Red Fisher Conference Semi Final - Three Rivers Hockey Club (2) vs Chicago Shamrocks (3)

[ImporterExporter]

BEST OF SEVEN FORMAT:


Three Rivers Hockey Club (2 Seed)

HEAD COACH:

AL ARBOUR


FORWARDS:

DEAN PRENTICE - NEWSY LALONDE (A) - MARK RECCHI

ALEX OVECHKIN (A) - ELMER LACH - THEO FLEURY

BOB PULFORD - DOUG GILMOUR - BOBBY BAUER

DON MARCOTTE - WALT TKACZUK - JOE MULLEN

ED WESTFALL
PHIL GOYETTE

*The 2nd line will play as much or slightly more than the 1st line at ES.

**Goyette is capable of filling in up and down the lineup given his versatile career as a strong checker (Montreal) and solid offensive C (New York) and will fill if an injury occurs to one of the starting C's.

***Bauer is an injury replacement for a Recchi/Fleury or offensive upgrade on Westfall when we need a jolt of offense. Bauer would roll on the 3rd line as the engine w/Gilmour and Pulford and Mullen dropping to the 4th line as the depth goal getter w/Tkaczuk and Marcotte. If Bauer plays and Westfall sits, Marcotte and Pulford would assume top PK spots w/Gilmour and Prentice taking on 2nd team roles.


DEFENSEMEN:

DENIS POTVIN (C) - SERGE SAVARD

JC TREMBLAY - BUTCH BOUCHARD (A)

JIM SCHOENFELD - ART DUNCAN

GLEN HARMON

*Glen Harmon is an injury replacement for Tremblay and logical partner for Butch Bouchard as they played together for years in Montreal in the 1940's.


GOALIES:

JACQUES PLANTE
ROY WORTERS


SPECIAL TEAMS:

Primary Power Play (1-3-1 umbrella):

Lalonde RHS (net to slot)

Ovechkin RHS (left circle to point) - Fleury RHS(slot to net) -- Lach LHS(right half wall)

Potvin LHS(point)

Lach is the primary C and first man on the dot though given his strength in that area. Lalonde, the other C will back him up if bounced. Ovechkin will roam between left circle and the blueline, drifting higher when Potvin moves to his right towards Lach.

Secondary Power Play:

Forwards - Doug Gilmour (C) LHS - Mark Recchi LHS - Joe Mullen RHS
Defensemen - Denis Potvin LHS - Art Duncan RHS

*Tremblay will sub in for Potvin when Three Rivers hold a lead or come on late for DP in other situations. Given Potvin will be doing very little to no PK'ing, Arbour will be able to use him for nearly the entirety of the PP chances given and more importantly, an increased role at ES.


Primary Penalty Kill:

Pulford (C) -- Marcotte (C)

Tremblay -- Savard


Secondary Penalty Kill:

Gilmour (C) -- Tkaczuk (C)

Schoenfeld -- Bouchard

Spare PK players include Prentice, Fleury, Potvin


VS

Chicago Shamrocks (3 Seed)​

Coach: Hap Day

Patrick Elias - Frank Nighbor (A) - Charlie Conacher
Vladimir Krutov - Frank Boucher (A) - Rod Gilbert
Zach Parise - Anze Kopitar - Cecil Dillon
Nick Metz/Giroux* - Claude Giroux* - Rick Tocchet

Slava Fetisov (K) - Drew Doughty
Herb Gardiner - Erik Karlsson
Ryan Suter - Jimmy Thomson

Clint Benedict
Harry Lumley

Spares: Tony Amonte, Ryan O'Reilly, John Carlson
*Giroux will also see time at LW on the 4th line

PP1
Krutov - Boucher - Conacher
Karlsson - Fetisov

PP2
Elias - Giroux - Gilbert
Doughty - Gardiner/Suter

PK1
Nighbor - Metz
Fetisov - Thomson

PK2
Kopitar - Dillon/Krutov
Suter/Gardiner - Doughty

Extra PK C: Boucher

Need A Goal
Krutov - Boucher - Conacher
Fetisov - Karlsson

Team Info/Highlights
- Defensive team with a defensive coach built around two-way centers Nighbor/Boucher/Kopitar with supporting wingers. We will likely do a lot of scoring on the counter attack
- Although Day was defensive he would allow his elite offensive players leeway, so we do not expect any issues with Conacher or Karlsson
- Speaking of Karlsson, we specifically built a 3rd pairing that was strong defensively in order to get him in the most favorable situations
- Given our defensive strength up front we will likely have less offensive power than some teams. This was addressed in 2 main ways:
1. Good ES scoring depth
2. Special teams: we have several low-penalty players (without sacrificing grit) which should give us more PP's than PK's, we have very strong PKers, and a strong 1st PP unit built to make the most out of our point men, Karlsson and Fetisov (Boucher is the half wall distributer, Conacher and Krutov will be a real handful down low/in the slot)

Click to read more...

 

[ImporterExporter]

Bobby Bauer will be giving Westfall a breather in this series.

Bauer will skate on the 3rd line w/Pulford (lw) and Gilmour (c).

4th line will be Marcotte-Tkaczuk-Mullen

 

[ImporterExporter]

Good luck @Hawkey Town 18 ! Should be a hellova match up here.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Good luck @Hawkey Town 18 ! Should be a hellova match up here.

Thanks. Looking forward to it!

 

[Sturminator]

My questions for this series:

1. Can Chicago's PK punish Three Rivers for playing Denis Potvin through both powerplay units?

2. What's going on with the Chicago 4th line? It feels a little disjointed skills-wise, and I'm not sure what the plan is for deploying the unit? What matchups will Chicago seek with those players?

3. How will Newsy Lalonde do against Chicago's centers?

4. How will Charlie Conacher do against Prentice/Pulford/Marcotte?

 

[ImporterExporter]

WHY THREE RIVERS SHOULD WIN



1. Who Is Slowing Ovechkin? Conversely Who Is Winning Battles For Chicago Among The F's?

One of the issues the previous team (Montreal) who faced Three Rivers faced was not having a deep team in terms of RW capable of harassing and slowing down Ovi in any consistent manner.

I don’t see the needle being moved much in this series either.

Cecil Dillon (3rd line) is the only plus defensive presence on the right side for Chicago and certainly on home ice, Ovechkin’s line will play power on power with either of the top 2 lines for Chicago, namely that 2nd unit featuring Gilbert.

We then look back to the blueline and see Doughy/Karlsson at RD, matchups that should favor Ovechkin IMO.

Conversely, arguably the best offensive weapon on Chicago, Conacher, will go through the same ringer Gordie Howe endured last series.

Prentice, Pulford, Marcotte, Potvin to be precise.

Chicago’s strength is down their middle, especially in defending (top 9). The top player overall on each line is the C and it’s not really close.

But Chicago also has a soft group of C’s. Those softer C's are going against 4 C’s who are probably the meanest/most intimidating physical presences in the league this year top to bottom. Not to mention they are also strong defensively on the whole.

Lalonde fared better than most against Nighbor head to head and both times their teams faced off in the playoffs, Lalonde (Montreal) prevailed. This is highlighted in the bio I did for Lalonde last month. Lalonde was also solid defensively, many new pieces of evidence found in said bio. With his elite physicality and pest abilities, he’s going to test Nighbor significantly.

Lach on Boucher? Lach was an absolute wrecking unit all over the ice (some of that was known, I found/added a lot more in his new bio). Numerous contemporaries (coaches/players/writers) highlighted him being the best 200 foot player in the game for years and or/the most physical F to boot.

Lach can do all the things Boucher is capable of offensively, was a good defensive C, elite skater, a gem in the dot. The huge difference is Lach brings an element of physicality that Boucher can’t. And he brings it without a big penalty record.

Lach has the better goal scorer (Ovi vs Krutov) by far. In terms of finishing, Lach isn't losing anything going from real life partner, Rocket Richard, to fantasy partner here, Ovechkin.

Krutov-Boucher-Gilbert lacks a true threat as a puck retrieval artist. Krutov the only one noted of the 3 with any real physical edge. Krutov spending more time in puck battles robs the line a bit of their best finisher.

Even Ovi through about 2010 was an absolute unit of a player. Incredibly physical, could and did bowl over a lot of folks deep in the offensive zone. Lach was a great forechecker and playmaker. Fleury would go anywhere on the ice. Despite his size he obviously carved out a HOF career and held his own against many players a lot bigger than him. And he had fantastic pest ability. The line can skate very well, it has an all time great finisher, probably the best ever, great playmaking, physicality across the board, plus a good (Lach) and responsible (Theo) defender to cover up for Ovi’s one big weakness.

Chicago’s top line of Elias-Nighbor-Conacher suffers the same issues as their 2nd unit IMO.

Three Rivers is a very strong defensive unit, top to bottom. You can’t rely on skating the puck into position on the offensive. Certainly not with any regularity. You’re going to have to win puck battles and get it below the blue line. Conacher is the closest thing Chicago has to a forechecker on this line. Chicago can’t look to Elias or Nighbor winning physical battles against many teams, let alone Three Rivers.

So it’s Conacher and Krutov, as the primary puck winners for Chicago in the top 6. That’s a tough spot to be in given they are the best goal scorer on each unit as well. It makes them easier to get away from the net and a body on.

Three Rivers doesn’t have that issue in the top 6.

Three Rivers is superior on the 3rd line no matter how you slice it. Pulford > Parise. Pulford’s only marginally behind Parise in ES scoring (51 vs 48) and brings a lot more to the table beyond that, namely the defense/PK work/uber physical presence. And let’s not forget Pulford’s rep on the 60’s dynasty leafs. The Leafs wouldn’t trade Pulford for Andy Bathgate. He was hugely important to those squads.

Gilmour > Kopitar. Gilmour is Kopitar defensively but a touch better on the offense and has a significant edge to his game vs the opposition. And like Pulford vs Parise, Gilmour is the better playoff performer though Kopitar has 2 really strong runs to his name.

Bauer and Dillon are closer than people might think.

Bauer was a 4 time AS (both pre-post WWII) in 39, 40, 41, and 47. He lost 3 full years of his career (aged 27, 28, 29) to the war which possibly robbed him of more AS nods, not to mention is definitely impacted his 7 year VsX which is still a respectable 74.6 (especially in a 3rd line role). Looking at his offensive output both prior to and post WWII, it’s estimated he would have been in the low 80’s without the missed time. He was a key secondary member on a pair of title winning teams. Dillon scored the most goals and points during his lone title run with the Rangers in 33 so that’s a big accomplishment to his name without a doubt.

Dillon obviously w/the checking advantage in both directions and that’s probably the difference between the two but if you look at post season recognition (AS nods) and scoring exploits, Bauer is right there.

And lastly, I’ll take the Rivers 4th line as well. Marcotte-Tkaczuk-Mullen vs Metz-Giroux-Tocchet.

At ES Three Rivers edges out Chicago in terms of scoring. Three Rivers is better defensively, more physical across the board.



2. Three Rivers Edges Out In Top 4 D Thanks to Playoff Resumes

As I touched on in the assassination thread, I think Fetisov-Doughty is a bit redundant in terms of style.

Fetisov’s best overall attribute/combo is his skating/puck moving ability. Doughty falls into the same boat when you’ve seen his career arc on TV and look at the numbers. Obviously Fetisov is a terrific 2 way stud, on the level of Potvin certainly. Doughty and Savard are ranked very closely all time by most.

Doughty’s style throughout the bulk of his career was being the primary catalyst from the back end for LA. He generally got the highest marks for his transition ability despite his offensive totals being capped by Sutter’s system. He’s certainly capable of being a strong defensive presence but that is more fleeting than the rest of his game.

Three Rivers is better balanced when it comes to the top pair IMO.

I think Slava and Potvin are more or less the same type of player, Potvin being the meaner/heavier of the two.

Once again, I'll plug the Scotty Bowman quote on Potvin, regarding his comparison to Doug Harvey and impact on NY.

What I remember about the Islanders more than anything was Potvin. He was their key. He was an exceptional defenceman, a really strong physical guy. And he could play a lot. He was as close as anyone I ever saw to Doug Harvey. Their passing was right on the mark. And he was mean like Harvey. If you tried to hit either of them, you were going to pay a price. Potvin was maybe a little more fiery. Doug was fiery too, but he didn't show it as much. And for a guy who could play both ways, Potvin was a real offensive threat. He had a good shot. He probably didn't get as much attention as he should have, because when he started Orr was still in his prime.

But if we’re talking about a top flight defensive stopper, Savard fits the bill. There are a lot of people who put him into the highest tier of defensive defensemen. But unlike some, he was a great skater, even after his serious leg injuries. The late Canadiens1958 highlighted this a few years ago in a post in the Scotty Bowman Top 100 Canadian Players thread:

Bowman valued skating, defensive abilities, integrating a team and the willingness to play hard.

Skating - whole game vs a few shifts or period.

Serge Savard, even post broken legs, was a better skater than Larry Robinson.Spin moves,finesse at high speed,transition. Conversely, Trottier and Pete Mahovlich were maybe high average skaters as centers.

We also have, later in the same thread from respected HoH member Staniowski, another gentlemen who actually watched these folks player, post this:

Savard over Robinson.....I don't think anybody who watched the Habs in the '70s would have to wonder too much about why somebody would value Savard over Robinson. First, for some of the years that Bowman coached them, Savard was definitely the better player.

But, also, Savard was the player on those teams that was the most comforting for Habs fans to see on the ice in key situations. He was the smartest player (along with Lemaire), the most versatile (along with Lapointe), a great skater, great defensively....he played forward some (so did Robinson).

His presence really allows Potvin to move forward comfortably. Look to join rushes and use that lethal wrist shot Potvin was known for.





People forget how deadly Potvin was as a goal scorer. 3 times he led the league among D. Despite playing just over 1000 games (vs 14-1600 by other top scorers) he still ranks 5th all time in goal scoring among D and his goals per game (0.29) is bested only by Bobby Orr (0.41). Coffey (0.28), Bourque (0.25) are comparable.

What about playoff performances?

Potvin finished 10th overall in the HoH top 40 Playoff Performers all time a few years ago. Only Doug Harvey finished higher among D. His best 5 year, playoff VsX score is the best all time, better than even Orr. He captained the Islanders dynasty, was their best overall player, and according to folks like Scotty Bowman, was the catalyst for said dynasty.

Over the 4 consecutive title years, Potvin had 85 points in 78 games and was a ridiculous +57.

For his career he ranks 4th all time in playoff points among D. 2nd all time in goals.

Savard came in 27th on that list. Another TRHC player who raised his game to another level come postseason play, especially offensively. His best 5 year playoff VsX is actually 1 point higher than Guy Lapointe. Smythe winner.

Between the pair, they have 11 Cup wins to their name. Experience/success is in great abundance.

In a 7 game series, as good as Slava and Doughty are based on resumes, they’re still looking up at Potvin-Savard.

The 2nd pair, like the top pairings is close in a vacuum, overall, all time sense.

Karlsson has the best reputation thanks to a pair of Norris wins. Herb Gardiner is the lowest ranked player on either 2nd pair.

The one thing that stands out about Gardiner-Karlsson is lack of playoff success. Neither won a title. In fact both have combined for 1 Cup final appearance (Gardiner lost w/Calgary of the WHL in 1924 vs Montreal).

Compare that to Tremblay-Bouchard.

Obviously most people rank Karlsson over Tremblay but the same goes for Bouchard vs Gardiner.

Stylistically speaking the pair is very similar. Bouchard and Gardiner were both rugged, big defenders capable of playing a shutdown role. Karlsson and Tremblay much softer types, with a slant to the offensive, though Karlsson is more dynamic offensively speaking because of his skating. Tremblay is easily the better defender though and in terms of playoff scoring, Tremblay is elite (5th all time in playoff VsX among D). When it comes to big stages, Tremblay raised his game more than most all time.

Three Rivers will use their tremendous fore checking LW’s (Prentice, Pulford, Marcotte and even Ovechkin) to put a hurt on Karlsson when he is retrieving the puck.

Playoff experience/success heavily favors Three Rivers here.

Bouchard went to 9 Cup finals, winning 4.

Tremblay went to 6 Cup finals, winning 5. He came very near to winning the Smythe twice.

Overall, the top 4 is close in an all time sense but again, when the chips are down, I think Three Rivers has the clear edge in the postseason format and a more air tight defensive presence.



Plante >> Benedict

Clint Benedict is an average goalie in this league size (18 teams). He’s generally ranked in the 10-13 range all time by most reputable historians.

I think he’s playing on the right style team with the right style coach (Day) but at the end of the day he’s outclassed by a decent margin vs Plante, who is often ranked 3rd overall among G’s and generally never below 5th.

Plante also gets the better of the argument in terms of postseason play. Plante came in 8th overall in the HoH Top 40 Playoff Performers of All Time project, the 2nd goalie ranked (behind Roy). There were 6 goalies and Benedict didn’t make the cut.

I actually think Benedict has a decent playoff resume having studied him quite a bit when doing leg work for the Pete Green bio. Was definitely subpar prior to the 1920’s dynasty on Ottawa, when he had a couple of solid playoffs on Cup winners, followed by a few surprising runs with the Montreal Maroons in the mid to late 1920’s, showing some stellar work.

At the end of the day, though, this is very solid advantage for Three Rivers, at a crucial 60 minute position.



4. Playoff Performers Favor Three Rivers In General.

Plante (8), Potvin (10), Gilmour (26), Savard (27) all ranked inside the top 40 playoff performers all time for Three Rivers vs just Nighbor (16) and Boucher (30)

Lalonde had a pretty small playoff record all told but he was very strong overall. He was crucial to the 1st Cup winner in Montreal Canadien history in 1916. Very strong in 1918 and had a legendary run in 1919 that ended with the Cup finals being suspended tied 2-2-1 through 5 games.

In fact the only 2 times he faced Nighbor head to head in the playoffs, Montreal (Lalonde) won and his playoff VsX is slightly higher (1918-present).

Lalonde ranks higher in playoff VsX (68th vs 88th for Nighbor)

What about Mark Recchi?

How about 147 career points in 189 games. 3 Cup wins, on 3 separate teams, to the tune of 64 points in 74 games. He was a monster on the very first Penguins Cup winner in 91, with 34 points in 24 games. Only Lemieux had more. He then won a pair of titles at ages 37 and 42, still chipping in 30 points in 50 games (Carolina/Boston).

He ranks 54th in playoff VsX all time just behind Bobby Clarke and right in front of Charlie Conacher.

Ovechkin finally got the monkey of his back a few years ago with the Conn Smythe run, leading the postseason in goals.

He’s by no means an ace but consider since he came into the league, Ovechkin has the 3rd most playoff points (behind Sid and Malkin), the most playoff goals, and ranks tied for 5th in points per game among players w/75+ games played since 05-06. And of course has the title/Smythe to go with the figures.

Doug Gilmour (25th) and Lach (28th) rank very highly in playoff VsX all time. They raised their offensive game to another level and were key members of title winning teams (3 times in Lach’s case).

Gilmour has 188 points in 182 games. That ties him with Joe Sakic for 9th all time, ahead of folks like Yzerman, and Trottier. Led the playoffs in scoring in 86, assists in 93 and was a crucial member on the 89 title winner in Calgary.

Lach led the playoffs in assists (both times on Cup winners) twice, and points once (Cup winner). He scored the overtime, Cup winning goal in 1953 vs Boston.

Joe Mullen comes in 77th. He’s a luxury on the 4th line. Led the playoffs in goals twice, once for a title winner (Calgary in 89) and won 3 titles overall.

On Chicago, you have the highest player overall in Boucher (13th) and then others who find their way into the top 100 are Elias (51st), Conacher (56th), Nighbor (88th)

What about the blueline?

Potvin is the top VsX performer all time in the playoffs when it comes to best 5 runs. Better than Orr, Coffey, everyone.

Tremblay ranks 5th all time, one spot behind Lidstrom, and just in front of Larry Robinson and Al MacInnis. I'd consider that tremendous.

Heck, even Serge Savard made the top 27 list put up by seventieslord back in 2018. He came in 22nd, one spot ahead of Guy Lapointe.

Obviously Fetisov has an absolutely stellar resume in the Soviet Union on the big stages and that largely makes up for the unimpressive showing once he did make it to the NHL. I don’t hold that much against those first wave Soviets who were already at the back end of their primes or past it. Slava’s work on the international stage from the late 70’s through the end of the 1980’s was incredible. Finished his career with 2 Cup wins in Detroit in the late 90’s, though he was a depth player by that point (late 30’s).

Doughty has 2 strong runs, especially that first Cup jaunt in 2012 (he was not good vs Rangers in 2014) but beyond that has a very disappointing playoff resume. He’s a -3 over 84 career games.

Karlsson suffers from even less exposure. Had the one big run in 2017 (lost in conference finals) but otherwise nothing good, though much of that was on Ottawa’s ineptness at building a legitimate roster and subsequent injuries the last 4 odd years now.

Herb Gardiner, never on a Cup winner.

While the forwards are more evenly matched in terms of postseason production/accolades, the blue line and net are clear victories for Three Rivers.



5. Special Teams Keeps Three Rivers Best Players Fresh at ES


Another nuance in this series (like the last one) is the usage of top players on special teams.

Three Rivers does not rely on a single top 6 F to take part in PK duties

Pulford-Marcotte
Gilmour-Tkaczuk

Not only are Pulford-Marcotte a statistically great duo in terms of usuage/kill rates, their contemporary praise (especially Pulford) put them into the elite class of PK artists. Pulfod when his career ended in 1972, was 2nd in SH points. Marcotte scored 6th most SH points over his career (tied w/Craig Ramsay).

Nighbor on the top PK unit for Chicago means he'll be taxed more than his counterpart Lalonde who only has duties on the top PP team for Three Rivers. PK work is heavy going. Over the course of a series, this will add up.

Fetisov also playing top PK duties, to go along with top PP chores. Compare that to Potvin, who will play at ES and on the PP exclusively thanks to stellar PK defensemen (Savard, Tremblay, Schoenfeld, Bouchard). Could DP play the kill for Three Rivers? Sure. But keeping him off those units allows him to conserve energy for ES specifically.

If you look at the old special teams roles threads overpass put up, Potvin was playing 87% of his teams PP time (only Orr and Bourque played more all time) as it were so him playing 1:35-1:45 of the PP is nothing extravegent, more so precisely because he doesn't have to play on the PK. This means more time at ES, which is where the bulk of the game is played.

I like Chicago's special teams on the whole. It's a bit harder comparing the top PP units given the style differences (2 D vs 1). Three Rivers has the greatest PP goal scorer ever in Ovi. Another elite all time threat in Lalonde. A playmaker (Lach) that rivals Boucher in that department certainly. And lastly, looking at the defensemen, Potvin cancels out the brilliance of Fetisov/Karlsson.

I already highlighted the skills of Three Rivers top PK F's and the fact that nobody in the top 6 features there.

Take a look at the PK defenders for Three Rivers:

Tremblay-Savard

Here you can see their usage/kill rates from overpass' study a # of years back. This is the top 20 defensemen all time (1960 onward) in terms of usage on the PK, with their kill rate (team based) to the far right. The smaller the # the better. You want to be as far below 1.0 as possible.

Tremblay is 4th.
Savard 12th.

If you remove those who don't have at least 500 game played, they're 2nd and 7th.

One can even see Jim Schoenfeld in 20th spot in terms of usage, sporting a league best 0.77 kill rate.

Penalty Kill (defencemen)

Player	Pos	GP	SH%	TmSH+
Tom Johnson	D	359	77%	0.91
Jacques Laperriere	D	691	76%	0.87
Doug Harvey	D	347	68%	0.86
J.C. Tremblay	D	796	66%	0.87
Jaccob Slavin	D	377	66%	0.87
Marcel Pronovost	D	636	66%	0.91
Bill White	D	604	65%	0.88
Bobby Orr	D	657	62%	0.79
Ivan Provorov	D	315	61%	1.12
Zdeno Chara	D	1553	59%	0.88
Bill Gadsby	D	453	58%	1.01
Serge Savard	D	1040	58%	0.82
Francois Beauchemin	D	903	58%	1.06
Ray Bourque	D	1612	58%	0.88
Jay Bouwmeester	D	1240	57%	0.96
Bill Hajt	D	854	57%	0.77
Chris Chelios	D	1651	57%	0.85
Barry Beck	D	615	57%	1.01
Tim Horton	D	1010	57%	0.88
Jim Schoenfeld	D	719	56%	0.77

Obviously Fetisov is a very strong PK player. I could throw Potvin on a kill unit and say the same thing but I'd rather the #1 play more minutes at ES. Jimmy Thomson on a top unit? Doable but he's outclassed by both Tremblay and Savard clearly.

Suter/Gardiner - Doughty vs Schoenfeld-Bouchard?

I'll take the latter duo which again is Three Rivers. Schoenfeld's best attributes were his size/strength and ability to keep the net clear on the kill and you can see in the chart above he was used there A LOT and had tremendous success. Bouchard was one of the biggest, strongest players of his era. He was renowned defensive presence and used a lot on the kill even though he played prior to 1960. There is simply more defensive reuptation and quantifiable numbers to look at that moves the needle towards Three Rivers.

 

[Sturminator]

But Chicago also has a soft group of C’s.

I don't think it's fair to call Chicago's centers soft. Claude Giroux is soft, and he doesn't match up well, but that's the only matchup problem I see at center.

 

[ImporterExporter]

I don't think it's fair to call Chicago's centers soft. Claude Giroux is soft, and he doesn't match up well, but that's the only matchup problem I see at center.

Disagree.

Relative to the league itself and furthermore, to the match up at hand, Chicago's finesse style of C, is probably their biggest issue when lining them up, top to bottom vs Three Rivers (if you see it from my argument/pov). Otherwise Ovechkin's matchups reign supreme at ES here.

Nighbor and Boucher were much more finesse styles relative to the leagues in their era (1910-late 30's). I've read more than enough on both through bios already done plus countless hours of research in the newspaper archives. Head to head, Lalonde for example, had plenty of success vs Nighbor. In 2 playoff series, Lalonde and Montreal moved on two times. Lalonde was responsible (dirty play) for putting Nighbor on the shelf on one occasion. Lalonde outscored Nighbor 38-36 head to head in real life in the regular season and in 2 playoff series (3 games for Lalonde/4 games for Nighbor) head to head at C, Lalonde scored 4+1 while Nighbor went 1 goal). That came in 1917 and 1919.

Lalonde's physical presence is going to draw some penalties no doubt about it. He crossed the line multiple times, even factoring in era. But, with that came elite pest qualities. Often times his actions, clean or otherwise, caused someone from the other side to do something stupid themselves. We see this occur with Sprague Cleghorn, who knocked himself out of a playoff series trying to fight Lalonde.

Nighbor obviously succeed tremendously in a very violent era, however, Lalonde himself had successes there, and in a head to head situation, Nighbor is soft relative Lalonde. There is a clear physical edge.

Same goes on with Lach vs Boucher.

I view Boucher as a clean, but fiesty C, who let Bill do the heavy lifting for good reason. I don't get the impression that Boucher was remotely close to Lach in terms of physicality. I'm looking at this relative to their peers in real life and the opponent in this series.

ATD 2022 Bio thread

Zdeno Chara !!! Awards and Achievements: Stanley Cup Champion (2011) Norris Trophy Winner (2009) 3 x First Team All-Star (2004, 2009, 2014) 4 x Second Team All-Star (2006, 2008, 2011, 2012) World Cup Runner-Up (2016) 2 x World Championship Silver Medal (2000, 2012) World Championship Best...

hfboards.mandatory.com

In that bio you see significant contemporary praise for Lach's physicality and 2 way acumen. Across most of his career so the reputation wasn't fleeting. He was a guy who leveled Milt Schmidt with the hardest check of the entire 1953 SCF. 35 years old, second to last season. Luminaries such as Jack Adams speak to his reputation as a nasty SOB. Sid Abel to his relentless style. Players who struggled in playoff formats vs Lach? Cowley and Max Bentley.

Again, I'm not saying that Boucher is relegated to playing a perimeter game per say, but in terms of pure physicality and ability to impact the game on a said physical level, he's far behind Lach.

Kopitar, another guy in the present era who plays a lot smaller than his actual size. I'm a big fan of Kopitar but one thing he doesn't do that well is play with a physical edge. The forecaster highlights what I've seen over the years.

Compared to Doug Gilmour who is very physical. Who always brought it in the playoffs. He does all the Kopitar things, but happens to be slightly better offensively, and waaay more physical relative his opponent.

Great thread I'm currently reading in regards to Gilmour's career (HoH thread). HO really highlights his statistical achievements but you also see testimonies of other traits.

Ok Let's talk about Doug Gilmour

Inspired by the 2009 hall of fame thread.. I am shocked there are people questioning whether or not he should get in. First let's establish the fact that Gilmour was a very good two way player, gritty, tough, very good leader. now onto the numbers.. 1414 points in 1474 career games...

hfboards.mandatory.com

Tkaczuk vs Giroux is a landslide in terms of physicality.

Can Chicago withstand that disparity?

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

@ImporterExporter said:
But Chicago also has a soft group of C’s.

I don't think it's fair to call Chicago's centers soft. Claude Giroux is soft, and he doesn't match up well, but that's the only matchup problem I see at center.

I will provide answers to Sturminator's questions and give a full rebuttal to IE's comments some time this week, but wanted to address this point now since there's already been some back and forth.

IE, you are mis-using the term "soft." A soft player is able to be intimidated/gotten off their game by an opponent who gets physical/nasty and has issues going to tough areas. Giroux may have some issues in that regard, but Nighbor/Boucher/Kopitar definitely do not.

I am especially surprised to see you try to call out Kopitar, a modern player who has well known reputation for being able to handle big centers out west in his career like Getzlaf and Thornton.

I will agree that my centers do not play a super physical game and are not intimidating presences like a Mark Messier type, but that doesn't make them soft.

In fact, this was part of our team building strategy mentioned in the Team Info in my Roster Post, we should be well below league average in taking penalties while also not being soft or sacrificing grit.


A few supporting quotes from the linked bios:

Nighbor
Nighbor was the NHA's highest scoring player in '17. that may be the only season in history where the same player was both the best defensive forward and the top scorer.

Joe Malone and Frank Nighbor are tied as the leading goal-getters in the NHA.
....
It is an odd fact that Nighbor has been harassed and nagged all thru the season while Malone is seldom the butt of opposing players. The answer lies here:

Nighbor irritates opposing players, not only in the skill in which he pops in goals, but in his persistency in trailing the puck, and in his almost uncanny efficiency in snagging it off the other fellow's stick. In doing this he nearly always makes his victim look like what is termed in sporting parlance a "sucker," and very frequently his opponents seek to make up their lack of hockey skill by rough-house.

Malone as a player is not of the same value as Nighbor, even tho he is by a fluke of circumstances tied with the Pembroke boy in scoring. Malone has done his work in bursts while Nighbor has plugged steadily. Nor is Malone the equal of Nighbor in speed or back-checking ability. But for sheer stick-wizardry, particularly close to the nets, Malone has the edge.

Ottawa Citizen: 2-17-1926 said:
Frank Nighbor at center was a tower of strength to the Ottawas, both offensively and defensively. He was given rather a rough ride by heavy body checks, but returned bumps for bumps and all together played one of his very best games. In the second period, X attempted to cross-check Ottawa's famous center-ice player, but the latter beat the Canadien to a punch, although Ottawa supporters thought both should have gone off, if a penalty was deserved.

A curious thing happened midway in the second period, when Morenz, at top speed, charged at Nighbor. The latter saw what was coming and neatly side-stepped him, with a result that Morenz crashed into X, knocking the Canadien defense man down on the ice.

There is a whole section in his bio illustrating how Nighbor was often targeted by the opposition, here are 2 quotes from that:

Toronto World: 2-14-1918 said:
Frank Nighbor appeared at centre for the Ottawas and was the pick of the line. Nighbor was given a fierce grueling by the Toronto team and in the first period there was just one continual procession of players to the penalty bench for their methods of checking Nighbor. Frank came through all right until a few minutes before the close. Reg Noble lifted the puck and struck the Ottawa star in the left eye.
....
Nighbor worked like a Trojan and scored Ottawa's only goal in the third period when he took the puck around the back of the net and shoved it in unassisted.

Ottawa Citizen: 1-20-1926 said:

The game, while bitterly contested from the start, was quite free from undue roughness until near the end of the final period when Billy Coutu got his stick around Frank Nighbor's neck and threw him heavily to the ice. For this offence referee Laflamme gave Coutu a ten minute penalty.
....
During the latter part of the game, Frank Nighbor, of the Ottawas, was given much attention. He was given many a rude jolt with elbows and knees, but came through it all, and in the end was playing much more aggressively than when he started.
....
Nighbor foiled rush after rush of the Canadiens, and while he showed little aggressiveness in the opening period, except when scoring the Senators' first goal, he was quite a factor in the 2nd and 3rd periods, regardless of the many heavy checks he received.

Boucher
Boucher, Cook Brothers Set Great Pace with Rangers

But with all his clean play, Boucher is an aggressive player. He is the brains behind the manuevers which place the puck in scoring position. The former Northwest Mounty, whose slogan is "keep a level head at all times," can wield his fists with the same precision as he does a hockey stick, and few pucksters go out of their way to tangle with him.

26.1.1936 - The Milwaukee Journal:

The cleanest player! In nine years he has spent only 104 minutes in the penalty box; Eddie Shore of Boston served 165 in a single season. Frank Boucher's average penalty in a year is 11 1/2 minutes; that of the leading offenders is 129.

All of which would mean little if Frank were a mediocre or a timid player. But he is neither. As to his playing ability - in the nine seasons he has only once finished out of the first ten in scoring, and he is universally considered one of the greatest centers of all time.

...

"But they taught us in the Mounted to let no one get the drop on us, and I would have fought somebody that night, sure, as a warning. It just happened to be Bill Phillips."

After that, he had no trouble?

"Oh, surely - had some and gave some. But one night early next season something happened. I got bumped hard and I saw red, but suddenly another thing they teach in the Mounted came to me: 'Don't shoot until you have to - be slow on the draw!' and somehow, instead of going for the man I took after the puck. I was so mad I stickhandled it up the whole rink before I knew what I was doing, but I scored. It's been that way ever since - when I get mad I take it out on the puck." And he added, with his quiet smile: "That's why I always like to get a good bumping at the start of a game."

Kopitar
NHL.com June 5, 2012

"Me and Anze have been pretty close since the day we got here," Brown said. "We've been friends, and we've played together for our whole careers. ... It was about a year or two ago you saw something different in him, both from a defensive standpoint and physically. The first couple of years, he'd go in the corner and get knocked around a little bit. Now he goes into the corner and comes out with the puck."
...
Kopitar's physical maturation in the past two seasons has been impressive. The former finesse forward now handles the puck along the boards with a command that recalls fellow California NHL stars Joe Thornton and Ryan Getzlaf, fighting off defences with his size and agility.

Drew Doughty said:

He's methodical. He doesn't look like he's going fast, but he is. He's able to make plays under pressure. He's able to use his big frame to just "Heisman" guys. When I get that guy the puck, I know something good's gonna come out of it. When me and him are on the ice together, you know, we make magic together.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

@ImporterExporter

I notice you mentioning bios in some of your comments. Can you please link the bios to the names in your roster in the OP for everyone's easy reference?

 

[nabby12]

Chicago in 4, just for IE saying something so stupid calling Kopitar soft.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

My questions for this series:

1. Can Chicago's PK punish Three Rivers for playing Denis Potvin through both powerplay units?

We think we are well set up to counter-attack on the PK, which makes sense because we are counter-attack type of team. Our 2nd PK unit of Kopitar with either Dillon or Krutov have plenty of offensive skill to be a SH threat. None of our PK D are black holes offensively either, they all are capable of moving the puck.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

My questions for this series:

2. What's going on with the Chicago 4th line? It feels a little disjointed skills-wise, and I'm not sure what the plan is for deploying the unit? What matchups will Chicago seek with those players?

Here is our estimated Regular Season minutes chart. Giroux is only playing abt 2 minutes at Center, with our other Centers picking up that slack. Our 4th line doesn't have a specific identity because they're mainly meant to be used throughout the lineup with other players in order to give us different looks/options. I see it like the following, but of course Hap Day will have the last call:

Giroux will get a few shifts at LW on the 1st line filling in for Elias. This will be on offensive zone draws, as it gives us both a RHS and LHS faceoff option (Day has the option to deploy Giroux in a similar manner for other key faceoff situations when warranted).

Day will want the option to throw Tocchet out when extra toughness or even dropping of the gloves is required or if he just wants him to stir shit up. This is reflected by Ratelle getting 1 less ES minute than his linemates, but of course that doesn't mean Tocchet can only go our with the 2nd line.

Metz may get some shifts in the top 9 when his defense is needed, but 3 Rivers doesn't have a dangerous RW, so I don't see that being needed as much here like it was in our Round 1 series against Bossy.

In offensive zone situations Giroux on the LW with Boucher/Kopitar - Tocchet
In defensive zone situations Metz on the LW with Boucher/Kopitar - Tocchet

So, as you can see, Metz - Giroux - Tocchet will get very little time as a unit



Estimated Regular Season Minutes
Forwards

Players	ES	PP	PK	Total
P. Elias	13	3		16
F. Nighbor	15		4	19
C. Conacher	15	5		20
V. Krutov	13	4	1	18
F. Boucher	15	4		19
R. Gilbert	12	2		14
Z. Parise	13			13
A. Kopitar	14		3	17
C. Dillon	13		2	15
N. Metz	3		4	7
C. Giroux	6*	3		9
R. Tocchet	6			6
TOTAL	138	21	14	173

*Giroux only has about 2 ES minutes at Center

Defense

Players	ES	PP	PK	Total
S. Fetisov	18	4	4	26
D. Doughty	17	2	3	22
H. Gardiner	15	2	1	18
E. Karlsson	17	5		22
R. Suter	13	1	2	16
J. Thomson	12		4	16
TOTAL	92	14	14	120

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

My questions for this series:

3. How will Newsy Lalonde do against Chicago's centers?

We have 2 good options to match up against Lalonde. Frank Nighbor, who is an elite defensive center and in the conversation for best defensive forward ever (and best two-way forward ever). The other option is Anze Kopitar, who has the size and strength to handle Lalonde and as I'm sure most know is very strong defensively (Selke record for reference: 1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 9, 9, 12)

Lalonde fared better than most against Nighbor head to head and both times their teams faced off in the playoffs, Lalonde (Montreal) prevailed. This is highlighted in the bio I did for Lalonde last month. Lalonde was also solid defensively, many new pieces of evidence found in said bio. With his elite physicality and pest abilities, he’s going to test Nighbor significantly.

Why does your bio summary of the 2019 playoffs only focus on goals and completely ignore assists? This is especially relevant when Nighbor was primarily a playmaker. Nighbor's offense already gets underrated when looking at points totals compared to players who got a larger percentage of their points from goals, and now you're trying to take away assists altogether?

Here's the more complete story of the 2019 Playoffs
Nighbor misses the first 3 games for a family matter, Montreal wins all 3 and Lalonde scores 9 points (8-1).
In the last 2 games with Nighbor back in the lineup, each team wins 1 game. Nighbor scores 2 points (0-2), Lalonde scores 4 points (3-1).

Your bio describes this as:
"For series, Montreal wins 4-1, Lalonde scores 11 goals in 5 games (8 in 3 games without Nighbor) while Nighbor held scoreless in 2 games he played in (games 4/5)."

An experienced GM like you should know better.


I don't have source for the 2017 Playoffs stats, here is what your bio says:
+++++
Game 1 - Lalonde scores 1+1 in 5-2 Montreal win in Montreal, butt ends Nighbor late in 3rd getting himself suspended for game 2. Nighbor had 1 goal.

Game 2 - Lalonde out, Nighbor plays but held scoreless in Ottawa's 4-2 win in Ottawa.

Montreal wins the NHA title on aggregate 7-6 despite losing all 5 games to Ottawa in regular season. Nighbor held to just 1 goal in 2 games after blitzing league w/41 in 19 games during reg. season.
+++++

So Lalonde scores 1 more point than Nighbor in their win (assuming you're not ignoring his assists again), but then an interaction with Nighbor gets Lalonde suspended for the second game. This sounds like Nighbor frustrated Lalonde and caused him to take a stupid penalty which perhaps cost his team the second game and almost the series.
Nighbor goes scoreless in the second game, but that has nothing to do with Lalonde because he's not even playing.

 

[BenchBrawl]

My Frank Nighbor/Ottawa Dynasty Playoffs Project covered the pre-dynasty years, although it wasn't done with the goal of analyzing his opponents.

It appears Lalonde's brutality did partially help Montreal win in 1917, insofar as Nighbor appeared shaken in Game 2 from Lalonde's antics from Game 1, despite Lalonde being suspended. Nighbor clearly had a concussion in Game 1 and unsurprisingly he still felt the effects in Game 2. Being unconscious for a long time in the lockerroom is a clear sign of concussion.

In 1919, Nighbor stole the show upon his return in Game 4 after missing the first three games due to his sister's death, but Lalonde stole the show in Game 5, so that's a tie for that year.

---

Here's a copy/paste:

1917 Playoffs

OTTAWA SENATORS VS. MONTREAL CANADIENS

Note: Nighbor plays for the Ottawa Senators.

Game 1: The Ottawa Journal, 8 Mar 1917 (5-2 Loss)

Lineups

Ottawa-----TEAM-----Montreal
Benedict-----Goalie-----Vezina
H.Shore-----Defence-----Mummery
Merrill-----Defence-----Corbeau
Nighbor-----Centre-----Lalonde
Gerard-----LW-----Noble
Darragh-----RW-----Pitre
Subs unknown

GERARDMEN PLAYED FAR BELOW FORM AND IN ADDITION WERE FORCED TO TAKE CONSIDERABLE ABUSE--NIGHBOR DELIBERATELY LAID AWAY

DIRTY ATTACK ON NIGHBOR

With 20 seconds remaining to be played, Frank Nighbor was laid out cold by Newsy Lalonde. Lalonde says it was an accident, Referee Johnny Brennan declares it was a delibarate attack. At any rate Nighbor was not taking part in the play when he was cut down, for Harry Mummery had scuffled the puck away from him and was making off along the boards. Lalonde was behind, and, wheeling suddenly, ran into Nighbor full tilt. The Pembroke boy dropped and was carried unconscious from the ice, with blood streaming from a gash in his face. He laid unconscious in the Ottawa room for a considerable time. Meanwhile Lalonde had been given a match foul by Johnny Brennen, but as there was only 20 seconds more to play, the penalty did not penalize.

SMITH WALLOPED NIGHBOR

Nighbor was knocked out previously to the Lalonde assault. Tommy Smith laced him across the knees, and Nighbor limped off. And it was during his absence that Canadiens broke the two-all tie and rushed in all three of their winning counters.

NIGHBOR'S NICE GOAL

...Nighbor, weaving and threading his way through the Canadien defence, rounding the net, and notching, unaided on a brilliant play, put Senators up even.

(LALONDE vs. NIGHBOR)

On the line for all around effectiveness, both from a skull cracking standpoint and form a hockey one, Lalonde appears to have bested Nighbor.

Game 2: The Ottawa Journal, 12 Mar 1917 (4-2 Win)

Lineups

Lalonde suspended

Ottawa-----TEAM-----Montreal
Benedict-----Goalie-----Vezina
H.Shore-----Defence-----Mummery
Merrill-----Defence-----Corbeau
Nighbor-----Centre-----Smith
Gerard-----LW-----Noble
Darragh-----RW-----Pitre
Boucher-----Sub-----Laviolette
Cy Denneny-----Sub-----Berlinquette
Co. Denneny-----Sub-----Couture
Lowrey-----Sub----- (none)

SHOULD HAVE WON

Ottawa should have own out. On the night's play they were at least four goals better than their opponents, but they failed miserably around the nets, just where they had been strong all season. [...] Nighbor especially could not get going in his old-time wat and tired and sore from Wednesday's grueling game he was kept on the ice too much.

Gerard and Nighbor, tired out form the hard game of Wednesday, were in Saturday's clash too much. They did well, but did not have their usual "pop".

OTTAWA IS ELIMINATED

1918 Playoffs

Missed the playoffs

1919 Playoffs

OTTAWA SENATORS vs. MONTREAL CANADIENS

Game 1: The Ottawa Journal, 24 Feb, 1919 (8-4 Loss)

Nighbor missed the game due to the death of his sister. Took the first train out of town.

Note on Newsy Lalonde: In fact Newsy Lalonde was easily half the team for the Habitants-on their showing Saturday night-and he was the outstanding star of the struggle.

Game 2: The Ottawa Journal, 27 Feb, 1919 (5-3 Loss)

Nighbor missed the game (see Game 1)

Game 3: The Ottawa Journal, 3 Mar, 1919 (6-3 Loss)

Nighbor missed the game (see Game 1)

Note on Newsy Lalonde: Lalonde scored 5 goals out of 6 for the Canadiens

Game 4: The Ottawa Journal, 4 Mar 1919 (6-3 Win)

Lineups (from LaPresse, 4 Mar 1919)

Ottawa-----TEAM-----Montreal
Benedict-----Goalie-----Vezina
S.Cleghorn-----Defence-----Corbeau
Cameron-----Defence-----Hall
Nighbor-----Centre-----Lalonde
Broadbent-----RW-----Pitre
Denneny-----LW-----Berlinguette
Gerard-----Sub-----O.Cleghorn
Boucher-----Sub-----Malone
Darragh-----Sub-----McDonald

NIGHBOR RETURNS TO HOCKEY HOSTILITIES AND DISPLAYS RARE FORM

Frank Nighbor played the whole sixty minutes and he was worth half a dozen men alone. His checking was superb and he was a delight. Many, many times during the match the Canadiens came up to Nighbor two, three and four abreast but their attacking waves melted when Nighbor poked into view. He did not score a single goal but he was the hero of the hour. His playing was clean-cut, outstanding and wonderfully effective.

The crowd gave a cheer for Nighbor when he stepped out of the dressing room for the conflict.

NIGHBOR WAS THE HERO

Every man in the Ottawa squad played a stellar game, with Nighbor as the shining light.

Note on Newsy Lalonde: Lalonde seems to have played a decent game but missed some chances

Game 5: The Ottawa Journal, 7 Mar 1919 (4-2 Loss)

Lineups

Ottawa-----TEAM-----Montreal
Benedict-----Goalie-----Vezina
Cameron-----Defence-----Hall
S.Cleghorn-----Defence-----Corbeau
Nighbor-----Centre-----Lalonde
Broadbent-----RW-----Pitre
Darragh-----LW-----Berlinquette
Gerard-----Sub-----O.Cleghorn
Boucher-----Sub-----Couture
Denneny-----Sub-----Malone

Frank Nighbor, the renowned centre player of the losers, did fine work also, but did not show his best playing of the season.

Note on Newsy Lalonde: Newsy Lalonde and Bert Corbeau were the outstanding stars of the battle and played wonderful hockey.

OTTAWA IS ELIMINATED

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

1917 Playoffs

OTTAWA SENATORS VS. MONTREAL CANADIENS

Note: Nighbor plays for the Ottawa Senators.

Game 1: The Ottawa Journal, 8 Mar 1917 (5-2 Loss)

Nighbor was knocked out previously to the Lalonde assault. Tommy Smith laced him across the knees, and Nighbor limped off. And it was during his absence that Canadiens broke the two-all tie and rushed in all three of their winning counters.

Great info thanks!

The bolded/underlined really stood out to me. It seems the main reason Montreal was able to win this game was because of the dirty play on Nighbor. With Nighbor off the ice they went from a 2-2 tie to a 5-2 lead.

I don't think dirty tactics like that are a viable strategy for any ATD team to win a series, but let me just say a few words on how Chicago is well suited to handle Lalonde if he decides to get nasty.

1. Nighbor has a policeman on his line in Charlie Conacher that will step in if needed. From Conacher's bio:
"Conacher was Toronto's policeman for many years and a great one. He didn't go looking for trouble, but if it came along he would clear it up."

2. Nighbor does not have to take all the matchups with Lalonde, as Anze Kopitar and our 3rd line is a fine option as well.

3. Rick Tocchet is as mean as they get and a willing fighter no matter who the opponent. If it comes to it Day can always send Tocchet after Lalonde, and there's no one else on 3 Rivers that can do anything about it.
Tocchet had 237 fights, good for 21st all time (source: Most Career NHL Fights).

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Doughty Defensively

Since Doughty's defensive game has been questioned by you here and in the assassination thread and I believe some others voiced a similar opinion, here is some evidence of his defensive game.

To begin with, as I'm sure we all know, the modern Norris trophy is heavily correlated with offensive output. Compared to other modern winners/finalists Doughty's offensive finishes among Dmen is lower, from which we can derive that his superior defensive play is being recognized and making up that offensive gap.

Doughty's scoring finishes among defenseman in his 3 Norris Finalist years:
2010 - 3rd Norris / 3rd scoring
2015: 2nd Norris / 14th scoring
2016: 1st Norris / 9th scoring
2018: 2nd Norris / 7th scoring

Here's how the Norris winners finished in Dman scoring for the last 10 seasons:
2012: Karlsson - 1st
2013: Subban - 1st
2014: Keith - 2nd
2015: Karlsson - 1st
2016: Doughty - 9th
2017: Burns - 1st
2018: Hedman - 5th
2019: Giordano - 2nd
2020: Josi - 2nd
2021: Fox - 2nd

*Only 2 Norris winners outside the top 2 in scoring, and only one outside the top 5 and it's Doughty

Here's how the Norris runner-up finished in Dman scoring for the last 10 seasons:
2012: Weber - 6th
2013: Suter - 3rd
2014: Chara - 24th
2015: Doughty - 14th
2016: Karlsson - 1st
2017: Karlsson - 3rd
2018: Doughty - 7th
2019: Burns - 1st
2020: Carlson - 1st
2021: Makar - 5th

*Only one Norris runner-up finished lower in Dman scoring than Doughty did in his two runner-up finishes and it was Zdeno Chara (no argument from me that Doughty isn't as good as Chara defensively)

Supporting Sources

2018 PWHA Mid-Season Awards named Best Defensive Defenseman

2018 NHLPA Player Poll - 2nd Most Difficult to Play Against voting

2019 NHLPA Players Poll - 2nd Best Defenseman (18th in Dman scoring this year)

2020 NHLPA Players Poll - 4th Best Defenseman (28th in Dman scoring this year)

2021 NHLPA Players Poll - 4th Best Defenseman (16th in Dman scoring this year)


Sporting News - 12/05/2017

On one side you have Karlsson, perhaps the most dominant offensive defenseman the NHL has seen since the days of Bobby Orr. Doughty, on the other hand, is the premiere shutdown defensive defenseman in the NHL.

NBC Sports - Apr 12, 2018

Doughty’s absence for Game 2 is going to be significant for two reasons. First, he is probably the best shutdown, defensive defenseman in the NHL and is coming off another regular season that will get him plenty of Norris Trophy attention.

LA Times - May 28, 2012

Doughty is a more disciplined and complete player than he was as a Norris runner-up in 2009-10. He contributed a goal and an assist to the victory that clinched the Western Conference title Tuesday and has two goals and 10 points in 14 games. He’s also plus-10 defensively while averaging 25 minutes 52 seconds of ice time, some of it hard minutes in a shutdown role.
...
(quoting John Stevens assistant coach) “Clearly the veteran guys on our team have really had a positive impact on Drew and his evolution as a very good defensive defenseman when he’s called upon to do that. He defends as good as anybody. His offense, obviously, speaks for itself. I don’t think people realize just how good his feet are and how good his position is and how good he is in one-on-one situations.”

CBS Sports - June 3, 2014

This Stanley Cup Final isn't as much a competition between Doughty and McDonagh as it is a treat for hockey fans. These are two guys who very well could have a few Norris Trophies to their names before their careers are done.

Each are among the true two-way defensemen in the league, showing that you don’t have to be a shutdown guy to play good, sturdy defense. They also have proven the importance of possessing offensive skill in aiding two of the most exciting transition teams in the league. That ability to turn defense to offense so quickly makes them stand out.

Hockeyfeed.com - 2018

Doughty is considered by many to be the NHL's very best defensive defenseman

, and he would no doubt fetch a massive price on the free agent market. And perhaps even more importantly he would provide a gigantic upgrade to literally every single blue line in the league.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

I have been extra busy at work this week, so for now I'm just going to try to touch on some of the specific comments from IE that I don't agree with (I will make a separate post for each in case I can't get to everything):

We then look back to the blueline and see Doughy/Karlsson at RD, matchups that should favor Ovechkin IMO.

I have already addressed Doughty above.

As it says in my Team Info, we constructed a 3rd pairing that is strong defensively (R. Suter - Thomson) so it's likely that Jimmy Thomson may be seeing more of Ovechkin (at least in defensive zone situations) than Karlsson will. Thomson's bio is littered with quotes about his strong defensive play and physicality. When looking at the late 40's/early 50's Leafs that won 4 Cups in 5 years, Thomson was their best Dman over that span.

Our team defense is built around our Centers and Dmen, with almost all the wingers as good to strong secondary defensive support. With elite defensive Centers like Nighbor and Kopitar, and a good two-way center in Boucher, we don't feel that we need shadows for players like Ovechkin. Although as you mention, Cecil Dillon is a good defensive RWer.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Lach can do all the things Boucher is capable of offensively, was a good defensive C, elite skater, a gem in the dot. The huge difference is Lach brings an element of physicality that Boucher can’t. And he brings it without a big penalty record.

I can't believe I'm reading this first bolded part. Lach is not close to Boucher offensively.

7yr Vs.X
Boucher: 95.1
Lach: 86.1

Boucher is also the better playoff performer, twice leading the playoffs in scoring, and was also included in the HOH board's Top 40 Stanley Cup Playoff Performers list at #30 (Lach was not on the list).

Boucher can play physical, I'm not saying he's more physical than Lach, but he's not soft and actually appeared to use the physical play of his opponents to rev up his game, as I've illustrated in my previous post above.

Kind of funny to bring up Lach not having a big penalty record in a comparison with Boucher, who won 7 Lady Byng Trophies (the all-time leader).
Searching the HOH Award Voting Results thread I can't even find any instances of Lach receiving a vote for the Byng. His PIM totals don't seem high, so he's got that, but no comparison to Boucher.

The Boucher vs. Lach comparison is one of the largest advantages for Chicago in the series, as Boucher is a legit 1st Line C in a draft this size.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

I don't fully agree with IE's comments on the top 4 D. I've made my comments on Doughty already. On the second pairings, calling out Karlsson for lack of a playoff resume while at the same time trying to pump up Bouchard, seeming not to consider team situation at all.

Karlsson did well with what he had and his 2017 playoff run was amazing, and he has another solid run as well as a great resume in Best on Best Tournaments including being named Best Dman at the 2014 Olympics (best on best stats can be found in his bio).

Bouchard on the other hand, should get credit for contributing to winning teams for sure, but how often was he the #1 Dman on his team for a Cup win? I'd say just once, and it was in 1944 when the league talent was depleted by the War.

We need to look beyond Cup counting when evaluating playoff performance, and beyond Playoff Vs.X, which cannot be looked at in the same context as Regular Season Vs.X due to large differences in games played from season to season.
I will say that JC Tremblay has a strong playoff resume.

As a player, Erik Karlsson is head and shoulders above Tremblay and Bouchard. and I think that gap is clearly larger than any gap down to Gardiner.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

In the ATD many tend to leave out 3rd D-pairings and 4th lines in our team comparisons/evaluations. IE did not mention each team’s 3rd Dpair in his comments. When it comes to 4th lines I am more understandable as 4th liners can get very little ice time and be used more as utility/situational type players, but the 5th/6th Dmen will be playing at least 25% of a game, which is significant and should be considered.

I am about to run out the door, so hopefully I can get to a more detailed comparison later, but the 3rd Dpair for Chicago (R. Suter - J. Thomson) is a large advantage in this series when comparing to 3 River’s 3rd pair (Schoenfeld - Duncan).

 

[Batis]

We need to look beyond Cup counting when evaluating playoff performance, and beyond Playoff Vs.X, which cannot be looked at in the same context as Regular Season Vs.X due to large differences in games played from season to season.
I will say that JC Tremblay has a strong playoff resume.

Reading this made me think that it perhaps would be worthwhile to take a look at the Playoff VsX with another lens. What if we would calculate the score of each player based on how the playoffs scoring race looked after the round in which their team was eliminated? So for the players that were part of the teams that made the Stanley Cup finals their VsX score would still be calculated based on how the actual scoring race ended up but for the players that were eliminated in the conference finals or earlier their VsX score would be calculated based on how the scoring race looked after the round of play in which their team was eliminated.

Players that lost in the first couple of rounds would likely still be at somewhat of a disadvantage in such an adjusted Playoff VsX calculation since they were competing on pretty equal terms (in regards to games played) with far more players than what the players that made it far into the playoffs did. But that disadvantage would be far less extreme than it is when using the current system.

Just to be clear I don´t think that the current Playoff VsX numbers should be thrown out or anything. But when comparing a player from a dynasty level team with a player on a team which rarely made it far into the playoffs perhaps something like this could be useful.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Reading this made me think that it perhaps would be worthwhile to take a look at the Playoff VsX with another lens. What if we would calculate the score of each player based on how the playoffs scoring race looked after the round in which their team was eliminated? So for the players that were part of the teams that made the Stanley Cup finals their VsX score would still be calculated based on how the actual scoring race ended up but for the players that were eliminated in the conference finals or earlier their VsX score would be calculated based on how the scoring race looked after the round of play in which their team was eliminated.

Players that lost in the first couple of rounds would likely still be at somewhat of a disadvantage in such an adjusted Playoff VsX calculation since they were competing on pretty equal terms (in regards to games played) with far more players than what the players that made it far into the playoffs did. But that disadvantage would be far less extreme than it is when using the current system.

Just to be clear I don´t think that the current Playoff VsX numbers should be thrown out or anything. But when comparing a player from a dynasty level team with a player on a team which rarely made it far into the playoffs perhaps something like this could be useful.

This is a good thought, although I still see some major issues. A player that is part of a 7 game series gets nearly double the games of a player that is part of a sweep. Each could average a point a game and they wouldn't even be close in a Vs.x score for that round.

 

[Batis]

This is a good thought, although I still see some major issues. A player that is part of a 7 game series gets nearly double the games of a player that is part of a sweep. Each could average a point a game and they wouldn't even be close in a Vs.x score for that round.

Yes that is definitely a major issue. Though it seems to me that even with this flaw such a system would be far more balanced than the current Playoff VsX is when it comes to comparing players on dynasty level teams with players on teams that rarely made it past the second round in the four-round era.

 

[Sturminator]

I personally just look at points-per-game relative to era in the playoffs, and leave it at that. Never had much use for Playoff VsX for the reasons discussed in this thread.