Milt Dunnell Cup Finals 2022: Montreal Canadians (1) vs. Vancouver Millionaires (2)

[ResilientBeast]

Reading through some Tarasov bios I see a couple flaws with the Canadiens players in their top 6

Busher Jackson - Realizing he's probably the least important member of Montreal's top 6 I wonder about his fit specifically with Tarasov. From Dreakmur's 2013 bio

In a way, it's true for the coaches in the elite hockey of the Soviet times. Their success was measured not by who personally liked or personally disliked them. On Tarasov's level, it was mostly about his winning track, gold medals at the Olympics, World and National Championships. Looking back from nowadays to his time in hockey, one can be easily appalled by his coaching methods. He was a dictator. Hockey players were treated like chess pieces in the game that Tarasov played. Whether one played for the Team USSR or the Red Army club, he demanded total dedication to HIS hockey and HIS team. Things like personal matters, being tired, impossible training or game tasks simply had never been accepted by Tarasov. He was ruthless on his road to success. Some players were psychologically broken by his methods. Some managed to become champions.

Is party boy Busher Jackson really going to buy into whatever the ATD equivalent of Tarasov's methods are?

You posted that commented from Bobby Hull about Reay getting him to abandon his freewheeling offensive approach and play a more balanced game. That article says "5 years ago" the article itself was written in 1973. Which means Hull between 1957-58 & 1966-67 evidently wasn't really a two way guy at all. So lets not extend credit to "peak" hull for being a decent two way player. Will free wheeling style that he played with at his peak really mesh with Tarasov's team centric play?

We must try to avoid solo actions and keep it a team effort. In teamwork we are the best.

That period contains all of his Hart and Art Ross trophies.....

NOVEMBER 12, 1973
Although Hull and Stapleton both left Chicago with bitter feelings toward top management, they still respect Reay. "If Billy had been running things himself," Hull once said, "I probably would never have left." It was Reay who, five years ago, ordered Hull to abandon his free-skating, gun-them-down style and play an orderly, conservative, close-checking left wing. And that undoubtedly added years to Hull's playing life.

 

[The Macho King]

I appreciate how light this post is on criticism of Kucherov, because my guy is like the second coming of Patrick Kane, but 7 seasons behind. Playoff warrior.

He's better than Kane.

 

[ResilientBeast]

Plenty of units (including the majority of Tarasov's lines) have succeeded with the center being the least offensively gifted of the three. Have you heard of Soviet hockey? If that's your criticism - that the line won't work because the wingers are more talented than the center - idgaf. It's complete nonsense.

This is interesting because Tarasov himself in Road to Olympus seems to believe that the centers are the most valuable members of the line (From Dreakmur's 2013 bio as well)

The second conclusion I made then was that the centre forward had to be the best player on the team.

You didn't answer my question on Maltsev on my "Malone-meter" but from the centers project your own comment

That is correct to the best of my knowledge. Maltsev was the primary puck-carrier and playmaker for his line wherever he went. In Dynamo, they played him at center, which is what one would expect with a player of his talents, but the national team was running a different kind of system which seemed to largely turn on lateral movement in the neutral zone starting from the right wing. This is likely also the reason why the Soviets in the Tarasov era are known to have preferred left-handed shooters. With a bunch of left-handed RWs like Maltsev, Mikhailov, Vikulov, etc. moving laterally from the right would set them all up to make forward passes on the forehand while cutting across the neutral zone.

At any rate, this was Maltsev's role on the national team. He was essentially still playing a "center" role, but in a different system, and from the right wing. I think he's primarily a center, but he was great playing RW in the Soviet system, so I dunno.

So as I thought domestically a C because he was the most talented player on Dynamo, but a RW internationally with the national team because of your coach. Interesting stuff.

 

[Sturminator]

You are grasping at straws.

Tarasov tended to construct his lines around centers who were strong two-way players, while deploying his most talented forwards - guys like Firsov, Kharlamov, Vikulov and Maltsev - primarily on the wing. That's exactly the team makeup he's got here. His opinions about what constituted the "best" hockey players are irrelevant.

Alexander Maltsev's international record, which is arguably the best of all-time among forwards, was built mostly playing right wing. You don't actually have a point here, do you?

---

Strange that you should pick this fight.

If you're looking for a natural center who struggled to have the same impact as a wing, that would be Hooley Smith. Almost the entirety of Smith's accolades came as a center after the departure of Nels Stewart from those Maroons teams. As a right wing on the S Line, he was little more than a glorified grinder. Hell, Dit Clapper was a better right wing than Hooley Smith.

 

[ResilientBeast]

You are grasping at straws.

Tarasov tended to construct his lines around centers who were strong two-way players, while deploying his most talented forwards - guys like Firsov, Kharlamov, Vikulov and Maltsev - primarily on the wing. That's exactly the team makeup he's got here. His opinions about what constituted the "best" hockey players are irrelevant.

Alexander Maltsev's international record, which is arguably the best of all-time among forwards, was built mostly playing right wing. You don't actually have a point here, do you?

---

Strange that you should pick this fight.

If you're looking for a natural center who struggled to have the same impact as a wing, that would be Hooley Smith. Almost the entirety of Smith's accolades came as a center after the departure of Nels Stewart from those Maroons teams. As a right wing on the S Line, he was little more than a glorified grinder. Hell, Dit Clapper was a better right wing than Hooley Smith.

Neither of those comments were attacks on your team, weird that you immediately went there

Just providing information to readers.

 

[ResilientBeast]

Reading through some Tarasov bios I see a couple flaws with the Canadiens players in their top 6

Busher Jackson - Realizing he's probably the least important member of Montreal's top 6 I wonder about his fit specifically with Tarasov. From Dreakmur's 2013 bio



Is party boy Busher Jackson really going to buy into whatever the ATD equivalent of Tarasov's methods are?

You posted that commented from Bobby Hull about Reay getting him to abandon his freewheeling offensive approach and play a more balanced game. That article says "5 years ago" the article itself was written in 1973. Which means Hull between 1957-58 & 1966-67 evidently wasn't really a two way guy at all. So lets not extend credit to "peak" hull for being a decent two way player. Will free wheeling style that he played with at his peak really mesh with Tarasov's team centric play?



That period contains all of his Hart and Art Ross trophies.....

More Tarasov, on how defenders should play and move the puck. Contrasted with the two puck rushing defensemen Montreal has dedicated to moving the puck.

He really doesn't believe in puck-carrying when leaving the defensive zone. He mentions that he wants no more than two strides before a defenseman whips a pass up to another player who already has a head of steam.

Sprague Cleghorn (Quotes from @Dreakmur 2015)

Sprague broke in with the Renfew Creamery Kings where he performed briefly as a forward and was then moved back to the defense. Playing alongside the great Fred Taylor, he emulated the Cyclone's famous rushes. His sensational end-to-end dashes, frequently culminating in a goal, were featured for many years.

Gorman feels Sprague was such a great star because he was a terrific scorer. A forward before he settled back to a defence post, Sprague led many a rush. He could take a pass on either side and could fire the puck as hard as any forward in the game at that time.

Hod Stuart (Quotes from Dreakmur 2013)

Just how good was Hod Stuart? When the Hockey Hall of Fame was established in 1945, the powerful skating defenseman, the Bobby Orr of his era, was included as one of the 12 initial inductees. That tells you just how highly acclaimed he was.

While he was on the ice, Stuart exhibited many of those qualities which have gained him renown in the hockey world. He handled his stick with marvelous dexterity, skated rings around most of the men on the ice, broke up rush after rush with ease, and several times carried the puck down through the whole Toronto team, his great speed carrying his huge bulk along with almost irresistible force.

So Tarasov himself says he doesn't like the defensemen to hold onto the puck, and would prefer a couple of quick strides and then they move it to the forwards. Doesn't really mesh with the two prominent rushing defensemen the Canadiens have on the back end.

 

[Sturminator]

That's not actually a quote from Tarasov. Not sure who said that, but it wasn't him.

Tarasov is the coach who famously experimented with 2-2-1 teams in which four players were expected to attack up ice while one guy stayed home. He was known for his public admiration of Lennart Svedberg, a player who epitomized the puck-rushing defenseman of that era of European hockey. He converted at least one natural center (Viktor Kuzkin) to the blueline and used him extensively at both the club and international level. He coached the great Nikolai Sologubov, another famed puck-rushing defenseman, to great success for many years on the national team. The idea that he didn't know what to do with an offensive defenseman is simply bizarre.

In short, there is no substance to this argument beyond the fact that Tarasov wanted his teams to advance the puck as quickly as possible, which usually meant passing it up the ice. That's just hockey, man.

 

[ResilientBeast]

The idea that he didn't know what to do with an offensive defenseman is simply bizarre.

That isn't what I said though......?

Hopefully someone has Road to Olympus and can clarify, I only can go off the information provided.

 

[ResilientBeast]

About Sologubov specifically, from Rob Scuderi's 2016 bio

Coaches generally prohibited defensemen from joining the attack in the offensive zone - there was too much risk in it - but Tarasov allowed Sologubov to do so. This is explained by the fact that there was a measure of safety in Sologubov's attacks. If successful, they would result in a net gain on the scoreboard. Tarasov knew, as well, that should he fail to score, Sologubov would still be able to steal the puck.

http://www.sovsport.ru/gazeta/article-item/146734

This depiction is different than how you portray it. There's a difference between an offensive defenseman and a puck rushing defenseman which Cleghorn and Stuart were.

 

[Sturminator]

As long as we're talking about coaches, when did Lester Patrick run a team that even vaguely resembled the squad that you have put together? His teams were almost exclusively built around two-way centers (Frederickson and Boucher, plus Colville/Watson at the very end), and his best offensive defenseman on the teams that actually won anything was Ching Johnson.

That's not hyperbole; Johnson was the leading scorer among defensemen on both of the Rangers teams Patrick coached to the Cup - 1928 and 1933 - and none of the defensemen he coached in Victoria was particularly worth a damn. We know how Patrick's Rangers teams played because we have it on video. Here it is:



Notice how the Rangers defensemen hang out at their own blueline while the forwards go into the offensive zone. This is about as far away from the style of hockey Vancouver is built to play as it is possible to get. Patrick has a reputation for innovation in terms of how his forward lines were constituted, but his teams were in no way, shape, or form similar to what you have built here.

 

[Sturminator]

That isn't what I said though......?

Hopefully someone has Road to Olympus and can clarify, I only can go off the information provided.

Considering that Tarasov is referred to in the third person in the "quote" you provided, it's abundantly clear that those are not his words. If you don't know who or what you're quoting, why do you do it, at all?

About Sologubov specifically, from Rob Scuderi's 2016 bio


http://www.sovsport.ru/gazeta/article-item/146734

This depiction is different than how you portray it. There's a difference between an offensive defenseman and a puck rushing defenseman which Cleghorn and Stuart were.

Ah...I see. So Tarasov only let his defensemen bring the puck up ice when they were actually good at it.

The more you know.

 

[ResilientBeast]

Considering that Tarasov is referred to in the third person in the "quote" you provided, it's abundantly clear that those are not his words. If you don't know who or what you're quoting, why do you do it, at all?


Ah...I see. So Tarasov only let his defensemen bring the puck up ice when they were actually good at it.

The more you know.

Are you familiar with how ATD bios are constructed and presented?

No, the quote implies that Sologubov engaged with the play once it was already in the offensive zone....not by bringing the puck up the ice himself.

 

[ResilientBeast]

As long as we're talking about coaches, when did Lester Patrick run a team that even vaguely resembled the squad that you have put together? His teams were almost exclusively built around two-way centers (Frederickson and Boucher, plus Colville/Watson at the very end), and his best offensive defenseman on the teams that actually won anything was Ching Johnson.

That's not hyperbole; Johnson was the leading scorer among defensemen on both of the Rangers teams Patrick coached to the Cup - 1928 and 1933 - and none of the defensemen he coached in Victoria was particularly worth a damn. We know how Patrick's Rangers teams played because we have it on video. Here it is:



Notice how the Rangers defensemen hang out at their own blueline while the forwards go into the offensive zone. This is about as far away from the style of hockey Vancouver is built to play as it is possible to get. Patrick has a reputation for innovation in terms of how his forward lines were constituted, but his teams were in no way, shape of form similar to what you have built here.

The creation of systems by which his teams could be successful. I find Frederickson's portrayal as a "two-way center" a bit inflated by 1925 overall. He had tremendous support from Foyston and Walker who managed to use his hook check despite playing wing (gasp).

It seems that Victoria swamped the Canadiens with depth and speed and simply skated them into the ground, using perhaps the first short shift (if one can call five minutes short) system in hockey history to great effect.

We will see later that Frank Fredrickson was considered a good two-way player, but in the context of this Cup series, the credit for keeping the Canadiens and specifically Howie Morenz under wraps (other than his Game 3 hat trick) has to be spread around. Jack Walker, the old hook check master, was the Vics' best defender in open ice, and surely helped defend not only his own lane, but also the entire ice with his hook checking. Frank Foyston also got half of the icetime against Morenz, and seems to have played quite well. And then of course there is Lester Patrick, the old fox, the brain behind the system. So while it's a nice feather in Fredrickson's cap to have been part of a tight defensive pressure system that shut down the Flying Frenchmen, he was far from alone in the effort.

Lester was a tremendous hockey mind and himself one of the best rushing defensemen/rovers during his peak. So sure the team doesn't fit the mold of the Cougars/Aristocrats/Rangers that Lester had during his coaching career. But he was clearly adaptable to the personnel he had on hand both times. Coaching a tighter defensive team in Victoria that were largely anemic offensively outside of Frederickson to offensive juggernauts in New York.

 

[Sturminator]

Are you familiar with how ATD bios are constructed and presented?

That's funny. I actually helped Rob write that Sologubov bio.

 

[ResilientBeast]

That's funny. I actually helped Rob write that Sologubov bio.

I know, I see the acknowledgement

 

[rmartin65]

In an all-time sense, I'm not sure that McDavid has surpassed Bill Cowley.

Really? I'll take the player with 4 Art Ross trophies over the player with just 1, but that might just be me.

 

[ResilientBeast]

The creation of systems by which his teams could be successful. I find Frederickson's portrayal as a "two-way center" a bit inflated by 1925 overall. He had tremendous support from Foyston and Walker who managed to use his hook check despite playing wing (gasp).



Lester was a tremendous hockey mind and himself one of the best rushing defensemen/rovers during his peak. So sure the team doesn't fit the mold of the Cougars/Aristocrats/Rangers that Lester had during his coaching career. But he was clearly adaptable to the personnel he had on hand both times. Coaching a tighter defensive team in Victoria that were largely anemic offensively outside of Frederickson to offensive juggernauts in New York.

Realistically why this all matters is that Lester Patrick was clearly adaptable to the players he had on hand and would create systems that would put them into the best position to succeed. So I'm less concerned about building a team that resembles Cougars/Rangers

Tarasov achieved greatness by creating his systems and molding the players into the ideal hockey machine who would execute his vision.

 

[Sturminator]

Lester was a tremendous hockey mind and himself one of the best rushing defensemen/rovers during his peak. So sure the team doesn't fit the mold of the Cougars/Aristocrats/Rangers that Lester had during his coaching career. But he was clearly adaptable to the personnel he had on hand both times. Coaching a tighter defensive team in Victoria that were largely anemic offensively outside of Frederickson to offensive juggernauts in New York.

Did you seriously just bring up Lester Patrick's playing career in defense of his ability to run your team?

Live by the sword, die by the sword, cowboy.

 

[Sturminator]

Tarasov achieved greatness by creating his systems and molding the players into the ideal hockey machine who would execute his vision.

And who were the players that washed out for failure to adapt to Tarasov's coaching?

I'll give you one for free: Evgeni Mayorov. Ya got any more?

 

[BenchBrawl]

Ted Kennedy and Steve Rucchin's names were associated earlier.

Ted Kennedy―along with Orr― is the greatest playoff performer in this series. We should resist the temptation to paint him as some plugger doing dirty work in the corners. This is a man who should have won two or three Conn Smythe trophies, if the award had existed.

He raised his offensive game in the playoffs and was known as the "take charge" leader on those Toronto teams. The opposite of a passenger.

In 4 Stanley Cups out of 5, he led his team in playoff scoring. No one reported him as letting loose his defensive or physical game to come to these results. He can do both, and did. Multiple times.

1945 Cup

Rk	Player	Pos	GP	G	A	PTS
1	Ted Kennedy*	C	13	7	2	9
2	Babe Pratt*	D	13	2	4	6
3	Mel Hill	RW	13	2	3	5
4	Gus Bodnar	C	13	3	1	4
5	Sweeney Schriner*	LW	13	3	1	4

1947 Cup

Rk	Player	Pos	GP	G	A	PTS
1	Ted Kennedy*	C	11	4	5	9
2	Gaye Stewart	LW	11	2	5	7
3	Syl Apps*	C	11	5	1	6
4	Nick Metz	LW	6	4	2	6
5	Howie Meeker	RW	11	3	3	6

1948 Cup

Rk	Player	Pos	GP	G	A	PTS
1	Ted Kennedy*	C	9	8	6	14
2	Max Bentley*	C	9	4	7	11
3	Syl Apps*	C	9	4	4	8
4	Harry Watson*	LW	9	5	2	7
5	Vic Lynn	LW	9	2	5	7

1949 Cup

Rk	Player	Pos	GP	G	A	PTS
1	Ted Kennedy*	C	9	2	6	8
2	Sid Smith	LW	6	5	2	7
3	Max Bentley*	C	9	4	3	7
4	Cal Gardner	C	9	2	5	7
5	Harry Watson*	LW	9	4	2	6
6	Ray Timgren	LW	9	3	3	6
7	Fleming MacKell	C	9	2	4	6
8	Jimmy Thomson	D	9	1	5	6

1951 Cup

Rk	Player	Pos	GP	G	A	PTS
1	Max Bentley*	C	11	2	11	13
2	Sid Smith	LW	11	7	3	10
3	Ted Kennedy*	C	11	4	5	9
4	Tod Sloan	RW	11	4	5	9
5	Joe Klukay	RW	11	4	3	7

 

[BenchBrawl]

On Maltsev's and Mackay's softness

RB dug out a random post of mine where I question Maltsev's softness. So what? Maltsev plays with Bobby Hull and Ted Kennedy, and has an offensive role. He doesn't need to be a physical force. Also, we're not claiming he would cause trouble to a Bobby Hull-like winger in a shadow role. That was the claim about Mackay, and why his softness was brought up.

 

[BenchBrawl]

In terms of Ryan Getzlaf vs. Patrice Bergeron, I have the conviction Getzlaf was a better hockey player. Bergeron was great at one thing they give a trophy for, but I don't think it translates into him outcompeting Getzlaf.

In the playoffs, those core Boston players (Bergeron and Chara) never felt like they took the bull by the horn. Those Bruins teams were so deep, they "got there" anyway, but they weren't pushing their team through by share will, like Getzlaf did a few times with average Anaheim lineups.

Those impressions are supported by the numbers in this thread, where Ryan Getzlaf exceeds playoff scoring expectations more than Bergeron by a large margin : Playoff Scoring Relative to Expectations

In terms of ESVsX, Getzlaf is at 59 vs. Bergeron at 49.

Their Hart record is 2, 6, 7 versus 5 in favor of Getzlaf again. Their peak season was the same, in 2014, where Getzlaf beats Bergeron clean in Hart voting.

Place	Player	Age	Tm	Pos	Votes	Vote%	1st	2nd	3rd	4th	5th
1	Sidney Crosby	26	PIT	C	1340	97.81	128	8	1	0	0
2	Ryan Getzlaf	28	ANA	C	877	64.01	5	96	28	5	0
3	Claude Giroux	26	PHI	C	435	31.75	2	15	42	27	19
4	Semyon Varlamov	25	COL	G	256	18.69	1	8	23	22	9
5	Patrice Bergeron	28	BOS	C	137	10.00	0	4	9	17	13
6	Tyler Seguin	22	DAL	C	84	6.13	0	1	6	12	11
7	Joe Pavelski	29	SJS	C	71	5.18	0	0	3	11	23
8	Anze Kopitar	26	LAK	C	58	4.23	0	0	4	9	11
9	Jonathan Toews	25	CHI	C	53	3.87	0	2	4	4	7
10	Ben Bishop	27	TBL	G	52	3.80	0	0	5	6	9

Boston and Anaheim didn't face each others very often since they play East vs. West, but in the small sample size they got the following stats:

Ryan Getzlaf 21-5-15-20 (+5) (14 ES pts)
Patrice Bergeron 20-1-5-6 (-4) (3 ES pts)

I wouldn't put too much stock on it, but worth presenting.

Bergeron was better defensively but Getzlaf was no slouch there, and Getzlaf played a more physical game spending his career in a division playing against big superstar centers, in the days where the Western Conference was considered the tougher league.

All of this to say, Ryan Getzlaf was more of a true franchise player than Bergeron. He was a Mark Messier-lite, a guy you want in the trenches.

 

[BenchBrawl]

On Montreal Ryan Getzlaf is reunited with his long-time linemate Corey Perry, one of the most stable duos in hockey history, playing 10+ years together.

What Perry has done in the last three years is unusual. His superstar abilities are gone, but he helped three different teams go deep in the playoffs, and all the fanbases loved him. If that's not a glorious statement on his intangibles, I don't know what is. Where your superstar abilities are gone, all you have left are those intangibles. And three years in a row, on three different teams, he made a real impact to push his teams through, despite a limited role.

If nothing else, the last three seasons crystallizes Perry as a winner, like an old boxer who lost his reflexes but can still compete by experience.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Then Getzlaf-Perry is completed by George Hay, an underrated player for years in the ATD. Hay, like Elias, was known for his adaptability. Hay brings everything they need and vice versa.

GOOD TEAM PLAYER

He is a player capable of "teaming" with any club and gets the best out of his mates irrespective of their abilities and temperaments.

George Hay bio

George Hay's star power was huge, and the more I read on him the more I feel his name fell through the cracks of history. In the 1925 MacLean article, Tommy Gorman voted him greatest LWer, despite having coached Cy Denneny, which is remarkable. That was before his big 1928 season in the consolidated NHL, where he finished 4th in Hart trophy behind Morenz, Worters and Shore, and won the 1st AST against Aurèle Joliat.

Hay had a great shot, was a fast skater, could score goals and make plays, was noted as being particularly elusive to body checks and was a praised backchecker from even before his professional career began. His only weaknesses―his small size and lack of playoff record―are perfectly covered for by Getzlaf-Perry. He is free to play his game to his maximum potential.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Speaking of building lines with synergy and complementarity in mind, I want to make a comment about Vancouver's modern duo on their 2nd line, McDavid-Kucherov, that is less about the line itself than about a subjective GMing critic.

First, I agree with Sturm that the toll this line is putting on Gordon Roberts is ridiculous.

But beyond that, I see the merit in using a player with an incomplete short career to pimp up a line stylistically. But TWO such players, side-by-side? It feels like overexcitement over the latest trend, in a game where history and nostalgia are the heart of the matter. Too much is like too little.

No rule against it, just a matter of taste.