Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
CaptainRafalski

Two Interesting Articles on Deboer

98 posts in this topic

The last two nights sucked, but at the same time, it's really hard to put them entirely on PDB:

 

Against the Preds, Jagr does exactly what you'd want him to, Preds get an incredibly fortunate bounce.

Against the Avs...three friggin' posts.  Team on ice unfortunately gets caught and gassed at the worst possible time.    

 

I'm not sure what a new coach can do with what he has to work with.  It feels like it will be change for change's sake.  Does the next coach get the guys who don't score for 10 games or more at a time to start scoring more consistently?       

 

It's the mentality that Lou started being carried over to the fans. He made some interesting switches (some worked, some failed), so everyone thinks Pete has to be fired if Robinson got canned the following season after being one game away from back-to-back Finals (how crazy is that). But for the past two years, this team has never played poorly for an extended stretch. They have not been embarrassed at all. They got bad goaltending and have struggled to score. How do you blame that on a coach? This year the PP has been good. The PK has been good. The team system continues to be strong.

 

Maybe Pete doesn't trust young players so much, but this is a veteran team, so that is only going to be an issue for a small few. And if Lou wanted those young guys to play, he easily has the power to make it happen.

 

If Deboer gets canned, he would have a job in 15 seconds around the league. Why? He took a team to the Stanley Cup Finals in his 1st year. They proceeded to lose their two best players and other 20+ goal scorers and continue to play damn well. After each game (win or lose), every coach and GM is saying, "damn that team is hard to play against. They play a great system game, and they take away a ton of what we do well. Shame he lost two of the top 25 forwards in the game."

Edited by devilsrule33

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

pete got caught with a bad matchup on the ice in crunch time. his energy guys got pinned and  failed. there absolutely is "some" culpability on him. but the biggest reason we lost was not capitalizing on our chances. we wasted a nice effort against a 77 point team. if this keeps happening my support deboer will just turn to apathy and I will care less if hes canned.  his fault or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Colorado outshot NJ 9-8 in the third.

 

In Dallas, NJ outshot Dallas 8-6.

 

In Nashville, NJ outshot Nashville 8-7.

 

Breaking even on the shot board while trailing is really hard and yet NJ did it 3 straight nights - just couldn't get the insurance goal in either game.

 

OUTSHOT by 1 or 2 shots lol hahaha for the love or god Tri. Do you even realize how silly it sound to say that you OUTSHOT someone simply cause you have 1 or 2 more shots in a period? That shot could be a weak wrister from the blue line just to get a faceoff in the offensive zone.

 

i wouldnt say my team outshot the other team other than if it was by a wide margin, PP and PK during the game is also something to look at when you make statement like that

Edited by SterioDesign

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been a big supporter of PDB, but the love affair w/ these veterans w/ no upside is getting old. I know Gelinas has been awful defensively, but the PP was awful without a real shooter at the point.  And Harold instead of Larsson is just MORONIC!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Colorado outshot NJ 9-8 in the third.

 

In Dallas, NJ outshot Dallas 8-6.

 

In Nashville, NJ outshot Nashville 8-7.

 

Breaking even on the shot board while trailing is really hard and yet NJ did it 3 straight nights - just couldn't get the insurance goal in either game.

 

This!

 

NJ played as well as you can vs Colorado.

You win 8/10 games like that...But you lose 2/10.

 

Hockey has a large luck component and that's the way it goes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the mentality that Lou started being carried over to the fans. He made some interesting switches (some worked, some failed), so everyone thinks Pete has to be fired if Robinson got canned the following season after being one game away from back-to-back Finals (how crazy is that). But for the past two years, this team has never played poorly for an extended stretch. They have not been embarrassed at all. They got bad goaltending and have struggled to score. How do you blame that on a coach? This year the PP has been good. The PK has been good. The team system continues to be strong.

 

Maybe Pete doesn't trust young players so much, but this is a veteran team, so that is only going to be an issue for a small few. And if Lou wanted those young guys to play, he easily has the power to make it happen.

 

If Deboer gets canned, he would have a job in 15 seconds around the league. Why? He took a team to the Stanley Cup Finals in his 1st year. They proceeded to lose their two best players and other 20+ goal scorers and continue to play damn well. After each game (win or lose), every coach and GM is saying, "damn that team is hard to play against. They play a great system game, and they take away a ton of what we do well. Shame he lost all two of the top 25 forwards in the game."

 

That's the main reason I could see something happening...only because you never really know with Lou. 

 

The main question is does Lou think this team is or isn't performing to its capacity?  I'm not sure how much of an argument can be made that the team is underachieving.  The coach seems to put them in a position to win a lot (even moreso now that they're not getting near replacement-level goaltending on a near-nightly basis, the way they were last season), but there's just too many guys who don't or can't find ways to put pucks in the net. 

 

 

OUTSHOT by 1 or 2 shots lol hahaha for the love or god Tri. Do you even realize how silly it sound to say that you OUTSHOT someone simply cause you have 1 or 2 more shots in a period? That shot could be a weak wrister from the blue line just to get a faceoff in the offensive zone.

 

i wouldnt say my team outshot the other team other than if it was by a wide margin, PP and PK during the game is also something to look at when you make statement like that

 

You're not looking at this right SD...teams trailing in the 3rd tend to outshoot their opponents, as they start shooting from all angles, try everything to get pucks on net, take more risks, etc.  The fact that these trailing teams are having trouble getting much in the quantity of good scoring chances when they were trying that much harder to get them IS a good sign...especially against a good team like Colorado, who needed to both pull their goalie AND have a gassed Devils team on the ice to score.

 

That being said, you can only get by on doing good things for so long when they don't produce needed results.  The Devils need to start finding ways to stop being an endlessly "unlucky" almost team, and start finding ways to win these games they seem to win everywhere but on the scoreboard.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the stat on nbcsn last night was that the devils are 14-0-3 when leading going into the 3rd. So now we are 14-0-4. (I might have the win total wrong but we don't have a regulation loss).

It's unfortunate that we gave up late goals the past 3 games but holding leads hasn't really been a problem, it's just that when you do blow one it hurts badly and gets magnified because fans think it's a point we should have had.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the stat on nbcsn last night was that the devils are 14-0-3 when leading going into the 3rd. So now we are 14-0-4. (I might have the win total wrong but we don't have a regulation loss).

It's unfortunate that we gave up late goals the past 3 games but holding leads hasn't really been a problem, it's just that when you do blow one it hurts badly and gets magnified because fans think it's a point we should have had.

 

15-0-4. Still, that percentage leaves them only 19th in the league in that department.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the main reason I could see something happening...only because you never really know with Lou. 

 

The main question is does Lou think this team is or isn't performing to its capacity?  I'm not sure how much of an argument can be made that the team is underachieving.  The coach seems to put them in a position to win a lot (even moreso now that they're not getting near replacement-level goaltending on a near-nightly basis, the way they were last season), but there's just too many guys who don't or can't find ways to put pucks in the net. 

 

 

 

You're not looking at this right SD...teams trailing in the 3rd tend to outshoot their opponents, as they start shooting from all angles, try everything to get pucks on net, take more risks, etc.  The fact that these trailing teams are having trouble getting much in the quantity of good scoring chances when they were trying that much harder to get them IS a good sign...especially against a good team like Colorado, who needed to both pull their goalie AND have a gassed Devils team on the ice to score.

 

That being said, you can only get by on doing good things for so long when they don't produce needed results.  The Devils need to start finding ways to stop being an endlessly "unlucky" almost team, and start finding ways to win these games they seem to win everywhere but on the scoreboard.   

 

What I mean is that, we can look at stats all we want, we don't have the skills to "support" those shots. I guess im not sure how to put this clearly but we're lacking scoring for a reason, cause we don't have much scorers. So you can't look at any % of what our team is doing in term of shots and compare it to another team when its lets say sharp, Toews, Kane, Hossa, Keith etc etc taking those shots.

 

i guess you can quantify somehow scoring % on the amount of shots a player takes that goes in and all but still, it's all about positioning, where and when you take the shots etc etc that all goes into play most of the time.

 

im so absolutely sick of us looking at stats saying we're all fine and that our numbers should be better because of this and this stat and that we're simply unlucky. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I mean is that, we can look at stats all we want, we don't have the skills to "support" those shots. I guess im not sure how to put this clearly but we're lacking scoring for a reason, cause we don't have much scorers. So you can't look at any % of what our team is doing in term of shots and compare it to another team when its lets say sharp, Toews, Kane, Hossa, Keith etc etc taking those shots.

 

i guess you can quantify somehow scoring % on the amount of shots a player takes that goes in and all but still, it's all about positioning, where and when you take the shots etc etc that all goes into play most of the time.

 

im so absolutely sick of us looking at stats saying we're all fine and that our numbers should be better because of this and this stat and that we're simply unlucky. 

 

The Devils aren't particularily unlucky - the problem is they don't shoot enough.

 

Plus it's funny that the players you used as examples shoot a lot. Figures.

Edited by Marshall

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Devils aren't particularily unlucky - the problem is they don't shoot enough.

 

Plus it's funny that the players you used as examples shoot a lot. Figures.

 

you completely understood what i mean come on now dont nitpick.

 

lets put it this way. You somehow have to get bitchslaped 20 times by one of 2 groups. A group a 8 years old girls or by a group of UFC fighters. Who do you pick?

 

Our shooting "quality" is "8 years old girls worthy" really. We're among the worst scoring team in the league, there's no other reasons for that than we're lacking scoring skills and us outshooting another team by 10 shots isnt compensating either from that lack.

 

it goes both ways, there's also a reason we made it to the finals 2 years ago, we had 3 30 goals scorers and a few 20+ goals scorers.

Edited by SterioDesign

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Found these over at HF Boards:

 

DeBoer, The Tyrant And Locker Room Terror Nobody Sees

 

Florida Panthers Fire Head Coach Peter DeBoer After 2010-2011 Season

 

The first talks about how he treats young players.  One of my biggest complaints is how he continues to bury the young guys in favor of the old vets.  

 

The second talks about his firing from the Panthers.  Ironically they had enough with his constant line juggling and inability to hold leads.

 

First of all, the Panthers thing is old news. We have known about the rumors on why the Panthers fired him and his disagreements with the player for years. Then we knocked the Panthers out of the playoffs. That story was over. But when things aren't going so smoothly for the Devils, some people love to all of a sudden remember all that ancient history and act like it's breaking news again.

 

The first article is especially egregious. It's a sensational headline, and the story feeds off negativity to make it seem like the walls of the Prudential Center are caving in.

 

I am not one of the jerks on here that attacks someone for being a poor fan because they vent about the team and believe we are screwed - those are almost always legitimate opinions. However, when it comes to sill sh!t like this, I just can't stand for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you completely understood what i mean come on now dont nitpick.

 

lets put it this way. You somehow have to get bitchslaped 20 times by one of 2 groups. A group a 8 years old girls or by a group of UFC fighters. Who do you pick?

 

Our shooting "quality" is "8 years old girls worthy" really. We're among the worst scoring team in the league, there's no other reasons for that than we're lacking scoring skills and us outshooting another team by 10 shots isnt compensating either from that lack.

 

it goes both ways, there's also a reason we made it to the finals 2 years ago, we had 3 30 goals scorers and a few 20+ goals scorers.

 

Top players get a ton of shots. That is why they score. This was just discussed today on twitter as so many people were going on about how good Kessel's shot is. He is secnd in the league in goals with the 2nd most shots.

 

And a smart individual pointed out:

 

 Retweeted by James Mirtle

Kessel is a great example of why shot quantity is so important: even w/ his skill he still only shoots ~1% better than avg for a forward.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I mean is that, we can look at stats all we want, we don't have the skills to "support" those shots. I guess im not sure how to put this clearly but we're lacking scoring for a reason, cause we don't have much scorers. So you can't look at any % of what our team is doing in term of shots and compare it to another team when its lets say sharp, Toews, Kane, Hossa, Keith etc etc taking those shots.

 

i guess you can quantify somehow scoring % on the amount of shots a player takes that goes in and all but still, it's all about positioning, where and when you take the shots etc etc that all goes into play most of the time.

 

im so absolutely sick of us looking at stats saying we're all fine and that our numbers should be better because of this and this stat and that we're simply unlucky. 

 

Both you and Triumph/CR1976 have valid points. The fact that the Devils are putting on more shots than the opposition when leading is a great sign from  team play stand point. They are playing hard, counter attacking and creating shots when leading. However, as you said, the problem is that the players putting those shots on net just can't score for the life of them right now. It will take a while for the Devils to have shot producing players of the caliber you listed at forward. However, Gelinas/Merrill/Severson will definitely help bring some offense from the blueline in the coming years.

 

The issue with this team is that it isn't just a "fire the coach" or "fire the GM" or "start Cory" away from success. They have great goaltending most games now, they have solid defense that limits shots most nights, but they also have a middle of the road forward roster on paper that is underachieving in actuality. Looking at the roster the team should be a few points better than they are, and unfortunately those few points may very well cost them. But I don't think anyone looked at that roster in August and saw a regular season power house either.

Edited by Devil Dan 56

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PDB is not the problem with this team. It's lack of skilled fw's. When a 41 yr. old is your highest scorer.  This is not a bad team. We don't get blown out by anyone! We're IN every game & players are well prepared.  If he has to go it's one thing but I don't see therein/Hitchcock,trotz etc going to put a crapload of goals on the board.  DB has a menza menz team! You can't make chicken salad out of chicken sh>t

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Top players get a ton of shots. That is why they score. This was just discussed today on twitter as so many people were going on about how good Kessel's shot is. He is secnd in the league in goals with the 2nd most shots.

And a smart individual pointed out:

45]

Retweeted by James Mirtle

45]

7a090c194e95017867285c49d3485b26_bigger.Draglikepull@draglikepull 2h

Kessel is a great example of why shot quantity is so important: even w/ his skill he still only shoots ~1% better than avg for a forward.

This is a good post.

It's counter-intuitive but shooting isn't necessarily a skill. Obviously some people have better shots than others, but quantity is the number that you should be focusing on. When you throw stuff on net you can beat a goalie cleanly, score on a deflection, create a rebound, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a good post.

It's counter-intuitive but shooting isn't necessarily a skill. Obviously some people have better shots than others, but quantity is the number that you should be focusing on. When you throw stuff on net you can beat a goalie cleanly, score on a deflection, create a rebound, etc.

 

Good point. Look at Clarkson in his 30 goal year. They guy would shoot from the bench that year if they'd let him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you completely understood what i mean come on now dont nitpick.

 

lets put it this way. You somehow have to get bitchslaped 20 times by one of 2 groups. A group a 8 years old girls or by a group of UFC fighters. Who do you pick?

 

Our shooting "quality" is "8 years old girls worthy" really. We're among the worst scoring team in the league, there's no other reasons for that than we're lacking scoring skills and us outshooting another team by 10 shots isnt compensating either from that lack.

 

So if we translate your example* into hockey, that makes UFC fighters NHL'ers and 8 y-o girls into...well, peewee hockey players. There are no peewee players in the NHL. The NHL doesn't work in the way your example describes it. There are good and bad shooters in the NHL, but they are still by and large the best in the world. 8 y-o girls throw weaker punches than the worst NHLer shoots.

 

The problem is the shooters and it isn't. Their shots are fine - if they weren't they'd have terrible percentages at this point in the season (they don't). The problem is that they don't generate enough shots. 

 

*or should I just ignore your examples and nod my head? That's usually how you want it played.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Top players get a ton of shots. That is why they score. This was just discussed today on twitter as so many people were going on about how good Kessel's shot is. He is secnd in the league in goals with the 2nd most shots.

 

And a smart individual pointed out:

 

 Retweeted by James Mirtle

Kessel is a great example of why shot quantity is so important: even w/ his skill he still only shoots ~1% better than avg for a forward.

 

 

 

 

 

 

yeah but it goes hand in hand... he can put it in. Put Kessel instead of Gionta on every single breakaway he had this year. Im sure there's a few extra goals right there. You're not a "good player" because you shot a lot, you're a good player cause you bury a good amount of them. Also those top players are playing top minutes AND PP... so obviously they'll have more shots cause they have more ice time. Again, they are top players cause they deserve it and can bury their chances. Honestly how many of our guys would be top line on another above average team?

 

Also with kessel's speed he's a monster off the rush and he creates his own chances. No one on the devils are even close to do what he does with his speed... mayyyyyyybe Brunner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah but it goes hand in hand... he can put it in. Put Kessel instead of Gionta on every single breakaway he had this year. Im sure there's a few extra goals right there. You're not a "good player" because you shot a lot, you're a good player cause you bury a good amount of them. Also those top players are playing top minutes AND PP... so obviously they'll have more shots cause they have more ice time. Again, they are top players cause they deserve it and can bury their chances. Honestly how many of our guys would be top line on another above average team?

Also with kessel's speed he's a monster off the rush and he creates his own chances. No one on the devils are even close to do what he does with his speed... mayyyyyyybe Brunner.

Players who shoot a lot usually get shots because they are good players. If you look at the leaders for SOG, you usually see players like Ovechkin, Parise, Neal, etc. They bury their chances because they get more

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So if we translate your example* into hockey, that makes UFC fighters NHL'ers and 8 y-o girls into...well, peewee hockey players. There are no peewee players in the NHL. The NHL doesn't work in the way your example describes it. There are good and bad shooters in the NHL, but they are still by and large the best in the world. 8 y-o girls throw weaker punches than the worst NHLer shoots.

 

The problem is the shooters and it isn't. Their shots are fine - if they weren't they'd have terrible percentages at this point in the season (they don't). The problem is that they don't generate enough shots. 

 

*or should I just ignore your examples and nod my head? That's usually how you want it played.

 

yeah cause of course i didnt exaggerate my example just to make it stand out right? you have to take it like literally to make it sound wrong.

 

how many games did we lose that we only allowed like 15 shots or below and got near 25 shots and lost by a goal or in SO ? How many games did the leafs won in the last 2 years while being outshot by like 20 goals? Why? cause they have skilled players who can put it eventhough they dont take generate as much shots, also while their goalie is doing the job too.

 

im not even sure what youre trying to prove here. My point is that we don't have scorers who can get the job done on a regular basis. Our personal is the problem, not the amount of shots we're taking. Teams with good players are still winning games simply by putting it in at the right time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree on the quality of the articles not being the best.

 

I feel like the treatment of the young players reminds me of Brent Sutter when he was a coach. It seemed like our young guys (I think it was guys like Vrana and Bergfors at the time) would play 5 minutes with Cam Janssen and that was it.

 

I wonder if this is an CHL thing? In juniors your young players are 15-16 year olds playing against 19-20 year olds. The players need time to physically grow more than anything. It's not as unusual for a guy to sit on the fourth line for a year and then turn in a much improved season the next year when he's bigger. In the NHL, guys need confidence and to improve their skills, they're as big as they're going to get.

 

Maybe some of these coaches, despite coming from a "developmental" league, really aren't that good at actually developing players?

 

 

Even if it's not Deboer's strength as a coach, I think it's a stretch to say he's ruined anyone. Interview Adam Henrique or Jon Merrill in two years and you'll probably hear the opposite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Players who shoot a lot usually get shots because they are good players. If you look at the leaders for SOG, you usually see players like Ovechkin, Parise, Neal, etc. They bury their chances because they get more

 

and i say they bury their chances cause they are skilled players with a better nose for the net. Like i said it all goes hand in hand. 

 

to say "They bury their chances because they get more" straight like that is absolutely wrong. 

 

Just look at the shootouts or breakaways or a guy in a good shooting position in front of the net, put James Neal for 10 shots and then put 

Rinaldo for another 10... repeat the exercise 3-4 times. Tell me what you're expecting in results there. Cause what you're saying is that it should be pretty tight cause well they have the same amount of shots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and i say they bury their chances cause they are skilled players with a better nose for the net. Like i said it all goes hand in hand.

to say "They bury their chances because they get more" straight like that is absolutely wrong.

Just look at the shootouts or breakaways or a guy in a good shooting position in front of the net, put James Neal for 10 shots and then put

Rinaldo for another 10... repeat the exercise 3-4 times. Tell me what you're expecting in results there. Cause what you're saying is that it should be pretty tight cause well they have the same amount of shots.

It is wrong though. If they were better at burying their chances, they'd have higher shooting percentages

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Players who shoot a lot usually get shots because they are good players. If you look at the leaders for SOG, you usually see players like Ovechkin, Parise, Neal, etc. They bury their chances because they get more

 

One exception (might be others) is Stamkos.  His career shooting percentage is something like 17 percent, and it got over 20 percent in one season. 

 

Just as an aside, I think more receptive to the idea of stressing SOG if it weren't for those yahoos in the crowd who indiscriminately yell "shoot!". 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0