Our first lines are both really good and the composition of each makes sense. Jagr is the best player here and Boucher/Conacher are the next best in whichever order. The Francis-Jagr duo is proven and my Boucher-Conacher duo should easily work. I don't see much separating these.
Yeah, I think both top lines are pretty good. Montreal has the edge at two of the three positions- RW (as much as I like Conacher, Jagr is definitely the superior player) and LW- and, as you mentioned, the overall best player among the six. Plus, Montreal's offense is more balanced; both Firsov and Jagr are threats to shoot or pass, while Boucher and Conacher are more limited in scope when it comes to producing offence. In other words, you can't shut down Montreal's offense by keying in on one puck-carrier, but I think Montreal can but a real damper on Hogsmeade's line by slowing down Boucher.
I think my second line just fits a lot better. George Armstrong is being asked to do a whole lot here for Montreal. He's both the defensive conscience of the line as well as the primary puck-winner. That's already a lot, but Armstrong was not a great skater - he'll be huffing and puffing the length of the rink doing overtime for Dionne and especially Stewart. What happens when Armstrong is behind the net working to get the puck out front, and instead the Lunas win possession and Bobby Orr or Scott Niedermayer starts the transition up ice? The line's sole defensive conscience can't possibly get back in time. Meanwhile, for my unit, Hooley Smith is being tasked to do a lot as well, but there are important differences on why mine works better: first, Hooley was a strong skater with a lot of speed so I don't mind having him do more work, and second, he's working from centre ice which is a more impactful position defensively. The Panarin and Kane duo also doesn't absolutely require a puck hound in the corners like Nels Stewart does. Hooley won't always be digging around along the boards, so he'll be able to check back more readily.
@ImporterExporter dug up some good
evidence that Stewart was not (always) poor defensively or slow. We aren't billing him as some sort of speed-demon defensive wonder, but we think there is ample evidence that - especially during his career at wing- he was not the vampire (I believe that is how
@Sturminator once referred to him) as the caricature we often make him here in the ATD.
As for Dionne- I think he was much better as a puck winner than he gets credit for, but I will agree that the majority of the puckwinning burden is on Armstrong. We believe that the offensive abilities of Stewart and Dionne will make this trade-off worth it, as they are almost certainly one of the strongest 2nd line duos around this year.
The third lines are built for different purposes. Montreal's is a two-way matchup line, mine is a secondary scoring line that's responsible enough defensively. I don't really know where to start in comparing them since their uses are different, so I'll sort of justify mine a bit since I know people will see Joe Thornton's name and wince. I think this is a really good setup for Jumbo. His biggest playoff problem IMO was that his motor sometimes didn't run as hot as it needed to, so having two big dudes on his wings who played tough, physical hockey is what he needs to get activated. Roberts and Thornton is an obvious scorer/playmaker duo and Stasiuk was a very good ES scorer too (8th in ES scoring in his full seasons with Boston versus 22nd on the PP over the same span). In this more sheltered role with less pressure to produce, I think Thornton should excel.
I agree that making comparisons across lines with two separate purposes is difficult.
I prefer my fourth line as well, as I think Mosdell is considerably better than Rolston as a shutdown centre at ES, and while I campaigned for Oatman in the pre-merger project because of his versatility and longevity, strictly on a per-game basis, Scotty Davidson was just a much better player.
This is another instance of two lines that don't have the same function. I agree that Mosdell is the superior player; Rolston was selected to help out on special teams and provide some positional flexibility. I'd say our spare (Marty Walsh) would be a better fit at ES, but that would cause issues on special teams.
Oatman vs Scotty Davidson is a classic case of peak vs longevity.
@ResilientBeast may disagree here, but I have no issues saying Davidson at his peak was a better player than Oatman at his peak. But Davidson's peak was quite short, while Oatman has extremely impressive longevity.
Both defenses look pretty good, with a lot of mobility along with solid chemistry within pairings. Obviously having Bobby Orr is a sizable advantage. Not much else to add right now.
Orr is definitely the best defender in this (and any other) series, but Montreal makes up the ga (and then some) in terms of depth. The HoH list has them
Orr
Chelios
Gadsby
Niedermayer
Goodfellow
That looks about right to me, except for one name- Jack Campbell. He's been discussed at length since the project, but there is no doubt in my mind that he is absolutely belonging in that range. His career was shot, but there is a good case for him as the best player in the game, and a decent case for best of all time (granted, "all-time" didn't reach too far back at that point) until Bowie and McGee. Even if you think that is too high, Campbell is certainly the next best, which means Montreal has 4 of the top 6 defenders.
Some quotes talking about Campbell-
"Campbell, the finest hockey player in Montreal at present, who was the Vics cover-point...”
"Campbell and J. Arnton, usually the stars on the team..."
"Had the Victorias been a little harder pressed perhaps their play would not have appeared so brilliant and dashing, but such play as Campbell showed can only be characterized as wonderful. His speed and his cleverness at dodging are worth going a long way to see; in a couple of instances he wriggled through the whole McGill team and only stopped at the goal-keeper, while the puck seemed to be magnetically attracted by his stick"
"J. Campbell again played a marvellous game and was ably seconded by E. Barlow and J. Kinghorn, who both played well. Crathern also kept goal well”
"For the winners, Campbell as usual played brilliantly at cover point and Crathern in goal was invaluable."
“One of those grand runs for which Campbell was famous..."
"The M.A.A. men seemed flushed with victory and immediately started their rushing tactics, but to no purpose, Campbell and Arnton could not be passed”
"Campbell at last made on of the runs for which he is now so famous, and taking the puck the full length of the ice put it through the posts”
“Campbell, at coverpoint, as usual, however, was a whole team in himself, and it was chiefly due to his fine play that some of the combined rushes of the M.A.A.A. men lost their effectiveness for scoring”
“On the Vic side, as usual, Campbell carried off the honors. He seemed the only one who could withstand the rushes of W. Hodgson successfully, and when he would up as fine a run as ever was seen in a hockey match by getting the puck past Paton and scoring he was rewarded by the unstinted applause of the spectators."
“J. Campbell’s playing was work going a long way to see"
“Campbell was in his element, and was always cool and exact in his checking"
“but Campbell proved to be a regular stone wall. Nothing passed him”
“Of course, the match last night did not furnish much criterion for Campbell proved time and again that he was able to play most of the opposing team”
“After about 15 minutes play Campbell, by one of the grandest runs and prettiest pieces of dodging ever witnessed…”
"Campbell was brilliant and cool, as usual, while Shearer, Eddie Barlow and Jack Arnton played their old time game”
"J. Campbell, at cover-point, bring down loud applause by frequent clever runs clean through his opponents"
“Campbell made many exceptionally fine runs and thus removed all danger temporarily”
“Campbell retaliated by another grand run clean through every one of his opponents, who he either knocked over or cleverly dodged by the excellence of his head work"
“Campbell was instrumental in first breaking the attack by one of his dodgy runs”
“The most prominent and striking feature of the match was the dashing and brilliant play of Campbell, of the Vics, who to-day stands unequaled”
Grant Fuhr's playoff resume is a lot better than Lundqvist's, but as I said in the draft thread, Lundqvist is the man. To argue against him would be disingenuous for me, so I'm fine with calling it even.
Even works for me. I would like to commend you on your goalie coach selection, by the way. That was a great move, in my opinion.
All in all, I think the Montreal Victorias win a hard fought series on the back of some gamebreaking offensive talent and superior defensive depth.