneider| 5 | 5 | 0 | 10
TOTAL | 92 | 14 | 14 | 120

Montreal will give an unusually high number of minutes to its 4th line and #5 defenseman. This is done for the following reasons:

- Bobby Rowe is an outstanding #5 defenseman, who is in the same category as PCHA peers Lloyd Cook, Art Duncan, and Frank Patrick, all of whom I think are strong #4 defensemen in the ATD. He gets high minutes for a #5 defenseman because he deserves them. He will be paired with Coulter after the expiration of powerplays that go the full two minutes, and will mix in occasionally with all of the other top-4 defensemen in getting his minutes, based on who needs a rest.

- Mathieu Schneider is a powerplay specialist, and a good one, but he's weak defensively at even strength. He will play heavy PP minutes, but will be sheltered at even strength, only taking offensive zone draws with Rowe against lower units.

- Montreal has strong depth among the forwards, going all the way down to the 4th line, which boasts a Selke winner in Troy Murray at center and a 3-time IIHF all-star in Sergei Kapustin at LW, who I think is among the most underrated players taken in the draft this year, and has the talent to play on an ATD 2nd line. The 4th line will play relatively high minutes both because it is deserving, and in order to keep all of the forward units fresh in Tommy Gorman's high energy checking scheme. In addition to having strong talent for an ATD 4th line, Kapustin - Murray - Tremblay is a tough, aggressive unit which will be used to wear down opponents. Murray and Tremblay were both very physical players who hit to hurt, and Sergei Kapustin had a fair amount of grit, himself.

 

[MadArcand]

Montreal has strong depth among the forwards

I don't know if that's how I'd put it, but it's certainly an interesting bunch. Strong bottom 6 and top line, but that other 3rd line masquerading as 2nd line...

 

[Sturminator]

I don't know if that's how I'd put it, but it's certainly an interesting bunch. Strong bottom 6 and top line, but that other 3rd line masquerading as 2nd line...

I don't think that's fair, at all, but go ahead and stab yourself in the face at the sight of Roenick and Doan on a scoringline if that makes you feel better.

 

[MadArcand]

I don't think that's fair, at all, but go ahead and stab yourself in the face at the sight of Roenick and Doan on a scoringline if that makes you feel better.

Roenick is fine as low-end 2nd line center, but Doan? Doan's offense is pretty much the same as Verbeek's. There's a reason Doan is usually used as a good 3rd liner or elite 4th liner instead of 2nd liner on the off wing.

 

[BraveCanadian]

I don't know if that's how I'd put it, but it's certainly an interesting bunch. Strong bottom 6 and top line, but that other 3rd line masquerading as 2nd line...

I don't think that's fair, at all, but go ahead and stab yourself in the face at the sight of Roenick and Doan on a scoringline if that makes you feel better.

Roenick is fine as low-end 2nd line center, but Doan? Doan's offense is pretty much the same as Verbeek's. There's a reason Doan is usually used as a good 3rd liner or elite 4th liner instead of 2nd liner on the off wing.

Yeah I think Roenick, particularly peak Roenick, is ok as a second line center in this.. he was really something at his best but it was a relatively short time. For people that value longevity more heavily he might slip below the bar.

The combination of him and Doan though.. gritty but pretty light on offense for a 2nd line in this..

Then again Joe Nieuwendyk and Charlie Simmer aren't going to light it up either. imo.

The second line seems like a weakness in both squads.

 

[Sturminator]

Roenick is fine as low-end 2nd line center, but Doan? Doan's offense is pretty much the same as Verbeek's. There's a reason Doan is usually used as a good 3rd liner or elite 4th liner instead of 2nd liner on the off wing.

First of all, Doan has plenty of NHL experience playing the left wing at this point. Hell, he's listed as a left wing on a bunch of sites. I guess you weren't paying attention when Reen was called out on that weeks ago.

Second, Shane Doan's offense is about the same as that of Brian Propp, Rick Martin and Steve Shutt, and unlike all of those guys, Doan has spent most of his career as the best offensive player on his line. He's as close to Bill Barber as Verbeek is to him, and he never got to play with anybody half as good as Bobby Clarke. I guess you didn't pay attention to any of the discussion or analysis going on with the VsX system this year, eh?

Read the thread or don't, though I shouldn't expect to change your distorted opinion of all modern non-elite forwards not named Palffy. Shane Doan is no great shakes as a 2nd line glue guy; he is probably below average in that role, but he is far from being bad. He's a better all-around player than Rick Martin and Steve Shutt, and those guys are playing on top lines this year. You've got a lot of stabbing to do.

 

[Sturminator]

Yeah I think Roenick, particularly peak Roenick, is ok as a second line center in this.. he was really something at his best but it was a relatively short time. For people that value longevity more heavily he might slip below the bar.

I guess you haven't paid much attention to the conversation about Roenick this year. Jeremy Roenick has been underrated in the ATD specifically because he was not what you think he was, that is, a player with a short peak who sucked once he left Chicago. He was actually quite good in Phoenix and the first year in Philly, put up several more good scoring seasons, and was voted 4th and 5th among centers in AST voting in his post-Chicago years. Roenick's 10 season weighted VsX results put him only a little bit behind Sittler and Savard as a scorer, and we all know about the intangibles he brings. Also, Roenick carried the Hawks scoring by huge margins for three years of his prime, and that in a stifling Keenan/Sutter defensive system that hurt his scoring, so he's underrated even by the VsX numbers.

Like MadAr, I refer you here. Jeremy Roenick is about an average 2nd line center in the ATD, and was a very good value where Reen took him.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

While I do agree that Montreal has a below average 2nd line, I think some of you are underrating Roenick. He's below average for a 2nd line center, but not out of place at all. I don't have the most up to date vsX spreadsheet, but on mine he posts a very similar resume to Sittler, and he does bring some grit too. I'd take him over Nieuwendyk all day.

 

[MadArcand]

First of all, Doan has plenty of NHL experience playing the left wing at this point. Hell, he's listed as a left wing on a bunch of sites. I guess you weren't paying attention when Reen was called out on that weeks ago.

I don't know if I'd call ~25% of a career plenty, but whatever.

Second, Shane Doan's offense is about the same as that of Brian Propp, Rick Martin and Steve Shutt, and unlike all of those guys, Doan has spent most of his career as the best offensive player on his line. He's as close to Bill Barber as Verbeek is to him, and he never got to play with anybody half as good as Bobby Clarke. I guess you didn't pay attention to any of the discussion or analysis going on with the VsX system this year, eh?

You do realize that Satan scores exactly as much as Barber in VsX, right? And that there's only Bill Guerin between Doan and Verbeek in the table as far as (primarily) RWs go?

Judging by that, should I put Satan on my 2nd line instead of having him as spare?

Read the thread or don't, though I shouldn't expect to change your distorted opinion of all modern non-elite forwards non named Palffy. Shane Doan is no great shakes as a 2nd line glue guy; he is probably below average in that role, but he is far from being bad. He's a better all-around player than Rick Martin and Steve Shutt, and those guys are playing on top lines this year. You've got a lot of stabbing to do.

Thank you very much for your strawman argumentation, but I actually like Doan as a player, I had Doan on my teams in the past, and I wanted Doan as my 3rd line RW this season but Reen beat me to the punch by drafting Doan way higher than he ever went.

I don't know what your point is, really. Two lower-end 2nd liners and a 3rd liner don't make a great 2nd line no matter how you slice it.

 

[BraveCanadian]

I guess you haven't paid much attention to the conversation about Roenick this year. Jeremy Roenick has been underrated in the ATD specifically because he was not what you think he was, that is, a player with a short peak who sucked once he left Chicago. He was actually quite good in Phoenix and the first year in Philly, put up several more good scoring seasons, and was voted 4th and 5th among centers in AST voting in his post-Chicago years. Roenick's 10 season weighted VsX results put him only a little bit behind Sittler and Savard as a scorer, and we all know about the intangibles he brings. Also, Roenick carried the Hawks scoring by huge margins for three years of his prime, and that in a stifling Keenan/Sutter defensive system that hurt his scoring, so he's underrated even by the VsX numbers.

Like MadAr, I refer you here. Jeremy Roenick is about an average 2nd line center in the ATD, and was a very good value where Reen took him.

Nice try but Roenick was not the same hell bent going for broke player later on that he was in Chicago those few years.

No one can maintain that kind of reckless abandon and have a long career.

He was still productive but he was neither as good offensively or all around imo.

And once again, I understand why 7 years was chosen as the cutoff for vsX to include early era players fairly, but Roenick doesn't have the best longevity.. he fits nicely into that 7 year peak calculation so it flatters him somewhat.

 

[Sturminator]

And once again, I understand why 7 years was chosen as the cutoff for vsX to include early era players fairly, but Roenick doesn't have the best longevity.. he fits nicely into that 7 year peak calculation so it flatters him somewhat.

No, he wasn't quite as good in Phoenix, but he was still very good. Did you actually read that thread? Roenick's 10 year VsX scores are also quite good. He had a lot better longevity than you think. Here a little comparison of top-10 seasons in VsX:

Jeremy Roenick: 89 (+37)*, 89 (+29)*, 83, 82, 79, 74, 72 (+34)*, 67, 63, 62

Denis Savard: 100, 98, 83, 82, 81, 78, 75, 62, 59, 56

Joe Nieuwendyk: 76, 74, 74, 71, 70, 64, 63, 54, 51, 51

*Chicago years when Roenick carried team scoring by a huge margin

So tell me again how Roenick has no longevity.

 

[BraveCanadian]

No, he wasn't quite as good in Phoenix, but he was still very good. Did you actually read that thread? Roenick's 10 year VsX scores are also quite good. He had a lot better longevity than you think. Here a little comparison of top-10 seasons in VsX:

Jeremy Roenick: 89 (+37)*, 89 (+29)*, 83, 82, 79, 74, 72 (+34)*, 67, 63, 62

Denis Savard: 100, 98, 83, 82, 81, 78, 75, 62, 59, 56

Joe Nieuwendyk: 76, 74, 74, 71, 70, 64, 63, 54, 51, 51

*Chicago years when Roenick carried team scoring by a huge margin

So tell me again how Roenick has no longevity.

One: I never said that Roenick has NO longevity. I said he doesn't have the BEST longevity. Savard is a good comparable in that department because they both started declining pretty badly after 7-8 seasons.

Two: Savard also carried his team in scoring. Are you going to put little +() * on his totals too? In his best seasons he had 20-40 more points than the next best just like Roenick.

 

[Dr Pepper]

Good luck, Sturminator! Should be a close series, hopefully.

 

[Sturminator]

Two: Savard also carried his team in scoring. Are you going to put little +() * on his totals too? In his best seasons he had 20-40 more points than the next best just like Roenick.

Denis Savard didn't play in the stifling defensive system that Roenick did during his best seasons. The Hawks under Keenan/Savard during Roenick's prime were an extremely defensive team (one of the best in the league in goals against), and Roenick was discouraged from playing creative, attacking hockey. This quote is from Roenick's bio - referring to Darryl Sutter, JR said:

One of our problems is everything he says about me, he goes through the papers," Roenick said. "We are very limited in what we do offensively. He doesn't like fancy plays. He likes dump-and-chase.

Just how much of a break we should give Roenick for playing his best seasons in such a system is an open question, but the point is that, as it is for Frank Mahovlich's years in Toronto, being by far the best offensive player in a heavily defensive system that stifles creativity is generally not a good environment to maximize one's scoring.

 

[Sturminator]

Judging by that, should I put Satan on my 2nd line instead of having him as spare?

If Satan brought anything more than scoring, he probably would be a viable 2nd liner, yes. I know you understand the difference between Bill Barber and Miro Satan, MadAr. For a 2nd line glue guy, Doan is not a bad scorer, at all.

I don't know what your point is, really. Two lower-end 2nd liners and a 3rd liner don't make a great 2nd line no matter how you slice it.

I know you are impervious to new information about modern players, so I'm not going to bother anymore discussing Doan and Roenick with you, but I'll take you to task for calling Helmut Balderis a low-end 2nd liner. He is anything but that.

There are really not a whole lot of "questions" any more about Balderis' career. He was a somewhat mysterious player in the past because of the relatively short time he spent on the Soviet national team, but we now have a clear picture of his career. All you have to do is open his bio - the information is there. In the Soviet league, Balderis had a long and excellent career, winning the scoring title twice, and putting up career numbers which are extremely similar to those of Alexander Maltsev, and this mostly on Riga teams that were worse than Maltsev's Dynamo teams. Their career top-10 VsX numbers in the Soviet league are as follows:

Maltsev: 112, 100, 94, 92, 90, 80, 79, 69, 67, 65

Balderis: 111, 102, 100, 96, 94, 88, 82, 77, 68, 65

They are so close as scorers in the Soviet league as to be virtually indistinguishable from one another, and career regular season performance is the best baseline we have for judging the talent of these players.

Balderis only played for the Soviet national team for five seasons, and for the 5th he was a throw-in relegated to a lower line in 1983 simply because Tikhonov couldn't keep the league scoring leader off of the national team. Over the four seasons in the 1970's in which Balderis played regularly for CSKA/Red Army internationally, he was very good.

- Best Forward award at the 1977 World Championships
- 2nd in Soviet scoring during the 1977 Super Series vs. WHA teams
- Goals leader at the 1978 World Championships
- 1st in scoring for CSKA during the 1979-80 Super Series vs. NHL teams

His scoring record with the national team over the course of his career there also ends up looking extremely similar to Maltsev's. These are the Soviet scoring leaders in the World Championships over the period of Balderis' prime on the Red Army team (1976 - 1979):

Player|Goals|Assists|Points|Games|Points-per-game
Boris Mikhailov|32|24|56|38|1.47
Valeri Kharlamov|24|29|53|38|1.39
Helmut Balderis |24|21|45|37| 1.22
Vladimir Petrov|17|23|40|28|1.43
Sergei Kapustin|24|14|38|33|1.15
Viktor Zhluktov|17|19|36|37|0.97
Aleksandr Maltsev |9|20|29|23| 1.26
Aleksandr Yakushev|13|5|18|20|0.90
Vladimir Shadrin|5|9|14|19|0.74

Balderis' international career was short, but sweet. He didn't play for the Red Army team longer only because of a personal conflict with Viktor Tikhonov, not because he lacked the talent. He was, like many Europeans of the era (e.g. Martinec, Novy, etc.) almost certainly the main puck carrier on his line, but we know from his time playing on the CSKA 2nd line with Kapustin and Zhluktov that he could share the puck, as he led the line in assists during their time together (see table above).

The only thing separating Balderis from Maltsev is the length of his international career. That's it. Their careers in the Soviet league are nearly identical, as is the quality of their performances at the national team level. Maltsev is one of the most accomplished Soviets of all-time in international competition, and that obviously makes him more valuable than Balderis, but to what extent? Soviet international play is essentially like the playoffs for NHL players. How far apart would we expect two NHL players to be in the draft if they had virtually identical regular season value, but one of them only got a few shots in the playoffs and was very good, while the other had a long and successful playoff career? One round? Two? We are essentially talking about the difference between Mike Bossy and Teemu Selanne.

And yet there is still a three round gap between Maltsev and Balderis in the ATD, and that's with Maltsev undervalued at #143 this year. Helmut Balderis remains undervalued in the draft, and is in fact a very strong 2nd line scorer - the kind of offensive guy you can build a line around. I agree with TDMM that he's probably on the level of a guy like Kovalchuk offensively, but with a more well-rounded game. Teemu Selanne used to get a lot of mindless hate around here, too, and was called a "playoff choker" and other such nonsense on more than one occasion in past drafts. Thankfully, we have gradually come around on Selanne, and now he is respected for having had an excellent career, in spite of limited opportunities in the playoffs when he was at his peak. It's about time we start showing Helmut Balderis the same respect. The guy was a superstar in his prime, and had a long and very successful career in spite of Viktor Tikhonov.

 

[MadArcand]

Basically, you feel your team is above-average at pretty much every lineup slot. I know it's the playoff and all, but c'mon.

That said, I took a quick glance at the 2nd line RW slots on all teams, and you're right, Balderis isn't below average there. While plenty of teams have clearly better players in the spot, just as many have players that are clearly worse. Thus Balderis is actually perfectly fine average to above-average 2nd line RW.

And while you continue to harp about me 'hating' modern forwards, I think it's really not the case, at least when it comes to 90s/early 2000s guys like Roenick and Doan (I like both of them, in fact I probably overrate the whole generation). If it was about the Keslers and Perrys and Pahlssons of the world, you'd be likely much closer to truth. But then it's not just forwards, since I 'hate' on picks like Mitchell and Lundqvist too.

IMO, Roenick just falls to the bottom 1/3rd of the 2nd line centers. Maybe he's close to the top of that group, I dunno, but I doubt you can sell him as actually above-average when compared to other teams' 2nd line centers.

And Doan... well, there are players with worse offense used in top-6 roles here and there, sure. Doesn't mean he's great in the role.

Oh and BTW Satan definitely had more to his game than just scoring. Maybe someone could take a flyer on him as bargain-basement 2nd liner one day - as much as I hate him, he's still worlds better than Bobby Schmautz.

 

[Sturminator]

One: I never said that Roenick has NO longevity. I said he doesn't have the BEST longevity. Savard is a good comparable in that department because they both started declining pretty badly after 7-8 seasons.

You will find that players who are still scoring above the 70% mark in the 8th seasons and onwards are rare, and most are 1st liners in the ATD. Roenick's longevity is pretty average for a player of his generation. I also don't know where you get the idea that Roenick became less physical after he left the Hawks. I saw a good bit of Roenick as a Coyote in the Pacific division, and he was just as mean as ever. In fact, the Yotes and Sharks used to have kind of a feud going during Roenick's years there, and Phoenix in general was a fairly thuggish team for a while there with guys like Claude Lemieux, Brad May, etc. Here - a couple of good Roenick hits from a single Sharks game - one right in the beginning and one where he buries Jeff Norton and takes the puck to the net for a scoring chance at 01:15.



I'm sorry man, but you're just wrong about Roenick's style of play after leaving Chicago. He was still a very physical player in Phoenix. I quite like this hit, as well:



Even in Philly, JR was still a really aggressive player, who liked to crash in down low and bury defensemen on the forecheck. Flyers fans loved him his first couple of seasons there for exactly that reason. Here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Li-B9_muwE&t=27s

I like this one, too:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgcphaduBHA&t=2m5s

...although it is borderline boarding, IMO. No offense, but I don't get the impression that you really saw much of JR's career after he left Chicago. I should add that Roenick and Doan are especially well suited to an offensive system that will ask them to bang and forecheck a lot when Balderis can't enter the zone with possession. Tommy Gorman is pretty much the king of forechecking, and Roenick's style of play fits perfectly into a heavy forechecking system.

 

[BraveCanadian]

I'm sorry man, but you're just wrong about Roenick's style of play after leaving Chicago. He was still a very physical player in Phoenix. I quite like this hit, as well:

....

No offense, but I don't get the impression that you really saw much of JR's career after he left Chicago. I should add that Roenick and Doan are especially well suited to an offensive system that will ask them to bang and forecheck a lot when Balderis can't enter the zone with possession. Tommy Gorman is pretty much the king of forechecking, and Roenick's style of play fits perfectly into a heavy forechecking system.

I'll be the first to admit that I did see more of Roenick in Chicago then later (being a Leaf fan) but you're still upselling all three of these guys like crazy.

I'll also still be the first to claim that he wasn't as good after leaving Chicago too. His style of play takes a toll.

Yes, he was still good and yes he is still decent here as a 2nd liner (particularly when you take into account his grit).

However, I'll stick to my point that he and Doan aren't exactly going to be lighting it up.

And I am a Roenick fan.

 

[Sturminator]

Basically, you feel your team is above-average at pretty much every lineup slot. I know it's the playoff and all, but c'mon.

That's funny, I remember saying quite clearly, in this very thread, that I consider Doan a below average 2nd liner, and Roenick an average one. Helmut Balderis is definitely a strong 2nd line scorer. He is basically Alexander Maltsev with a shorter international record. In terms of skill, I think the line ends up being a fairly average unit, on the whole, though the personnel does fit well into the heavy-forechecking system Gorman's team will run, so even when they face tight checking, they'll still have success playing dump and chase with Roenick and Doan.

As far as the rest of the team is concerned...I would say Art Coulter is about average for a #2 defenseman, and Schneider is really a PP specialist who should be protected at even strength, but he is a good PP specialist whose production on the man advantage is on the same level as Doug Wilson's, and he is being protected at even strength, so he's fine in his role. The rest of the roster spots...yeah, they're well-manned. Reen built a strong roster this year, and one that is a good match for the coach's particular style of hockey.

 

[Sturminator]

I'll also still be the first to claim that he wasn't as good after leaving Chicago too. His style of play takes a toll.

Roenick's well-publicized two year struggle with knee problems right in the middle of his career was basically the only health problem he ever had (besides getting his jaw smashed by Hatcher) until he entered the real twilight of his career. The guy was actually a remarkably durable player throughout his career. Some guys can do it and some guys can't. Roenick was still lighting people up well into his 30's. This nebulous "it takes its toll" argument is an easy one to make, but every player is different, and Roenick managed to play that style for a long time. You admit, yourself, that you don't really know much about his career after he left Chicago. I don't understand why you persist in making this argument in the face of evidence to the contrary.

I'll be the first to admit that I did see more of Roenick in Chicago then later (being a Leaf fan) but you're still upselling all three of these guys like crazy.

Ok, I get that you want to criticize Roenick and Doan, but who is the 3rd guy? You mean Balderis? It's hard to argue with statistics, man. The main part of the argument for Balderis isn't some flowery his-coach-said-he-was-really-super kind of nonsense, but a simple look at his offensive production. The only part of Balderis' career that you can really criticize is his international record, but he was excellent in the short time he spent on the Soviet national team. Do you have a concrete argument to make against Balderis or are you just doing a bit of drive-by criticism here?

 

[BraveCanadian]

Roenick's well-publicized two year struggle with knee problems right in the middle of his career was basically the only health problem he ever had (besides getting his jaw smashed by Hatcher) until he entered the real twilight of his career. The guy was actually a remarkably durable player throughout his career. Some guys can do it and some guys can't. Roenick was still lighting people up well into his 30's. This nebulous "it takes its toll" argument is an easy one to make, but every player is different, and Roenick managed to play that style for a long time. You admit, yourself, that you don't really know much about his career after he left Chicago. I don't understand why you persist in making this argument in the face of evidence to the contrary.

If the evidence is a couple of youtube videos and a quote where he is supposed to dump the puck in, I'll stick with what I saw in the games.

Ok, I get that you want to criticize Roenick and Doan, but who is the 3rd guy? You mean Balderis? It's hard to argue with statistics, man. The main part of the argument for Balderis isn't some flowery his-coach-said-he-was-really-super kind of nonsense, but a simple look at his offensive production. The only part of Balderis' career that you can really criticize is his international record, but he was excellent in the short time he spent on the Soviet national team. Do you have a concrete argument to make against Balderis or are you just doing a bit of drive-by criticism here?

I haven't said anything about Balderis' at all. I'm not familiar enough with him. Unlike Roenick.

The third guy I was referring to was Gorman who is also getting a big upsell here.


All this back and forth basically leaves us where we started. You have a very average 2nd line overall. And possibly a below average scoring one depending on how people look at it.

 

[Sturminator]

The third guy I was referring to was Gorman who is also getting a big upsell here.

So where would you place Gorman? Don't like that I called him "the king of forechecking"? He did invent the strategy and use it to stomp a mudhole through the league with a couple of mediocre teams, you know. At worst, Gorman belongs in the conversation among coaches as soon as we get past the top-5.

But we basically agree, then. Montreal's 2nd line is pretty average. It is neither particularly good, nor particularly bad. Considering how strong the rest of the team is, it doesn't have to be that good.

If the evidence is a couple of youtube videos and a quote where he is supposed to dump the puck in, I'll stick with what I saw in the games.

Right, all those times you watched him play in Phoenix. Recall bias is a tough thing to kick. You're kind of a throwback to the old days in the ATD when every modern player got picked to death for his faults, real or imagined.

 

[BraveCanadian]

So where would you place Gorman? Don't like that I called him "the king of forechecking"? He did invent the strategy and use it to stomp a mudhole through the league with a couple of mediocre teams, you know. At worst, Gorman belongs in the conversation among coaches as soon as we get past the top-5.

The Border Cities Star, Oct 4, 1934:

"A star pitcher in the Northwestern Baseball League, Leroy Goldsworthy, a forward who goes to the Canadiens, is an all around athlete. About 22 years old, he is regarded as a smart hockey player. Tommy Gorman credits him with thinking out the "fore-checking" method of defense which won the world's title for the Hawks."

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=_BA_AAAAIBAJ&sjid=204MAAAAIBAJ&pg=4483,1635976

Right, all those times you watched him play in Phoenix. Recall bias is a tough thing to kick. You're kind of a throwback to the old days in the ATD when every modern player got picked to death for his faults, real or imagined.

Well, I didn't actually go to Phoenix but I did watch him on TV if that counts.

Besides, I have a bunch of modern players on my roster. So there goes that criticism.