All-Draft Teams - 1982

After reviewing the 1981 draft - and seeing some of the very interesting players that came from there, we can move along to 1982.

Check the draft for yourself!

The first line: Pat Verbeek, Ray Ferraro and Dave Andreychuk
2nd: Ron Sutter, Doug Gilmour and Tony Granato
3rd: Patrick Flatley, Rich Sutter and Brian Bellows
4th: Gary Leeman, Vladimir Ruzicka and Dave Reid

D: Phil Housley, Scott Stevens
Gary Nylund, Ken Daneyko
Dave Ellett, Ulf Samuelsson

G: Ron Hextall
Kenn Wreggett
M. Gosselin

This team is way better than the 1981 team, if you ask me. There is way more depth in the forward position, better goaltending and I think the defense is much stronger as well. It'll be easy to rank this higher than 1981, but you can judge for yourself.

Among forwards: 12,364 games played, 3,723 goals, 4,866 assists, 8,589 points, 13,124 PIM, 1,176 PP goals, 464 Game Winners in the regular season.
In the playoffs, 1,247 GP, 277 goals, 446 assists, 723 points, 1,433 PIM and 42 game-winning goals.

5 Stanley Cups, 1 Memorial Trophy, 11 All-Star appearances, 1 Selke Trophy

Among defensemen: 7,230 GP, 812 G, 2,577 A, 3,389 PTS, 10,796 PIM, 283, PPG, 117 GWG.
In the playoffs: 680 GP, 49 G, 188 A, 237 PTS, 1,136 PIM, 12 GWG.

8 Stanley Cups, 1 Masterton Trophy, 2 First-Team All-Stars, 22 All-Star game appearances, 1 Conn Smythe Trophy.

Among Goalies:
1,424 GP, 612 wins, 569 losses, 136 ties, 38 Shut outs
Playoffs: 181 GP, 91 W, 83 L, 5 SO

1 Stanley Cup, 1 First Team All-Star, 1 Vezina Trophy, 1 Conn Smythe Trophy, 1 All-Star game appearance.

Total: 14 Stanley Cups, 1 Masterton Trophy, 1 Vezina Trophy, 1 Conn Smythe Trophy, 1 Memorial Trophy, 1 Selke Trophy, 3 First-Team All-Stars, 34 All-Star game appearances.

The forwards are tremendously improved - though the defensive and goal-tending numbers were stronger from the year before. Personally, I like star-power in the forward position better than the longevity and glamour of Chelios's career - so I give the edge to 1982.

I should include the positions each of these all-stars were drafted at ... you'd be surprised how some players that are in this category of success were still drafted in the fourth round, or 240th overall. It shows the incredible unreliability a high draft pick presents. You might draft in the top 3 and wind up with a Patrick Stefan or an Alexandre Daigle.

Draft numbers from 1982:

• B. Bellows (2)
• G. Nylund (3)
  
• R. Sutter (4)
  
• S. Stevens (5)
• P. Housley (6)
• R. Sutter (10)
• D. Andreychuk (16)
• K. Daneyko (18)
  
• P. Flatley (21)
• G. Leeman (24)
• P. Verbeek (43)
• K. Wreggett (45)
• M. Gosselin (55)
  
• D. Reid (60)
• U. Samuelsson (67)
  
• V. Ruzicka (73)
• D. Ellett (75)
  
• R. Ferraro (88)
• R. Hextall (119)
  
• T. Granato (120)
  
• D. Gilmour (134)
  

The big surprises - lots of strong defensemen selected high in the draft. Gilmour, Granato, Hextall and Ferraro should NOT be at the bottom of this list - it's absolutely amazing that players like that get drafted AFTER guys like Dave Reid and Gary Leeman.

Rankings:
(1) 1982
(2) 1981

Player of the Draft:
My "Player of the Draft" from 1982 is: Scott Stevens

Regular season: 1,635 GP, 196 G, 712 A, 908 PTS, 2,785 PIM, 75 PPG, 34 GWG
Playoffs: 233 GP, 26 G, 92 A, 118 PTS, 402 PIM, 12 PPG 8 GWG
2 First-Team All-Stars, 1 Conn Smythe Trophy ('00), 13 All-Star appearances, and very importantly, 3 Stanley Cups ('95, '00, and '03).

Honorable mentions go to Doug Gilmour and his great career, but more importantly, to Ron Hextall, with his 1 First-Team All-Star, 1 Vezina Trophy ('87) and Conn Smythe Trophy ('87) even though he never won a Cup.

All-Draft Teams - 1981

Throughout training camp I've been spending a lot of time looking at / reviewing old draft history to see what players went to which teams, and where they were drafted, etc. I was interested in seeing if there was a pattern, or some way of knowing which prospects might jump out.

It's really interesting to know that, basically, there are about 15 bonafide NHLers in a draft, and maybe three or four star players - if you're lucky, one or two franchise players, every year. But where are they and where do they come from?

Well - as I've been going through the drafts, I've discovered that, basically before the lockout - teams had absolutely no idea what they were doing. You should look at the 99 - 2003 drafts, they are brutal in the top end, while the second - fourth rounds are where the quality picks come from.

Anyhow - I've wanted to make All-Star Teams out of each draft - looking back on each year, selecting the best team out of the bunch of players and then having the draft years go head-to-head to see which was the best (just for fun).

In any case, this has taken a lot of work and ALSO a lot of time to just collect the data. So I may draw this out for a little while. Meaning, not post something every day, but rather every few days - and I want to see what you think about it. Look at the list, look at their accomplishments and see where you'd rank the draft year - and see if there are players you would include on the team vs. the players I put on the team.

Anyhow - I begin the whole process way back in 1981 (a good year if you ask me : if we go back much further than this, I don't even recognize players' names. Even in 1981, I'm not sure who's who - but I've tried).

Check the draft for yourself!

The first line: Mark Hunter, Dale Hawerchuk and Mike Eagles
2nd: Tony Tanti, Ron Francis, Normands Leveille
3rd: Richard Chernomaz, Claude Loiselle, Scott Arneil
4th: Steve Gatzos, Doug Smith, Todd Strueby

D: Chris Chelios, Al MacInnis
Garth Butcher, Bruce Drive
Joe Cirella, Tom Kurvers

G: Grant Fuhr
John Vanbiesbrouck
Clint Malarchuk

Look like a good team? Not so much in the forward position, eh? I would agree. This group (thanks in great part from Chelios and Fuhr) have a load of awards in their name.

Among forwards: 7,198 games played, 2,038 goals, 2,125 assists, 5,001 points, 7,258 PIM, 598 PP goals, 189 Game Winners in the regular season.
In the playoffs, 515 GP, 110 goals, 220 assists, 329 points, 575 PIM and 15 game-winning goals.

1 Calder Trophy, 1 Selke Trophy, 3 Lady Byngs, 1 Clancy; 11 All-Star appearances, 2 Stanley Cups

Among defensemen: 6,373 GP, 826 G, 2,784 A, 3,610 PTS, 9,170 PIM, 343, PPG, 98 GWG.
In the playoffs: 696 GP, 94 G, 314 A, 408 PTS, 1,030 PIM, 14 GWG.

4 Stanley Cups, 4 Norris Trophies, 25 All-Star appearances, 9 First-Team All-Stars

Among Goalies:
2,088 GP, 918 wins, 771 losses, 278 ties, 77 Shut outs
Playoffs: 236 GP, 122 W, 97 L, 11 SO

5 Stanley Cups, 2 FirstTeam all-Stars, 2 Vezina Trophies, 1 Jennings Trophy, 9 All-Star Game Appearances

Total: 1 Calder, 11 Stanley Cups, 2 Vezina, 1 Jennings, 4 Norris, 45 All-Star Game Appearances, 19 First-Team All-Stars, 3 Lady Byngs, 1 Selke, 1 Clancy.

Not bad.

Rankings:
(1) 1981

Player of the Draft: (edit, Oct. 3)
I have added this section to highlight the player of the draft, because in some instances, the numbers of the draft can be heavily skewed by the inclusion of one particularly significant player that might have a career that would be considered greater on its own than the culmination of all of the other players in the draft combined. For example, in the 1983 draft, there's a player that single-handedly makes that draft incredible. And you'll see who that is very shortly.

In any case, my "Player of the Draft" from 1981 is: Chris Chelios, who has finally retired just this year after an absolutely unparalleled career.

Regular season: 1,651 GP, 185 G, 763 A, 948 PTS, 2,891 PIM, 69 PPG, 31 GWG
Playoffs: 266 GP, 31 G, 113 A, 144 PTS, 423 PIM, 13 PPG 6 GWG
3 Norris Trophies ('89, '93, '96) 11 All-Star Game appearances, 3 Stanley Cups, 5 First-Team All-Stars. An incredible career, especially considering he was drafted 40th overall. A very special honorable mention to Al MacInnis, who is undoubtedly right up there as a great NHLer with Chelios.

Designing compelling characters

It's not easy to come up with classic characters. Think of basically any character that Tim Curry has played

He rocked in Congo. "Abso-lutely true"

Rocky Horror Picture Show: "Antici- - PAtion"
The Three Musketeers: "..." I can't quote him from this.

I don't know what movie this is even from.

It: "Down here we all float, Georgie"

? He kind of looked like this in Clue, he was the butler, but also Mr. Body, in one of the conclusions. Though I'm not sure he had a beard in Clue.

And he really challenged himself in this role. Great character actor.

After that brief example of how important memorable characters are to a great story - I come to these bits of advice courtesy of Suite101.com:

You need apparently only three things. 1) An interesting and plausible character back story:

The character backstory is necessary due to the effects it has on the character’s present self. Unless vital to the plot or story of a particular screenplay, no character is isolated from the rest of the world. He is affected by almost everything that surrounds him including his family background, education, friends, religion, birthplace and way of life.

Therefore, his actions, beliefs, thoughts and the way he reacts to events are somehow related to his past and the reasons why his present self is portrayed the way it is. Backstory should not be blatantly revealed but provide yet more subtle insight on the deeper workings of the character’s heart and mind.

Because of the fact that nuances in present characters can ultimately be explained by a rich background, in return a rich background can provide existing characters with a more dynamic personality.

2) the character goal;

All characters need to have a clear and measurable goal. This not only justifies their existence in the story but also allows the audience a chance to relate to the character as their goal or ‘reason for being’ is revealed throughout the story.

The Protagonist’s goal sets the story in motion and it is important to make sure this goal, though achievable is also something that is worth fighting or even dying for. After all, the stakes of the story are placed upon the importance of this goal. The protagonist will risk his entire being in order to achieve it so the gains he will receive should the goal be reached needs to be of equal or greater value. For example common goals in action films include saving innocent people or someone important to the protagonist. In romantic films the goal is often gaining the love of the protagonist object of affections.

The Antagonist’s goal which is in direct opposition to the protagonist’s bears the true task of creating conflict in the story which in turn allows the plot to develop further. Without conflict, the story will idle and will ultimately prove to be uninteresting and dull.

3) and the character motivation.

The character motivation also allows audiences an inside view of the character on a deeper level. Characters that are injected with plausible motivations are allowed to have an added dimension and the more personal the motivation the more likely it is for audiences to be able to understand and therefore relate to the character.

These motivations can be apparent to the character and audiences when played straight but can also be used to add twists and turns to the story should the writer hold back the reveal.

Similar to the character goal, the character motivation also has to have as much intensity as needed to support the genre base of the story. Because screenplays deal with events that are critical to the character’s existence, the character motivation needs to be the essence and spirit necessary to push him right up to his limits as it drives him to achieve his goal.

Character motivation creates the reason why the character will run through burning buildings, head into enemy territory or risk his life to save a stranger. A motivated character has a true reason for being and a true reason for wanting to be alive and fighting fit for the next scene. The fact that he is memorable and dynamic drives audiences into following him throughout the journey.

I think that one of the more difficult parts of writing a character with a clearly defined goal is that you don't necessarily start with a character that has a clearly defined goal. And sometimes without a dramatic need, either.

These needs or goals can be something that emerge from out the plot - but could be something that was seeded way back in their past, which only emerges as a result of some mitigating circumstance that brings that old dramatic need into the present for the character.

I look back and realize that my protagonist Luc Lefevre was just doing his job when a circumstance revealed an item out of his past which he was ashamed of - which propelled him toward a clearly defined resolution. My other protagonist, Dr. Casey Miller, has been a different challenge - because he needs a few things in his story - and his back-story isn't developed in any particular way. In fact, his character flaw might be that he doesn't have much of a back-story. And that fits his character really well.

However, by the nature of his job (and his inability to be great at some parts of his job) he finds himself desperate to achieve a clearly defined goal - but along the way, finds a personal ambition that holds either equal, or even greater, importance than his career - but those things are all in conflict with a series of antagonists who required Miller's professional assets to achieve a goal of their own.

Given the choice, I would get Tim Curry to portray Casey Miller in film. It would be awesome.

Tips for writing a screenplay

Writing a good screenplay is an art - but also a craft

Here are some thoughts from Danny Rubin on the matter.

10 steps to writing a screenplay
1)Write what you know.

Anyone can write about anything! Fact! The key is in-depth research about the story-worlds and subjects you are writing about.

When I was developing Lefevre's Redemption, this particular tid-bit jumped out at me. I was going to set it in New York City (because it's popular and everyone could relate to it) but I simply didn't know anything about it. I didn't have a feel for the city. I didn't know the places, the good parts and the bad parts. It was completely foreign. Thus - I asked myself, "what do I know?" And so it was set in Windsor. This led to the availability of a LOT more options for me, because I knew so much more about it. Good advice.

2)Write what you feel most passionate about.
This sounds obvious, but it’s a crucial aspect that needs to be considered when you choose the subject of your next script. Some writers have many ideas, constantly come up with new ones. They feel very excited about them for a while but when it gets down to the nitty gritty of the writing and re-writing process they lose interest. And of course they have a seemingly good excuse: They have had a new idea! Writing a good script takes a long time. So you’ll need to be so passionate about your idea that you will commit your time happily to it.

If you believe in it, follow it through and don’t let yourself being side-tracked. But at all means collect new ideas (see point 5).

Well, am I particularly passionate about crime dramas? Not really - but I was passionate about telling the story that I wanted to tell. The time-traveller who cathartically causes what he sets out to prevent was a major ambition of mine. When the time-travel became too awkward and weird for the book (which, let's admit it! time travel is always weird and awkward) I cut it out. But the first draft of the novel was definitely inspired by something I was definitely passionate about.

3)Writers write.
Develop a working structure that enables you to do a certain amount of work every day. It’s not the quantity, and not even the quality that matters. First of all, you need to get into the rhythm of writing every day. Re-writing will give your script the quality it needs.

This is a great point - and one I have struggled with. Over the past two months, with a regular start time at a job (that I hated) I was able to punch out an hour or 20 minutes every morning while I had the story ready to go. Just writing is a big, big part of the story. Even though just writing means you skip some things - which I admit - it makes the rewrite all the more important! But don't be a perfectionist - just get the ideas on the page - you can sculpt them later.

4)Develop a portfolio.
Collect several poignant ideas you want to develop in the future. It makes sense to write them down in premise or synopsis form first and develop them into treatments and drafts when you’ve got the time to dedicate yourself to them.

Yeah, I've got something like this. I wouldn't call it a "portfolio" but I have a list of working ideas that I'd love to get to some day. One is my hilarious experience with an oversight board that was installed - and all the problems that went along with it. I am planning to make it a play, and also a comedy. It was such a fiasco that you'd have to see it to believe it. I've got a few cool ideas, but most of them probably work out to be short stories or little skits - I'm not sure how interested I am in jumping into another 150+ page novel right now.

5)Dramatise [sic] exposition.
Exposition is the necessary evil of screenwriting. Dramatise [sic] it and convert it into ammunition. Or make it funny. Or both!

What this means is, if you have to have a character explaining why something happens (like Dan Brown does in all his DaVinici novels) then you'd better make that moment of exposition exciting. He'll usually divide scenes of exposition with foot chases, car chases, fake-drowning liquid oxygen tanks, and things like that. Or, put jokes in it, that's a good idea, too.

6)Don’t make life easy for the protagonist.
Story progression means conflict!

Yes, you don't have much of a story if you don't have conflict. This really shouldn't be a bullet point, but ... maybe it is? If you have no idea what you're doing, then this should really be the first most important thing. A protagonist has a problem, and that stands in his way of achieving his goal. The problem is important.

7)Develop multi-dimensional characters.
No human being is simple. Neither are the characters in a film.

And don't just do this because we say so; this is so that people can identify with your character. If they have some sort of back story, then people can know about them, and if that back story influences how they act now, that helps people think that they can predict or expect certain things from your character. This helps with empathy. But then, twist it up a bit - have the character do something a little different and unpredictable - which shows that they're more complicated and deep than you'd expect.

8)Don’t write dialogue that is on the nose.
Write natural dialogue that is appropriate to your story, characters and genre.

This is definitely a tough part of the book - because lousy or awkward or over-used dialogue can stick out and ruin your story and flow. I may have to look more into this - does each character have a unique voice? Do they all sound the same? Can you tell one from the other? If you were to show a line of dialogue to someone else, could they tell which character (or what type of character) said it? A tough challenge.

9)Writing is re-writing!
Picture this: Your first draft is the impressive rock of stone you have managed to carry into your workshop. But now you need to expose the detailed shape of the rock which inspired you to pick it up in the first place. Layer by layer, draft by draft, your carving the sculpture free from the unnecessary shell of rock that is covering it up.

It sure is. You have to go back and make sure that everything flows together. The word Cohesion is very important between characters, plot, narrative, back stories, scenes and even paragraphs. And you have to make sure you're happy with it all. Gotta go back and see what you think.

10)Seek feedback and criticism without ever losing your own vision.
Being able to analyse your own work is a vital skill that can be trained by communicating with other writers, script editors, directors, actors, producers etc. If you can detect the aspects of your script that need to be more developed and improved, you will be able to cope with negative feedback.

Now, on this front, I often want my story to be a surprise - I don't want people to know what it's all about before they read it. A good story should have something unexpected - I know when my folks read the first little bit of LR that they were expecting something much more funny than what they got. I was too, to be honest. That's not how it turned out. And I think they were more intrigued by not knowing what was going to come of it, than they were with "that I'd written a book." However, they all agreed that the time travel was bad. We all agree that time travel is bad.

However, this next new story I've been developing is really exciting, and I'm very close to getting it out there for reading - so ... I hope people like it even though there really haven't been any proof-readers for it yet.

Editing
Apparently, it would unacceptable to not stress the importance of editing. Though this link almost mentions this step like some people wouldn't think to do it.

Sometimes when you write your funny stuff, the best way is to just write it as it comes and pay no attention to quality. Forget spelling, grammar and everything else but just getting that stuff onto the page. Let it sit for a week without looking at it, then go back and reread it; if it still makes you laugh (or grin) then start editing it for the quality. Tighten it up, rearrange the sequence if you need to and generally make it more readable. Work on the punch lines to see if you can shorten them or make them stronger.

I can agree with this. My experience has been to just write. Get the thoughts out, get the characters on the page, get the work done. It's the editing process where you can take what you already have and make adjustments. These adjustments make sure the scenery is just right, the metaphors and symbols are strong, the characters' voices are unique, and the clarity of the scene is executed with strength. If you narrowed your focus while you were writing and worried about all these details as you were going at it - you'd really struggle to get the work done. This is the flaw of a perfectionist who can't move forward until something is complete.

There's an eraser on the end of the pencil so we can go back and make changes, so no need to be perfect on the first draft.

Your Screenplay Sucks is a blog by the author the book, Your Screenplay Sucks! I guess he has made a career of editing, reviewing, commenting on and destroying screenplays for cash. And he found that most mistakes in screenplays are the same, so wrote a book about his thoughts on the matter. Anyhow - the blog is interesting.

Of note - he says about scene descriptions (which you don't hear a lot about when reading on the subject):

My theory is that you have a tad more room on Page 1 than anywhere else. No paragraphs over 5 lines, as per usual, 3 is better, 2 is swell, but you don’t have to leap into story. Set stuff up a little. Tell us what that craggy industrial wasteland looks like. Give us a bit of mood… But not half a page for an opening image. My usual thought is to read scripts on line and see what they do. Used to be, eons ago, that you had no dialogue on page 1, but that’s long gone.

It’s a bit more leisurely than page 2 – 110, but not a lot. Gee, now I’ve confused you.

Naming fictional characers

This can be some of the most fun you have when creative writing - and sometimes the most frustrating. You want a name that sounds cool, heroic, telling, dastardly, but not too corny. Not always easy. But easier than picking out baby names.

Creative Writing: Choosing Names for Fictional Characters

Names must match the character they portray; therefore it is important to know the characters first: who they are, what they do, and why they do it before deciding on a name. Arthur Miller’s character, Willie Loman has become an iconic name because it perfectly describes who he is and his position in the world.

Avoid silly names unless writing for children. Dickensian names such as Mr. Pumblechook or Mrs. Pardiggle will appear contrived as will very formal and antiquated names such as Viscount Rothschild. Common names such as John and Susan are boring and say little about the character.

In Lefevre's Redemption, I went with "Luc Lefevre" because I wanted something French Canadian (matching the heritage of the city, the street names and the families around Windsor) but also something a bit tough - you can name more than one famous hockey player named either Luc or Lefevre, I think. Also, the alliterative L and L in the first and last names match along with the Marvel comic universe where your super-heroe's mild-mannered persona is often with matching letters: Peter Parker, Bruce Banner, Ryan Rogers, as examples.

"Mickey Gordon" was supposed to have a childish twist, and of course there's nothing more cliche than a cop with an Irish name. "Arsenio Con Pisco" was supposed to sound regal and foreign. "Chase Nguyen" was picked because Nguyen is like the Smith of the Korean world. I wanted a name that was overly common, but foreign, which would make pinpointing his identity difficult if detectives were searching for him. Chase, although it comes with connotations because it is in fact a verb as well as a name, was picked by a friend of mine (Zach Cranny) who thought it would be cool.

"Hal Doric" was because I wanted a towering but old-school feeling for someone. You get the 2001: A Space Odyssey (never spelled Odyssey before!) reference from the humane, but uncompromising computer, and a reference to an old Grecian culture - sometimes elegant and sometimes brutal.

The Tomb of the Undead characters have neat names, too. Casey Miller, Howard Bolam, Monique DeChamplaines, Barnum Mantell (dinosaur reference!), Darrell Starkwood, Balaam Zeira Rabba and Agras bas Ma'Aseh - not to mention Dustin Mugabe (the villain). [just yesterday - or something like that - I decided that I'd rather name Monique, Evelyn. It sounds silly, like, what does it matter what her name is? But I think in terms of how the story comes together toward the end - that this is the right name for her.]

As always, a cohesive writing unit is important - and having everything come together is integral to a well-plotted, well-conceived and well-executed story!

Often there are excellent opportunities with character names to toss in a reference to your influences while writing. I would like to use a few names from Michael Crichton novels - I was thinking of using the name Regis Edwards, an homage to Ed Regis from Jurassic Park - a character that was sadly cut from the script when the movie was released back in 1993.

had this happen to me

and thought it was funny. So I found a fun way to share it with you. I hope you like it.

[Click to enlarge]

Brett Hull vs. Tie Domi

I've had a lot of difficulty figuring out where this fits in chronologically. It was some time after Team Canada was putting together their national team when Brett Hull concluded he would play for the U.S. (and pretty much quit being Canadian) from that point on. It was a gripe with Canadians, 'cause Hull was in the throes of his Hall of Fame career, doing just fine at the NHL level. They were astonished that he wouldn't accept an invitation to the team, especially because Canada is always a favourite to win.

I think Canada struggled that year, but I don't really recall. Hull was in the papers quite a bit around that time, and I was able to get a picture of him from the Toronto Star (the Internet didn't have pictures of hockey players, you still needed hockey cards for player info back then). This had to be some time in the mid-90s, though I can't be sure if it were after the '91, '96 or '98 series. I just don't remember.

Anyhow, I found a few good picks of Tie Domi and a few good pics of the Golden Brett and though, what the hey? It'd be cool if Domi beat the bejezus out of 'im. And that led to this comic. It's set at a pancake dinner hosted by the Lion's Club in the basement of the Nobleton Town Hall down beside the arena. As far as I know, the Lion's Club still hosts these dinners in the same location to this date.

Click to enlarge: