Fisher Conference Final: Montreal Canadiens vs Montreal Maroons

[TheDevilMadeMe]

How often do you see your 3rd line playing against his 3rd pairing? I can't imagine it would happen often enough to matter..

That being said, you're probably right that it might be an issue in transition. I just have a very hard time imagining a scenario where RB's 3rd pair and your 3rd line are on the ice at the same time in RB's offensive zone..

Who else is the third pairing playing against if not the third line?

 

[jarek]

Who else is the third pairing playing against if not the third line?

Maybe nobody. However, how often is that exact situation going to happen? It's so situational to the point that it's a largely irrelevant concern IMO.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Maybe nobody. However, how often is that exact situation going to happen? It's so situational to the point that it's a largely irrelevant concern IMO.

It's standard practice for a coach to prefer to match his 3rd best pairing against the 3rd best line of the other team.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

It's standard practice for a coach to prefer to match his 3rd best pairing against the 3rd best line of the other team.

I have to be honest jarek, this is a pretty basic concept, you're trying to get your top 2 D pairs out against your opponents' scoring lines to stop them, so naturally your 3rd pairing will see a lot of time against your opponents' 3rd line.

 

[jarek]

That isn't the point guys..

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

That isn't the point guys..

I don't follow. Here's how I'm seeing things with regards to this specific topic:

- BB is saying his 3rd line against RB's 3rd pairing is a matchup in his favor because of speed (a pretty standard type of argument for a series thread)
- You said you don't think that matchup will present itself often enough to be considered relevant
- TDMM and I disagreed for the reasons we stated


Now obviously this is merely one factor/matchup/comparison among many that need to be considered and not the crux of the entire series but surely worth mentioning. Is there something else I'm missing?

 

[ResilientBeast]

I don't follow. Here's how I'm seeing things with regards to this specific topic:

- BB is saying his 3rd line against RB's 3rd pairing is a matchup in his favor because of speed (a pretty standard type of argument for a series thread)
- You said you don't think that matchup will present itself often enough to be considered relevant
- TDMM and I disagreed for the reasons we stated


Now obviously this is merely one factor/matchup/comparison among many that need to be considered and not the crux of the entire series but surely worth mentioning. Is there something else I'm missing?

My counter to that is with that you're ignoring 60% of my skaters on the ice.

He has two speedy forwards on a line, with the exception of my third line I have at least two speedy back checking forwards who should be able to minimize the threat when my third pairing is out there.

 

[jarek]

I don't follow. Here's how I'm seeing things with regards to this specific topic:

- BB is saying his 3rd line against RB's 3rd pairing is a matchup in his favor because of speed (a pretty standard type of argument for a series thread)
- You said you don't think that matchup will present itself often enough to be considered relevant
- TDMM and I disagreed for the reasons we stated


Now obviously this is merely one factor/matchup/comparison among many that need to be considered and not the crux of the entire series but surely worth mentioning. Is there something else I'm missing?

The Amonte line figures to be playing 13 minutes a game at ES. The speed advantage will not be very relevant in the defensive zone IMO. So the only time it'll really matter is on the transition. How many times per game do you figure that's going to happen if the Amonte line plays those 13 minutes, AND RB's 3rd pair is out, AND they're in RB's offensive zone, AND the puck gets turned over in such a way that allows a clean zone exit where RB's defense has to chase them down?

It just seems like something that MIGHT happen once a game.. if that..

 

[BenchBrawl]

Even if the Maroons, despite having an inferior coach, somehow managed to avoid this brutal match-up, their 3rd pairing would still end up getting exposed.Why? Because the Canadiens' 2nd line is also very fast, and you don't want your 3rd pairing facing the other team's top line.

The Canadiens' 2nd line is also very fast

Glenn Anderson:

NHL Coaches Poll, 1984

Fastest Skater:

1. Glenn Anderson
2. Mike Gartner
3. Denis Savard

For the past seven years, Anderson, 27, and Mark Messier have been one of the fastest, most fearsome attacking duos in NHL history

Electrifying performer, ultra-fast, tough and skilled

very fast, skilled in all areas and physically aggressive...

difficult to hit because he is so fast...

Incredibly fast skater

Anderson's ability to do more things faster than almost anyone in the league makes him a remarkable finesse player...

He is blindingly fast and able to make plays while at top speed.

Mike Modano:

1994 Coaches Poll

Best Skater: Sergei Fedorov (8), Teemu Selanne (3), Paul Coffey (2), Mike Modano (2), Mike Gartner (2), Pavel Bure (1), Alexander Mogilny (1), Jeremy Roenick (1)

1994 Coaches Poll: Fastest Skater: 1. Sergei Fedorov (10) 2. Pavel Bure (5) 3. (tie) Paul Coffey, Mike Gartner, Mike Modano, Alexander Mogilny (2).

He was the first guy behind our net to get the puck out, and he was so fast he'd [get in position to] take the first pass up ice

He still swoops over the ice at warp speed and backs off defensemen with his skating as effectively as anyone since Buffalo's Gilbert Perreault in the 1970s.

"What he's able to do with the puck at a high speed might be the most amazing part of Mike's game,"

Barry Melrose's top 5 skater in NHL history

1.Orr
2.Coffey
3.Modano
4.Fedorov
5.Bure

https://www.nhl.com/news/melrose-minute-best-skaters-in-nhl-history/c-4037

His speed was his strength

Paul Thompson:

their only dangerous stickman was Paul Thompson, speedy brother of the Boston goalie

The very rapid Paul Thompson

 

[ResilientBeast]

Can we stop here for a second, how on earth does me having a worse coach immediately make it such that you'll get mismatches the entire time? What do you expect Laviolette to do? Sit there drooling the entire game?

 

[ResilientBeast]

It's also still ignoring 60% of the skaters I have on the ice

1st Line - Taylor, Firsov
2nd Line - Prentice, Richard, Gilbert
3rd Line - Harris, Bowie
4th Line - Bourne, Curry (?)

Are all fast enough and again with the exception of Bowie willing backcheckers.

So yes if we were playing 3v2 rush up the ice you'd have the advantage, too bad that isn't hockey

 

[BenchBrawl]

Faceoffs

Hard to get any information for Taylor, Bowie and Fredrickson.I did a quick google search for Shadrin because I found no info in his biography.Found two quotes.I covered the Maroons by ctrl-ing "face" in every forward's linked biography, plus that extra search for Shadrin since he's a center.The Maroons are free to provide more information on their players (or mines).

There's no comparative conclusion due to the missing information.What I can say is that the Canadiens have a question mark on their 3rd line only (Fredrickson), whereas the Maroons have question marks on their 1st and 3rd lines (Taylor and Bowie respectively), plus their 1st PP unit (Bowie).The Canadiens are particularly strong on their 1st PP unit (Trottier/Andreychuk) and on their 2nd PK unit (Trottier/Sheppard).Both teams have two players who can take faceoffs on their 4th line (Andreychuk/Sheppard and Shadrin/Bourne).

Bryan Trottier

Best on faceoffs: Bryan Trottier

He was dominant in all other phases of the game from play-making to penalty killing.In addition, he took every critical face-off for his team.

Brent Sutter, though, fondly remembers a time when another squadron ruled the dots.

During the 1980s, New York Islanders head coach Al Arbour, with great success, would platoon Bryan Trottier (a lefty) and Sutter (a righty).

"Trots and I took all the faceoffs in our zone".

He'd take' em on one side of the ice and I'd take 'em on the other side of the ice.Al put us out there at the same time.

https://www.pressreader.com/canada/calgary-herald/20091205/283008280869662

Mike Modano

Overall, the Bruins, up 2-1 in the best-of-seven final, have won 56.1 per cent of faceoffs in the playoffs. The last Stanley Cup champion with a faceoff success rate over 55 per cent? The Dallas Stars in 1999, who won 55.6 per cent of draws with six players at 50 per cent or higher (minimum 40 faceoffs):

Joe Nieuwendyk, 59.8%
Mike Modano, 56.6%
Benoit Hogue, 54.6%
Derek Plante, 53.6%
Guy Carbonneau, 51.9%
Brian Skrudland, 50.9%

http://www.cbc.ca/sports-content/ho...s-draw-confidence-from-faceoff-dominance.html

"When Mo is at his best he does so many little things—face-offs, penalty killing, playing against other teams' top players,"says Dallas coach Dave Tippett.

His game had evolved so much by then that Modano was considered a great passer and an excellent defender, a two-way center who could win face-offs and check the best opposing players into the boards.

https://books.google.ca/books?id=Js...AVM4ChDoAQgoMAI#v=onepage&q=face-offs&f=false

Bridging the eras - the Islanders of then, the Sharks of now - was another wave of (faceoffs) aces.The likes of Mike Modano and Steve Yzerman.

https://www.pressreader.com/canada/calgary-herald/20091205/283008280869662

Like it is for hitters in baseball, one faceoff out of 10 can be the difference between having great numbers and good numbers. After consulting with coaches and centers, here are their top five faceoff men, the guys you want in the circle when it counts:

1. Yanic Perreault, Montreal: 373-219 (63.01 percent)
2. Rod Brind'Amour, Carolina: 510-389 (56.73 percent)
3. Joe Nieuwendyk, New Jersey: 312-217 (58-98 percent)
4. Dave Andreychuk, Tampa Bay: 226-137 (62.75 percent)
5. Craig Conroy, Calgary: 346-246 (58.45 percent)

Also considered: Mike Modano, Dallas ... Chris Gratton, Buffalo ... Mats Sundin, Toronto ... Joe Sakic, Colorado ... Mike Sillinger, Columbus ... Todd Marchant, Edmonton.

Gregg Sheppard

as well as proving himself as one of the league's premier faceoff men and penalty killers

Another factor in the Penguins' penalty killing difficulties is the absence of veteran center Gregg Sheppard. Sheppard, whose faceoff skills helped make him a steady penalty killer, was released this past summer.

Dave Andreychuk

Like it is for hitters in baseball, one faceoff out of 10 can be the difference between having great numbers and good numbers. After consulting with coaches and centers, here are their top five faceoff men, the guys you want in the circle when it counts:

1. Yanic Perreault, Montreal: 373-219 (63.01 percent)
2. Rod Brind'Amour, Carolina: 510-389 (56.73 percent)
3. Joe Nieuwendyk, New Jersey: 312-217 (58-98 percent)
4. Dave Andreychuk, Tampa Bay: 226-137 (62.75 percent) this season ... Another big guy who can get down low. With that height, he leans over the circle, making it tough to get to the puck ... Along with Perreault, the only other player this season over the 60-percent mark.
5. Craig Conroy, Calgary: 346-246 (58.45 percent)

http://a.espncdn.com/nhl/columns/stevenson_chris/1479670.html

He's the type of player who has outstanding hands around the goal. He will fit into our style of play, and he's good on face-offs."

http://www.nytimes.com/1996/03/14/sports/hockey-devils-lose-chambers-but-gain-andreychuk.html

A team defined by the flash and dash of young standouts Martin St. Louis and Vincent Lecavalier is propped up by the mettle of Andreychuk, a player with scars older than some of his teammates."He slips under the radar because you're so worried about other people," says Flyers coach Ken Hitchcock. "But at the end of the night he's played on all the power plays, taken all the key face-offs, killed all the penalties and been out there in the first and last minutes of the game. He's a real heart-and-soul guy."

https://www.si.com/vault/2004/05/17...he-lightning-around-will-he-finally-win-a-cup

he has become an expert in the game's overlooked arts: taking face-offs, blocking shots, killing penalties and checking top players.

https://www.si.com/vault/2004/05/17...he-lightning-around-will-he-finally-win-a-cup

Henri Richard

Henri Richard. That son of a ***** was the best centre I ever played against. He was good on faceoffs. He was fast. The little ******* could score. He was a tough little guy and I respected him. Henri was the most underrated player on the Canadiens.

Vladimir Shadrin (and Yuri Liapkin)

Esposito loses the faceoff in the Soviet end to Shadrin, the Moscow Spartak center who has emerged as a master of faceoffs...

One other tidbit is that the Soviet line with Shadrin and Yakushev were having such a tough time winning faceoffs in Game 1 that they actually resorted to using a defenceman, Yuri Liapkin, for 4 faceoffs. Liapkin did pretty good too winning 3 of 4 draws.

http://edmontonjournal.com/sports/h...w-much-can-we-trust-stats-from-pre-replay-era

Bob Bourne

Has winning touch when taking faceoffs

 

[ResilientBeast]

Can we stop here for a second, how on earth does me having a worse coach immediately make it such that you'll get mismatches the entire time? What do you expect Laviolette to do? Sit there drooling the entire game?

To elaborate on this more, how exactly does a better coach impart a massive advantage? Plenty of teams with ATD caliber coaches have lost to lesser coaches over the year.

Just because Arbor > Laviolette doesn't mean Laviolette will be incapable of escaping unfavourable matchups, more and more I'm struggling to see why coaches impart massive advantages in drafts like this.

This is a general comment and not specific to this matchup if someone could explain please go ahead.

 

[jarek]

To elaborate on this more, how exactly does a better coach impart a massive advantage? Plenty of teams with ATD caliber coaches have lost to lesser coaches over the year.

Just because Arbor > Laviolette doesn't mean Laviolette will be incapable of escaping unfavourable matchups, more and more I'm struggling to see why coaches impart massive advantages in drafts like this.

This is a general comment and not specific to this matchup if someone could explain please go ahead.

I don't really get it either. I think better coaching can certainly lead to better preparation, a better game plan, and potentially a better execution of said game plan, but within the game itself, I haven't seen it too often where a game got out of hand because one guy coached better than the other.

The only time I think coaching can be a big problem is if you have a coach that didn't win a cup, or has a history of playoff disappointments. Those definitely are major factors, but even then, I don't see how those things would affect much of anything during the playing of the game. I think better coaching just leads to bigger advantages for the preparation of the games than anything else.

Of note here though is that Laviolette did make the bone headed decision of constantly sending Briere out against Bergeron in the playoffs one year, and got burned for it horribly. This is according to Flyers fans. On the other hand, Laviolette is the only coach to have made the finals with 3 separate teams in this era (ever?), which may suggest we should be having a higher opinion of him to begin with.

 

[ResilientBeast]

I don't really get it either. I think better coaching can certainly lead to better preparation, a better game plan, and potentially a better execution of said game plan, but within the game itself, I haven't seen it too often where a game got out of hand because one guy coached better than the other.

The only time I think coaching can be a big problem is if you have a coach that didn't win a cup, or has a history of playoff disappointments. Those definitely are major factors, but even then, I don't see how those things would affect much of anything during the playing of the game. I think better coaching just leads to bigger advantages for the preparation of the games than anything else.

Of note here though is that Laviolette did make the bone headed decision of constantly sending Briere out against Bergeron in the playoffs one year, and got burned for it horribly. This is according to Flyers fans. On the other hand, Laviolette is the only coach to have made the finals with 3 separate teams in this era (ever?), which may suggest we should be having a higher opinion of him to begin with.

If teams with subaverage goaltending can win the ATD, lower end coaches should be able to. For my money a team is better off with an elite goalie and below average coach than with a below average goalie and an elite coach.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Of note here though is that Laviolette did make the bone headed decision of constantly sending Briere out against Bergeron in the playoffs one year, and got burned for it horribly. This is according to Flyers fans. On the other hand, Laviolette is the only coach to have made the finals with 3 separate teams in this era (ever?), which may suggest we should be having a higher opinion of him to begin with.

Whenever asking "ever" about a coaching accomplishment always check Scotty Bowman first

Also, this is a fine accomplishment but a lot of coaches who probably could have done this didn't have the opportunity because they didn't get fired from the first or second team they took to the Cup (or at least didn't so quickly). So good on him for making it work with 3 different teams by don't forget that he also got himself fired from those first 2 teams. For the record I'm fine with Laviolette as an ATD coach, this is just a comment that coaching 3 different teams to a Cup Fina isn't any better than coaching the same team to 3 Cup Finals. It's kind of like Messier Captaining 2 teams to a Cup...people make a big deal out of it, but how many Captains that win a Cup get traded to another team while still in their prime?...very few. There's probably several guys that could have Captained 2 teams to a Cup but they were never put in that position or "given the opportunity" because they remained with their team.

Sorry that kind of turned into an off topic rant

 

[jarek]

Whenever asking "ever" about a coaching accomplishment always check Scotty Bowman first

Also, this is a fine accomplishment but a lot of coaches who probably could have done this didn't have the opportunity because they didn't get fired from the first or second team they took to the Cup (or at least didn't so quickly). So good on him for making it work with 3 different teams by don't forget that he also got himself fired from those first 2 teams. For the record I'm fine with Laviolette as an ATD coach, this is just a comment that coaching 3 different teams to a Cup Fina isn't any better than coaching the same team to 3 Cup Finals. It's kind of like Messier Captaining 2 teams to a Cup...people make a big deal out of it, but how many Captains that win a Cup get traded to another team while still in their prime?...very few. There's probably several guys that could have Captained 2 teams to a Cup but they were never put in that position or "given the opportunity" because they remained with their team.

Sorry that kind of turned into an off topic rant

Fair points. Yeah, I guess if I really think about it I'm not sure what it actually "means". I was going to say that it suggests he's flexible and able to work with a diverse group of players, but even if that's true (it isn't necessarily), I'm not even sure how that would help him here.

 

[ResilientBeast]

Whenever asking "ever" about a coaching accomplishment always check Scotty Bowman first

Also, this is a fine accomplishment but a lot of coaches who probably could have done this didn't have the opportunity because they didn't get fired from the first or second team they took to the Cup (or at least didn't so quickly). So good on him for making it work with 3 different teams by don't forget that he also got himself fired from those first 2 teams. For the record I'm fine with Laviolette as an ATD coach, this is just a comment that coaching 3 different teams to a Cup Fina isn't any better than coaching the same team to 3 Cup Finals. It's kind of like Messier Captaining 2 teams to a Cup...people make a big deal out of it, but how many Captains that win a Cup get traded to another team while still in their prime?...very few. There's probably several guys that could have Captained 2 teams to a Cup but they were never put in that position or "given the opportunity" because they remained with their team.

Sorry that kind of turned into an off topic rant

Laviolette has a shelf life because of his style, that's why I got a true players coach in Frank Patrick to back him up.

 

[jarek]

Laviolette has a shelf life because of his style, that's why I got a true players coach in Frank Patrick to back him up.

By his style, do you mean his knack for pissing his players off? He's a lot like Tortorella in that respect.

 

[ResilientBeast]

By his style, do you mean his knack for pissing his players off? He's a lot like Tortorella in that respect.

Yup

But how much can that possibly matter in his one and only season coaching my team

 

[jarek]

Yup

But how much can that possibly matter in his one and only season coaching my team

Not sure. I suppose you could look at it as an aggregate of his entire coaching career?

When things are going good, the players are able to ignore the rantings and ravings. However, when there is a losing streak, he starts to lose the bench a little bit.

Although if you look at it this way over the course of a single season, it doesn't really make much sense.

I suppose if you had any moody players, like a Bathgate or Richard, it might be an issue. However, looking at your roster, you seem to be chock full of strong leader/team-first kind of players that will understand Laviolette losing his mind. So in that respect, I think that effect will be minimized more than usual with your roster.

There isn't even a situation with your team where Laviolette could really mess up the matchups, like he did with Briere (it was really more a symptom of not really having a great matchup line if you ask me). The Richard/Shadrin lines playing against top scoring lines is just so obvious that nobody could screw it up. You've also got enough defensive skill throughout the defense that there isn't really a single pairing that could get victimized too badly from a defensive point of view.

Honestly, your team is just so boring and cookie cutter that there aren't any serious holes you could poke through.

 

[ResilientBeast]

Except 4D, I think Patrick is borderline top 100 all time but I can see why people don't

 

[jarek]

Except 4D, I think Patrick is borderline top 100 all time but I can see why people don't

I don't care where they rank. I was merely referring to their ability to defend against the opposing forwards. Your top pair, Mantha and Lowe are all guys I would say are at least plus defensively at this level.

There are questions about Patrick and especially Liapkin but overall I'd say you're OK.

I do have one concern about your blueline, particularly the top pair. It has often been said that Laviolette requires strong skating defensemen who are really adept at moving the puck out of the defensive zone for his teams to have success, because his system often has the forwards blowing the zone and leaving the defense out to dry. I'm not concerned about this with Patrick and Liapkin, but I would like to hear how your team will manage this when the other 4 defensemen have the puck.

 

[ResilientBeast]

I don't care where they rank. I was merely referring to their ability to defend against the opposing forwards. Your top pair, Mantha and Lowe are all guys I would say are at least plus defensively at this level.

There are questions about Patrick and especially Liapkin but overall I'd say you're OK.

I do have one concern about your blueline, particularly the top pair. It has often been said that Laviolette requires strong skating defensemen who are really adept at moving the puck out of the defensive zone for his teams to have success, because his system often has the forwards blowing the zone and leaving the defense out to dry. I'm not concerned about this with Patrick and Liapkin, but I would like to hear how your team will manage this when the other 4 defensemen have the puck.

Pulling some stuff from the bios

Gadsby

While playing with the Hawks, Gadsby established himself as a terrific competitor who was equally adept at leading a rush as he was on the defensive aspects of the game. Bill could be an aggressive player on the ice (a (clean) bodycheck on Tim Horton in 1955 broke the Leafs' player's leg and jaw, almost ending his career) but whose calm demeanour off the ice was a paradox.

-13x Top 10 in NHL scoring by a defenceman (1,1,1,2,2,2,2,2,4,4,6,7,7)
-12x Top 10 in NHL assists by a defenceman (1,1,1,2,2,2,3,4,4,4,7,8)
-11x Top 10 in NHL goals by a defenceman (1,1,2,2,2,3,3,4,6,6,9)

Clearly strong offensively as well as defensively classic two way D

Clapper

-Four times Top 5 in NHL scoring by a Defenceman (1st: 1941, 2nd: 1939 & '40, 5th: 1943)

No direct quotes about his puck handling ability sadly

 

[ResilientBeast]

Mantha is a stay at home guy for the most part but he had some offensive ability being one of the higher scoring blue liners of his time

Kevin Lowe

Beginning in 1979-80, Lowe's solid two-way play and articulate leadership in the dressing room was a factor in the team's success for 13 years. His mobility, defensive hockey sense, and puck handling skills made him an asset on a club that won five Stanley Cups in seven years beginning in 1983-84.

Lowe had outstanding hockey sense and vision which game him a superior advantage by understanding the defensive breakdown of the oncoming attack. An agile though not fast skater, Lowe used his anticipation to relieve the opposition of the puck. He would then safely move the puck up to one of his many outstanding forwards. It is safe to say that the Oilers forwards couldn't have cheated offensively like they did if they didn't have a defensive stalwart like Lowe to break up plays and spring the forwards loose with great transitional passes.