Toggle sidebar

ATD 2017 Draft Thread II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hmm... I'll complete my first line.

Stockholm selects Sweeney Schriner, LW

SweeneySchriner.jpg
 
BenchBrawl said:
Is that the guy jarek confused Jacques Laperrière with?
Click to expand...

Probably, though it doesn't appear that Tremblay was as much a rusher as I thought. Seemed to be a lot more of a passing guy. Either way, I'm glad to have one of the best play-off defensemen. He's a wimp when the game gets rough, but being paired with Robinson should remedy that.
 
I didn't confuse Laperriere with anyone - I just thought he was a different type of defenseman than he actually was. Why? No idea! :laugh:
 
Finally home and getting caught up...the overall defense in the Robson is incredible (meaning a combination of strong defensive forwards, Dmen, and goaltenders)
 
jarek said:
I think those two would have a difficult time playing together. They might spend more time in the box than actually on the ice together. :laugh:
Click to expand...

SUre, penalties.

But when they would actually be on the ice playing and not in the box which would be most of the game most nights - it's an alpha pair.
 
Random thought: if we did not have any knowledge of the Malone - Lalonde pairing in real life, and someone went ahead and put them together, what would other fellow GMs think about it? Will this GM be blasted for putting two puck dominant, and goal scoring oriented forwards together?

Just a random thought.
 
I think someone would probably use that line of attack. In the end, the ATD is a game of rhetoric, using the information available.

The best way to counter such an attack would be to name a real life line combination with a similar skill set, and say "if so and so can play together, there's no reason to think Malone and Lalonde wouldn't", and the voters would have to decide.

Really, with a snake format, and a very educated group of GMs, nitpicking like that is the only way to differentiate our teams.
 
Sprague Cleghorn said:
Random thought: if we did not have any knowledge of the Malone - Lalonde pairing in real life, and someone went ahead and put them together, what would other fellow GMs think about it? Will this GM be blasted for putting two puck dominant, and goal scoring oriented forwards together?

Just a random thought.
Click to expand...

Personally, unless a players has shown that he cannot play with a certain other player, I will give it a fair look. Andy Bathgate, as an example, was a puck dominant player, but I don't think he ever had the chance to play with another player who could do anything close to what he could. Just because he never did doesn't mean he couldn't have.

Having one guy who only passes, one guy who only shoots, and one guy who only mucks it up makes a line very predictable, and that makes it easy to defend.
 
I've always erred on the side of players being capable of adapting to playing with other players with a similar skillset. I've never fully bought into this idea of glue guy - playmaker - goal scorer. In theory, this makes sense, but I think highly skilled players will be able to find ways to work well with other similarly skilled players, even if the traditional way of thinking suggests they cannot.

As Dreakmur says, unless you have two guys who showed a clear inability to perform together in real life (Gretzky - Hull maybe being the most famous), I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt to the players.

That being said, I still believe the traditional components of a line need to be there. Also, if a guy never showed the ability to satisfy one of those components in real life (the aforementioned Hull, for example, never finished top-10 in assists), then it would be foolish to believe they'd suddenly be able to do it now.

As a side note, I think using Malone and Lalonde wasn't the best example because both guys in real life showed the ability to distribute the puck. Lalonde had a 1st and 2nd place finish in assists, and Malone also had 2 top-5 finishes (NHL only, they likely had several more before this). These are two examples of fairly versatile players, despite what traditional canon would have you believe.
 
Time to catch up on picks made over the past couple days:

Rob Blake: Was 1 of the 3 names I strongly considered for lidstrom's partner. I got to think had he been there at 105 I might have picked him. Should form a decent 1st pairing with Chris Pronger.

Alex Delvecchio: Had him in 2015, very good, I sort of feel he's a little un-appreciated in NHL history. Looks like he may form a 2 way duo on Leaf's 1st line. Still how much left wing did he really play? I sort of remember him as only a centre. Good pick though.

Bryan Hextall: Still sad I didn't get him. Very good pick, good right winger that can do a lot of things for a team.

Luc Robitaille: You went for an all LA Kings 1st line it looks like, that said that line's going to be very soft but has all the makings of a classic ATD line (goal scorer in Luc, playmaker in Gretzky, defensive guy in Kurri)

Alexei Kasatonov: A good all time great Russian defenseman for sure. Good familiarity on a pairing to with Fetisov.

Tommy Phillips: Not overly familiar with him but he reads like a good 2 way guy and someone that is a good anchor for a 2nd line.

Larry Murphy: Great to have gotten him, the familiarity is there with Lidstrom and the guy should be good offensively and help out Kharlamov and Boucher + whoever I get to me my 1st line right winger.

Max Bentley: The "lesser" of the Bentley brothers is still a great pick. Playing behind mikita too adds offense to your 2nd line.

Pavel Bure: The Russian rocket, you got 2/3 of a Russian 2nd line there as well along with Feodorov.

Vladislav Tretiak: After missing out on Hextall I decided to go goalie. In Tretiak I get one of the top 10 goalies of all time. Familiarity is also there with Kharlamov.

Michel Goulet: Goulet gives you another offensive force on your team to go with Selanne and Dionne. ? will you spread the wealth and separate Goulet from Dionne and Selanne or put all 3 together and make for a great 1st line?

Alexander Maltsev: For a brief time on Friday I look at Maltsev but I didn't feel that he met the needs my team had. I think he's more of a right winger so he'll get paired with Lalonde I guess on your 2nd line.

Doug Gilmour: A good pick for sure, His run with Toronto in the mid 90's was unreal. The definition of warrior is definitely Gilmour. Him, Lafleur, Roy, Seibert and Savard is a great corps for your team.

Frank Brimsek: Another goalie I've always liked, in fact him and Tretiiak where my top 2 choices for pick 108.

Jacques laperriere: Good pick, should form a decent 1st pairing with Sprague Cleghorn (the former player, not our esteemed fellow GM).

Marcel pronovost: I remember a few drafts back looking at him and actually having his name typed out to pick but then I read up on his injury concerns and didn't pick him. If he's healthy you got a good 1 but if it he gets injured then look out as Howe may be decent but he's not one of the top #1's out there.

Ebbie Goodfellow: I think you're the first GM with 3 defensemen. Be interesting if your 2nd pairing is as talented as your 1st pairing of Stewart/Kelly.

Sweeney Schriner: Very good pick for sure. Good goal scorer for sure. Looking at that bio Conn Smythe certainly praises him up.

JC Tremblay: Dreamkur becomes the 2nd GM with 3 defensemen. I had Tremblay in 2012 as my 1st defenseman in a 32 team draft. Very good player.

Ching Johnson: Another guy I've always wanted to pick but can never do so. Was looking at him to go with Nicklas lidstrom.

Anyway those are my thoughts on recent picks. Hopefully we'll see the action pick up here soon.
 
These injury concerns about Pronovost are overplayed. Yes, he got injured. But, if you look at the logs, he played through a lot of stuff, and really did not miss that much time in comparison to other defensemen. Starting from 1951-1952 (when he established himself as an NHLer) and continuing through 1964-1965 (his 34 year old season, and the last season he received Norris voting), Marcel Pronovost played in 946 out of a possible 980 games, meaning he played in 96.5% of his possible games. In modern times, (82 game seasons) that's playing 79 games a season.

He may have gotten dinged up, but he continued to suit up for his team.
 
This is true and again I don't want anyone to get slighted by my thoughts as they're meant to create debate, Pronovost is a fine defenseman who would be good for any team.
 
I doubt this is who folks thought I was trading up to get but sometimes you just gotta pull the trigger and ensure you get your guy. With this acquisition not only are we getting one of the most physically dominant hockey players ever to grace this earth - we're getting another leader, goalscorer, playmaker (his VSx rating of 85.4, while good already, underrates him somewhat which I'll explain later on in the season):
 
tony d said:
This is true and again I don't want anyone to get slighted by my thoughts as they're meant to create debate, Pronovost is a fine defenseman who would be good for any team.
Click to expand...

I did not feel slighted; just correcting a common misconception, as you are not the first to mention his injury history.
 
rmartin65 said:
These injury concerns about Pronovost are overplayed. Yes, he got injured. But, if you look at the logs, he played through a lot of stuff, and really did not miss that much time in comparison to other defensemen. Starting from 1951-1952 (when he established himself as an NHLer) and continuing through 1964-1965 (his 34 year old season, and the last season he received Norris voting), Marcel Pronovost played in 946 out of a possible 980 games, meaning he played in 96.5% of his possible games. In modern times, (82 game seasons) that's playing 79 games a season.

He may have gotten dinged up, but he continued to suit up for his team.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Pronovost was one tough SOB.

When I made the comment about injuries, it wasn't meant to sounds like a bash. I was doing a comparison between Pronovost, Johnson, and Tremblay for my pick, so I was trying to get a read on how each guy played. I just found that most bios on Pronovost talked about how much he got hurt rather that his style of play.

I ended up with the guy I wanted. All 3 of the above were very similar in terms of value, and all 3 had very different weaknesses. Tremblay's weakness of "toughness" was the one that I felt was insulated best on my current roster.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom