The 2010 AAA Draft (rosters, picks, discussion, etc.)

[VanIslander]

The skinny on Streit:

1. Streit has had one great season in Montreal, granted (hyped Hab, wouldn't have been if had one great season in Nashville).
2. And two more good seasons on Long Island (playing very heavy minutes on a team where the next best blueliner is Bruno Gervais).
3. He has almost no NHL playoff experience but one decent Olympics;
4. And one significant world championships to go with a half dozen other multiple assist world championship tourneys.
5. Nine years in the Swiss league not much of a consideration.
6. Streit's three-and-a-half years in the NHL shows he is a decent third line pairing guy at the AAA level of all-time competition, playing the first powerplay unit and heavy minutes when trailing. (I scoffed at the first round pick and thought if there had been a minimum 400 NHL games played for active players requirement - instead of the 300 we had - then he wouldn't have been picked.)

 

[seventieslord]

The skinny on Streit:

1. Streit has had one great season in Montreal, granted (hyped Hab, wouldn't have been if had one great season in Nashville).
2. And two more good seasons on Long Island (playing very heavy minutes on a team where the next best blueliner is Bruno Gervais).
3. He has almost no NHL playoff experience but one decent Olympics;
4. And one significant world championships to go with a half dozen other multiple assist world championship tourneys.
5. Nine years in the Swiss league not much of a consideration.
6. Streit's three-and-a-half years in the NHL shows he is a decent third line pairing guy at the AAA level of all-time competition, playing the first powerplay unit and heavy minutes when trailing. (I scoffed at the first round pick and thought if there had been a minimum 400 NHL games played for active players requirement - instead of the 300 we had - then he wouldn't have been picked.)

Not trying to pick a fight, or even really defend streit, because I was unsure of the pick too, though not to the point of saying it was my least favourite of the day, but - how can we so easily say who's a 1st, 2nd, or 3rd pairing AAA defenseman? At this point there is a 20 defenseman difference between a 2nd (where they have him) and 3rd-pairing (where you say he should go) guy. that's not very much considering how deep into the draft we are. It's practically nothing.

I wish I had an internal ranking system so precise. I'm just happy that I can sort these guys out into "could have played in the MLD, good AAA guy, average AAA guy, AA guy, and scrub".

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

The skinny on Streit:

1. Streit has had one great season in Montreal, granted (hyped Hab, wouldn't have been if had one great season in Nashville).

He was 3rd in scoring by all defensemen, 8 points behind Lidstrom and 3 points behind Gonchar. I'm pretty sure he'd have gotten at least some hype even if he wasn't a Hab.

2. And two more good seasons on Long Island (playing very heavy minutes on a team where the next best blueliner is Bruno Gervais).

I would call them "very good" seasons, all things considered. I mean, he was outscoring all the forwards on the team while lapping his teammates in +/-. And I actually (get this) watched him play quite a bit those years - he was far less pathetic than his teammates.

3. He has almost no NHL playoff experience but one decent Olympics;

Which "one" Olympics was that? 2006, when he scored the winning goal in a 3-2 victory of the Czechs, then assisted on the second goal in the 2-0 win over Canada, as he captained Switzerland to shocking 6th place finish? Switzerland had to go through a qualifier to even get to the Olympics, where Streit had 3 points in 3 games (I think in 2005).

Or was it 2010, when he was again captain of a Swiss team that Canada needed a shootout to beat and that gave the USA all they could handle in 2 games? Didn't Streit lead Switzerland in ice time by a huge margin? (He did have 3 assists in 5 games). I don't see how anyone who watched those games wouldn't have been impressed by what they saw.

Sorry if the tone here comes off as irritated, but this is in his profile.

I realize that 2 tournaments isn't a big sample size, but it's twice as many as one.

(He also played in the 2002 Olympics with 2 points in 4 games, but I don't think Switzerland made any noise that years).

4. And one significant world championships to go with a half dozen other multiple assist world championship tourneys.
5. Nine years in the Swiss league not much of a consideration.

He has 36 points in 74 career World Championship games, going back to 1998. That's pretty good for a defenseman, especially one playing on a team that is anything but stacked compared to the competition.

Agree that it's hard to know what to make of what he did in the Swiss league and that it probably doesn't add much. (well, it probably doesn't add anything except knowing that he played hockey at some sort of professional level for almost a decade before making his NHL debut).

6. Streit's three-and-a-half years in the NHL shows he is a decent third line pairing guy at the AAA level of all-time competition, playing the first powerplay unit and heavy minutes when trailing. (I scoffed at the first round pick and thought if there had been a minimum 400 NHL games played for active players requirement - instead of the 300 we had - then he wouldn't have been picked.)

He still would have been eligible due to the 30+ years old alternate requirement.

Edit: And for what it's worth (probably not all that much), I believe that Streit has the best Norris record of any defenseman in the AAA draft.

Double Edit: I totally understand why people think he was a reach in round 1, considering there were quite a few better overall players available. But I'm not sure if any of them have Streit's unique skillset, which is what I was looking for. Anyway, carry on.

 

[VanIslander]

I realize that 2 tournaments isn't a big sample size, but it's twice as many as one.

I can't argue with that logic. I didn't watch his two games played in the 2010 Olympics.

I totally understand why people think he was a reach in round 1, considering there were quite a few better overall players available. But I'm not sure if any of them have Streit's unique skillset, which is what I was looking for.

Good point. Taking a guy earlier based on team-building considerations is fair game, especially if he belongs in the draft and there are no ideal equivalents (I took Volchenkov much earlier than I wanted to, but I had no doubt he was worthy of this draft and feared another team nabbing him before I expect him to go, so for pair-chemistry consideration (I mean, they shut down Crosby, and played together on the top pairing for years, with Martin as the coach) I took him early.

How can we so easily say who's a 1st, 2nd, or 3rd pairing AAA defenseman? At this point there is a 20-defenseman difference between a 2nd (where they have him) and 3rd-pairing (where you say he should go) guy. that's not very much considering how deep into the draft we are. It's practically nothing.

Ah, I see your point. In the main ATD the difference is significant because of the drop off in top end talent. It would be splitting hairs here: the significance of an in-fact minor difference would be marginal. As long as nobody is claiming he'd be a top pairing guy against all-time competition (unless he played for a Swiss team internationally or the Islanders of the new NHL era, really basement teams at the highest level of competition).

 

[seventieslord]

Wow. I've been looking at it, and I think I like Mickey Roach more than Red Green. They have practically identical NHL resumes, but Roach has that awesome year in the OHA. I was semi-critical of Roach (more of the wording used to describe him), but I admit he's a good spare. Where does this leave Green, who is on London's 1st line?

This all started because it's late and I'm bored and I asked myself, "self, are you sure Red Green was your least favourite pick of Day 2?" and now I can say I'm sure.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Wow. I've been looking at it, and I think I like Mickey Roach more than Red Green. They have practically identical NHL resumes, but Roach has that awesome year in the OHA. I was semi-critical of Roach (more of the wording used to describe him), but I admit he's a good spare. Where does this leave Green, who is on London's 1st line?

This all started because it's late and I'm bored and I asked myself, "self, are you sure Red Green was your least favourite pick of Day 2?" and now I can say I'm sure.

Red Green was picked on Day 3

You're right, their offense is very similar with Roach leaning slightly more towards playmaking and Green slightly more towards goal scoring. 2 pluses for Green:

1) Green is a LW, a much shallower position than C (which is what Roach is). By this point, virtually ever wing is going to be unable to keep up with his center in terms of offense.

2) Green can handle the rough stuff for a scoring line.

From his LOH bio: "He was an accomplished goal scorer as an amateur and pro and could handle the rough side of the game as well."

This is backed up by his PIM totals - he was twice top 10 in PIMs and has 295 PIMs in 195 total NHL games.

Roach, on the other hand, has no high finishes in PIMs and only has 54 PIMs in 211 total NHL games. In fact, his LOH talks about his"ability to manoeuvre his tiny little frame with great speed and agility."

_________________

Before coming to the NHL, Green was a NOHA First All-Star Team (1922). I'm too lazy to look up his competition for the award or to see how it compares with Roach's OHA First Team All-Star (1919)

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I can't argue with that logic. I didn't watch his two games played in the 2010 Olympics.

According to his hockey-reference profile: http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/s/streima01.html, he played 5 games in the 2010 Olympics (with 3 assists).

 

[DaveG]

here's my two favorite picks from each day (not including Johnstown) and my least favorite pick, with reasoning behind why I feel that way about said pick.

Day 1:
Jason Allison, C, Regina
Billy Barlow, F/Rover, Queen's

Mark Streit, D, London - not a bad pick, just not one I would have made in the first couple rounds. Definitely works as a top end PP guy for this draft, but on day one? I'm still not sold. Certainly won't hurt a team though, just seems like an odd pick this soon.

Day 2:
Glen Murray, RW, Winnipeg
Danny Lewicki, LW, London

Brad Stuart, D, Colorado - really not sure on this pick, and never was really sold even after explanation. I can see him fitting as a #4/5 defenseman maybe, but that's not something you go after this early unless they bring something unique to the table. There are a few players from the same era that went undrafted who I would have taken over Stuart to be honest.

Day 3:
Scott Mellanby, RW, Regina
Curt Giles, D, Philadelphia

Andrew Brunette, LW, Winnipeg - was in the conversation for Johnstown to select, but not this early. Decent enough player for this draft but doesn't seem to fit this early. Likewise with Red Green and a couple other picks this day.

Day 4:
Jim Dorey, D, Abbotsford
Darren Puppa, G, Kosice

Peter Zezel, C, Regina - much like Streit, good player taken too early for my tastes. About Day 7, maybe even 6, this pick doesn't stand out to me like it does on Day 4. Certainly won't hurt the team.

Day 5:
Vladimir Ruzicka, C, Abbotsford
Reggie Lemelin, G, London

Tim Young, C, Toledo - really not a bad pick even. Only thing I really don't like is the lack of more then one standout regular season, but he has a nice playoff run to make up for it.

Day 6:
Mikael Renberg, RW, Kosice
Gaetan Duchesne, LW, Abbotsford

Robert Picard, D, Winnipeg - decent enough specialist for this draft, but probably could have been had later on.

Day 7:
Cory Stillman, LW, Winnipeg
Tony Gingras, F, Philadelphia

John Cullen, C, Kosice - very strong day, hard to say this pick is the worst as it's not even a bad pick.

Day 8:
Sami Kapanen, W, Kosice
Yevgeny Paladiev, D, Regina

Pavel Kubina, D, Toledo - good player from the modern era that doesn't get the credit he's due. But that said, seems a bit early to be taking him in this draft.

Day 9:
Pelle Eklund, C, Philadelphia
Vladimir Golikov, C, Queen's

Janne Niinimaa, D, Winnipeg - not sold on him. Decent peak but extremely inconsistent player. Maybe I'm falling victim to my own modern bias of him being a bit of a disappointing pick for where he was taken.

Day 10:
Pentti Lund, RW, Toledo
Alexander Golikov, RW, Regina

Dustin Brown, W, Abbotsford - I understand the role he's there to play, but I'm not seeing it. Could have seen this pick later in the draft but Day 10? doesn't make sense to me. Yes I realize the irony of that seeing as how we picked Tucker on the same day.

Day 11:
Alexander Semin, LW, Colorado
Alexander Skvortsov, W, London

Martin Havlat, W, Regina - good player that happened to fall into a very good day. Only thing I don't like about this pick is his injury history... that's it.

Day 12:
Terry Crisp, C, Toledo
Michal Pivonka, C, Queen's

Sami Salo, D, Abbotsford - another oft. injured player. Then again if he were healthy all the time he'd arguably be early AAA draft/ late MLD material.


working on 13-24

 

[BillyShoe1721]

Awhile ago someone asked if anyone had a better offensive peak for a defenseman, Jim McKenny with a 2nd, 4th, and 7th trumps Streit's 3, 7, and 8. Added onto the fact that he had a 14th, 15th, 16th, and 17th as well.

 

[seventieslord]

Red Green was picked on Day 3

You're right, their offense is very similar with Roach leaning slightly more towards playmaking and Green slightly more towards goal scoring. 2 pluses for Green:

1) Green is a LW, a much shallower position than C (which is what Roach is). By this point, virtually ever wing is going to be unable to keep up with his center in terms of offense.

2) Green can handle the rough stuff for a scoring line.

From his LOH bio: "He was an accomplished goal scorer as an amateur and pro and could handle the rough side of the game as well."

This is backed up by his PIM totals - he was twice top 10 in PIMs and has 295 PIMs in 195 total NHL games.

Roach, on the other hand, has no high finishes in PIMs and only has 54 PIMs in 211 total NHL games. In fact, his LOH talks about his"ability to manoeuvre his tiny little frame with great speed and agility."

Both good points.

_________________

Before coming to the NHL, Green was a NOHA First All-Star Team (1922). I'm too lazy to look up his competition for the award or to see how it compares with Roach's OHA First Team All-Star (1919)

I checked with SIHR. It's actually pretty good. I should have looked last night. He topped Alex McKinnon, who went on to be a decent NHL defenseman. Bll & Bun Cook were also in the league. Also Shorty Green. So the league wasn't completely without talent.

Bill Cook actually led the league in 1921, and Shorty Green in 1920. the 1919 and 1923 seasons have no stats; I think the league was very short-lived. Anyway, yeah, it was a pretty impressive season, not quite as good as Mickey Roach's in 1919, but good.

Awhile ago someone asked if anyone had a better offensive peak for a defenseman, Jim McKenny with a 2nd, 4th, and 7th trumps Streit's 3, 7, and 8. Added onto the fact that he had a 14th, 15th, 16th, and 17th as well.

You might be right, but it's certainly not as easy as comparing finishes when one was in a 12-17-team league and one played with 30. Compare them as a percentage of the 2nd-highest-scoring defenseman, that would make more sense. Eliminate Orr, of course:

McKenny: 100 98 71 63 57 56 54
Streit: 98 88 71 54

Their best seasons really aren't that far off. And really, I could have declared Mike Green a freak in training and removed him from the calculation too.

Anyway, it's clear McKenny has put together more offensively strong seasons at this point. Streit is better defensively and has received award recognition. Overall it's a close call.

 

[VanIslander]

According to his hockey-reference profile: http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...streima01.html, he played 5 games in the 2010 Olympics (with 3 assists).

Of course.

Or was it 2010, when he was again captain of a Swiss team that Canada needed a shootout to beat and that gave the USA all they could handle in 2 games?

These are the two games I was talking about. I missed both those games.

 

[DaveG]

as promised (before the **** hit the fan with admissions at work) 13-24:

Day 13:
Jacques Martin, coach, Queen's
Leo Reise, Sr., D, Colorado

Michal Handzus, C, London - extremely good day, so I'll just go with my most surprising pick here. Zeus is one of the most interesting selections in a draft that's full of them. A modern guy that's perhaps a bit under-appreciated for what he brings to the table. PK/Checking Line specialist at this level? Really not sure. I'll be curious to see how he's used. His size makes him an asset if used correctly and knowing TDMM, he will be.

Day 14:
Terry Crisp, coach, Regina
Magnus Arvedson, LW, Kosice

Murray Henderson, D, Abbotsford - Decent enough defenseman but I have to wonder if this was simply an era requirements pick. It doesn't make much sense to me to select a 3rd pairing defenseman this early otherwise.

Day 15:
Gord Pettinger, LW/C, Abbotsford
Pekka Lindmark, G, Queen's

Jose Theodore, G, Winnipeg - Again, probably another case where my own modern biases play against me. I won't call him a one-season wonder like some rather infamous but undrafted therefore unnamed modern goalies. He has one great season, two pretty good seasons, and after that.... not much. The plus side is that he has a tendency to win a round in the playoffs. And having Thomas as a backup makes this pick much more palatable.

Day 16:
Jiri Lala, RW, London
Bill Brydge, D, Philadelphia

Robert Reichel, C, Colorado - One of the cases where I'm going with the eye test on this pick. Reichel had immense talent but aside from his 2 years in Calgary always left me wanting more. Probably the most notable thing to me though was his propensity to no-show in the playoffs. He's a good specialist but I'm not sure I like him as a #2 centerman.

Day 17:
Keith Carney, D, Kosice
Stu Barnes, F, Colorado

Gary Sabourin, RW, Abbotsford - Can't figure this one out though maybe I'm just missing something. As a defensive specialist he's alright, but I think there were just simply better available.

DAY 18:
Joe Reekie, D, Winnipeg
Harold Snepsts, D, Colorado - Legendary moustache

Alex Burrows, RW, Toledo - I like Burrows, I really do. But not in this draft. I will say as a pest he probably ranks second behind Tucker here, but this is simply a case where I'd like to see more consistent production out of the player before I say he's worth being taken here.

Day 19:
Michael Nylander, C, Kosice
Paul Holmgren, RW, Philadelphia

Ian Laperriere, RW, Winnipeg - Good checker and good enough middleweight to effectively police. But I'm not sure he has enough to his game for me to justify taking him in this draft as more then an extra to be honest.

Day 20:
Marek Zidlicky, D, London
Kim Johnsson, D, Philadelphia

Rollie Melanson, G, Toledo - 3 cups are nice, and he had 2 good years on the Island playing a good bit of games. But away from New York? Those are some pretty rough numbers. I know numbers don't tell the whole story (hell, we drafted Meloche), but I'm really trying to buy into this pick.

Day 21:
Barry Trotz, coach, Philadelphia
Dan Maloney, LW, Queen's

Larry Popein, C, Abbotsford - Not calling this a bad pick. This is just a guy I'm going to need a bit of selling on when it comes to the playoff analysis. Just don't know enough about him and I'm willing to admit that.

Day 22:
Jon Casey, G, Philadelphia
Eric Weinrich, D, Kosice

Tony Conroy, W, Colorado - Again, don't know much about this pick. Going to need some selling on this one for the playoffs. Really there were a few from this day where that will be the case, but this one stood out to me as the one I know the least about.

23:
Gary Sargent, D, Regina
Olli Jokinen, C, London

Al Smith, G, Colorado - Interesting selection as a backup. A case of a guy that didn't really shine until he jumped to the WHA. His NHL totals don't do much for me, but he has a solid win-loss record in the WHA. Mind you that's with a strong New England team, but they're still decent enough regular season numbers.

Day 24:
Bobby Kromm, coach, Colorado
Joel Quenneville, D, London

Tom Johnson, coach, Kosice - I really like the Kosice team but I just have a hard time with this pick. Great record as a coach, but there are some available ones with relatively poor records that I would have considered here first.

 

[VanIslander]

VOTE TODAY!

Send to me, VanIslander, via PM the winner and 3 stars of each of the two series to determine the final playoff spot.

The regular season will thereafter officially be finished, full rankings released, and divisional semifinal playoffs will then begin.

 

[VanIslander]

Only six (6) have submitted votes so far. Keep them comin'!

 

[VanIslander]

seven (7) so far

 

[seventieslord]

Peter Zezel, C

- 5'11, 220 lbs
- Stanley Cup Finalist (1985, 1987)
- Advanced to 2nd round 7 times and 3rd round 4 times
- 6 54+ point seasons (and 2 more 62/63-point seasons cut short by injury)
- Career Adjusted +32
- 53.5% on faceoffs in his last NHL season, the first that they began tracking

In his first NHL season, he established a Flyers rookie record of 46 assists while helping the team to a berth in the Stanley Cup finals. He was quickly regarded as one of the league's premier faceoff men and used his tenacious style to earn himself duty on the penalty-killing unit.

Zezel played a vital role in the resurgence of the Maple Leafs in the early 1990's as a checking centre and faceoff specialist, but he also added his share of timely goals using the soft hands and hard shot developed in his junior days.

He was awarded to Dallas as part of a compensation package in 1994 when the Leafs signed Dallas forward Mike Craig. The following year, Zezel signed as a free agent with St. Louis. After a short stint with the Blues, he was traded to New Jersey before being traded to Vancouver by the Devils on February 5, 1998.

Zezel left hockey in 1999 to focus on family issues. His two-year-old niece had succumbed to leukemia and he lost his passion for hockey. In the summer of 2001, he was diagnosed with hemolytic anemia, a rare disorder in which red blood cells are destroyed faster than the body can replace them.

...On May 26, 2009, at age 44, Peter Zezel lost his battle to his rare blood disorder.

Peter Zezel carved out a nice career as solid two way second or third line center.

Though somewhat on the small side, Zezel was extremely strong, especially his lower body. He was great along the boards as he was so hard to knock down. He was also an agile skater with great balance, and his background as a soccer player (he played with the Toronto Blizzard of the NASL and the North York Rockets of the CSL) gave him an extra advantage over most hockey players - great puck skills with his feet. In the corners and in faceoff scrums, Zezel would go in and use his strength and balance to tie up his opponent, and then kick the puck to an open teammate.

Though known best as a defensive oriented checking center, Zezel had some good offensive talents. He had a strong and accurate wrist shot and slap shot, but preferred to set up an open teammate than shoot the puck himself. He was very confident with the puck. His offensive totals were hindered by his commitment as the team's checking center, but twice Peter scored 72 points. In 1986-87 with Philadelphia when he finished behind Tim Kerr for the team goal and point scoring lead. In 1988-89 and in 1989-90 Peter enjoyed his longest run as an offensive player, often centering Brett Hull in St. Louis.

An excellent faceoff man, Zezel was a crunch time player. Some questioned his inconsistent intensity, but he became a favorite of Mike Keenan, the most demanding coach of the day. Keenan inherited a young Zezel in Philadelphia and later recruited his services in St. Louis and Vancouver.

...Through he played in a career-high 79 games in 1985-86, he took a step backwards like many NHL sophomores do. He recorded a career-best plus-27 rating but scored "only" 17 goals and 54 points. Because of the Flyers' great depth he had to accept a role on the third line and played well as a checking center, helping to mould his career.

In 1986-87, Peter stepped up his game by establishing career-highs with 33 goals and 72 points. He had a strong playoff as a checking forward, scoring 3 goals and 13 points in a 25 game run that saw the Flyers push the mighty Edmonton Oilers to 7 games in one of the greatest Stanley Cup finals ever.

A great special teams player, Zezel added a career-high 14 power play goals in 1987-88. However he only add 8 even strength goals for a decline of 11 goals from the previous year. His point total also dropped, by a total of 15 points.

...Fully recovered from his fractured ankle, Zezel finished the 1990-91 season strongly. Between the two teams in 1990-91, Peter reached the 20-goal mark for the fifth consecutive season. However Zezel's production declined for much of his stay in Toronto. From 1991-94, he registered 36 goals and 64 assists in 175 games for the Leafs. A variety of small but nagging injuries (most notably a back problem that forced him to sit half of the 1993-94 season) didn't help him much...

First and foremost I will always remember Peter Zezel for his faceoff expertise and sound defensive game, his reliable play every night and his tough though clean approach to the game. No wonder why he was one of Mike Keenan's favourite players.

I will also remember Peter Zezel as the heartthrob in Philadelphia. Girls swooned after him. His cool hair even landed him a small role in the Hollywood hockey movie Youngblood. He certainly would not look out of place beside Rob Lowe or Patrick Swayze.

Most will remember Zezel as a Flyer or a Maple Leaf, where he spent the bulk of the best years of his career. Because he was such a valuable player even when he was no longer able to contribute offensively, he bounced around the league a lot in later years, with two stops in St. Louis as well as in Washington, Dallas, New Jersey and Vancouver.

But I also remember Zezel as a great person. I had the chance to watch Zezel closely in his final season and a half with the Vancouver. I remember seeing glimpses of the Zezel I watched in Philly and Toronto, but clearly something was weighing on his mind. That was confirmed late in the season when he left on a personal leave. It turned out he desperately wanted to be with his family after his two year old niece had died of leukemia.

Zezel never came back, opting to be with his family. He played senior hockey in Ontario and coached youth hockey and started up a hockey school in Toronto. Rumor had it he would return to the NHL only if he could play for the Leafs. But he did not want to be away from his family any longer.
.

Zezel embraced the role of checking centre, relentless penalty killer and face off specialist in Toronto.

considering that he played only 4 1/2 seasons in Philadelphia, Peter Zezel enjoyed one of the most upbeat relationships with local fans of anyone who skated at the spectrum. Part of his appeal was his enduring work ethic and the other part was his delightful personality. Anyone who watched the center play or whomever conversed with him came away convinced that this was a very good man and a darn good stick handler to boot.

Clarke: "when Peter first took the ice is a flyer, some of us remarked that he reminded us of Brian Trottier with his build. As for the other parts of his game, we could tell right away that he was very bright and saw the whole ice."

Zezel had come to hockey by way of soccer. He was an expert booter and played professionally for Toronto of the North American soccer league… In time, he managed to incorporate kick work into his on ice repertoire. It would become a permanent part of Peter's game and particularly advantageous during face-offs.

Coach Mike Keenan found Zezel's teamsmanship a primary asset. During a game with Los Angeles, the flyers were protecting a one goal lead when the Kings pulled their goaltender for an extra attacker. Defenseman Mark Howe flipped the puck from his own goal line out of the flyers zone and towards the open net. Zezel was close enough to the puck to add an extra tap in and get the credit for the red light himself. Instead, he resisted the temptation and Howe wound up with the goal. "The play was typical of Peter's unselfishness. It was a comment on the type of person he is and always has been."

Zezel played 79 games in his second year and was no less effective. His plus minus climbed to +27 and his overall ice presence impressed coach Mike Keenan who favored Peter's grit. "He was very talented," said Keenan.

… At one point he had become such a fan favorite in Philly that he had to be accompanied by a bodyguard when he went grocery shopping. He frequently paid people to buy clothes for him while he stayed in the safety of his home. At 5'11'', 200 pounds, Zezel emerged as one of the league's top face-off specialists. "I try to use my feet a lot," he said, "and I cheated a bit."

"I was not a number one center," he admitted. "I liked the role of being a good face-off man and a little bit of everything. I wasn't going to be a 40 goal man."… He was likeable wherever he played but never more so than when he wore the orange and black at the spectrum.

midway through the 1990 – 91 season he was acquired by the leafs with Bob Rouse.… Leaf fans certainly like Zezel's approach to the game. Not tall but extremely sturdy at 220 pounds, he was difficult to knock down. He used his stocky body to push opponents off the puck and could make dangerous passes once he got a hold of it. He was more a playmaker than a goalscorer and was never afraid to battle for a loose puck.… His creativity kept him in the NHL for his first few years, but as he got older, Zezel changed his game to become more of a checker and top face-off man. When Pat Burns became leafs coach in 1992, he found an excellent role for Zezel by putting him in the middle of his checking line. The line clicked and was soon getting plenty of ice time, often against the best opposing line.… In the 1993 playoffs his work in the face-off circle was nothing short of spectacular and his ability to check in opposing center was a work of art. His soccer background made him one of the few players in the league who could control the puck with his feet..

the sturdy center had his best year in 86-87, not coincidentally when the flyers went finals. He was a terrific second or third line center, good at both ends of the ice, and tenacious on the puck and away from the play. He was considered a character player…

fantastic on face-offs – here are 15 guys you'd want to have on the ice in the last minute of play to take a crucial face-off: ...... 15. Peter Zezel.

Fletcher had to submit a "protected list", exposing all but 15 eligible players in the Leaf system who were under contract: Potvin, Gill, Ellett, Lefebvre, Macoun, Rouse, Manderville, Pearson, Zezel, Anderson, Andreychuk, Baumgartner, Clark, Eastwood, Gilmour. (22 players were unprotected including solid NHLers Puppa, Mironov, Cullen, Foligno, Krushelnyski, Osborne. This demonstrates Zezel's importance to a franchise even as his offense was declining.)

… Then came the winner, near the end of the period, On the harmless looking play. As the puck rolled in behind the Canuck goal, McLean came out and beat Berg to the puck. He cleared it off the boards, but Zezel knock the puck down in midair at the face-off circle and one timed it before McLean could get back. The leafs won it 3 to 2.

… Zezel had proven his ability to raise his game another level for the playoffs. He would be missed more than one might have thought.

Zezel has 100 point potential…

solid first two seasons for flyers at their center behind Dave Poulin and Ron Sutter... Needs to be pushed at times; Mike Keenan pushed and Zezel usually responded... scored a hat trick to keep flyers alive in game four of Ranger series, although they lost in game five...

Zezel is a fine skater, fast on his feet and very agile. He can stop and start instantly and the same holds true for his ability to change direction. He is also one of the best in the league at playing the puck with his skates, a skill no doubt transferred from his experience playing soccer. Zezel can kick the puck up to his stick or take it off the boards with his skates with exceptional quickness. Zezel keeps his head up as the play moves around him and that just adds to his good hockey sense and anticipation. He is very aware of where he is on the ice and is especially good at using his teammates. In fact, Zezel probably looks to his teammates a little too much; he should develop a little selfish streak can take greater advantage of the opportunities he gets. He has a good shot, quick to the net though not all that hard, and he can score from a distance. He is good at getting the defenseman to set himself as a screen, and that helps Zezel on his longshots.

Zezel is a very physical player, always hitting at both ends of the ice and he hits hard, carrying a lot of bulk on his relatively small frame. Zezel works very well to the side of the opposition net, planting his skates and sticking his butt into the defenseman covering him, thus not allowing the opposing player to get at the puck, or even to hold Zezel's arms. He has excellent balance and is very strong on his skates… Zezel is a very hard worker and has matured well during his first two years in the league. He should only get better as his experience grows. He wants to be the best and works at it, Peter gets into funks where his attitude and his drive suffer.

he last alphabetically but first in the hearts of Philly's female fans… Took giant strides toward stardom last season… Strong skater and deft passer, he reminds some people of a young Brian Trottier the way he finishes his checks. "When I bump, I play better," he claims…

Zezel is an excellent skater. He's fast on his feet, agile and strong. He can stop, start and turn on a dime.… His foot skills allow him another dimension of control when he takes the puck off the boards, and also makes him dangerous when the puck seems to have gotten away from him. Zezel is improving as a playmaker by becoming more patient… His anticipation and hockey sense help him there, just as they do with his checking; he can be a fine defensive center.… He is also become one of the league's premier divers, and will fall to the ice shamelessly in search of an opposition penalty… He is also a cheap shot artist and will do whatever he can to get under an opponents skin and then skate away. He carries a lot of muscle and bulk on his frame, and Zezel hits hard. His size, strength, and above all, balance allow him to plant himself to the side of the opponents net… He is a hard worker, though just the slightest touch inconsistent, and he continues to mature into a fine NHL player… Tremendously popular in Philadelphia… His strong play helps make the flyers one of the league's deepest and strongest teams down the middle.

the power of Zezel's game is rooted in his feet.… His increased confidence comes from seeing patience pay off, and knowing that looking the ice over and not just making the first play he sees, makes for scoring opportunities. Zezel has a good selection of shots. His wrist shot as quickly released and generally accurate, forcing the goaltender to make a save. His finesse talents alone are enough to force the opposition into taking penalties, but Zezel augments that penalty drawing ability with some of the league's best dives.… Though gifted in the finesse areas, Zezel is also a good physical player he is not above putting his stick into the opposition. He does not back up that stick work by fighting.… It's not that Zezel isn't a hard worker, because he is. Or that he's unwilling to correct physical aspect of his game. Even Zezel himself admitted he didn't feel right and sought the services of a sports psychologist last season.

Zezel is a skilled finesse player, and primary among his physical finesse skills is his footwork and skating… Zezel uses his feet better than any player in the NHL, especially on face-offs, where he will tie up the opposition stick before kicking the puck to one of his own wingers. But he's an excellent skater on top of the fancy footwork, possessing speed, quickness, agility, and strength. He's got excellent one step moves, is hard to knock off the puck and has a very tight turning radius, and he complements his skating with a strong degree of hockey sense and play reading ability. Zezel shows poise with the puck and books to use his teammates, and he can be fairly creative in his passing. His hand skills are strong. He carries or passes the puck equally well… He can also be a strong defensive player because of his skills. Those skills make him a PowerPlay regular. Balance is the key to Zezel's physical game, for it allows him to plant himself and make plays despite checking in body position. Strength of course is the key here, and Zezel can get off shots while being checked, and he uses those assets in his own hitting… As long as he keeps his intensity level high, his play ranks accordingly. It's not that Peter isn't a hard worker or that he doesn't care, because he is and he does – he just needs to maintain his focus from night to night and shift to shift.…

Zezel combines toughness with excellent foot and hand skills… Zezel can juke with or without the puck. He is poised under pressure and a good passer. He draws the attention of one or two defenders and find the open man. Zezel can score from all areas of the ice. He skating and lower body strength powers his slapshot. He has very strong wrist and is accurate with his shot. Zezel excels on both special teams, but his finesse skills really make him an asset on the power play. He gets into a tripod stands and is very difficult to budge from the front of the net. He is a very good for checker because of his balance and strength. He will aggravate opponents by using his stick and then going and drawing a penalty within artistically enhanced fall… Zezel is a crunch time player whose only question mark is his inconsistent intensity. He is shown a good attitude since the move to Toronto.

Zezel profited tremendously from the addition of Doug Gilmour to the leafs lineup last season. Gilmour is a much better passer and touch player than Zezel is, and attempting to provide those assets was strained for someone who was more of a number two or three and then a number one. He is the key face-off guy. He's strong on his skates without being speedy or flashy about it. He gets where he wants to go, for checks well, pursues the puck. He has good power and balance, he drives into the draws, then drives into the center against whom he faced off.… A solidly built player who does not get pushed around… Defenseman find it difficult to knock him down… Intensity and focus are problems for Zezel. Inconsistency is a problem for Zezel. Hockey sense is a problem for Zezel. Effort is NOT a problem for Zezel.

Zezel has been traded for some big names… Moves with great ease of motion, whether covering his check or breaking away from one. His low center of gravity and husky physique make it nearly impossible to dislodge from his feet. A superior face-off man, Zezel can control the puck, skate with it, or find his teammates with excellent passes. Last year he notched his 500th NHL point, still he is known for his defense… Considered something of a cheap shot artist in some corners, Zezel runs the constant risk of running into someone who owes him one… Zezel seems to have settled into his role as the team's premier defensive forward… An excellent character player, Zezel is an important part of the Toronto scheme.

WILL – win with defense
CAN'T - afford more injuries
EXPECT – excellent checking
DONT EXPECT - Mr. nice guy

Zezel is a checking forward who can pick up his offensive chances. While his major duty these days is to shut down the other team's top scoring lines, he can also provide some offense of dazzle of his own by polishing off a 2-on-1 or scoring with his powerful shot off a breakaway. The bonus to playing against other team scoring lines is that they are prone to week defensive game, and Zezel has the hand skills, quickness and anticipation to cash in on his offensive chances. He has a knack for big, timely goals. Zezel is dominant on face-offs. The skill makes him an excellent penalty killer, since winning and draw can quickly eat seconds off the clock. Zezel is a choppy skater, but he is tenacious and gets where he has to go.

Zezel is not merely intense: he's wired. If anything, he gets too intense and will sometimes overdo things and take bad penalties. He is compact, solid player who does not get pushed around. Zezel has become a bit injury prone in recent years, which makes them reluctant to initiate physical play as often as the coaches wish he would.

Zezel has evolved into an excellent checking forward. He has always worked hard, but now he is working much smarter than he did in the past. He is a strong force and a major part of Toronto's resurgent season.

injuries forced Zezel to the sidelines for more than half the season, and it was a type of injury that prevented him from doing much off ice work, so he was never at his peak all year. The wear and tear are starting to show on Zezel, but he has a bulky frame with thick, soccer player legs, and he appeared to be recovering well from his back problems late in the season. He has to play a physical game to be effective.

Zezel has evolved into a grinding two-way player. He is a Husky skater who hits hard and played outstanding defense.… A very reliable player who knows the game… Has always performed well under pressure… Remains one of the most respected defensive forwards in the game

WILL - play hard-nosed hockey
DON'T EXPECT - a timid skater

Zezel skates well, hits hard, and plays a stifling defensive game. Once upon a time, he showed signs of becoming a legitimate scoring threat. His scoring talents took a backseat to two-way, grinding style, however. Much of his career has been spent as a checking center.… Though he's moved around the league quite a bit, he's usually the player another team badly wants, rather than the one his current employers want to get rid of.

WILL - check ferociously
EXPECT - top face-off man

 

[VanIslander]

only eight (8) votes so far

c'mon guys! ... don't delay

 

[VanIslander]

ten (10) votes... of a possible 14... 8 to win a series... both decided

 

[tony d]

You got mine right?

 

[VanIslander]

You got mine right?

yep...

 

[VanIslander]

The 2010 AAA Regular Season Standings


The Frederic McLaughlin Division

1st London Bandits
2nd Queen's University Golden Gaels
3rd Philadelphia Bulldogs
4th Colorado College Tigers
------
5th Abbotsford Pilots


The Ambrose O'Brien Division

1st Regina Pat Canadians
2nd Johnstown Jets
3rd Toledo Walleye
4th HC Kosice
------
5th Winnipeg Victorias


The divisional semifinal playoffs will begin Monday morning

Update your team's line-up, where apt, for a 7-game postseason series

​

 

[MadArcand]

****, Regina?

 

[seventieslord]

****, Regina?

****, Kozice?

Let's try not to make this a numbers bonanza!

 

[VanIslander]

The Double-A Draft sign-up thread has begun.

The following players from the 2010 AAA Draft were picked in the last Double-A Draft: Billy Barlow, Daniel Briere, Jaroslav Drobny, Morris Lukowich, Lubomir Visnovsky, Mike Palmateer, Bert Marshall, Mike Bullard, Guy Chouinard, Murray Craven, Bob Trapp, Jim McFadden, Bret Hedican, Sergei Starikov, Shawn Burr, Earl Ingarfield, Percy Traub, Yevgeny Mishakov, Leo Reise Sr., Dmitri Khristich, Tom Bladon, coach Terry Crisp, Mark Johnson, Howie Meeker, Bill Brydge, Bohumil Modry, Mike Murphy, Ivan Romishevsky, Bob Plager, Charles Tobin, Stanislav Petukhov, Mickey Roach, Real Chevrefils, Olli Jokinen, that's 34 in all, to go along with the 31 who went in this year's MLD.

The Double-A Draft is valuable! If you've got time to research and profile some guys, then consider joining the Double-A Draft. No name dropping though, we need write-ups at this stage to show the value of overlooked guys.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

London's PP

wrong thread.

hfboards really needs to bring the "delete" function back.