ATD 2022 Draft Thread II

[ResilientBeast]

Do I need to down my tea and post the name

I know who you mean.

But yes you obviously have to post their name

 

[VanIslander]

His nickname is "Ronnie Franchise".

Not flashy.

Ron Francis.

Good morning Vietnam!

...er, I'm in Korea. Same diff.

 

[Sturminator]

Well...our research on Busher Jackson is finished and a new bio for him is posted in the thread. I've done my best to keep it as short as possible, though a couple of quotes are duplicated as they deal with multiple aspects of Jackson's game. This was painstaking work, and both BB and I devoted some hours to it. Searching the old databases for Jackson proved to be tricky, for a variety of reasons. He had a brother who also played for the Leafs for a while, he was so popular that lots of minor-league athletes named Jackson during that period also went by the moniker "Busher" (including one particular basketball player I grew to dislike intensely), and he had enough star power that the databases are flooded with fluffy and useless mentions of his name which take time to sift through. Nevertheless, I am pleased with the final product.

My conclusions, tl;dr:

1. He was a bigger star and better stickhandler/skater/puck-carrier than I had thought. Mentions of Jackson as the best player in the world pop up repeatedly.

2. There is ample evidence of his physicality.

3. His reputation as a backchecker is more complex. Descriptions of his checking from early in his career through the end of his prime (basically the 1936-37 season) indicate that he was a strong and willing backchecker. He is described as "hard-working", and seems to have played a good two-way game as a younger player. But the wheels clearly fell off after the Kid Line was broken up for reasons which mystified contemporary commentators, and which remain mysterious today. Descriptions of Jackson's checking (and really, his game, in general) from 1938 through the end of his career are consistently critical, and he is described as being lazy, and even "pitiful" by contemporary commentators.

That's enough for my opinions. I'll let the documents speak for themselves as much as possible.

 

[VanIslander]

No.

Selke clearly identified Busher Jackson and Charlie Conacher as part of the problem: the 1930s Leafs didn't win more than 1 cup because the star forwards didn't try hard away from the puck.

I read Selke's autobiography (bought - among the 50+ books i had shipped from @seventieslord back in '06 or '07) but donated it along with 150+ other hockey history books i actually read (not much else to do overseas pre-smartphone era) in 2013.

I thus could never draft those wingers. But their center receives rave reviews in history books for backchecking and consistent defensive play.

 

[Sturminator]

Frank Selke had many reasons to throw eggs at Jackson and Conacher for their off-ice antics, and his autobiography was written many years after the Kid Line broke up, when he was an old man. Frank Selke was also a man notorious for his grudges, and probably kept another Leaf out of the hall of fame for his role in the collective bargaining movement. Selke's testimony is certainly part of the picture, but that's all it is.

 

[rmartin65]

No.

Selke clearly identified Busher Jackson and Charlie Conacher as part of the problem: the 1930s Leafs didn't win more than 1 cup because the star forwards didn't try hard away from the puck.

I read Selke's autobiography (bought - among the 50+ books i had shipped from @seventieslord back in '06 or '07) but donated it along with 150+ other hockey history books i actually read (not much else to do overseas pre-smartphone era) in 2013.

I thus could never draft those wingers. But their center receives rave reviews in history books for backchecking and consistent defensive play.

I think taking any one source as the definitive word on something is a clear path to failure. Should a coach’s autobiography be given serious consideration? Absolutely. But I think that there is also value in combing through news archives and seeing what other contemporaries are saying, seeing what the prevailing thoughts about the player were at the time they were playing. Multiple sources also have the potential to expose a personal vendetta or clash of personalities that may be found in a single source.

More information is almost always better than less, provided the information is obtained from reliable sources.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

3. His reputation as a backchecker is more complex. Descriptions of his checking from early in his career through the end of his prime (basically the 1936-37 season) indicate that he was a strong and willing backchecker. He is described as "hard-working", and seems to have played a good two-way game as a younger player. But the wheels clearly fell off after the Kid Line was broken up for reasons which mystified contemporary commentators, and which remain mysterious today. Descriptions of Jackson's checking (and really, his game, in general) from 1938 through the end of his career are consistently critical, and he is described as being lazy, and even "pitiful" by contemporary commentators.
.

Descriptions plural? I guess technically.

First off, kudos to you for the thorough and well-organized bio. I find bios organized by section to be much easier to glean useful information from.

As to the content:

I see the one glowing quote about Jackson's backchecking from 1934. It's from a player on a different team, so that holds some weight.

The "he checked his wing" (in a single game some time years ago) quote from 1940 is pretty weak.

The thing about him shadowing Gagnon (nobody will draft him in a draft this size right?)... I don't know. Seems Jackson was told by his coach to follow Gagnon around the ice beating him up, which, at least to me, is more evidence of toughness than necessarily defense.

That one undrafted player in 1934 was actually really impressed by Jackson's backchecking at the time. It's something. How to reconcile it with reports of Jackson as basically one of the worst backcheckers in the league later in his career?

 

[Sturminator]

That one undrafted player in 1934 was actually really impressed by Jackson's backchecking at the time. It's something. How to reconcile it with reports of Jackson as basically one of the worst backcheckers in the league later in his career?

Post-peak Busher Jackson clearly wasn't all that good of a hockey player, but nobody's drafting him for what he did after the Kid Line days. I think the description of Jackson as "hard-working" from his prime years also holds some weight. It was a very defensive era of hockey. "Hard-working" and "crappy backchecker" seem to be mutually exclusive descriptors, no?

I don't think anyone is going to mistake Jackson for a good checker in the ATD, even during his prime, and you're right that there's not that much praise of his defensive game during his prime. Nevertheless, it's out there, and the contemporary criticism of his checking comes from his twilight years. Your mileage may vary, but I don't think it's fair to consider him a poor checker during his prime.

For the record, I'm pretty sure the guy who described Jackson as a "Grade A backchecker" was actually coach of the New York Americans at the time.

 

[overpass]

But the wheels clearly fell off after the Kid Line was broken up for reasons which mystified contemporary commentators, and which remain mysterious today.

I appreciate the well-researched bio, Sturm and BB. Jackson as a great natural talent, skater, and puck handler really comes through. Most of the more modern comparisons that come to mind are centres rather than wingers. Sounds like he may even have had some Mario to his game, in a 1930s way.

Did you read the Dink Carroll column on the occasion of Jackson’s death that I posted earlier? He gave an account of the breakup of the Kid Line that he had heard from their coach. At their peak the Toronto trio usually faced checking lines, but then Detroit’s coach matched his big line against them with success, taking advantage of their lack of attention to backchecking. After that every other coach followed suit, playing power on power against the Kid Line, so the line had to be broken up.

I realize this account may not be the whole story. It seems a bit too simple…did no one really try matching up their scorers against the Kid Line before? Or did it have to wait for the combination of Detroit’s outstanding two-way line and some decline in the play of the Leafs? At best it’s a simplified version of the story, not taking up too many column inches.

I’m curious what you think about this account and if it is consistent with your research. Link is below, the column is up and to the left of the story I’ve linked.

The Montreal Gazette - Google News Archive Search

 

[BenchBrawl]

Here's a description of prime Conacher and Jackson stopping shots on the PK.

"Throughout the first two periods, the Leafs were handicapped by the loss of men, due to penalties, though St. Louis failed to score due to fine efforts by Hainsworth, ably assisted by such alert teammates as Busher Jackson and Chuck Conacher, who often rushed in behind him and flipped aside treacherous shots that had eluded the goalie"

21 Dec 1934, Page 26 - The St. Louis Star and Times at Newspapers.com

 

[BenchBrawl]

I appreciate the well-researched bio, Sturm and BB. Jackson as a great natural talent, skater, and puck handler really comes through. Most of the more modern comparisons that come to mind are centres rather than wingers. Sounds like he may even have had some Mario to his game, in a 1930s way.

Did you read the Dink Carroll column on the occasion of Jackson’s death that I posted earlier? He gave an account of the breakup of the Kid Line that he had heard from their coach. At their peak the Toronto trio usually faced checking lines, but then Detroit’s coach matched his big line against them with success, taking advantage of their lack of attention to backchecking. After that every other coach followed suit, playing power on power against the Kid Line, so the line had to be broken up.

I realize this account may not be the whole story. It seems a bit too simple…did no one really try matching up their scorers against the Kid Line before? Or did it have to wait for the combination of Detroit’s outstanding two-way line and some decline in the play of the Leafs? At best it’s a simplified version of the story, not taking up too many column inches.

I’m curious what you think about this account and if it is consistent with your research. Link is below, the column is up and to the left of the story I’ve linked.

The Montreal Gazette - Google News Archive Search

Didn't take a deep enough dive to unpack this. Maybe Sturm did.

I didn't put the focus on the Kid Line as much as clarifying Jackson himself first.

I hadn't realized just how naturally talented he was. Your Mario Lemieux comment is apt, he was that kind of player with raw talent coming out of his ears.

He was a fast, graceful, shifty skater, and could fake both sides. Had one of the best shots in the league, both forehand and backhand. He was described as the "snakiest stickhandler" in the circuit. He was one of the best to receive any kind of pass without missing a beat. He could fight too, and throw hits. Had good size (200 lbs 5'11''). Basically, he had all the skills at a high level.

 

[ChiTownPhilly]

Here's a description of prime Conacher and Jackson stopping shots on the PK.

"Throughout the first two periods, the Leafs were handicapped by the loss of men, due to penalties, though St. Louis failed to score due to fine efforts by Hainsworth, ably assisted by such alert teammates as Busher Jackson and Chuck Conacher, who often rushed in behind him and flipped aside treacherous shots that had eluded the goalie"

21 Dec 1934, Page 26 - The St. Louis Star and Times at Newspapers.com

I kinda have an instinct that Busher Jackson's reputation has taken too much of a hit.

I KNOW that Charlie Conacher's reputation has taken too much of hit.

But I'm not sure that their case is helped by plaudits for their performance against the St Louis Eagles.

Didn't the Eagles smoke unconscionable bone that season?!?

 

[Sturminator]

I appreciate the well-researched bio, Sturm and BB. Jackson as a great natural talent, skater, and puck handler really comes through. Most of the more modern comparisons that come to mind are centres rather than wingers. Sounds like he may even have had some Mario to his game, in a 1930s way.

Did you read the Dink Carroll column on the occasion of Jackson’s death that I posted earlier? He gave an account of the breakup of the Kid Line that he had heard from their coach. At their peak the Toronto trio usually faced checking lines, but then Detroit’s coach matched his big line against them with success, taking advantage of their lack of attention to backchecking. After that every other coach followed suit, playing power on power against the Kid Line, so the line had to be broken up.

I realize this account may not be the whole story. It seems a bit too simple…did no one really try matching up their scorers against the Kid Line before? Or did it have to wait for the combination of Detroit’s outstanding two-way line and some decline in the play of the Leafs? At best it’s a simplified version of the story, not taking up too many column inches.

I’m curious what you think about this account and if it is consistent with your research. Link is below, the column is up and to the left of the story I’ve linked.

The Montreal Gazette - Google News Archive Search

Thanks, pass. Diving into Jackson's career reminded me of what first drew me to the ATD: the research. Win or lose, I'm proud that BB and I have managed to shed some more light on the career of a guy who I think was truly one of the icons of his era. There aren't too many holes left in our knowledge of hockey's greatest players; it was a privilege to have the chance to fill one of those holes, to the best of our abilities.

I wasn't actually familiar with that column, though BB may have found it. I jumped the gun somewhat in my enthusiasm whilst making that bio, and haven't yet completely incorporated his work into the final product. I probably restricted the date range of my searches too narrowly to catch an article from the 1960s. I didn't find any contemporary criticism of the Kid Line's defensive prowess in my meanderings through the archives. The criticism I found was always directed at the later Jackson - Apps constellation, and there is certainly plenty of that.

What to make of it? The members of the Kid Line were all basically washed as big-time hockey players at a young age, even for that era, but they didn't fall apart all at the same time. The last season in which they really dominated the league as a unit was 1934-35. Jackson and the center both had down years in 1935-36 (Jackson was a holdout early in the season and seemed to have suffered a prolonged slump...no idea what was going on with the center) while Conacher dominated. The center was out of the league by 1936-37 while Jackson experienced a resurgence in what would be his final season as a top-flight player. Conacher, for his part, was injured for most of 1936-37, and was never the same player again.

So did the league figure them out in 1934-35? It doesn't appear so. The Leafs made the finals that year and lost to the Maroons, who pretty much had nothing but checkinglines at that point, so that loss doesn't really tell us much. They did lose in the Cup finals to the Red Wings in 1935-36, but again, Jackson and the center had been playing mediocre hockey all year up to that point. So I don't know if it was a matter of the Red Wings figuring them out, or Detroit simply beating them when they were already clearly in decline, and an explanatory narrative forming around that series after the fact.

In spite of our best efforts, there are still a lot of unanswered questions about the meteoric rise and fall of the Kid Line.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I kinda have an instinct that Busher Jackson's reputation has taken too much of a hit.

I KNOW that Charlie Conacher's reputation has taken too much of hit.

But I'm not sure that their case is helped by plaudits for their performance against the St Louis Eagles.

Didn't the Eagles smoke unconscionable bone that season?!?

The point is that they helped their goalie on the PK, that they were doing it; not who they were doing it against.

 

[tinyzombies]

I kinda have an instinct that Busher Jackson's reputation has taken too much of a hit.

I KNOW that Charlie Conacher's reputation has taken too much of hit.

But I'm not sure that their case is helped by plaudits for their performance against the St Louis Eagles.

Didn't the Eagles smoke unconscionable bone that season?!?

Here near the end of his career, he showed up in excellent shape but they refused his request for a raise so he returned home. So conditioning is not the issue. At least not this year.

Le devoir, 5 janvier 1942, lundi 5 janvier 1942


View attachment 506341

___

La tribune, 27 décembre 1935, vendredi 27 décembre 1935


Says Harvey's brother doesn't have his skating or hands but is better defensively. "Besides, he is as solidly built as Harvey is, he starts quickly, and is a better defensive player than Harvey." They also mention that Harvey is loquacious and is good at golf. Also that he has one of the most accurate backhanders in the league.

 

[VanIslander]

I have seen Charlie Conacher described most often as an in-your-face willing-to-drop-gloves policeman who has a hard shot. He ain't no Lionel in terms of strength or athleticism, but as siblings do, he tries constantly.

 

[tinyzombies]

L'illustration nouvelle, 18 décembre 1936, vendredi 18 décembre 1936

____

"Le vétéran Busher Jackson a pris part aux deux buts des Bruins et son lancer très dur, fait à 30 pieds des buts, alors qu'il n'y avait que quatre minutes de jeu à faire."

'Scored twice and his very hard shot from 30 feet from the net with only 4 mins left (won the game).'

Le Canada, 17 novembre 1943, mercredi 17 novembre 1943

___

"Busher Jackson let go a hard backhander."

"A Jackson shot (catches) Connell who is shaken but saves as usual."

Le petit journal, 3 janvier 1937, dimanche 3 janvier 1937

___

Forechecking: "Busher Jackson suivit Ia rondelle et réussit à s'en emparer juste comme a défense du Canadien arrivait sur lui."

"Busher Jackson followed the puck and managed to grab it just as the Canadien's defense got on him."
La patrie, 17 novembre 1943, mercredi 17 novembre 1943

---

"Although he is a veteran, Jackson was still one of the most skillful and scientific forwards in the league last year."

L'illustration nouvelle, 23 septembre 1939, samedi 23 septembre 1939

 

[ImporterExporter]

Three Rivers selects, from Kamloops,

The Wrecking Ball, Mark Recchi, RW

 

[Leaf Lander]

Leafs select hall of fame Defensemen and 4 x Stanley cup winners

Carl Brewer and Allan Stanley

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Patrick Elias, lw

 

[Claude The Fraud]

The Hull Olympiques are pleased to select, from Weston, Ontario, Adam Oates.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Three Rivers selects, from Kamloops,

The Wrecking Ball, Mark Recchi, RW

Obviously it's hard to compare guys with super longevity to all peak guys, but Recchi is the guy I thought of when I was trying to place Kucherov before this draft.

 

[The Macho King]

Obviously it's hard to compare guys with super longevity to all peak guys, but Recchi is the guy I thought of when I was trying to place Kucherov before this draft.

I will say I don't think Kucherov gives back nearly as much defensively as Recchi. Not Hossa or anything but Kucherovs lines tend to have solid defensive results on top of scoring.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Obviously it's hard to compare guys with super longevity to all peak guys, but Recchi is the guy I thought of when I was trying to place Kucherov before this draft.

I honestly have no idea who to compare guys with such short (relative) ATD resumes. Maybe folks like a Hod Stuart who died young but were clearly in the conversation for best playe rin the world, albeit over a shorter window.

Early career Recchi was basically all offense, goal scoring oriented, and 2nd half Recchi really morphed into a high end playmaker and more responsible F.

I just know given how wingers have flown off the board, Recchi was a fortunate find at 161 IMO. On a line with Ovechkin and Lach, he'll find opportunities to rack up assists and goals given the attributes of his linemates and his tenacious style will ease the burden on Lach in that regard as well.

 

[Dreakmur]

I will say I don't think Kucherov gives back nearly as much defensively as Recchi. Not Hossa or anything but Kucherovs lines tend to have solid defensive results on top of scoring.

Kucherov is a defensive zero at best here. He’s probably a minus.

“Defensive results” are not a measure of actual defensive play. I have yet to see any statistic that accurately measure’s a player’s defensive prowess. Kucherov starts like 70% or his shifts in the offensive zone, and he plays for a dominant line on a dominant team, so his “results” are skewed.