ChiTownPhilly
Not Too Soft
Okay, let's talk about this:
To keep to the spirit of ATD, we'll keep limit the discussion to players already drafted. We can update as players come off the board-
Mario Lemieux- would have been the best LW of all-time if his career had played out that way- but has rightfully never been used in any other capacity other than C. He HAS played LW; he CAN play LW... but why wouldn't you want his talent in-the-middle?!
Mark Messier- HAS played LW- no reason he couldn't play LW... and maybe one day he will- but he's so impactful at center-ice that he hasn't been used anywhere else, to my knowledge.
Red Kelly- In an ATD paradigm, I suppose he could get spot-starts at C for match-up purposes, if someone drafts oft-injured Cs, but he really doesn't seem to have any ATD value at all except as a D.
Alexander Ovechkin- CAN play RW- don't think he should be dinged even a little bit if playing RW... but then, why would you? Again, I guess if a team has a rash of starboard-side injuries, he could be pressed into service there... but it would require a perfect storm of time-loss to visualize this, in an ATD setting.
Cyclone Taylor- default position had been C... but use at D has shifted to an apparent "settled-law" matter.
Dit Clapper- when he was an RW, he was competing for post-season AS slots with lion-in-winter Cook & ascending Charlie Conacher. Tough crowd. Still, as a RH puck-moving D, he's pretty much always been used as a D. Could see him being used situationally as RW... but it seems that ATD orthodoxy frowns on having players play more than one role during an "in-game" context. [Most memorable example- @Hawkey Town 18 using Harvey bilaterally on a previous ATD Roster. It looked imaginative to me- but the idea didn't go the distance.]
Eddie Gerard- no recollection of his ever being used anywhere other than D (although LW accompanies his selection-panel).
Sid Abel- Mostly used as LW- although has been used successfully as a C.
Doug Bentley- always used as an LW. Seek professional help if you're tempted to use him at C.
Alex Delvecchio- see above.
Hooley Smith- mostly used as RW. As a RH-shot, I can see occasional value with him taking draws where RH-low is advantageous. Use at C would seem to be something that could be done on an emergency-basis. [RW/c]
Ebbie Goodfellow- q.v.: D. Bentley, Delvecchio. {D/c]
Henrik Zetterberg- see above. [LW/c]
Alexander Maltsev- see Hooley Smith, except that he's a LH-shot [RW/c]
Babe Siebert- who uses him anywhere other than LD? [D/lw]
Reg Noble-leaked into position 60 in the HoH top Wingers project- also listed as C/D... but I have no memory of him being used anywhere other than LW.
This takes us through Round 10 this year- and (with your permission) I'll humbly ask that the discussion be limited to the above examples, for starters- and then we can proceed after these individuals are discussed.
I think the above categorizations are relatively free from controversy... but part of the reason I'm posting these is that if someone believes I'm misapprehending- here's the place to add your perspectives.
To keep to the spirit of ATD, we'll keep limit the discussion to players already drafted. We can update as players come off the board-
Mario Lemieux- would have been the best LW of all-time if his career had played out that way- but has rightfully never been used in any other capacity other than C. He HAS played LW; he CAN play LW... but why wouldn't you want his talent in-the-middle?!
Mark Messier- HAS played LW- no reason he couldn't play LW... and maybe one day he will- but he's so impactful at center-ice that he hasn't been used anywhere else, to my knowledge.
Red Kelly- In an ATD paradigm, I suppose he could get spot-starts at C for match-up purposes, if someone drafts oft-injured Cs, but he really doesn't seem to have any ATD value at all except as a D.
Alexander Ovechkin- CAN play RW- don't think he should be dinged even a little bit if playing RW... but then, why would you? Again, I guess if a team has a rash of starboard-side injuries, he could be pressed into service there... but it would require a perfect storm of time-loss to visualize this, in an ATD setting.
Cyclone Taylor- default position had been C... but use at D has shifted to an apparent "settled-law" matter.
Dit Clapper- when he was an RW, he was competing for post-season AS slots with lion-in-winter Cook & ascending Charlie Conacher. Tough crowd. Still, as a RH puck-moving D, he's pretty much always been used as a D. Could see him being used situationally as RW... but it seems that ATD orthodoxy frowns on having players play more than one role during an "in-game" context. [Most memorable example- @Hawkey Town 18 using Harvey bilaterally on a previous ATD Roster. It looked imaginative to me- but the idea didn't go the distance.]
Eddie Gerard- no recollection of his ever being used anywhere other than D (although LW accompanies his selection-panel).
Sid Abel- Mostly used as LW- although has been used successfully as a C.
Doug Bentley- always used as an LW. Seek professional help if you're tempted to use him at C.
Alex Delvecchio- see above.
Hooley Smith- mostly used as RW. As a RH-shot, I can see occasional value with him taking draws where RH-low is advantageous. Use at C would seem to be something that could be done on an emergency-basis. [RW/c]
Ebbie Goodfellow- q.v.: D. Bentley, Delvecchio. {D/c]
Henrik Zetterberg- see above. [LW/c]
Alexander Maltsev- see Hooley Smith, except that he's a LH-shot [RW/c]
Babe Siebert- who uses him anywhere other than LD? [D/lw]
Reg Noble-leaked into position 60 in the HoH top Wingers project- also listed as C/D... but I have no memory of him being used anywhere other than LW.
This takes us through Round 10 this year- and (with your permission) I'll humbly ask that the discussion be limited to the above examples, for starters- and then we can proceed after these individuals are discussed.
I think the above categorizations are relatively free from controversy... but part of the reason I'm posting these is that if someone believes I'm misapprehending- here's the place to add your perspectives.