ATD 2017 Draft Thread II

[jarek]

I like this line. They are not great defensively (as a line), but Thornton can provide Richard and Joliat with good passes and play in the slot and both wingers are scoring threats. I think, that these wingers needed a man, who can feed them with assists and Thornton is a good variant here.

I think you really underrate Joliat's defensive game. As a 1st scoring line, this line is very capable of defending against the opponents they are likely to encounter. Thornton also adds a solid two-way game as well.

As far as needing a man to feed the wings the puck, you're right, and that is what I went for, although Joliat is more of a balanced scorer than one would initially think. He was a good playmaker as well as goal scorer.

A bit more on Joliat:

A ferocious five-feet-six and 135 pounds, Joliat earned the nick-name "Mighty Mite" with his amazingly tough, physical style. A marvelous stickhandler and passer, as well as a lethal shot, Aurele combined finesse and feistiness to become one of the most respected players of his time.

Joliat could spin and turn like few other players and showed a great sense of anticipation. He could break up plays and counterattack quickly, knowing that he had to excel at the finesse game.

Joliat was a magnificent two-way player whose 270 goals would tie Morenz on the all-time list.

Joliat was five foot 6 inches and 135 pounds. That made him one of the smallest and lightest players in NHL history, but he was one of the fastest, slickest, and toughest players of his era.

A complete player, he was as proficient at thwarting an enemy’s rush down the ice as he was at creating his own scoring chances.

Aurele Joliat was a prolific scorer and relentless backchecker during 16 rewarding seasons with the Montreal Canadiens. He never allowed his comparatively small frame to impede his progress in the NHL.

He was also an outstanding checker, capable of stopping an opponent and then quickly starting a rush of his own.

I think Joliat's game away from the puck is starting to get underrated and I don't understand why.

 

[Namba 17]

I think you really underrate Joliat's defensive game. As a 1st scoring line, this line is very capable of defending against the opponents they are likely to encounter. Thornton also adds a solid two-way game as well.

I didn't say they are bad. I said they are not great. But they may be good enough.

As far as needing a man to feed the wings the puck, you're right, and that is what I went for, although Joliat is more of a balanced scorer than one would initially think. He was a good playmaker as well as goal scorer.

I read everything, that is on HF about Joliat, and I know that he can be a good playmaker, this is another reason I like this line.
As for his defensive game - there are only couple of quotes about it and from them we may know that he did backcheck and was good enough in it. So, nothing really great, but no slouch either. He was not defensive genius, but definitely responsible enough.
BTW, his description can be used for Kharlamov or Firsov Pretty similar players, I'd say.

 

[jarek]

I didn't say they are bad. I said they are not great. But they may be good enough.


I read everything, that is on HF about Joliat, and I know that he can be a good playmaker, this is another reason I like this line.
As for his defensive game - there are only couple of quotes about it and from them we may know that he did backcheck and was good enough in it. So, nothing really great, but no slouch either. He was not defensive genius, but definitely responsible enough.
BTW, his description can be used for Kharlamov or Firsov Pretty similar players, I'd say.

I'd love to get other peoples' opinions on this, because everything that I've ever been led to believe about Joliat is that he was a very good defensive player.

 

[VanIslander]

I'm a llllooooong time Sharks fan but Thornton goes too soon in the ATD these days. He is physical, especially when checked - he pushes back, will drop the gloves - but he ain't much of a backchecker in most situations. He's an elite passer who finds of the open spaces to distribute the puck to, and stands up for himself when facing rough play.

Is Rocket Richard more of a one-timer scorer or puck-controller?

Will Richard demand the puck from Joe or be content to let the pivot hold onto the puck much of the time that the team has possession?

I would think a Bossy or Brett Hull more ideal for the asset base of Jumbo Joe.

 

[jarek]

I'm a llllooooong time Sharks fan but Thornton goes too soon in the ATD these days. He is physical, especially when checked - he pushes back, will drop the gloves - but he ain't much of a backchecker in most situations. He's an elite passer who finds of the open spaces to distribute the puck to, and stands up for himself when facing rough play.

Is Rocket Richard more of a one-timer scorer or puck-controller?

Will Richard demand the puck from Joe or be content to let the pivot hold onto the puck much of the time that the team has possession?

I would think a Bossy or Brett Hull more ideal for the asset base of Jumbo Joe.

Richard played well while being centered by Elmer Lach, who was supposedly a puck dominant player like Thornton. More than well, really. This is one of the reasons I took Thornton.

As for too soon? Are you serious? On what grounds do you believe he has gone too soon? When superior centers are drafted, I'd like to hear your thoughts on that.

 

[VanIslander]

As for too soon? Are you serious? On what grounds do you believe he has gone too soon? When superior centers are drafted, I'd like to hear your thoughts on that.

Too soon means there are a couple of undrafteds that should go before him. Two more dominant offensive centers and two better two-way centers and one euqally good passer but morte consistent backchecker. I'll list the five as soon as they are picked.

Signed,
The guy with the "extreme" opinion that Fedorov deserves to go 140th-160th range in the ATD.....

 

[overpass]

Richard played well while being centered by Elmer Lach, who was supposedly a puck dominant player like Thornton. More than well, really. This is one of the reasons I took Thornton.

As for too soon? Are you serious? On what grounds do you believe he has gone too soon? When superior centers are drafted, I'd like to hear your thoughts on that.

I'm not sure I see the fit between Joliat and Thornton. Joliat's signature play was probably the curl and pass after entering the zone. Will Thornton drive the net with speed to receive those passes?

To be fair to Thornton I don't think he's puck dominant in that he holds the puck too long - he does distribute the puck quickly and on time when his linemates are moving. But his style of play is unusual and it's not clear how it would work with everyone. Has he ever had success with a Joliat-style playmaker?

 

[jarek]

I'm not sure I see the fit between Joliat and Thornton. Joliat's signature play was probably the curl and pass after entering the zone. Will Thornton drive the net with speed to receive those passes?

To be fair to Thornton I don't think he's puck dominant in that he holds the puck too long - he does distribute the puck quickly and on time when his linemates are moving. But his style of play is unusual and it's not clear how it would work with everyone. Has he ever had success with a Joliat-style playmaker?

I think at some point we have to make concessions with respect to the types of players we believe certain guys will work well with. Joliat played with a specific type of center for essentially his entire career. He won a Hart Trophy the year he wasn't playing with that center, having a solid offensive season in the process. He proved at least on that one occasion that he was able to play without Morenz.

Besides, Joliat isn't just a playmaker. He actually had higher finishes in goals than assists in the NHL. He's much more well rounded than we give him credit for - same as Morenz.

As far as Thornton playing with that type of playmaker, I am unsure. However, if we're going to get *that* specific with the type of players we're "allowed" to put players with in order to have good chemistry, then count me out of any future drafts because at that point it's futile.

Too soon means there are a couple of undrafteds that should go before him. Two more dominant offensive centers and two better two-way centers and one euqally good passer but morte consistent backchecker. I'll list the five as soon as they are picked.

There is only one - I repeat, one - player who is anywhere near as good as Thornton as an offensive player. The other guy you're likely thinking of is clearly behind Thornton offensively and has nowhere near his physical game and dominance along the boards.

There is one other player who is close as an offensive player, but, again, not close to as physically dominant and I question if he's even as good as a two-way guy. And aside from the first guy I have referenced, nobody has not only his Hart record, but how much he dominated his team's scoring.

 

[Namba 17]

I'd love to get other peoples' opinions on this, because everything that I've ever been led to believe about Joliat is that he was a very good defensive player.

I think, you take quotes about players too literally. If you take what Gretzky says about other players without critical analysis, you may come to conclusion, that the NHL is full of all-time great geniuses. The reality though... The same here. If people, who wrote about Joliat, underlined how good he was offensively and then couple of them added "oh, and he backchecked too" it doesn't make him great defensive player, to my mind, it makes him responsible enough. And please, don't think, that I attack Joliat - as I said, from what I read, I came to conclusion, that he was good enough defensively, but, probably, not great.

 

[jarek]

I think, you take quotes about players too literally. If you take what Gretzky says about other players without critical analysis, you may come to conclusion, that the NHL is full of all-time great geniuses. The reality though... The same here. If people, who wrote about Joliat, underlined how good he was offensively and then couple of them added "oh, and he backchecked too" it doesn't make him great defensive player, to my mind, it makes him responsible enough. And please, don't think, that I attack Joliat - as I said, from what I read, I came to conclusion, that he was good enough defensively, but, probably, not great.

Joliat was a magnificent two-way player

Aurele Joliat was a prolific scorer and relentless backchecker during 16 rewarding seasons with the Montreal Canadiens.

He was also an outstanding checker, capable of stopping an opponent and then quickly starting a rush of his own.

More than one source using words that suggest a player that is more than just "good enough" at backchecking.

 

[monster_bertuzzi]

Too soon means there are a couple of undrafteds that should go before him. Two more dominant offensive centers and two better two-way centers and one euqally good passer but morte consistent backchecker. I'll list the five as soon as they are picked.

Signed,
The guy with the "extreme" opinion that Fedorov deserves to go 140th-160th range in the ATD.....

That is indeed a very extreme opinion.

 

[Dreakmur]

I think, you take quotes about players too literally. If you take what Gretzky says about other players without critical analysis, you may come to conclusion, that the NHL is full of all-time great geniuses. The reality though... The same here. If people, who wrote about Joliat, underlined how good he was offensively and then couple of them added "oh, and he backchecked too" it doesn't make him great defensive player, to my mind, it makes him responsible enough. And please, don't think, that I attack Joliat - as I said, from what I read, I came to conclusion, that he was good enough defensively, but, probably, not great.

You can look at Joliat's award voting record and compare it to his scoring. If a guy beat out better scorers in award voting, he probably brought something else to the table, right?

 

[jarek]

You can look at Joliat's award voting record and compare it to his scoring. If a guy beat out better scorers in award voting, he probably brought something else to the table, right?

Not to mention the multiple sources that praise his all around game.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Pretty good fit with Cheli if thats the route you're going.

That's the plan!

 

[Dreakmur]

Too soon means there are a couple of undrafteds that should go before him. Two more dominant offensive centers and two better two-way centers and one euqally good passer but morte consistent backchecker. I'll list the five as soon as they are picked.

Yeah, there are some undrafted guys who are arguably better than Thornton, but there's also some already drafted guys who I don't see as better.

What makes a guys like Elmer Lach better than Thornton? Yeah, he has a better play-off record, but he also got to play on a line where he was the 3rd best player. Thornton was almost always his team's primary offensive creator, and he often led his team in points by a very wide margin.

 

[jarek]

Yeah, there are some undrafted guys who are arguably better than Thornton, but there's also some already drafted guys who I don't see as better.

What makes a guys like Elmer Lach better than Thornton? Yeah, he has a better play-off record, but he also got to play on a line where he was the 3rd best player. Thornton was almost always his team's primary offensive creator, and he often led his team in points by a very wide margin.

There's really only one available player I'd concede as better than Thornton.. and it's not necessarily a slam dunk, or even close to one.

 

[Namba 17]

If a guy beat out better scorers in award voting, he probably brought something else to the table, right?

I didn't say he didn't. Please, read, what I wrote.

 

[jarek]

I didn't say he didn't. Please, read, what I wrote.

If a guy was only "good enough" defensively, or physically, people wouldn't use words like "outstanding" or "magnificent" to describe those specific traits.

But I see that you've already made up your mind.

Let me just finish with this: if Aurele Joliat was only average defensively and physically, nobody would ever take him in the top-100.

 

[Dreakmur]

I didn't say he didn't. Please, read, what I wrote.

I quotes what you wrote in my post....

 

[Namba 17]

Let me just finish with this: if Aurele Joliat was only average defensively and physically, nobody would ever take him in the top-100.

Just to make myself clear. We are speaking here about ALL TIME great. Is Joliat that great defensively, comparably to some other players in the ATD? I don't think so, I wrote why. Is Joliat good enough defensively (speaking in the context of ATD)? Yes.
As for top-100 - how would you estimate Ovechkin defensively?
As for Joliat - great offensive player, who was defensively responsible - off course, he is top-100 material.

 

[VanIslander]

An ATD forward used to call Rocket Richard out in the dressing room, with profanity even: "pass the ****'** puck when I'm open".

Richard's reaction? No, not to pass more, but to ask the coach to play on a different line.

Who will get the puck most of the time, Joe or Rocket? They each usually have it most of the time.

This is like Mikita and Hull...

 

[ResilientBeast]

An ATD forward used to call Rocket Richard out in the dressing room, with profanity even: "pass the ****'** puck when I'm open".

Richard's reaction? No, not to pass more, but to ask the coach to play on a different line.

Who will get the puck most of the time, Joe or Rocket? They each usually have it most of the time.

This is like Mikita and Hull...

Then how did Lach and Richard work?

 

[VanIslander]

Then how did Lach and Richard work?

Lach was most lauded for 1. his speed, 2. commitment to defense and 3. decision making. He was a playmaker in the sense of making the right decision at the right time.

Was he a puck controlling, pass-first possession puck hog?

I don't read that in descriptions of his play. Joe certainly loved to hold onto the puck (to a fault - has been criticized for it).

Maybe your perception of Lach is different?

 

[jarek]

Just to make myself clear. We are speaking here about ALL TIME great. Is Joliat that great defensively, comparably to some other players in the ATD? I don't think so, I wrote why. Is Joliat good enough defensively (speaking in the context of ATD)? Yes.
As for top-100 - how would you estimate Ovechkin defensively?
As for Joliat - great offensive player, who was defensively responsible - off course, he is top-100 material.

How about a different approach?

How was Joliat viewed defensively among his peers? If people use terms like "magnificent", "outstanding", etc., that's pretty high praise. How many other players within his era do you figure were lauded for their defensive play that way? Especially as one who could also score with regularity?

I doubt there are many.

Then how did Lach and Richard work?

My thoughts exactly. Moreover, when did this happen? Who was the one that said it? If it was Bob Fillion during the Rocket's 50 goal year, well.. I don't really care that much.

Lach was most lauded for 1. his speed, 2. commitment to defense and 3. decision making. He was a playmaker in the sense of making the right decision at the right time.

Was he a puck controlling, pass-first possession puck hog?

I don't read that in descriptions of his play. Joe certainly loved to hold onto the puck (to a fault - has been criticized for it).

Maybe your perception of Lach is different?

You've cherry picked a single instance of someone getting frustrated at Richard not passing the puck. Again, if we're going to get *that* nit picky about who certain guys play with, then we might as well not have this ATD because most players are going to be incompatible with each other.

I don't expect Richard to pass. I don't *want* him to pass. I want him to do what he made a career out of: score goals. Joliat and Thornton are there to make sure that happens. To work the boards and create space for Richard. Joliat's solid goal scoring resume shows that if he's a better option to pass to than Richard, Thornton can be confident in making that decision. Moreover, it doesn't matter which of them starts with the puck - we all know exactly where the intended target is, and that is Richard's stick.

I made a line where all three guys are capable of skating the puck up ice. Where all three guys will be strong enough along the boards to keep the cycle alive (Joliat more with his craftiness and determination than sheer strength). This is the same thing from last year with my 1st pairing - somehow having more options becomes a bad thing.

 

[BenchBrawl]

For what it's worth, this all appears to be nitpicking a bit.I don't see any huge problem with Joliat - Thornton - Richard.Of course if I was in a series against jarek I would try to raise as much legitimate questions as I can, but at first glance this doesn't look line-breaking.

I don't like Thornton as an ATD #1 center, but that's the price to pay for picking him last on the line.I learned the hard way last year that standards for the center position are higher.If we gave an absolute value (out of 10) to players on two lines, and they looked like this:

LW - C - RW
9 - 5 - 9
9 - 9 - 5

The 9 - 9 - 5 line would be deemed more acceptable and superior.