Toggle sidebar

ATD 2017 Draft Thread IV

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Andreychuk is no Mario, but he is quite useful as a niche player in that role. I dunno where I'd rank Chuckie all-time as a PP net presence, but I gotta think he's at least top-10. Not nearly as good an ES player, but I'd rather have him there than Tkachuk, for example.
 
For what it's worth (probably an infinitesimal quantity), Andreychuk also brings some secondary leadership.
 
Just for fun, here are some recently selected net presence wingers, and their best 7 years by overpass' adjusted PPP:

Andreychuk 206
Perry 179
Ciccarelli 178
Nolan 176
Kerr 172
Stevens 171
Verbeen 158
Guerin 156
Simmer 154
Tocchet 147
Benn 135 (est. incl last year & this year)

Basically, a lot of guys are in a pack, just about all of them are as close to Perry as Perry is to Andreychuk.

Obviously a lot of guys (like many centers, and finesse players like Selanne) are well ahead, but Andreychuk is the best of this class of player, at this particular thing.
 
He also leads the NHL all time in power play goals. He would have gotten a look from me at 458 had he still been available.
 
tony d said:
He also leads the NHL all time in power play goals. He would have gotten a look from me at 458 had he still been available.
Click to expand...

I really hate stats like that. He leads the NHL in PPG because he played in the 80s and forever. Assists are important too, and no one really cares that he piled on 5-10 more a season during his late 30s.

That said, looking at what he achieved in his prime on the PP, he still stands up very well to anyone similar drafted in the last 200 picks.
 
The Chicago Shamrocks will start off their bottom pairing with Gary Bergman, D


I'm hoping to add some more info about Bergman, but for now here's a little something about him from TDMM's bio...

legendsofhockey said:
Gary Bergman was a solid all-around defenseman in his 12-year NHL tenure. A fine skater with a knack for making smart decisions on offense, he also took a physical approach to the game when guarding his end of the ice. Known primarily for his decade long service in Detroit, Bergman also impressed as a member of Team Canada during the 1972 Summit Series.
...
His well-rounded play made him useful on both the power-play and penalty-killing units for the Wings. Although he incurred his share of penalties, Bergman wasn't considered a surly opponent on the ice. He rarely looked for trouble but also never backed down from an onrushing opponent, whether he was a fancy scorer or a power forward.
...
Bergman's consistent play often went unnoticed in the early 1970s. All eyes were on young superstars like Bobby Orr and Brad Park.
Click to expand...

Bergman was never a superstar, but he was quietly one of the NHL's best all-round defensemen for about 7 years.

7 straight years of all star consideration:

10th in 1967
8th in 1968
15th in 1969
11th in 1970
12th in 1971
8th in 1972
8th in 1973
Click to expand...


Bergman also played all 8 games of the '72 Summit Series as Brad Park's partner.
 
Time to review recent picks:

Bill Guerin: A name I've looked at in the past, brings toughness as well as goal scoring to any team.

Claude Giroux: Had I gone for an offensive 4th line it was between Giroux and undrafted for me. Having a down yr. in real life but for his career he's done good. I like the makeup of your 3rd line, goal scoring Nash, playmaker Giroux, glue guy Colville.

Floyd Curry: Had him in a past draft. One of the better penalty killing wings in this thing.

Pierre Turgeon: A favorite of mine growing up, he should do well on a line with Bure but those 2 together are as soft as a feather, not sure how Sutter will react to that. Having Dino on the line will help.

Bobby Rowe: Don't know much about him but he seems like a good player, reading his bio he was rough so that's good to have.

Tommy Dunderdale: Reading up on Dunderdale he seems like a good scoring line centre, good for a scoring 4th line.

Carol Vadnais: Had him last yr. as an extra, still he's a good offensive defenseman who should mesh well with the more defensive Joe Hall.

Gregg Sheppard: Seems like a scrapper, a perfect fit for a 4th line, should fit well with Topazzini.

Randy Carlyle: I've always found it hard to peg him. He usually is a bottom pairing guy around here but I wonder if he's good enough for that, sure he has a Norris but it's just the 1. Again not to slight you ck26 but it's just a pick I can never peg.

Rob Ramage: Time to do some damage because you got Rob Ramage. :D. It's a good pick. Here's some more trivia for you, in the loaded 1979 draft it was Rob Ramage who went #1 overall.

Wally Stanowski: Not a bad pick for a #6 especially when Leaf has strong defenseman like Orr and Chara. Maybe drafting a good #7 in his next round of picks would be a good idea.

Pat Verbeek: Had him last year, now there's a tough customer who can also score some goals, very good pick.

Dave Andreychuk: As I said earlier it was between Andreychuk and undrafted for me at 458. Very good power play scorer for sure. Brings little else but you have him on a line with Sheppard and toppazini so any short comings would be covered up.

Lars-Erik Sjoberg: Seems like a good one as well, he's described as the rock of a defense in his bio here so that should be good.

Gary Bergman: Another solid pick, it was between him and Timmonen for me when I went with Kimmo.

Anyway those are my thoughts on recent picks. I'm up at 458 and pretty certain who I'm going with unless I get scooped.
 
Coaching by division:

Bob Cole:

Scotty Bowman
Hap Day
Joel Quenneville
Pat Burns
Pete Green
Bob Johnson
xxx

Rene Lecavalier:

Glen Sather
Tommy Ivan
Anatoly Tarasov
Tommy Gorman
Lester Patrick
xxx

Foster Hewitt:

Peter Laviolette
Cecil Hart
xxx
xxx
xxx
xxx

Jim Robson:

Dick Irvin Sr.
Al Arbour
Darryl Sutter
Toe Blake
Mike Babcock
Fred Shero

---------------------------------

ATD coaching is a topic that interests me. It seems like strong coaching is a common thread running through all of the past champions, save one, and I wonder if coaching isn't a really underrated factor in team success. This year's run on coaches was particularly fascinating, and I wonder if it doesn't presage a rise in the value of coaches in the coming years. Unlike every other position/role in the draft, it seems like there really aren't enough great coaches to go around, even at a smaller draft size. Anyway, the coaching matchups in both the Lecavalier and Robson look like they should be fascinating, while the Hewitt looks like it will mostly be run by the lesser lights of history.

I feel like this is an area of team-building that deserves more meta-level scrutiny. Are there certain coaches who have natural but hidden advantages in the draft? Is it coincidence that Tommy Ivan has the most titles (three) to his name while Scotty Bowman has none? Are there certain team-building concepts which work better than others because there are historically more coaches cut out to run certain types of teams? Is a relative scarcity of "offensive" coaches a problem as the draft shifts more and more towards talent over grit? Are coaches undervalued in general?
 
Last edited:
Sturminator said:
Coaching by division:

Bob Cole:

Scotty Bowman
Hap Day
Joel Quenneville
Pat Burns
Pete Green
xxx
xxx

Rene Lecavalier:

Glen Sather
Tommy Ivan
Anatoly Tarasov
Tommy Gorman
Lester Patrick
xxx

Foster Hewitt:

Peter Laviolette
Cecil Hart
xxx
xxx
xxx
xxx

Jim Robson:

Dick Irvin Sr.
Al Arbour
Darryl Sutter
Toe Blake
Mike Babcock
Fred Shero

---------------------------------

ATD coaching is a topic that interests me. It seems like strong coaching is a common thread running through all of the past champions, save one, and I wonder if coaching isn't a really underrated factor in team success. This year's run on coaches was particularly fascinating, and I wonder if it doesn't presage a rise in the value of coaches in the coming years. Unlike every other position/role in the draft, it seems like there really aren't enough great coaches to go around, even at a smaller draft size. Anyway, the coaching matchups in both the Lecavalier and Robson look like they should be fascinating, while the Hewitt looks like it will mostly be run by the lesser lights of history.

I feel like this is an area of team-building that deserves more meta-level scrutiny. Are there certain coaches who have natural but hidden advantages in the draft? Is it coincidence that Tommy Ivan has the most titles (three) to his name while Scotty Bowman has none? Are there certain team-building concepts which work better than others because there are historically more coaches cut out to run certain types of teams? Is a relative scarcity of "offensive" coaches a problem as the draft shifts more and more towards talent over grit? Are coaches undervalued in general?
Click to expand...

I can certainly provide some insight on this.

I believe coaches are very much undervalued. You need only look at what Babcock has been able to accomplish with the current group of Leafs to see that.

Ivan in particular is nice because I feel he's usually had at pretty good value, his teams typically didn't take many penalties in general in real life, he found a good balance between offense and defense so I think he's a good fit with just about any group, AND he's one of the best player's coaches of all time to boot, so there are very few concerns with attitudes. I'm not sure there's another coach quite like Ivan.

Bowman I feel usually goes too high relative to other coaches. There's almost always one GM that takes Bowman well before any other coaches go.

It may very well be that a dearth of offensive coaches will exist moving forward, putting increased value on the really good ones.
 
Funny Sturm posts that as I am going to select a coach I feel will bring a lot to my team. I was debating between two different coaches and I am going to go with the one I feel fits my team best.

The Cobalt Silver Kings select Coach - Art Ross
 
jarek said:
I can certainly provide some insight on this.

I believe coaches are very much undervalued. You need only look at what Babcock has been able to accomplish with the current group of Leafs to see that.

Ivan in particular is nice because I feel he's usually had at pretty good value, his teams typically didn't take many penalties in general in real life, he found a good balance between offense and defense so I think he's a good fit with just about any group, AND he's one of the best player's coaches of all time to boot, so there are very few concerns with attitudes. I'm not sure there's another coach quite like Ivan.

Bowman I feel usually goes too high relative to other coaches. There's almost always one GM that takes Bowman well before any other coaches go.

It may very well be that a dearth of offensive coaches will exist moving forward, putting increased value on the really good ones.
Click to expand...

I generally agree with you about the value of coaches. They seem crucial enough to team success to maybe warrant going higher than they typically have, especially given the scarcity in the market which exists even in smaller drafts. Though I'll add that coach/roster synergy is extremely important, and there's no accounting for it when discussing the value of ATD coaches "in a vacuum".

Ivan went second (!) among coaches last year, which is crazy, and sixth this year, which seems about right. He doesn't look like one of the undervalued guys to me. Tarasov was always undervalued until Rob made him a champion, and Gorman (10th this year and last) always seems to go a tick low, though I guess both of these guys require somewhat specific team-building strategies to make the most of their talents.

Where Bowman gets taken always seems to be a complete crap shoot.
 
Matching coaching styles and techniques with players chosen is KEY.

Arbour domineered ice time. Bossy didn't dare ask for an extra minute of allotted ice time. Every line was expected to be fresh and accountable.

Sather let his players take extra shifts when they demanded it.

Bowman shortened the bench and rode his stars in key situations (eg., he said in OT he would live or die with his big-3 blueliners.

Day had just one forechecker usually the center, and the other two were expected to backcheck.

Green didn't allow defender rushing in protecting a lead. "Kitty bar the door."

Burns demanded backchecking. He sent Joe Thornon back to the minors because he wasn't checking (Burns loved the other 1st round Bruins, praising him constantly, the 18 year old IHL defensive player of the year who had a Calder trhy worthy NHL rookie campaign under Burnsie).
 
Sturminator said:
I generally agree with you about the value of coaches. They seem crucial enough to team success to maybe warrant going higher than they typically have, especially given the scarcity in the market which exists even in smaller drafts. Though I'll add that coach/roster synergy is extremely important, and there's no accounting for it when discussing the value of ATD coaches "in a vacuum".

Ivan went second (!) among coaches last year, which is crazy, and sixth this year, which seems about right. He doesn't look like one of the undervalued guys to me. Tarasov was always undervalued until Rob made him a champion, and Gorman (10th this year and last) always seems to go a tick low, though I guess both of these guys require somewhat specific team-building strategies to make the most of their talents.

Where Bowman gets taken always seems to be a complete crap shoot.
Click to expand...

If we were doing a pure ranking of coaches I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have Ivan 6th, but he's very easy to build a team around and a players coach, so he goes around there which is fine (I think I'd still have him in that 2nd tier of coaches, but probably not that high).
 
Sturminator said:
I generally agree with you about the value of coaches. They seem crucial enough to team success to maybe warrant going higher than they typically have, especially given the scarcity in the market which exists even in smaller drafts. Though I'll add that coach/roster synergy is extremely important, and there's no accounting for it when discussing the value of ATD coaches "in a vacuum".

Ivan went second (!) among coaches last year, which is crazy, and sixth this year, which seems about right. He doesn't look like one of the undervalued guys to me. Tarasov was always undervalued until Rob made him a champion, and Gorman (10th this year and last) always seems to go a tick low, though I guess both of these guys require somewhat specific team-building strategies to make the most of their talents.

Where Bowman gets taken always seems to be a complete crap shoot.
Click to expand...

I suppose a guy consistently going 6th among his "position" shouldn't be seen as undervalued, true.

Agree that coach/roster synergy is extremely important. One of the most important things in team building IMO.

Hawkey Town 18 said:
If we were doing a pure ranking of coaches I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have Ivan 6th, but he's very easy to build a team around and a players coach, so he goes around there which is fine (I think I'd still have him in that 2nd tier of coaches, but probably not that high).
Click to expand...

But shouldn't that ability to be very flexible be part of the valuation of a coach? That is a huge asset of his IMO, and justifies him going higher than his team accomplishments may merit.

In real life, he was known as a guy who would go with whoever was hot on any given night. He wasn't rigid in this way and if presented with a roster that is very flexible, with the ability to mix and match different pieces, I think that would go a long way in maximizing his talents behind the bench.
 
jarek said:
I suppose a guy consistently going 6th among his "position" shouldn't be seen as undervalued, true.
Click to expand...

Plus there's no way he's in the top 4, so the most he could be undervalued is 1 spot



But shouldn't that ability to be very flexible be part of the valuation of a coach? That is a huge asset of his IMO, and justifies him going higher than his team accomplishments may merit.

In real life, he was known as a guy who would go with whoever was hot on any given night. He wasn't rigid in this way and if presented with a roster that is very flexible, with the ability to mix and match different pieces, I think that would go a long way in maximizing his talents behind the bench.
Click to expand...

In terms of being selected in the ATD, sure, like I said he can easily fit into a team and with different types of players. In terms of purely ranking the best coaches of all time, no.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom