ATD 2017 Draft Thread IV

[Cyborg LeClair]

I'll expand on this post when I get home but I want to make sure the draft keeps moving. The Borg Collective select Pierre Turgeon

 

[jarek]

I'll expand on this post when I get home but I want to make sure the draft keeps moving. The Borg Collective select Pierre Turgeon

Well, this was one of the best offensive players remaining, that's for sure.

 

[King Forsberg]

Well I was catching up on the last page and saw Claude Giroux was picked and was going to comment on the whole C/RW but the post jarek quoted pretty much sums it up. I was seriously considering him with my next pick. Like I said then, he's one of the best special teams players in recent memory for me.

 

[jarek]

Well I was catching up on the last page and saw Claude Giroux was picked and was going to comment on the whole C/RW but the post jarek quoted pretty much sums it up. I was seriously considering him with my next pick. Like I said then, he's one of the best special teams players in recent memory for me.

It would be great if Sprague could update a bio for Giroux including all the comments about his ability to play RW, so if this discussion ever comes up again, we can just refer to that instead of having to dig up all this stuff all over again.

 

[Johnny Engine]

I was gunning for Turgeon as a sneaky offensive addition the entire draft, up until the point I drafted Hap Day as a coach. I just don't see them as personality matches at all. Kovalchuk certainly an odd duck in terms of playing style, but I certainly don't doubt his willingness to leave it all out on the ice, especially after those years in New Jersey where he was playing #1 defenseman-like minutes, often for quite conservative coaches. With that in mind, Vikulov made a lot more sense as my late offensive pickup - a guy who certainly wasn't physical, but has quotes describing him as someone who's willing to take a beating to make a play.

Is Turgeon a Sutter guy? I'm willing to hear arguments.

 

[seventieslord]

This argument was had last ATD. I would strongly recommend you go over it. Here's a link to where it started: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?p=113923537#post113923537

This statement by TDMM sums up my thoughts on the matter:



Fortunately, Giroux is a very obvious man to replace Ted Kennedy on the PP for you. According to the numbers I have, Kennedy scored only 53 of his 560 career points on the PP, 34 of them coming in his first 3 seasons. He shouldn't be anywhere remotely close to a PP unit at any cost.

That should read "53 of his post-1953 points".... which is actually a good deal of them.

edit: never mind, you are clearly adding in another Kennedy who is not Ted.

42 of his post-1953 points were on the PP. Out of 144.

 

[VanIslander]

I have always pined for an all-time draft where FOUR (4 exactly) centers have a top-6 role. It's a cryin shame they don't get the offensive ice time! They've never see top-6 role ice time, and there's no reason to think they will in THIS draft!

I think it'll take a 40-50 team ATD to make it possible.

Turgeon is one of the four (not my first of the bunch, but whatever).

PM me for the other three names if you wanna chat about it.

 

[jarek]

I was gunning for Turgeon as a sneaky offensive addition the entire draft, up until the point I drafted Hap Day as a coach. I just don't see them as personality matches at all. Kovalchuk certainly an odd duck in terms of playing style, but I certainly don't doubt his willingness to leave it all out on the ice, especially after those years in New Jersey where he was playing #1 defenseman-like minutes, often for quite conservative coaches. With that in mind, Vikulov made a lot more sense as my late offensive pickup - a guy who certainly wasn't physical, but has quotes describing him as someone who's willing to take a beating to make a play.

Is Turgeon a Sutter guy? I'm willing to hear arguments.

Man oh man.. Sutter has a lot of projects to work on this year.

I absolutely feel Kovalchuk can work in a more structured system. He proved that in NJ, and rather effectively at that. I spoke with TDMM about this at length a few times and his conclusion was that Kovalchuk really bought into what the coach was trying to get him to do. He managed to do it without losing his offensive touch to boot.

To be honest, Kovalchuk's years in NJ boosted his stock tremendously, at least for me. It proved that he could be more than a one dimensional scorer, even though he still wasn't that great defensively. According to TDMM, however, it wasn't due to a lack of effort.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I still have nightmares about Turgeon and my whole ''too soft'' 2nd line fiasco of last year.Never again

 

[jarek]

That should read "53 of his post-1953 points".... which is actually a good deal of them.

edit: never mind, you are clearly adding in another Kennedy who is not Ted.

42 of his post-1953 points were on the PP. Out of 144.

Thank you for clearing this up! You're right and this is my error.

 

[seventieslord]

Westfall prob falls into the same argument that 70s has against some of those guys but I imagine he has to somewhat be in the discussion.

No, I like Westfall more than those guys. Outstanding PK numbers seal the deal for me there. I'd definitely have him top-20 but he'd have to be the last 70s guy in that list.

 

[seventieslord]

Well, this was one of the best offensive players remaining, that's for sure.

HAHAHAHAHA..... "one of"

I was gunning for Turgeon as a sneaky offensive addition the entire draft, up until the point I drafted Hap Day as a coach. I just don't see them as personality matches at all. Kovalchuk certainly an odd duck in terms of playing style, but I certainly don't doubt his willingness to leave it all out on the ice, especially after those years in New Jersey where he was playing #1 defenseman-like minutes, often for quite conservative coaches. With that in mind, Vikulov made a lot more sense as my late offensive pickup - a guy who certainly wasn't physical, but has quotes describing him as someone who's willing to take a beating to make a play.

Is Turgeon a Sutter guy? I'm willing to hear arguments.

I'd have taken him too. I need to basically grab the best offensive center on the board to make sure my most injury-prone player (Malkin) is backed up as effectively as possible. The good thing is, whoever I take doesn't need to have any other skills than scoring, 'cause Malkin doesn't.

someone page seventieslord, turgeon alert

edit: nvm he was already on the scene

 

[jarek]

No, I like Westfall more than those guys. Outstanding PK numbers seal the deal for me there. I'd definitely have him top-20 but he'd have to be the last 70s guy in that list.

To be honest, how much does such a list matter? We're talking about the elite defensive guys of their respective eras. They were all checking the best of the best offensive players of their time.

The only real way to "quantify" how good these guys were is analyzing how effectively they were able to neutralize their checks. How much scoring they prevented from those players compared to how much scoring the rest of the league was able to prevent. And even then, that's not exactly a fair comparison because shutting down players isn't just about a single guy.

From a PK point of view, I get it. There are ways to pretty accurately quantify it. But from a defensive standpoint, it's so hard for me to see it. I realize Selke voting is a thing, but until very recently, I seriously doubt the voters actually looked at how effective those defensive minutes were rather than just coming to a conclusion based on what their eyes told them.

 

[jarek]

HAHAHAHAHA..... "one of"

There is one other player, at least, that I'd put in Turgeon's league offensively that is still remaining.

 

[Johnny Engine]

I'd have taken him too. I need to basically grab the best offensive center on the board to make sure my most injury-prone player (Malkin) is backed up as effectively as possible. The good thing is, whoever I take doesn't need to have any other skills than scoring, 'cause Malkin doesn't.

When it comes to guys who need good spares behind them in the lineup, my team is less concerned with injuries, and more concerned with finding a good RD who's good at rushing the puck and attempted murder

 

[VanIslander]

I was gunning for Turgeon as a sneaky offensive addition the entire draft, up until the point I drafted Hap Day as a coach. I just don't see them as personality matches at all.

NOT AT ALL. Hap Day was describing how ONLY his centers forechecked and a reporter asked about Apps, and he was the exception to the rule!

I think Turgeon fits well with a puck-possession squad (Babcock) or an opportnistic counterattack squad (Bowman), the center being the defensive crux of the Habs except when P. Mahovolich was on the ice, in which case a winger was.

 

[Cyborg LeClair]

Has Sutter had a team of skilled players and he just could not get anything out of them? Or has he always just had teams with mostly grinders and he's had success with them?

 

[jarek]

Has Sutter had a team of skilled players and he just could not get anything out of them? Or has he always just had teams with mostly grinders and he's had success with them?

This is a fair question, and I'm not sure.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/coaches/sutteda01c.html

He's actually had success with every team he's coached, at least in the regular season. His teams have varied wildly in terms of goal scoring, and I'm not exactly sure what to make of it. One thing is for sure.. his teams have consistently been excellent at preventing goals against.

The 2002 Sharks team is the only successful team of his that I can see that actually did well in goal scoring (4th in GF).

 

[Cyborg LeClair]

To make a proper post:
The Borg Collective have decided that assimilation of this league will be gained by having the most potent offensive top 9 possible. Resistance will prove futile as you struggle to match your players against our Selke winning center depth on 3 out of 4 lines and an offensively virile 3rd line centered by this player. His goal scoring is impressive, finishing 6th in goal scoring in 1993 with 58 goals and scoring 515 in his career, 9 seasons with at least 30 goals. But the biggest asset he'll bring to his line with Bure and Ciccarelli will be his playmaking. Finishing his career with 812 assists, this player finished top 10 in assists 3 times and had over 50 assists 8 times, peaking with 74 in a season that saw him finish with 132 points--good for 5th in the league and 5th in the Hart vote. The Borg Collective are proud to assimilate, none other than, Pierre Turgeon

A.K.A Pierre Borgeon ​

 

[Cyborg LeClair]

Yknow, i never PMd the next person either, its been so long since my list pick i forgot. I dont know if it does much good tho, its not like it alerts you anyway, you have to be on this site to see it.
I just PMd him. My bad guys, if you wanna knock Borg an hour for that, thats fair

 

[JFA87-66-99]

Ok at work sorry I can't really do trade offers right now and I'm not even sure who I want. The Pittsburgh Bankers select F Tommy Dunderdale. If anyone is interested I'll listen to trade offers later today

 

[seventieslord]

Regina finishes off their defense corps with Carol Vadnais, D

Vadnais was a tall, lanky kind of player whose historically listed size was 6'1", 185 (like 6'3", 205 today) but in the middle and end of in his career I have reports with him at 210, more like a 230 pounder nowadays.

After winning the cup as a bit part with the Habs, he was claimed by Oakland, where he immediately became their best and most valuable player, went to three all-star games, and earned the captaincy in 1971 before being traded to Boston for a king's ransom.

In Boston Vadnais settled in as the #2 behind Orr, won the 1972 Stanley Cup, went to the 1975 all-star game and put up some huge offensive numbers.

He was then, of course, involved in the famous Esposito/Ratelle/Park trade, and went on to be New York's far and away #1 all-situation defenseman for three seasons, a time when they were pretty bad at even strength. He did, however, outperform the team at ES and help them to a PP 9% better than average and a PK only 5% below average. He continued to post excellent offensive numbers and went to two more all-star games. Vadnais faded at 33-36, becoming a 2nd and then 3rd pairing player before finishing off his career in New Jersey.

By the end of it all, Vadnais averaged 24.85 minutes a game for teams 2% below average overall (below average at ES, above average on special teams). Since top pairing defensemen played more in the 70s, this translates to approximately 23.7 minutes per game in a more modern context, and that's averaged over 1087 games. He killed 53% of penalties for teams 2% above average and his best 7 VsXD scores are 100, 99, 95, 86, 80, 62, 58 - the 2nd best available right now. He played 106 playoff games and had 129 NHL fights. He finished 6th, 6th, 9th, 9th, and 10th in all-star voting and went to six all-star games with three teams, including two times when he wasn't top-10 in all-star voting, for a total of seven seasons of significant recognition.

(Vadnais played too much forward in 1969-70 for his offense to be counted as a defenseman. I don't know exactly how much it was (his estimated TOI still comes out at 26.5) but I'm suitably convinced it was enough that it wouldn't be right to include it. It would have been a 100 VsXD score but it is not in the above numbers)

Picking up a guy with this offensive and PP record means I don't need to use Tom Johnson or Serge Savard on the PP - they were passable #4 PP guys but not ideal. It also means I don't have to worry about the dilemma of using Goyette on the point based on his 2-3 seasons experience doing that. He won't be on any special team and can just worry about playing his two-way ES game.

It's been said Vadnais was a sieve defensively in New York in his 30s... I look forward to reading what contemporary reports have to say. I hope he's better defensively than that, but if I just have a guy who's tough and elite defensively for a 3rd pairing and needs Joe Hall to cover for him, then I'm OK with that too.

 

[jarek]

Regina finishes off their defense corps with Carol Vadnais, D

Vadnais was a tall, lanky kind of player whose historically listed size was 6'1", 185 (like 6'3", 205 today) but in the middle and end of in his career I have reports with him at 210, more like a 230 pounder nowadays.

After winning the cup as a bit part with the Habs, he was claimed by Oakland, where he immediately became their best and most valuable player, went to three all-star games, and earned the captaincy in 1971 before being traded to Boston for a king's ransom.

In Boston Vadnais settled in as the #2 behind Orr, won the 1972 Stanley Cup, went to the 1975 all-star game and put up some huge offensive numbers.

He was then, of course, involved in the famous Esposito/Ratelle/Park trade, and went on to be New York's far and away #1 all-situation defenseman for three seasons, a time when they were pretty bad at even strength. He did, however, outperform the team at ES and help them to a PP 9% better than average and a PK only 5% below average. He continued to post excellent offensive numbers and went to two more all-star games. Vadnais faded at 33-36, becoming a 2nd and then 3rd pairing player before finishing off his career in New Jersey.

By the end of it all, Vadnais averaged 24.85 minutes a game for teams 2% below average overall (below average at ES, above average on special teams). Since top pairing defensemen played more in the 70s, this translates to approximately 23.7 minutes per game in a more modern context, and that's averaged over 1087 games. He killed 53% of penalties for teams 2% above average and his best 7 VsXD scores are 100, 99, 95, 86, 80, 62, 58 - the 2nd best available right now. He played 106 playoff games and had 129 NHL fights.

(Vadnais played too much forward in 1969-70 for his offense to be counted as a defenseman. I don't know exactly how much it was (his estimated TOI still comes out at 26.5) but I'm suitably convinced it was enough that it wouldn't be right to include it. It would have been a 100 VsXD score but it is not in the above numbers)

Picking up a guy with this offensive and PP record means I don't need to use Tom Johnson or Serge Savard on the PP - they were passable #4 PP guys but not ideal. It also means I don't have to worry about the dilemma of using Goyette on the point based on his 2-3 seasons experience doing that. He won't be on any special team and can just worry about playing his two-way ES game.

It's been said Vadnais was a sieve defensively in New York in his 30s... I look forward to reading what contemporary reports have to say. I hope he's better defensively than that, but if I just have a guy who's tough and elite defensively for a 3rd pairing and needs Joe Hall to cover for him, then I'm OK with that too.

OK, I really hate to bring this up yet again, but I keep seeing people doing it and yet so far, I was the only one who got eaten alive for it.

Does a Vadnais - Hall pairing not have the exact same alleged issues of my Cleghorn - Cameron pairing of last year? I'm not exactly sure that Vadnais was necessarily a puck rushing type, but his ES offense will be hurt because, of the two, Joe Hall will be handling the puck more often given that he's the better offensive defenseman. Additionally, neither guy's defensive game is necessarily fleshed out all that well, so if one guy is carrying the puck up ice, the other guy's defensive game isn't necessarily strong enough to cover.

seventies, don't get mad at me. These are the exact arguments used against me when I threw Sprague Cleghorn and Harry Cameron together. Maybe you can mount a better defense than I was able to.

If you'd actually like to see the exchange, it all starts around here: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?p=114966021#post114966021

 

[BenchBrawl]

I'll take Gregg Sheppard, C/LW

 

[seventieslord]

I'll take Gregg Sheppard, C/LW

what? wow

ok, so I was never going to get him at 490