Series Particulars:
1. Proven Chemistry of Top Line
The MLP line dominated the inaugural NHL season in 1917-18. Malone scored 44 goals in 20 games (won Rocket and Art Ross), a record that stood until Maurice Richard came to be. Despite missing 6 games, Lalonde registered 30 points (23+7) in 14 contests, still good enough for 4th place in the league. Pitre finished with 23 in 20, coming in 7th. Their combined 101 points in 54 combined games was most in the league and the trio easily had the most goals for/fewest goals against.
2. Finding The Back of the Net
You need to score to win. MLP collectively and individually, knew how to do just that. 6 times Lalonde led his leagues goals. His record of 455 goals in major league hockey was not surpassed until '55-56 by Maurice Richard. Malone actually had a slightly higher goals per game average, which is saying something, and led the NHA/NHL 4 separate times, including a long standing single season record in 17-18. Even the 3rd wheel, Pitre, led his leagues 3 times in outright scoring w/2 Rockets (IHL/NHA). That's 12 goal scoring titles combined, creating a unique challenge in defending.
Top Scorers, 1909-1926, from the Hockey Compendium
Name | Games|Goals|Assists|Points
Newsy Lalonde | 296 |362 |81 |443
Joe Malone | 273 |343 |58| 401
Cy Denneny | 259 |258 |82 | 340
Frank Nighbor | 287 |238 |96 | 334
Frank Foyston | 297 |223 |72 | 295
Cyclone Taylor | 169 |189 |104| 293
Mickey MacKay | 247 |198 |92| 290
PPG (min 100 games)
Taylor - 1.73 (significantly fewer games played than everyone else)
Lalonde - 1.50
Malone - 1.47
Denneny - 1.31
Nighbor - 1.20
MacKay - 1.17
Pitre - 1.10
Foyston - 0.99
GPG (min 100 games)
Malone - 1.26
Lalonde - 1.22
Taylor - 1.12
Denneny - 1.00
Pitre - 0.95
Nighbor - 0.83
MacKay - 0.80
Foyston - 0.75
Bernie Morris winning an outright consolidated (NHA+PCHA) Rocket in 1916 over some big, big names, including Lalonde.
Darryl Sittler scored 40 or more goals 5 times. Bergeron 30 or more 6 times.
Matt Tkachuk already has a pair of 40 goal seasons to his name and is playing with a C who excelled w/a very similar winger in Brad Marchand. He and Bergeron have scored A LOT of huge postseason/SCF goals.
Joe Mullen scored 51 once, 40+ 7 times, and led the postseason in goals, twice.
3. Sunnyvale Is Built For Arbour (and your team, we'll get to that later)
Lalonde plays an Arbour style of hockey. Fast, aggressive on the man/puck, playing a robust physical, 200 foot game. There are a lot of similarities to Bryan Trottier. A born leader and line driver, he possesses the skill needed to carry a puck through traffic, and tenacity to win puck battles when the need arises. Big game player who routinely showed out well in Cup matches.
Malone isn't a carbon copy of Bossy, but he's pretty close. Scored a lot of goals by "finding space", operating often in the slot, net areas. Preference for a lightning quick release, choosing accuracy over power. Both were clean players who stayed clear of the penalty box. The biggest difference to me, is that Malone stickhandled more than Bossy, though that's largely explained by the era/rules differences.
D.A.L. MacDonald, Montreal Gazette, January 23, 1934: Turning Back Hockey’s Pages
Scoring marks were not the only records Malone that left behind him for future hockey stars to shoot at. In the days of rowdy hockey, when butchery was too often the means towards victory, Malone was a Frankie Boucher type of centre. It is significant that in 1919-20, when penalties records were kept for the first time, Malone served only 12 minutes on the side-lines, though scoring 39 tallies.
Tall, rugged and a great stickhandler, he was also a potent defensive unit. He had a fine poke-check, and like Nighbor, used a long stick to break up opposing attacks. He and Odie Cleghorn were probably the outstanding stickhandlers of their day. But unlike Odie, who used a short stick and nursed the puck along almost between his skates, Malone swept through the opposition with long, swinging strides. He was a left hand shot.
Dink Carroll, Montreal Gazette, June 28, 1950 (Malone elected to Hall of Fame)
One thing Joe could do was put the puck in the net. As we recall him he skated with his feet fairly wide apart, was hard to knock off balance, was always in the right place at the right time and had a hard and accurate shot.
Many respected observers regard Joe Malone as the greatest all-around scorer of the early NHL year. “He might have been the most prolific scorer of all time if they had played more games in those days,” said Frank J. Selke, the former Canadiens managing director who remembered Malone as a young professional. “It was amazing the way Joe used to get himself in position to score. In that respect his style was similar to Gordie Howe’s. Joe was no Howie Morenz as far as speed was concerned. But he was a clean player like Dave Keon and Frank Boucher. On the other hand, though, Joe never took a backwards step from anybody.”
Joe Malone describing his own shot
"I didn't have the hardest shot in the world," he said "but I knew where it was going most of the time. You can't say as much for the slap shot. With the old wrist shot you looked where you were shooting, trying to pick your spots. With the slap the player has to keep his eye on the puck, like in golf, or you're liable to fan the shot entirely. I've seen that done. It's an exciting play, but I wouldn't want to be the goaltender. You never know where the puck's going. Seems to me that's why so many goalies get hurt."
Veteran ice hockey fan voicing his opinion on Joe Malone in the December 30, 1919 issue of Ottawa Journal
"This fellow Malone, he is not the fastest but he is the smoothest forward in the league. He is absolutely reliable around a net. He is a great stickhandler, and a player who never gets flurried no matter how hard the going is. What Eddie Collins is to baseball, Malone is to hockey."
The story, up and down the F group, are players who were/are very willing to engage in the checking game, even the scorers. Speaking of checking.
4. Skating/Relentless Checking
One of the main features of Arbour's Islanders was the ability and willingness to engage w/an aggressive forecheck, especially on opposing defensemen. Sunnyvale was built with that in mind, starting w/the lynchpin Lalonde.
Throughout the Shithawks lineup, you'll find plenty of noted elite to good skaters. Not surprisingly, most were also noted checkers, ranging from solid to best ever.
Pitre, Gainey, Bourne, Mackell were of the exceptional skating variety. Among the swiftest of their day. Both Hay and Morris were routinely described as "fast, speedy". Even those who were closer to average like Lalonde, Malone, Tkachuk, Mullen brought a willingness to play physical. Their drive (like Ted Kennedy for Gallifrey) and relentlessness essentially gave them the ability to play faster than their natural skating allowed.
Lalonde and Sittler set the tone in the top 6, down the middle. Gainey and Tkachuk is an absolutely lethal forechecking combination. Bergeron is almost always going to be in the right spot at the right time. Time and space will be next to nil for any opposing group, be it F's or D. You have a maddening 4th line to play against due to a combination of speed/tenacity and enough skill to counter.
One of the most common qualities of great title teams, especially the dynasties, was an ability to overwhelm other teams with skating and checking in their bottom 6's. That spurs depth scoring, which often becomes the difference.
5, Versatile F Group
Versatility is everywhere in Sunnyvale's F group. Arbour has numerous configurations at his disposal from a tactical standpoint. Or if an injury occurs.
Malone played C/LW
Pitre - RW/D
Morris - RW/C
Tkachuk - RW/LW
Bourne - LW/C
Mackell - LW/C
6. Sunnyvale Counters Montreal's Style Beautifully
This is a key one.
As I pointed out a few times already, it's obvious the style of game Gorman's Victorias want to play here. You spelled it out but anyone with a solid base in historical knowledge woudl see it. Lean on Sunnyvale, check, check, check, cycle, cycle, cycle and win low scoring contests. A war of attrition and puck possession.
You talk about this not being an exercise in building all-star teams or looking at teams/construction. I couldn't agree more.
Let's break down how I avoided doing anything of the sort. I could have. I could have focused on gaining more VsX. I could have focused on taking someone other than Sittler or Hay to boost playoff standing on the 2nd line. I could have skipped on Cleghorn after I already had taken Harvey-Stevens, out of fear for PIMs or not being able to field a balanced roster. I chose to take Cleghorn because of the tactical advantages a 3rd #1D allows me, namely is reduces the amount of time a bottom pairing is exposed in a best of 7.
The ATD is about all time standing, and talent, first and foremost, but the nuances of the sport should also be intertwined as you point out. Sunnyvale took all of that into consideration. There are a lot of years under this belt and hard lessons learned along the way. A great roster but a bad fit w/a coach. Choosing VsX over a better all around player who could bridge a gap in a line. Getting hung up on Cup counting. Those sorts of misses.
How do you expect to do gain the upper hand against a team that can skate, check, and defend like Sunnyvale? Led by one of the best ever, to employ that kind of approach in Arbour?
On the ice, led by 2 of the greatest to ever do it at F (Bergeron, Gainey) and D (Harvey, Stevens). As I showed above, elite skaters and more than willing fore/backckers up and down the lineup. Elite transition (Harvey, Cleghorn, Pratt/Harmon and Vezina in G) out of the defensive zone which is a direct counter to the aggressive forechecking approach. A group of F's that had A LOT of talent in stickhandling and combination work associated often in early era hockey. Guys like Lalonde, Malone, Pitre, Morris, Hay, etc.
Sunnyvale is not a small hockey team. 9 of 12 forwards are 6'1" or bigger. Let's get that out of the way. The 2 smallest players (Mackell and Harmon) were elite skaters and hyper aggressive performers. Mullen, the other guy under 6 foot was visually a very tough player and I will include contemporary praise in the subsequent section. Size is great but more than that, if we're getting outside a vacuum is heart, desire, play style. I've seen hundreds of hockey players who are sub 6 foot and consistently out hustle and out physical guys 3, 4, 5 inches and 40-50 lbs heavier. I'm sure you have as well.
Secondly, a lot of Sunnyvale's guys played in the roughest era in hockey history. Most of those players were on the ice for 60 minutes or at least close to that. Enduring a robust style of game is in their DNA. Trying to employ a Gorman scheme against Sunnyvale, IMHO, is a tactic that really falls flat when you examine each individual player (both sides) and thus the collective of the Shithawks.
Size and physicality. Let's dig into that.
7. Why Raw Size is Overrated - And Montreal Isn't Even THAT Much Bigger Anyway
To do what Montreal wants to do, which is own possession, win a war of attrition, and wear down the opposition, they need numerous clear cut advantages. Hockey isn't won simply based on size. Style of play, how consistently size is used, actual verifiable contemporary praise and/or video evidence give us a more robust and clear idea than just raw numbers.
Someone can't draft a bunch of big players and say they'll just impose their will on the opposition. Who you're playing matters, and who you're playing is, IMHO. the most physical and relentless roster in the ATD this year. Not to mention the most accomplished defensive collective led by 4 absolute legends.
However, I'm going to compare the rosters as they would play one another (LW vs RW, C vs C, LD vs RW, etc).
Since TZ has brought up adjusted size and it been used throughout the ATD process, we'll go w/seventieslord's adjustment methods. Starting with a 1970 birthday, every 20 years you go back in time you add 1 inch and 10 lbs to the player's raw size.
Top Lines:
Malone - Born in 1890 - Raw size is 5'10'' 150 so he would get 4 inches and 40 lbs = 6'2'' 190 lbs
Bossy - Born in 1957 - Raw size is 6'0'' 186 so 0.5 inch+5 lbs = 6'0.5'' 191 lbs
Lalonde - 6'1'' 210
Barkov - 6'3'' 214
Pitre - 6'3.5'' 230
Shanahan - 6'3'' 220
Where is the substantial size advantage? It doesn't exist between the 2 lines who will be getting the most ice time on either team.
Barkov has a slight bit more length than Lalonde but gives up a tremendous amount of physicality in an overall sense against Newsy who's one of the most intense competitors the league has ever seen.
I think this is a wonderful microcosm of what I've been saying. Not that Lalonde is small, by any stretch, certain players simply play, way, way bigger than whatever height/weight is attached to their name. Barkov has never, ever, had to face someone with the combination of sheer talent and physical tenacity in the modern NHL. And Lalonde did pretty darn well historically, against some guy name Frank Nighbor who has Barkov beat as a defensive and offensive presence, all time.
Shanahan gets equaled/slightly bested by Pitre in size and the latter has a big skating advantage head to head. Pitre didn't initiate near as much physically as Shanahan but he also took zero shit and was noted as a very difficult player to check (Cy Denneny direct quote) or move off the puck/around the ice by physical means.
Malone and Bossy, are once again, in another department, spitting images of each other. Same size, same willingness to endure a beating to score goals, though neither are going to be physically draining opponents in any big way.
2nd Lines:
Nash - 6'4'' 211
Morris - 5'11'' 185
Kopitar - 6'3'' 225
Sittler - 6'1'' 200
Anderson - 6'1.5'' 195
Hay - 6'1'' 195
Based on just size, Nash vs Morris is the first real substantial difference head to head. Going beyond just size, Morris was routinely noted as aggressive, rugged, and is one of many Sunnyvale players who happened to perform during the most aggressive and volatile era in hockey history. On top of that Morris was a really good back checker. Nash, by anyone who saw him play, which should be a lot of us, was not a consistent, physical presence despite his size. He could be, but not everyone is wired that way. These are key facts that need included in this talk about size and how that translates (or doesn't) to the ice.
Let's rip a fraction of the quotes I have on Morris' style of play from the 2024 bio. The first entry is from the God-mode SCF win over Lalonde and the Habs in 1917
21 Mar. 1917 - The Province
-SCF vs Montreal, toughness highlighted in a series Morris absolutely dominated. 4 game series win for Seattle. 14 goals and 2 assists.
24 Mar, 1917 - The Province
-SCF Seattle clinches the title with Morris yet again dominant.
-"Morris scored six of his team's goals and he skated and checked and shot the puck as few hockey players in the game ever have been able to do."
31 Jan, 1918 - The Victoria Daily Times
-Morris carried off lion's share of honors as game's star.
-Noted
"was there at the checking game as well, and his work aided the home team materially."
Feb 21, 1918 - Seattle Daily Times
-Morris and Roberts played fine defensive hockey.
-Noted to play a very strong fore-checking game that saw Portland have trouble getting out of their own zone.
22 Mar, 1920 - Ottawa Citizen
-Noted as "short, rugged looking athlete"
-Noted as "wonderful shot and
sensational backchecker"
-Was idol of Seattle fans and regarded as "one of most dangerous forwards hockey has ever produced"
06 Dec, 1921 - Calgary Herald
-In post game (Mets lost 2-1 to Millionaires) write up
Morris "played a hard game and back checked stiffly."
16 Feb, 1922 - Seattle Daily Times
-Morris post game noted as
"best right wing in hockey"
-"Doing everything that the most particular critic could ask of a man"
-"
Backbone of Seattle attack"
-
"Wonder on defense, perfecting a swinging check with a stiff grip on his stick that is a beauty."
-"Time after time he batted the puck away from the Victoria team"
19 Oct, 1923 - Calgary Herald
-Morris noted as versatilte, bouncing between C and RW.
-Noted as "extremely hard backcheker"
-Most dangerous shot
-Even-tempered player who is "pretty skater but excels in stickhandling"
06 Dec, 1923 - Seattle Star
-Morris played a
"beautiful game for the invaders, backchecking like a demon."
26 Deb, 1923 - Saskatoon Daily Star
-
Morris checked Newsy Lalonde down at center ice, leading to a subsequent goal.
17 Jan, 1924: Calgary Albertan
-Clever and heady game w/stiff body checking
08 Mar, 1924 - Calgary Herald
-SCF, Morris (along with Oliver) noted as
"raising havoc with their incessant harassing of the Cap forwards who couldn't shake the checks."
-Morris sharpshooting noted but bulk of his (and Oliver's) excellent style was "shown in backchecking and they did that to a nicety."
Kopitar is a good bit bigger than Sittler but not significantly so. Then again, like Lalonde vs Barkov, size means less in this instance. Sittler was wired and did operate aggressively, which lends itself to playing bigger than just the raw, physical, totals.
Hay and Anderson are essentially identical size wise, though Anderson certainly played a more aggressive game than Hay. The counter to Hay not being super physical, is that he was excellent defensively while possessing good offensive acumen and was a gamer/team man who did whatever the coach needed. Jack Adams spoke to how easy it was to coach Hay and what he provided as a player and they appeal to a coach like Arbour.
Modern comparison - Patrik Elias comes to mind immediately.
3rd Lines:
Tkachuk - 6'2'' 202
Tonelli - 6'1.5'' 205
Sundin - 6'5'' 231
Bergeron - 6'1'' 196
Gainey - 6'3'' 210
Rantanen - 6'4'' 228
Sundin is one of the biggest C's ever, no doubt offers what I consider just the 2nd, big advantage in raw size vs Bergeron.
Then again, Bergeron is the pinnacle for modern defensive mastery at C, had elite possession metrics, elite faceoff ability, and a tenacity that = a guy playing bigger than his 6'1'' 200ish lbs might indicate.
Bergeron played Sundin head to head 14 times from 03-04 to 08-09 and did pretty darn well despite the size difference. Historically, Sundin was post-prime but Bergeron was also pre-Selke version. Tilting the ice at ES is what Bergeron did for the vast majority of his career.
Gainey gives up very little to Rantanen in size, can outskate him and is arguably the greatest fore/backchecking winger in league history. When you add int the pure doggedness of Gainey, and elite physicality while taking few PIMs, is a touch more size for Mikko really going to move the needle 1v1?
Tkachuk wipes out Tonelli across the board physically speaking.
4th Lines:
Bourne - 6'4'' 210
Davidson - 6'5'' 235
Mackell - 5'9'' 176
Point - 5'11'' 177
Cashman - 6'2'' 218
Mullen - 5'9.5'' 185
The big difference is Cashman vs Mullen.
Mullen was a bulldog of a player despite his size so I don't see him being pushed around in any meaningful way. He's not going to shy away from the corners, or slot/net areas. Mullen excelled going to those places and scored a whole lot of goals, regular season and postseason for a 4th liner in the ATD. Here are some fantastic quotes on Mullen, including by your own Brad McCrimmon. Having watched a bit of old tape from the Flames and Penguins days, I'm not worried about Joe being lost in a war of attrition or heavy going.
He never played for Arbour but something tells me Al would have welcomed Mullen w/open arms.
The Fire Inside said:
Of course, that heart of a lion was part of a complete package, which included a pretty good set of hands that came with that pint-sized 5'9" 180 pound frame.
From the day the right winger was acquired from the St. Louis Blues on Feb. 1, 1986, he became a fan favourite. It was more than the 16 goals and 22 assists he tallied in his 29 games the rest of that 1985-86 season. It was the grit, guts and offensive touch he added in the playoffs, leading all playoff scorers with 12 goals and guiding the Flames to the Stanley Cup Final against the Montreal Canadiens.
Over the next 4 seasons, he was as consistent as any scorer in the NHL, firing 47, 40, 51 and 36 goals.
"I tried to give it 100% and play both ends of the rink," says Mullen. "I tried to concentrate on my defensive side of my game. Once we turned it over and we had the puck, it was all out offense. Get the puck to the center and try to get in the open, get it back and shoot."
No mater the score, Mullen never took a night off.
100 Things Penguins Fans Should Know Before They Die said:
On the contrary, he scored most of his goals twisting and driving through traffic, often releasing the puck from awkward angles as he was tumbling to the ice. But my, was he effective.
He had a choppy stride, a by-product of his roller hockey days on the streets of Manhattan. But Mullen possessed great balance and surprising strength, along with a nose for the net.
Many feared it was the end of the line for the 33 year old winger. Displaying his trademark bulldog tenacity, Mullen beat the odds. He returned to action in the playoffs wearing a neck collar for protection and scored 8 goals, including 2 in Game 6 of the finals to help spark the Penguins to their first Stanley Cup.
Again, there were doubts about whether Mullen could bounce back. Again, the gritty winger defied the odds returning to score 33 goals in 1992-93 and 38 the next year to earn a spot on the Eastern Conference All Star Team.
At 39 years of age, it appeared he had finally reached the end of the line. But the Penguins missed his reliable two-way play and his penchant for scoring clutch goals.
Wikipedia said:
Mullen arrived in the NHL possessing great balance on his skates, an ability his teammates and coaches believed he gained from playing roller hockey. His coaches praised his willingness to play in the difficult areas of the ice, even though he stood only five foot nine inches tall and knew he would have to take a hit to make a play. Penguins' play-by-play announcer Mike Lange nicknamed Mullen "Slippery Rock Joe" for his ability to evade opposing players.
Nobody handed out placards with Joe Mullen's name last night. Nobody roared approval when he stepped onto the ice. Truth is, nobody really seemed to notice.
Hey, it was supposed to be Mario Lemieux's night at the Civic Arena, not Mullen's. Besides, Mullen is used to being overlooked. He could have made a made a career out of it if people didn't have a nasty habit of adding up the numbers on the scoresheet after every game.
That two-way diligence doesn't do much to pad Mullen's personal stats...
Joe Mullen put himself through a rigorous workout program during the offseason... it is difficult to overstate his value as a consistent, two-way contributor...
Scotty Bowman said:
He's so good defensively, we often use him in roles that take away from his offense. We don't put him on a lot of power plays. He always finds a way to score goals
Terry Crisp said:
He goes where the heavy going is, comes in front of the net and is smart enough to know how to take a check. A lot of players give you a first effort and that's it. With Mully, you'll see a second and third and sometimes even a fourth effort where he scores from his knees. He simply refuses to accept the fact they are trying to take him out o the play.
Emile Francis said:
He's not the biggest guy in the world, but he's strong and he's got great balance.
Emile Francis said:
He was a godsend last year. He has become an intrcate part of this team's goal-scoring ability. He's not only a good goal scorer but a playmaker.
Brad McCrimmon said:
Mully spent a career excelling in areas of the ice a lot of guys wouldn't visit on a threat of death. Great balance on his skates. Great desire. Great teammate. A little guy with big talent and a huge heart
Davidson was one of the biggest players of his era and adjusts to a whopping 6'5'' 235 but he's opposed by Bourne who goes 6'4'' 210. Hardly a small man. Both guys could fly on skates. Bourne was noted for his elite wheels, forechecking, backchecking, long reach, etc.
Complete Handbook of Pro Hockey 1980 said:
Call him "Jets"...He has them for skates...One of swiftest skaters in the league...Used mostly at left wing but played all three forward positions..Plays on power play...Kills penalties...
Complete Handbook of Pro Hockey 1981 said:
May be fastest skater in league and he knows how to use his speed...Has emerged as devastating penalty killer due to speed and long reach...Versatile guy who played all three forward position...
Complete Handbook of Pro Hockey 1983 said:
One of hockey's swiftest, most graceful skaters...Always a threat to penetrate behind opposing defensemen with his quick, clever moves...Used either at center or left wing...Excels in defensive part of game as checker and penalty killer...A versatile player...Receives and delivers passes well while in full speed...Uses his speed effectively to create two-one-one rushes and breakaways...
Complete Handbook of Pro Hockey 1984 said:
One of the fastest skaters in the game...Always a breakway threat...Important cog in Islanders' great penalty-killing unit...Usually a left wing but has played all three forward positions...Underrated defensive player...Can play point on power play...
Complete Handbook of Pro Hockey 1985 said:
Islanders missed his speed in losing Stanley Cup final to swift skating Edmonton...Sidelined with ankle injury during most of playoffs..Has exceptional skating speed...Always a threat to make solo fast-break rush from one end of ice to the other...Can play all three forward positions...Excels as penalty-killer...Good forechecker and backchecker...Has winning touch when taking faceoffs...Normally plays wing...
Bob Bourne
Position: Left Wing/Center, New York Islanders 1974-86; Los Angelas Kings 1986-88
Bourne made his own luck through the rest of his career on a combination of speed, versatility, determination, attitude and heart.
His SPEED, DEFENSE, AND PENALTY KILLING made him EXTREMELY VALUABLE even if he was not as well known as some of his teammates.
-Who's Who in Hockey
http://books.google.com/books?id=wpbLnSHBNHgC&pg=PT58&lpg=PT58&dq=bob+bourne+versatility&source=bl&ots=XN8Z4bp-ra&sig=DX9IyOdf13rWlkNNj1WJ57Vs9VM&hl=en&sa=X&ei=99IcU5vkMoSj0QG02YDwDQ&ved=0CEUQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=bob bourne versatility&f=false
Mackell and Point are almost identically sized, both are great, great skaters. More importantly though;
Here are the quotes on Mackell's game. Another player who just doesn't read like a guy who will mind playing a heavy checking game/series.
Greatest Hockey Legends said:
When he was called upon by the Leafs he was expected to be a defensive-minded winger with rugged intentions. He was considered by many to be the fastest skater in the league when he played, despite a bowlegged stance.
...
In the 1951-52 season MacKell was traded to Boston where he found a home for nearly a decade. He became an important part of the Bruins attack, as well as a specialty teams specialist. He was a regular on both the power play and penalty kill units, thanks to his speed. He was also noted for scoring goals from the side of the net.
Ultimate Hockey said:
He was a tough, chippy little center. Like a lot of small players, Mackell was a maddening guy to play against. He was a tricky center who would dart from point to point on the ice. He had superb acceleration, was a nifty stick-handler, and had a star quality shot. And the boy had heart.
....
Peak years 1953-57
Comparable Recent Player Theoren Fleury
In a Word ROOSTER
Who's Who In Hockey said:
One of the speediest skaters ever to grace the National Hockey League
Trail of the Stanley Cup said:
Mackell was a tough little centre.
What about the defensemen?
Top Pairs:
*Harvey - 6'1'' 210
Stevens - 6'2'' 215
vs
Potvin - 6'1'' 215
McCrimmon - 5'11'.5'' 202
2nd Pairs:
*Cleghorn - 6'3'' 230
McDonagh - 6'1'' 215
vs
Johnson - 6'3'' 225
Clapper - 6'5'' 225
3rd Pairs:
*Pratt - 6'5.5'' 240
Harmon - 5'11'' 195
vs
Neilson - 6'3.5'' 225
McAvoy - 6'1'' 211
You have to go all the way down to Harmon to find a small player on Sunnyvale, a guy who will be playing roughly 4-5 minutes of a 60 minute contest at 3RD. And Harmon possessed elite skating and transition ability during his playing days. Had no problems playing a physical game, despite the size. He is there to repel the forechecking of Montreal with the attributes I just listed.
Montreal's smallest player is on their top pair, though he also plays bigger than his listed size. There's that distinction again!
Stevens and Cleghorn offer 2 of the most intimidating and physically stout players the league has ever seen. We know how great Harvey was. Pratt was a massive player who played a massive game. Even McDonagh goes 215 and is the metronomic sidekick to a colorful and better partner, Cleghorn.
7. Montreal is Woefully Unbalanced Offensively
Beyond the fact that Montreal has a historically bad offensive group in the ATD, it's lacking playmakers that can be relied on to facilitate consistently, especially against the quality defensive team that is the Sunnyvale Shithawks.
Let's take a look at the collective, historical top 10 assist finishes for each team: Consolidated finishes for Sunnyvale's early era players are included.
Montreal - 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 8, 9, 9, 9, 10
Sunnyvale - 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9
Bossy, your best goal scorer, by far, is also your primary facilitator, historically speaking. That isn't a good thing in a team building exercise. That's not to say Bossy needed or needs Wayne Gretzky or even Trottier to be successful. Rather that it does place more of a burden on a guy who should be primarily focused on scoring goals, not handling the lions share of the playmaking role on the top unit.
Is Shanahan a reliable puck winner in a corner? Sure. Is he someone who should be looked at as making pinpoint passes and generating robust chances for others? I don't think so.
When you lack creativity, vision, and historical data on an ATD scale, guys like Harvey, Stevens, Bergeron, and Gainey are going to have a field day IMO.
Special Teams coming up next.
