ATD2025 Draft Thread Part II

[ChiTownPhilly]

I don't think C1958 saw Reardon play live, but I could be wrong.

Since we have access to so much material, a primary source indicating Reardon was a RD should be the standard before putting back the burden of proof on the GM, IMO. Even if I agree with you that it's very likely that C1958 would have corrected Fyffe if he knew.

Yup- you're right. His birth year post-dates Reardon's retirement. I have two snippets in mind- one direct, one hearsay. The hearsay one is that someone said 'C' saw Teeder Kennedy play- which (if an accurate recollection) would wind up being a kindergarten memory. The other- which I recall specifically, is to the effect that he heard old-timers argue Morenz v. Shore. By the time 'C' was a grade-schooler, Gordie Howe was GORDIE HOWE and any Morenz-Shore argument would no longer have been a credible GOAT argument.

Damn- Reardon had a short career. Then again, he lost three full seasons to WWII, so there's that.

In the past five 18-24 sized draft years, five Defensemen have ALWAYS been taken in the 2nd Round [Chelios, Coffey, Park, Clancy. Pronger]. Sometimes ['19, 25] Larry Robinson slips to the 2nd Round- and gives someone a bargain. This year, Fetisov slipped to the 2nd Round and gave Savannah a Roger Daltrey Bargain.

 

[GKJ]

Philadelphia Firebirds are selecting someone who is very familiar with our town. former Flyers Center, and 1987 Selke Trophy winner, Dave Poulin

 

[rmartin65]

That's like comparing 1970's Soviet hockey to the 1960's.

There was as big a difference between 1962 and 1979 hockey in Moscow as there was between 1892 and 1909 hockey in Montreal and cities thereabouts.

Is this true? I wouldn't call myself particularly knowledgeable on the ins and outs of Soviet hockey, but I can tell you that hockey didn't change over night in the 1890s and 1900s.

Everyone recognizes Bowie's greatness, right? Well, Bowie- who dominated the scoring charts in the 1900s- and MacDougall actually overlapped for one season, the 1899 Stanley Cup Champion Montreal Victorias. Let's look at their scoring totals (including SC games):

Name	Games	Goals	Assists	Points
Bob MacDougall	4	10	2	12
Russell Bowie	9	11.3	.5	11.83

MacDougall bests (essentially ties) Bowie while playing less than half the amount of games.

Lets look at this a little closer. MacDougall plays hist first game of the season on 11 February against Ottawa HC- it's the Victorias' last game before the SC series against the Winnipeg Victorias, it is clearly a warm-up. While it is MacDougall's first game, it is the Victorias' 5th.

Name	Goals	Assists	Points
Bob MacDougall	7.5	1	8.5
Russell Bowie	2	0	2

The second game MacDougall plays is game 1 of the SC series-

Name	Goals	Assists	Points
Bob MacDougall	1	0	1
Russell Bowie	0	0	0

The third game MacDougall plays in is game 2 of the SC series-

Name	Goals	Assists	Points
Bob MacDougall	1.5	1	2.5
Russell Bowie	1	.5	1.5

The fourth (and final) game MacDougall plays in turned out to be the Vics' last game of the year. The Vics lost 1-0 to the Montreal Shamrocks.

Alright, so they played 4 games together that season. Let's look and see what they did over just those four games-

Name	Goals	Assists	Points
Bob MacDougall	10	2	12
Russell Bowie	3	.5	3.5

And you are trying to tell me that an 1890s player isn't in the same ballpark as a player from the 1900s? That there was a "big difference"?

Disclaimer- Bowie was young, 18 I think. So this clearly isn't peak Bowie. And it is a small sample size. But, man, I don't know how someone can look at this data and think there was a huge chasm between the 1890s and 1900s.

And no, I don't think MacDougall was better than Bowie. I mean, it looks like he was in 1899, but over the balance of their careers Bowie was better, and you'll never see me argue otherwise.

But there is just no evidence to suggest that the stars of a previous generation couldn't hang with the stars of the next. To say otherwise runs contrary to the evidence in the game summaries and in the reconstructed stats tables.

 

[tinyzombies]

Yup- you're right. His birth year post-dates Reardon's retirement. I have two snippets in mind- one direct, one hearsay. The hearsay one is that someone said 'C' saw Teeder Kennedy play- which (if an accurate recollection) would wind up being a kindergarten memory. The other- which I recall specifically, is to the effect that he heard old-timers argue Morenz v. Shore. By the time 'C' was a grade-schooler, Gordie Howe was GORDIE HOWE and any Morenz-Shore argument would no longer have been a credible GOAT argument.

Damn- Reardon had a short career. Then again, he lost three full seasons to WWII, so there's that.

In the past five 18-24 sized draft years, five Defensemen have ALWAYS been taken in the 2nd Round [Chelios, Coffey, Park, Clancy. Pronger]. Sometimes ['19, 25] Larry Robinson slips to the 2nd Round- and gives someone a bargain. This year, Fetisov slipped to the 2nd Round and gave Savannah a Roger Daltrey Bargain.

He played with Bouchard (RD), I thought.

 

[Claude The Fraud]

The Ottawa 67's are pleased to welcome, from Montreal, Québec, the coach with the most Jack Adams in his brief case, former policeman and closest coach from the HA ever, Pat Burns.

 

[tinyzombies]

GORDIE DRILLON, to reunite with Apps. 47 VsX7 goals (same as Lafleur).

The Globe and Mail said:
It may surprise you to know that Apps was only one-fifth of a second faster than Gordie Drillon, whose severest critics picture as hockey's stationary forward, rather than a galloping giselle on the blades.

 

[tabness]

I'll pick an Al Arbour/Denis Potvin kinda guy, John Tonelli, LW

From what I've seen and read of the Islanders dynasty, their depth was a huge part of their success and there was a far greater emphasis placed on this contemporaneously than now when much of the talk anachronistically focuses on the big three superstars of Potvin, Bossy, Trottier, with maybe some love also given to the goalie and Arbour himself.

Of that vaunted depth, Tonelli seemed to be a standout, he clearly demonstrated ability to play a bigger scoring role, but of course usually did all the gritty work that he's known for.

 

[Hitru]

Is this true? I wouldn't call myself particularly knowledgeable on the ins and outs of Soviet hockey, but I can tell you that hockey didn't change over night in the 1890s and 1900s.

Everyone recognizes Bowie's greatness, right? Well, Bowie- who dominated the scoring charts in the 1900s- and MacDougall actually overlapped for one season, the 1899 Stanley Cup Champion Montreal Victorias. Let's look at their scoring totals (including SC games):

Name	Games	Goals	Assists	Points
Bob MacDougall	4	10	2	12
Russell Bowie	9	11.3	.5	11.83

MacDougall bests (essentially ties) Bowie while playing less than half the amount of games.

Lets look at this a little closer. MacDougall plays hist first game of the season on 11 February against Ottawa HC- it's the Victorias' last game before the SC series against the Winnipeg Victorias, it is clearly a warm-up. While it is MacDougall's first game, it is the Victorias' 5th.

Name	Goals	Assists	Points
Bob MacDougall	7.5	1	8.5
Russell Bowie	2	0	2

The second game MacDougall plays is game 1 of the SC series-

Name	Goals	Assists	Points
Bob MacDougall	1	0	1
Russell Bowie	0	0	0

The third game MacDougall plays in is game 2 of the SC series-

Name	Goals	Assists	Points
Bob MacDougall	1.5	1	2.5
Russell Bowie	1	.5	1.5

The fourth (and final) game MacDougall plays in turned out to be the Vics' last game of the year. The Vics lost 1-0 to the Montreal Shamrocks.

Alright, so they played 4 games together that season. Let's look and see what they did over just those four games-

Name	Goals	Assists	Points
Bob MacDougall	10	2	12
Russell Bowie	3	.5	3.5

And you are trying to tell me that an 1890s player isn't in the same ballpark as a player from the 1900s? That there was a "big difference"?

Disclaimer- Bowie was young, 18 I think. So this clearly isn't peak Bowie. And it is a small sample size. But, man, I don't know how someone can look at this data and think there was a huge chasm between the 1890s and 1900s.

And no, I don't think MacDougall was better than Bowie. I mean, it looks like he was in 1899, but over the balance of their careers Bowie was better, and you'll never see me argue otherwise.

But there is just no evidence to suggest that the stars of a previous generation couldn't hang with the stars of the next. To say otherwise runs contrary to the evidence in the game summaries and in the reconstructed stats tables.

From my perspective this illustrates well some of the problems with "star chaining". You have handfull of games from a time when other guy was 18. Additionally, we don't know what was their TOI or usage on ice. There's almost no statistical weight behind this comparison.

Don't take this wrong, I respect the effort and time spent in your research, but I just don't find this argument to be strong.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I'll leave a list, going to sleep.

 

[rmartin65]

From my perspective this illustrates well some of the problems with "star chaining". You have handfull of games from a time when other guy was 18. Additionally, we don't know what was their TOI or usage on ice. There's almost no statistical weight behind this comparison.

Your earlier concern with star chining was late bloomers, right? I don't think either Bowie or MacDougall could be considered late-bloomers here.

TOI? Players played the entire game back then, barring injury. Usage? Considering players played essentially the whole game, they were probably involved in both defensive and offensive situations.

The example doesn't end with this four game sample size. It's hard to talk about it here due to undrafteds, but using guys already drafted-

Harvey Pulford debuted in 1894. No one is really talking about him as a great player until 1903 ish.

Hod Stuart debuted in 1899. He doesn't really stand out until he goes to the WPHL, comes back to Canada as the best coverpoint (and dman) and one of the greatest players in the world.

Another player debuts in 1899. Doesn't stand out until he leaves for another league. Comes back and eventually finishes third in scoring, well into the 1900s. Plays into the NHA, even.

Another player debuted in 1895. Didn't really stand out until 1902, played regularly until 1908, played 3 games in the NHA.

Alf Smith debuted in 1895. 6th in scoring in 1897... 3rd in scoring in 1906 and 1907.

There are just too many data points suggesting that 1890s hockey was just fine. They are all small individually, but once you start putting them together your sample gets bigger, and gives a better picture. Which, I feel, supports my case.

 

[spitsfan24]

Always sucks having your clock during the middle of the night, but @GKJ's expired about an hour and a half or so ago.

@BenchBrawl is now up, although he said he'd send a list. Does anyone have it?

 

[ImporterExporter]

BB left me a list.

Matthew Tkachuk, LW

 

[spitsfan24]

I guess that means I'm up now.

The Windsor Spitfires are proud to select a player that our coach has spoken about in glowing praise several times, C Vyacheslav Starshinov.

He will act as our 4C, while being a key aspect of the penalty kill as well.

Will PM next.

 

[GKJ]

Going to take someone that I’m not sure why he doesn’t go higher looking back at some of these drafts: Alexander Mogilny. Should be in the Hall of Fame soon enough

 

[Johnny Engine]

GORDIE DRILLON, to reunite with Apps. 47 VsX7 goals (same as Lafleur).

The Globe and Mail said:
It may surprise you to know that Apps was only one-fifth of a second faster than Gordie Drillon, whose severest critics picture as hockey's stationary forward, rather than a galloping giselle on the blades.

View attachment 984254

This is the last of the players I expect to be drafted, from the post where I compared Apps and his most famous linemates, to another player with a very different reputation as a two way centre.

That centre was Mike Modano, who had his defensive come to Jesus period while linked up with a Drillon analog in Brett Hull, and defensive ace Jere Lehtinen. Apps's own Lehtinen is an ATD worthy grinder, I just can't see him finding a spot in a 20 team draft in 2025.

 

[VanIslander]

I have come across some gems of research bits in 20 years of ATD research. I have documented with my picks of Pulford a couple of drafts his heroic role as a 19 year old in the 1894 Stanley Cup playoff, heralded in a newspaper account from the day as the defensive reason the game was tied 1-1 after the first period, in the eventual loss. I can't seem to find the specific source or heck even the draft posts (ain't spending hours trying - ten minutes i just spent).

I did just come across this gem:

Pulford was tall and sturdily built, and owing to his robust playing style, which included delivering punishing body-checks on attacking forwards, he was nicknamed the Bytown Slugger. Since he played the defensive position of point, he seldom rushed the puck, preferring to hoist it in the air and down the ice, a tactic popular with fans. Pulford was admired by his teammates and served as their captain.

 

[Hockey Stathead]

This is the last of the players I expect to be drafted, from the post where I compared Apps and his most famous linemates, to another player with a very different reputation as a two way centre.

That centre was Mike Modano, who had his defensive come to Jesus period while linked up with a Drillon analog in Brett Hull, and defensive ace Jere Lehtinen. Apps's own Lehtinen is an ATD worthy grinder, I just can't see him finding a spot in a 20 team draft in 2025.

I have Modano and was going to take Drillon with next pick…

 

[tinyzombies]

This is the last of the players I expect to be drafted, from the post where I compared Apps and his most famous linemates, to another player with a very different reputation as a two way centre.

That centre was Mike Modano, who had his defensive come to Jesus period while linked up with a Drillon analog in Brett Hull, and defensive ace Jere Lehtinen. Apps's own Lehtinen is an ATD worthy grinder, I just can't see him finding a spot in a 20 team draft in 2025.

There are different components of defense. Playing net front line Drillon did AND backchecking is a lot to ask. Was he positionally sound in his end? Did he turn it over? Was he able to possess the puck in the ozone? I see him compared to Nels Stewart in his profile, but even that’s not exact as Drillon was as fast as Apps. The Leaf fans turned on him but the both of them had several years together at the top of league scoring. I can add Toe Blake or Jiri Holik to LW. I’m guessing it will be impossible to parse out the other details of his defensive game. There are articles that say they were both solid two-way as well. But if Lafleur is getting a pass, Drillon has the exact same VsX7 47 goals. I’ll poke around for more details but they likely don’t exist and I might have to drop him to a third line or balance things out. A lot of times the tough talk of coaches like Dick Irvin would concrete into opinion, even if his comments were meant to motivate a player. The duo obviously had success with a defensively responsible left winger. Then again I am just experimenting here and could also drop him to the third line if I have to.

 

[Dr Pepper]

Dawson City selects "Smokey" Harris, LW

 

[Hockey Stathead]

Detroit selects Vaclav Nedomansky, C/RW

 

[BenchBrawl]

BB left me a list.

Matthew Tkachuk, LW

Thanks for making my pick.