ATD 2017 Draft Thread IV

[VanIslander]

So, is there a timeline for voting here?

Apparently not.

April begins this week.

Vegas odds are 50/50 that the regular season will be in the middle of April.

 

[ResilientBeast]

Apparently not.

April begins this week.

Vegas odds are 50/50 that the regular season will be in the middle of April.

People said they'd be doing assassinations and I'm out of town till the end of the week JE and HT are in charge

 

[Batis]

I think Makarov should be bumped up based on his PK and possession ability. Batis started a nice thread in the HOH board about how Makarov and Krutov were the top PK forwards for the Soviets with some good supporting video evidence. I've included a lot of the info in my Makarov bio.

I have also worked on a statistical study of the penalty killing of the members on the Green Unit which probably will be posted in that thread sometime next week. I have studied the available games from seven tournaments/series during the time period of the Green Unit (Canada Cup 81, 84, 87, Super Series 82/83, 85/86, 88/89 and Rendezvous 87) and will present data such as estimated ice times on the penalty kill and goal differential while penalty killing. Because of the difficulties to determine exactly when a on the fly line change took place while watching a game on video these estimated ice times of course has a rather big margin of error. Because of this I decided to call it a tie when two players were within 10 seconds of each other. Despite these difficulties I still think that the estimated ice times can give much insight into the penalty killing hierarchy on the Soviet national team and CSKA Moscow during these tournaments/series.

As a preview this is how Makarov and Krutov ranked in my estimated penalty killing ice time among forwards during these tournaments/series.

Makarov: 1st at the 1984 Canada Cup, 1st at the 85/86 Super Series, 1st at the 88/89 Super Series, 2nd at the 1987 Rendezvous (behind Krutov), Tied for 3rd (with Khomutov) at the 1987 Canada Cup (behind Krutov and Bykov), Tied for 4th (with Zhluktov) at the 1981 Canada Cup (behind V. Golikov, Shepelev and Shalimov), Did not play in the 82/83 Super Series due to injury.

Krutov: 1st at the 1987 Rendezvous, 1st at the 1987 Canada Cup, 2nd at the 1984 Canada Cup (behind Makarov), 2nd at the 85/86 Super Series (behind Makarov), Tied for 4th (with Shepelev) at the 82/83 Super Series (behind Zhluktov, Shalimov and Skvortsov), Tied for 7th (with Skvortsov) at the 1981 Canada Cup (behind V. Golikov, Shepelev, Shalimov, Makarov, Zhluktov and Gimaev), In the 88/89 Super Series Krutov got injured in the middle of the game against Pittsburgh and did not play more in the series. At the time of the injury Krutov was 6th in penalty killing ice time among forwards (behind Makarov, Larionov, Bykov, Khomutov and Nemshinov).

And one thing worth noting is that during the 18 available Canada Cup games (out of 22 Soviet games in total) Makarov was on the ice for as many goals forward (5) as goals against (5) while penalty killing. For Krutov the numbers are 5 goals forward and 6 goals against. Considering the quality of opponents in those tournaments this is very impressive in my opinion. In the 8 games against Team Canada Makarov was on the ice for 3 goals forward and 4 goals against. Krutov was on the ice for 3 goals forward and 5 goals against. When taking into account the strenght of the powerplay units of those teams these numbers are also very impressive. This of course means that in the 10 games against teams which were not on NHL All-Star team level but still great both Makarov and Krutov was on the ice for 2 goals forward and only 1 goal against (Czechoslovakia in the 1981 semifinal).

 

[overpass]

Additional thoughts on my own players:

-Giroux is pretty good defensively in real life. At the very least, he should be better than Maltsev. On my own team, I think he should be on the same level as Cook, whom I believe has very little on his defensive game.

-Nash should also be on the same level as Cook

-Apparently, Krutov was considered very good defensively during his prime. Again, he could probably be on the same level as Cook.

So, either Cook needs to be bumped down one notch or the above guys need to be bumped up a notch.

Try this article for a positive quote from 1929 on Cook's defensive game.

https://bklyn.newspapers.com/clip/9838189/brooklyn_life_and_activities_of_long/

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

No way in my opinion.

Still think Modano is overrated around these parts defensively as well. I wouldn't have him the equal of a lot of the guys in his tier.

Modano PK'd a lot, and played in a defensive system, but I do think one tier above guys like Sakic and Forsberg feels more correct than 2 tiers. Also a lot of other guys in his tier were good defensively from the start or early in their careers where it took Modano a while. Maybe he's the one to swap with Toews?

 

[Batis]

One thing that stands out to me is Balderis ranking compared to some other Europeans of the 70's and 80's. Balderis on the same tier as Krutov, one tier ahead of Makarov, Kharlamov and Shalimov and especially three tiers ahead of Martinec all seem abit off to me. Krutov and Makarov should both be at least one tier above Balderis in my opinion. Krutov who was considered to be a very good defensive player during his prime should probably be even further ahead. Here is a quote about Krutovs defensive ability from the 1987 Canada Cup finals.

"Here´s Krutov. Most valuable player in the Soviet Union last year, most think now he is probably their best forward he has gone by Makarov. And the thing they like to talk about Krutov the thing they keep mentioning is that not only is he a great offensive player with great speed, great balance all of those things but he is also a terrific defensive player, great backchecker and plays a total game." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FeJ3lCpU6U&t=34m4s

And Martinec does in my opinion belong around the same tier as Balderis at the very least. I have not made any in depth analysis about the defensive game of Martinec or Balderis but three tiers separating them seems like alot to me. Here is an excellent post from VMBM regarding Martinec ability to steal pucks.

I have no specific interest to 'sell' Martinec here (he's a consensus choice for top 20, right??), but since he is my favourite player, I have naturally followed him somewhat more closely than many other players. One exceptional skill I have noticed was his ability to steal pucks. Some proof:

1972 World Championships, vs. USSR, Martinec steals the puck in his own zone and sets up Nedomansky for Czecholovakia’s first goal

1976 Olympics, vs. USSR, Martinec steals the puck from Viktor Shalimov and makes a play

1976 Canada Cup, vs. USSR, Martinec steals the puck from Skvortsov and passes it to Novak (don’t listen to the commentary, it’s totally out of sync = irritating!)

1976 Canada Cup, vs. Canada (RR)

- during Canada’s PP, Martinec strips Bill Barber of the puck and clears
- Lapointe mishandles the puck, and Martinec smells blood quickly & gets a great scoring chance

1976 Canada Cup, vs. Canada (final, G1), Martinec just takes the puck from Savard

1976 Canada Cup, vs. Canada (final, G2), Martinec steals the puck from Lapointe

1978 World Championships, vs. USSR (final round), Martinec steals the puck during Soviet PP, and has a breakaway (controversy follows)

One thing that I hadn’t paid much attention previously is Martinec’s strength. Only when I saw it mentioned in a Finnish sports book (a mention of Martinec 'manhandling' Ragulin!), I realized that yes, he was a strong player at least for his size, which maybe separated him from e.g. another small 'master technician', Vladimir Vikulov of USSR. Some demonstrations of that:

1976 Canada Cup, vs. USSR
- Martinec bumps Bilyaletdinov off the puck, sets up Bohuslav Stastny for Czechoslovakia’s 4th goal (again, don’t pay attention to the commentary)
- Martinec shows good strength (with the puck) on the boards during Czechoslovakia’s PP (see above about the commentary)

1976 Canada Cup, vs. Canada (RR), Martinec checks Reggie Leach for a good defensive effort

1976 Canada Cup, vs. Canada (final, G2) Martinec strips Bobby Orr of the puck, shows good strength on the boards

Edit: Just to be clear I am not saying that Balderis necessarily is ranked in the wrong tier but rather that Krutov, Makarov and especially Martinec are too low in comparison with Balderis and deserve to be bumped up. And to be honest I would say that as a group the Europeans who spent their primes in Europe gets somewhat underrated here when it comes to their defensive ability. Now I understand why considering that it is harder to find much information about their defensive game but to me it seems unlikely that all of the 7 greatest European forwards defensively was NHL players from the 80's-10's. And that 9 out of the 10 first Europeans was NHL players from that time frame.

 

[895]

re: bell curve

Does a bell curve really make sense?

Instead of defense, let's just look at overall hockey ability. How would that be distributed? Certainly not a bell curve. There are few elite players, more good players, quite a few average players and probably a thousand players that could play a 4th line role adequately. The difference between a 4th liner and an MLD player is probably not much.

Now looking at only defense obviously is different. There are players who are drafted specifically for their defense and not much else (Draper) and there are players who suck at defense and drafted only for their offense (Ovechkin). These things flatten the curve out a bit.

I think something closer to a uniform distribution might be more appropriate. 10 tiers might be a bit much though.

Maybe something like 10-3. 10 for the best, 5 for the exactly average and 3 and 4 reserved for guys like Hull, Cowley and Ovechkin.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

re: bell curve

Does a bell curve really make sense?

Instead of defense, let's just look at overall hockey ability. How would that be distributed? Certainly not a bell curve. There are few elite players, more good players, quite a few average players and probably a thousand players that could play a 4th line role adequately. The difference between a 4th liner and an MLD player is probably not much.

Now looking at only defense obviously is different. There are players who are drafted specifically for their defense and not much else (Draper) and there are players who suck at defense and drafted only for their offense (Ovechkin). These things flatten the curve out a bit.

I think something closer to a uniform distribution might be more appropriate. 10 tiers might be a bit much though.

Maybe something like 10-3. 10 for the best, 5 for the exactly average and 3 and 4 reserved for guys like Hull, Cowley and Ovechkin.

There has to be some kind of bell shape...there's not just as many elite defensive players as there is average defensive players, right? Same goes for terrible defensive players compared to average defensive players.

 

[895]

Are there less terrible defensive players than average ones? I'm trying to be careful about using the word average because in statistics it can mean different things.

Imagine all people who have ever played hockey at any level are lined up.

Are their more average defensive players or are their more terrible defensive players? Well considering there are 1000 tines more recreational players than career minor leaguers, there's definitely more terrible ones.

Now obviously we are only dealing with the elite here but the distribution shouldn't change. We are basically just ignoring the left 99.9% of the graph.

And like I said previously, players that are only drafted for their defensive or offense flatten it slightly.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Are there less terrible defensive players than average ones? I'm trying to be careful about using the word average because in statistics it can mean different things.

Imagine all people who have ever played hockey at any level are lined up.

Are their more average defensive players or are their more terrible defensive players? Well considering there are 1000 tines more recreational players than career minor leaguers, there's definitely more terrible ones.

Now obviously we are only dealing with the elite here but the distribution shouldn't change. We are basically just ignoring the left 99.9% of the graph.

And like I said previously, players that are only drafted for their defensive or offense flatten it slightly.

If you're terrible defensively you have to be elite in other areas (most likely offense) in order to be worth getting drafted, so in the ATD (not in the world) I would say yes there are more average defensive players than terrible ones.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

I'm not declaring seventies' defensive tiers as the last word on ranking players defensively, but I thought it would be fun to see what my lineup looks like...

1st: 2 - 1 - 7
2nd: 4 - 9 - 3*
3rd: 7 - 8 - 7
4th: 7 - 7 - 7

*This is Makarov who I think deserves a boost of at least 1 tier


This is about how I thought it would look. Here the 3rd and 4th lines look relatively similar, but the 3rd line is miles better offensively, more of a two-way line whereas the 4th is a pure checking line.

Makes me wonder if I should switch the LW's on the first two lines, currently I have them as follows:

Denneny - Apps - Alfredsson
Go. Roberts - Datsyuk - Makarov

Of course if I did make that switch the Datsyuk line would become the 1st line.

Any thoughts on this?

 

[jarek]

There has to be some kind of bell shape...there's not just as many elite defensive players as there is average defensive players, right? Same goes for terrible defensive players compared to average defensive players.

Alright, let's say you want to force a bell curve. Let's pretend for a second that the following Selke records represent every single player in history.

The first 14 guys have a record of 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 4, 5, 5
The next 8 guys have a record of 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 5
The next 3 guys have a record of 1, 1, 4, 4
The next 24 guys have a record of 1, 2, 4
The last guy has a record of 1, 5

If the above were true, does a bell curve make any sense at all?

All I'm suggesting here is that the model used should reflect the players' actual merits relative to each other, and they should not be forced to conform to a pre-defined model just because "that's how it's supposed to be". For my money, I think the rankings of the best defensive players more likely flatlines as opposed to following any sort of curve. For example:

The best x amount of players from each era are all roughly equivalent, give or take a bit here and there.

The next best x amount of players from each era are all roughly equivalent.

Etc.

The way I would define eras here is the prime of the notable defensive players of all time.

So, for example, Nighbor's career would be an era, Bergeron's would be another, Carbonneau's would be another, etc.

You'll end up with roughly around 15-20 "eras", with the top guys in each era all being roughly equivalent, with about an equal amount of guys in the top tier, and it goes down from there.

I actually think this is a much better way to look at this because now instead of comparing guys who never competed against each other for Selke votes, etc., you're comparing apples to apples. All of this hinges on whether or not you can get on board with the idea that the relative quality of defensive play from forwards in each era is roughly about equal. There are always going to be some exceptions (for example, I have no problems with suggesting Nighbor is better than Carbonneau), but this should roughly hold.

I might even come up with an era list and all the notable players as an off season project and see how it looks.

 

[seventieslord]

3-8-4
7-2-4
6-7-5
6-6-4

Is what I have..

I believe dreakmur and vanislander's teams do very well, the former with top end defensive players, the latter with depth.

 

[VanIslander]

I believe dreakmur and vanislander's teams do very well, the former with top end defensive players, the latter with depth.

It's "Namba 17 & VanIslander". The newbie drove and I rode shotgun and helped navigate.

Namba wanted a "two-way" team built with a center and defenseman first. I lobbied early on to go in other directions (given BPA in rounds 1 and 2), but he was sure that's what he wanted, so I suggested the best two-way defenseman and center available (Park & Nighbor), and so began the journey.

The funny thing I had to hold him to our committed direction because - as we all know - it's easy to get sidetracked by tempting options and impulsive moves. "Lets get Kovalchuk!" he said at one point. I reminded him of our game plan.

Namba came up with 12 of the players on the team, including entire lines (Phillips-Ratelle-Gartner) and pairings (Samuelsson-Bubla). As a co-GM, I simply agreed with those. I questioned some choices and he changed my mind about Middleton, Berenson, Korab. I saw my role as helping the new guy make wise decisions. It was a partnership of sorts in that we tried to agree on all decisions. But it's Namba's team (or better Namba 17 & VanIslander).

 

[Namba 17]

But it's Namba's team (or better Namba 17 & VanIslander).

It was definitely joint efforts and joint team. I can't say whose this team is, because we discussed every player and every pick and every pick was made only after we both came to an agreement about it.
And I'm very grateful to VI for our team work - his deep knowledge of a hockey's history is something any true fan of the game can dream of.

 

[Namba 17]

View attachment 94561

This file is a screenshot of my attempt to rank every team's forwards from 1-15 (or less, depending on the number of spare forwards) by their overall defensive ability and impact. The following considerations were made:

- selke voting
- overall reputation aside from voting
- penalty killing value
- volume and value of quotes
- longevity, did a player provide the same average level as another but for longer?
- sometimes we know little to nothing about a player's defensive ability. These players are at the bottom ends of the lists for the most part. I made educated guesses based on other factors: were they seen as a leader? backchecking might have been why. was another one of their linemates known as good defensively? that probably meant they didn't have to focus on it. were they tough or good in the corners? probably means they used those skills to some degree in their own zone. Did they ever play defense? that had to help them as a forward to some degree. and so on.

Results provided in good faith. Take a look at your own team and let me know if anything seems out of whack. I may know something about every player, and everything about some players, but no one can know everything about every player.

With every team ranked on its own, I'm going to take this and try a big 1-357 rank now. But it won't be ranked in such a hair-splitting fashion - everyone will be in tiers, and it will be on a bell curve with players rated anything from 0 to 10, with fewer and fewer players in each tier as you move outwards from 5 towards 0 and 10. With all of us drafting a large number of players who are "very good" defensively or even just "good", it might help to put into perspective where some players rank and how good a player has to be before you can really call him good in an ATD sense, or, as some put it "at least a plus defensively".

I just would like to pay some attention to great analysis of Mikhailov's play, made by Sturminator, defense included:
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/sh...81&postcount=6
Also, there are quotes about great defensive game by almost anyone in our roster - Blake, Phillips (who was named the best defensive F of his time), Ratelle, Walsh, even Gartner etc - literary, anyone.
We created a really two-way team - we don't have any F in the main roster, who would have been bad defensively and haven't backcheck.

 

[VMBM]

One thing that stands out to me is Balderis ranking compared to some other Europeans of the 70's and 80's. Balderis on the same tier as Krutov, one tier ahead of Makarov, Kharlamov and Shalimov and especially three tiers ahead of Martinec all seem abit off to me. Krutov and Makarov should both be at least one tier above Balderis in my opinion. Krutov who was considered to be a very good defensive player during his prime should probably be even further ahead. Here is a quote about Krutovs defensive ability from the 1987 Canada Cup finals.

And Martinec does in my opinion belong around the same tier as Balderis at the very least. I have not made any in depth analysis about the defensive game of Martinec or Balderis but three tiers separating them seems like alot to me. Here is an excellent post from VMBM regarding Martinec ability to steal pucks.

I whole-heartedly agree. Yeah, Balderis, Kharlamov, Yakushev, Novy, Hlinka... do those deserve to be ranked higher really? I think Martinec simply suffers from the fact that no one who has drafted him here has ever bothered (or hasn't been otherwise able) to make an encompassing/decisive Martinec bio, i.e. the sort that would use a lot of especially Czech sources. Maybe we was 'too lazy' during the "Non-NHL Europeans" project too, I don't know.

But when you watch old CSSR games from the 1970s, you see Martinec on the penalty kill A LOT, surely he was among the most used forwards. As for his other defensive play, I haven't found much written on it (and maybe I wouldn't emphasize it too much), but there is at least this mention in the Finnish sports book Talviurheilun Sankarit (the section on hockey was written by Jyrki Laelma):

Jyrki Laelma
"The most important thing is that Martinec's work capacity is unbelievable - even a simpleton can see that he is always able to carry the puck over the blue line, but his defensive contribution is never understood," said a journalist from Pardubice in Düsseldorf.

Quod Erat Demonstrandum; his defensive contribution is never understood in the ATD either

Here is my favourite defensive play from Martinec, in game 2 of the 1976 CC final:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyqUlMcGTII&t=37m5s
Espo and Pete Mahovlich on a breakaway; now surely that's a goal without Martinec's brilliant effort.

 

[jarek]

I just would like to pay some attention to great analysis of Mikhailov's play, made by Sturminator, defense included:
http://hfboards.mandatory.com/sh...81&postcount=6
Also, there are quotes about great defensive game by almost anyone in our roster - Blake, Phillips (who was named the best defensive F of his time), Ratelle, Walsh, even Gartner etc - literary, anyone.
We created a really two-way team - we don't have any F in the main roster, who would have been bad defensively and haven't backcheck.

I find it interesting that you say this, and specifically point out Ratelle and Gartner, but then go on to say how you think other players don't have much defensive ability in the ATD. I'm thinking of Joliat specifically, but there were others. This is especially prevalent when you go through the assassination thread.

 

[Namba 17]

I find it interesting that you say this, and specifically point out Ratelle and Gartner, but then go on to say how you think other players don't have much defensive ability in the ATD.

Probably, because it's true?

I'm thinking of Joliat specifically, but there were others.

I see Half of your posts are about how great was Joliat defensively
I didn't say, that he was bad defensively, BTW

This is especially prevalent when you go through the assassination thread.

This is just because I assassinated more

 

[Namba 17]

Here's what I came up with...

even though this was not meant to split hairs, certainly when i got towards the end of a tier and had to fill the last few spots from about a dozen who seemed deserving, it still felt like splitting hairs.

So definitely there will be cases where a player will be a level away from where you might put him. But if you see anyone who I'm way off on (let's say 2 levels or more), let's talk about him.

Just some my additional thoughts:
Makarov definitely should be higher.
Starshinov should be higher too.
I'd rate Mayorov lower, probably.
I wouldn't say, that Maltsev was that bad defensively.
I'd also rate Balderis lower - from what I remember, he was criticized for not backchecking enough.
I'd also rate Petrov one level higher...
Shadrin - probably, level up too...
Besides I can't understand why Phillips is not at least in tier 8... but I've said it already.

 

[King Forsberg]

Additional thoughts on my own players:

-Giroux is pretty good defensively in real life. At the very least, he should be better than Maltsev. On my own team, I think he should be on the same level as Cook, whom I believe has very little on his defensive game.

I agree with this. Early in his career when Giroux killed penalties more, he and M. Richards were amazing shorthanded. Even after Richards left Giroux was still a great PKer. It wasn't until new coaches changed the Flyers PK and took Giroux off almost completely to try and ease his minutes. Overall I'd say he should at least be in the 5 tier on seventies overall chart. He's behind some active guys not currently that he's, IMO, clearly better than defensively.

 

[Sprague Cleghorn]

I agree with this. Early in his career when Giroux killed penalties more, he and M. Richards were amazing shorthanded. Even after Richards left Giroux was still a great PKer. It wasn't until new coaches changed the Flyers PK and took Giroux off almost completely to try and ease his minutes. Overall I'd say he should at least be in the 5 tier on seventies overall chart. He's behind some active guys not currently that he's, IMO, clearly better than defensively.

Yes, take Benn and Doan for example. Benn's highest Selke finish is 45th, while Doan's finishes are 25th and 42nd and they're both in tier 5. Giroux has been 14th, 25th, and 28th in Selke voting, and he's in the bottom tier. I'll add Nash to this too. He's been 16th, 35th, and 65th in Selke voting, and he's in tier 3.

Either Benn and Doan need to be downgraded to a lower tier, or Giroux and Nash need to be bumped up.

 

[jarek]

I think we're taking this a little too far. seventies rankings are just his personal opinions, and shouldn't be treated as the actual rankings.

 

[Sprague Cleghorn]

I think we're taking this a little too far. seventies rankings are just his personal opinions, and shouldn't be treated as the actual rankings.

Of course seventies's list is not the absolute authority on FW defensive play. I'm suspecting that the reason seventies' list is getting so much attention is because there's really not much else currently going on to discuss. Besides, he did ask for input on his rankings.

 

[Sprague Cleghorn]

I've been going on about players being strong, average, weak etc. on their lines. Being uncertain of where a certain tier closes off, I feel like I've been using the word average a lot in my assassinations. Like seventies, I'm going to try to see which players are actually strong or weak in their roles, but this is in terms of overall value.

Disclaimer: this will be a list based on draft position ONLY. There will be no subjectivity from me, so Drinkwater is going to be grouped off as 2nd liner. It's up to you guys to personally adjust players where you see fit. Also, multi-positional players will be ranked at the position which they are listed by in the roster thread.

The first post will be for Cs.

Elite 1st line C:
Gretzky
Lemieux
Beliveau
Morenz
Mikita

Above average 1st line C:
Crosby
Messier
Nighbor
Clarke
Esposito

Average 1st line C:
Sakic
Trottier
Yzerman
Dionne
Boucher

Below average 1st line C:
Taylor
Lalonde
Schmidt
Richard
Apps

Weak 1st line C:
Forsberg
Kennedy
Ullman
Lach
Abel

Elite 2nd line C:
Fedorov
Bentley
Gilmour
Lindros
Stewart

AA 2nd line C:
Thornton
Smith
Datsyuk
Keon
Cowley

Average 2nd line C:
Malkin
Stastny
Perreault
Oates
Barry

BA 2nd line C:
Modano
Ratelle
Hawerchuk
Sittler
Petrov

Weak 2nd line C:
Savard
MacKay
Nedomansky
Toews
Sundin

Elite 3rd line C:
Larionov
Fredrickson
Sedin
Lemaire
Carbonneau

AA 3rd line C:
Bergeron
Tkazcuk
Keats
Kopitar
Colville

Average 3rd line C:
N. Backstrom
R. Backstrom
Getzlaf
Peca
Bowie

BA 3rd line C:
Weiland
Mahovlich
Primeau
Roenick
Nieuwendyk

Weak 3rd line C:
Mckenney
Novy
LaFontaine
Starshinov
Hlinka

Elite 4th line C:
Luce
Madden
Otto
Goring
McGee

AA 4th line C:
Stamkos
Walsh
Lepine
Goyette
Mosdell

Average 4th line C:
Shadrin
Jarvis
Sanderson
Poulin
Sullivan

BA 4th line C:
Kasper
Laprade
Hunter
Giroux
Turgeon

Weak 4th line C:
Dunderdale
Sheppard
Federko
Holik
Muller