@BenchBrawl
Same to you bud! Always tough but fun going up against you. Should be a great series here.
Coaching: Very slight edge to Ottawa
It's ironic, as the 2 side by side's I did in the HoH section w/Green were Lester Patrick (who Pitt just beat) and Hap Day.
Day is 5/6 all time for me. Fantastic defensive/checking oriented coach. Certainly has some innovative defensive tactics to his his resume. 5 titles in 10 years is exactly what Green had. Obviously the value of titles favoring Day given era differences. I do question the fit of some of the Ottawa F's for a Happy Day team.
With that being said, the foundation for what Day was doing in the 1940's was laid long before that by Green specifically in the 1909-13 and 1920-25 time periods. Please take 15-20 minutes if possible, i don't even care if you plan to vote for me. Green's contributions were historically massive.
Specific team play, a supported attack system that helped Ottawa dominate most of Green's time there during the 1st run, Ottawa blowing the doors off the league offensively while remaining above average defensively. His moving Taylor to D while mentoring him specifically on defense/blocking (great move), finding and developing Kerr and Darragh, the latter speaking very highly of Green and the impact he had on his career.
The 1920's saw another dynasty and the development of the earliest version of the neutral zone trap that I'm aware of. His use of wingers on their off wing to shadow specific stars was critical. Use of multiple wingers and not just the same people over and over to check opposing players.
King Clancy (Green discovered and scouted him) and Cleghorn both developed by Green specifically. Player and peer testimony both during his coaching all the way until after his death greatly summed up how great a coach Green was. Pre Lester Patrick, there isn't a coach remotely close to Green. He dominated the league and his peers like few others have and his contributions across the board were massive.
I'm very confident Green is a top 10 coach all time at this point. His win/loss record is sterling. And more importantly his contributions to strategy/tactics, scouting, development, conditioning, peer/player testimony are as or more significant than any coach IMO, not just because of the volume but timing especially. Doing things first is pretty big in this respect.
Forwards: Big Advantage Pittsburgh:
- I see a clear advantage in the top 6 for Pittsburgh.
- Pitt has better offense by a comfortable margin in top 6.
- Easily better defensive players (Russell/Harris/Olmstead/Beliveau vs Messier/Amonte/Roenick/Schriner?).
- Pitt has better fit and chemistry with a 3 real life duo's who are all joined by strong partners. Balderis is not THAT much of a drop from Geoffrion (at least offensively) and he's certainly on Cournoyer's level overall and is better offensively. Harris is miles better than anything Bowie-Russell ever had at LW. Westfall is big upgrade for Gainey-Jarvis.
- Can a Hap Day top 6 have a Panarin and Kovalev in it, especially with a Schriner who doesn't seem like anything special checking or defensively?
- Who is slowing/shutting down Beliveau and Bowie or their lines?
- Schriner-Messier-Kovalev meet Gainey-Jarvis-Westfall.
- Westwick and Wilson will be pushing Messier's buttons
- 3rd lines do 2 different things. I think Pittsburgh's does their job a lot better but it's a wash given all the players involved
- Please read the Westwick bio
- Pitt 4th line is going to absolutely wreck people both ways.
- Pitt simply has better offense on the 1st, 2nd and 4th lines. Elite skating team with high end defense up and down the line up. Gainey, Westfall, Jarvis, Harris, Russell, Westwick/Olmstead is an incredibly high end and deep corp of defensive forwards.
- Big game? Beliveau (Smythe), Gainey (Smythe), Westwick (could easily argue it), Balderis, Harris, Jarvis, Kunitz, Wilson, Westfall, are all above average to legendary postseason players.
1st Line: Moderate Advantage Pitt
Schriner is a clear notch above Olmstead here mainly because of his offensive record. A 91 v 76 VsX is a clear gap and they are both two opposite players. Beyond that, when you read Schriner's bio's which are on the longer side, you don't see much beyond his offensive traits. I see next to nothing going into any detail about checking, defensive abilities, etc. I'll just assume he's league average in those areas. Olmstead obviously brings a better all around game IMO as he's an above average back checker and elite fore checker/corner man and he's rolling w/ Beliveau here.
As good as Messier is all time, Beliveau is slightly better. As good as Messier is in the postseason, Beliveau is just a shade better (longevity is difference). I also like Beliveau's huge size and strength as buffer against Messier if Ottawa wants to go power on power on home ice. He's not pushing JB around like he might do with Gretzky. And the offensive gap that exists between Schriner and Olmstead is completely erased (almost to the literal decimal) looking at Jean and Mark. In most match ups, especially the postseason, Messier is going to give you a BIG advantage. Not in this match up though.
I also want to through some quotes out touching on the relationship between Beliveau and Olmstead:
It's these little things IMO that make the difference between winning and losing.
''He didn't stand any nonsense from us. Bert was about the best left wing I ever saw when it came to fighting for possession of the puck. And if I was where he wanted me, parked in front of the net, his pass would be perfect. Playing with Bert, I always felt that he got the best out of me, that he made me do smarter things than I would of done myself.'' - Jean Beliveau
''He's the best mucker in the league. By mucker I mean that he's the best man in the corners. He goes in there and digs the puck out for you.'' - Kenny Reardon
''Olmstead could hammer an opponent senseless, and seconds later chew you out on the bench because you were three inches out of position'' - Jean Beliveau
This is where the line really shifts in favor of Pittsburgh IMO and is a pretty wide gap as I think Kovalev is over his head on a 1st line to be honest. Kovy doesn't strike me as a player Day would like much either.
Balderis was a league MVP in 1977 and 2 time scoring champion in Soviet league that had
a lot of talent at F. Stellar record on the international circuit. I've seen his relative offensive value put in the 85-90 (VsX) range by others in previous years. Even on the more conservative end, he's still a much better offensive player in this setting.
As for the fit? Is it to the letter perfect? No, but it's quite good IMO:
(from Rob's 2017 bio)
Sturminator said:
- Based on what I have found, I think Triffy's analysis was most likely right on. Balderis seems to have been a player who would hold the puck and try to carry a line when on weak Riga teams or when his line was built to feed him, but he also seems to have been capable of sharing the puck when placed on strong lines, and was at any rate not a selfish player.
New York Times said:
"Their passing and quickness are impressive," said Arbour, the Islanders' coach...
Then the Soviet team scored what proved to be the winning goal on breakaway rush by Sergei Makarov and Helmut Balderis, who traded passes until Makarov was able to put the puck behind a charging Smith...
Throughout the game, the Soviet team demonstrated an outstanding ability to move the puck and to anticipate the movements of their teammates.
"They practice 11 months a year," said Arbour, who admitted he was impressed by the deftness and agility of the Red Army passing game. "They move it - and right away it's gone again."
This is an overview of Cournoyer a player Beliveau would have been very familiar with.
Joe Pelletier said:
For those who got to witness Yvan Cournoyer apply his trade live and in person knew they were seeing something special. One of the best skaters and stickhandlers ever to grace a sheet of ice, Cournoyer played with an affection for the game of hockey that was as obvious as it was rarely matched.
Despite his small size physically, Cournoyer was one of the strongest and most uncatchable skaters of all time.
Yvan was not only fast but was also an impressive stickhandler, and had a booming slap shot that was deadly accurate. Yvan was actually a pretty tough player and was never intimidated by bigger stronger players.
"I was never the kind of guy who was going to hit first. But if a guy dropped his gloves I didn't back down."
Some quotes about Boom Boom from your 2017 bio:
Bernard Geoffrion said:
I was a natural as a stick-handler, I was a natural as a shooter
ourhistory.canadiens.ca said:
While his legend was built around his nose for the net and his booming slap shot, Geoffrion was also a skilled passer and playmaker, usually picking up at least as many - if not more - assists as goals.
Once I looked more closely at Balderis and saw he was certainly capable of playing an unselfish game given he doesn't have to be the focal point here, I was sold. He possesses top shelf stick handling and elite wheels (Cournoyer) and he had a lethal shot and was very good at putting the puck in the net while also being a very solid passer of the puck (Geoffrion).
In reality his offense is probably just a shade behind Boom Boom but certainly a full measure above Cournoyer. He has a lot of similarities to the guys above, especially Cournoyer IMO.
People forget Beliveau was a very good skater, especially considering how damn big he was for the era. I can see him and Balderis doing damage together in transition not to mention in short areas down low, cycling, Balderis able to probe and carry the puck given his high end ability there.
2nd Line: Moderate Advantage Pitt
Harris comfortably here.
Even before extensive bio I put up on Harris he was still well out in front IMO. Panarin has less than 400 games to his name. Even a 5 year VsX isn't going to be kind to him. He's got 1 AS nod (would have had another this year to be fair).
Harris has one of the best resumes in PCHA history when you talk about longevity. Was an AS reserve player in 1912 (literally because of his back checking) and had another 6 spots on the postseason AS squad dating all the way to 1921. He was a unanimous choice in 1917 at RW for Portland. He was the only winger to ever lead the PCHA in scoring. And his new bio shows he was one of the very best defensive players from start to finish in the league as well as being an extremely physical player. Oh, and he was an elite skater on the level of Cyclone Taylor (bio in OP).
Even being generous, Panarin probably isn't worth more than Harris offensively due to his very short career (391 games) and Harris blows Panarin away in basically every other aspect of hockey.
Panarin is another player who I'm not sure is a good fit for Day.
Give me Bowie by a little bit.
Even if you're overly conservative with Bowie's offense he's as good or better than Roenick and I personally have Bowie by a full notch given his dominance over his peers for a long period of time and the chemistry of the line. Bowie is in about as good a spot to succeed as you could hope in a draft this size with no trading. 2 defensive stalwarts with passable offense on either side with skills that compliment Bowie perfectly IMO.
This is a wash IMO.
Russell was a slight reach for the purpose of reuniting him w/Bowie so he could stand to go down about where Amonte ended up who was a prime target btw if I hadn't have went w/ BR. Amonte is going to provide more offense by a full notch over Russell but Russell is a clear step above Amonte going the other way, though Amonte is no slouch there. Russell's calling card was his back checking and passing. And he's riding w/ the man who helped him get into the HOF.
3rd Line: Wash
I like Landeskog a lot as a player, but this is Gainey by a mile. Don't need to really elaborate IMO.
Two totally opposite players. I'm higher on McGee than most even though Jarvis generally goes higher. This feels like a wash but I'll be generous and give McGee a very slight nod as I think his peak was a little brighter than Jarvis. Don't forget Jarvis' legendary face off ability late in games and on the PK. Pitt is still well out in front overall though IMO.
Broadbent by a bit. I personally like Westfall just as much given he's a top 3 defensive winger of all time but Broadbent is a HOF'er and just a strong 2 way player on a 3rd line. I really like both of these 3rd lines for the roles their intended to play. Great job here BB!
4th Line: Moderate Advantage Pitt
Forget where they are drafted. Please.
Kunitz has a postseason AS, winner of 4 Cups with more than a few big moments as a key secondary piece on every Cup team. Has elite possession metrics, is a fantastic and relentless fore checker and brings good ability to a 2nd PP unit while being a solid player in his own end.
I still think this is Sheppard because his PK ability is the peak ability out of the 2 but Kunitz has a very strong resume for a 4th liner here and both had better than average postseason careers though Shepp never was able to hoist the Cup.
Westwick easily if you read the bio I just finished.
Harry Westwick
It's basically a complete career reconstruction. Very proud of that one. There are numerous reasons that man is in the HOF.
He has a fabulous regular season resume and was absolutely money in the SC challenges against a lot of really strong opposing rovers (Marty Walsh, Tommy Phillips, Si Griffis, Joe Hall, Lester Parick, was the only one who got to him a bit).
To give you and idea of how good he was against all those rovers, Ottawa went 13-3-1 with Westwick scoring 20 goals in 17 games. That group of players above combined for 16 in those 17 games.
He's about the perfect 4th liner.
Pound for pound the toughest player of his era and arguably all time given the insane violence taking place between 1896 and 1908. He beat the shit out of Joe Hall and once skated off the ice w/a bone sticking out of his leg and then watched the game from the side, to give you an idea how tough he was. And his longevity is elite. Was known from ocean to ocean and well liked even by rival fan bases.
Tommy Gorman saidhe would have won the Byng trophy every year had it existed. Newsy Lalonde confirmed this as well post death and commented on how good a skater Westwick was. One of the cleanest players of the era yet a royal pain in the ass to play against. Alf Smith said he was the greatest athlete he ever knew.
Great skater, very unselfish player, but scored at a goal per game pace and twice led Ottawa in scoring. I got some of his assists reconstructed and in 1905 he had 13 to go with 15 goals for 28 points in 8 games. He drew a lot of penalties against. Another important detail.
And his defensive reputation was sterling. Not quite a Phillips but read his bio and you'll get a very clear idea of how damn good he was, for a long time in that area.
Wilson by a good bit IMO. He was talented and thought highly enough to be a postseason AS in the PCHA and WCHL. Wilson was aces in the postseason more often than not, especially offensively which is a nice bonus here. Wilson brings elite pest/checking ability. He'll take some penalties no doubt but he's EXACTLY the type of player I want agitating Messier because MM retaliating (which he was known to do) will only help Pittsburgh more.