Larsson

[thefiestygoat]

he looked better than Fayne tonight

I thought they both looked good but Fayne was better in my opinion. Fayne had to play a bit more at evens against tougher competition and with less favorable zone starts. They both deserve to play though.

[The 29th Pick]

I thought they both looked good but Fayne was better in my opinion. Fayne had to play a bit more at evens against tougher competition and with less favorable zone starts. They both deserve to play though.

Fayne wasnt terrible...but he did let Sedin in deep when he scored (although Corey shudda stopped it)

[Daniel]

Larsson had his best game in a long time tonight (although he still shows ZERO confidence in firing any shot more than 5 MPH in the offensive zone) - maybe Lou had a talk with DeBo and got the guillotine removed?

Of course I'm still expecting the same ol' same ol' when Sal comes back Saturday or next week.

I will give Larsson credit for a good game tonight. Gelinas was awesome though.

It wouldn't shock me if Harrold is put on waivers soon.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[The 29th Pick]

I will give Larsson credit for a good game tonight. Gelinas was awesome though.

It wouldn't shock me if Harrold is put on waivers soon.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

that should be done.....unless Lou can trade some other D 

[Pepperkorn]

"You have to be solid in all areas. I'm not looking for a goal or an assist, just physical play, reliable defensively, get the trust of the coaches. Not be minus-5 or 6 in five games."

Umm, coach...have you seen these stats to which you are referring? Your pet project Harrold is a minus-6. .

Well see, then the take-away for you should probably be that Harrold is sitting because of his -6. You might have missed his point. DeBoer may not have had it together enough to be really articulate. Just a thought

[thefiestygoat]

Fayne wasnt terrible...but he did let Sedin in deep when he scored (although Corey shudda stopped it)

I can't blame Fayne for that at all, Sedin was out wide enough that that is 100% on Schneider. Greene and Fayne were the best 2 D in my opinion tonight. Larsson had a strong game and Gelinas did, but Gelinas was also well protected by the DeBoer tonight which really helped him stand out. Greene and Fayne did a lot of the heavy lifting that goes unnoticed.

[Daniel]

I can't blame Fayne for that at all, Sedin was out wide enough that that is 100% on Schneider. Greene and Fayne were the best 2 D in my opinion tonight. Larsson had a strong game and Gelinas did, but Gelinas was also well protected by the DeBoer tonight which really helped him stand out. Greene and Fayne did a lot of the heavy lifting that goes unnoticed.

While I'll admit that I'm not great at picking up on the match ups, I seem to recall Gelinas getting some shifts against the Sedins.

As I said before, I'm very interested to see what happens when Sal comes back. Either Gelinas gets sent back down or Harrold is put on waivers. I'm leaning towards the latter. I don't think they would have played Gelinas tonight if he wasn't going to get a legitimate shot to stay with the team. On the other hand, you'd rather have Gelinas get regular playing time in Albany than having him on the bench very third game or so.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[Z-Man]

That is why Harrold is sitting for Larsson, I don't think DeBoer is being inconsistent in what he is saying here.  Larsson's had some tough breaks in addition to not playing well, but if anyone wants to contend he's played well at the beginning of the season, I'm not sure what you're watching.

 

Actually Tri, this was PDB's reasoning:

 

“Harry’s played some good hockey for us,” DeBoer said. “I think he was fantastic early. He’s not a big guy. I think sometimes the grind levels his play off a little bit and we’re just going to take a step back here and put some fresh legs in.”

 

So bringing up Larsson's +/- and using it to identify weak play isn't consistent with his need to play Harrold.  Larsson had some struggles, but why bring up the +/- when "good hockey" Harrold has a worse number? 

[Z-Man]

Well see, then the take-away for you should probably be that Harrold is sitting because of his -6. You might have missed his point. DeBoer may not have had it together enough to be really articulate. Just a thought

 

Pep, see my point above.  Harrold wasn't benched for his -6.  According to Pete, he's played "good hockey." 

 

Either way, I hated PDB calling our Larsson using stats when the entire team has crappy stats. 

[thefiestygoat]

While I'll admit that I'm not great at picking up on the match ups, I seem to recall Gelinas getting some shifts against the Sedins.

Gelinas and Larsson saw mostly Higgins-Santorelli-Kassian, not pushovers at all but not on the same level as what Greene and Fayne were seeing for the most part with the Sedins and Kesler. Gelinas saw the Sedins and Kesler well less than any other D, even Larsson, so it must have been an odd shift.

Greene and Fayne saw 41.7% and 33.4% of the Devils even strength ice time respectively. Gelinas and Larsson saw 24.7% and 31.4% of the Devils even strength ice time respectively. Gelinas had the least even strength ice time for the Devils D but was on for 43.1% of the Devils PP time - rightfully so.

Gelinas had the 2nd most favorable zone starts for any Devil tonight, and best for a D, with a O/DSt% of 70%. To put that into perspective the Devils other D: Zidlicky: 54.5%, Larsson: 54.5%, Volchenkov 50%, Fayne 42.9%, and Greene 27.3%. Greene and Fayne only had 3 offensive zone starts (this all being off faceoffs at EV) each. Gelinas and Larsson had 7 and 6 offensive zone starts each.

Gotta give credit to DeBoer, he put Gelinas in a place to succeed and Gelinas took advantage of it. Incase anyone is wondering, O/DSt% = offensive zone starts at EV/ (offensive + defensive zone starts at EV). The higher the percentage the more favorable the zone starts.

 

 

As I said before, I'm very interested to see what happens when Sal comes back. Either Gelinas gets sent back down or Harrold is put on waivers. I'm leaning towards the latter. I don't think they would have played Gelinas tonight if he wasn't going to get a legitimate shot to stay with the team. On the other hand, you'd rather have Gelinas get regular playing time in Albany than having him on the bench very third game or so.

I really have no clue what they are going to do, or really what they should do. Like earlier today, I noted that Salvador and Volchenkov get grief (even misplaced by me in the past) due to their contracts, but they've both been solid this year, especially as key anchors on the PK. I don't think you can take them out unless Volchenkov's 5v5 play really, really drops off.

 

I'd actually like to see the Greene and Fayne pairing get a solid run of games. I feel like that's a pair that can do some heavy lifting matchup wise and take some of the burden off the other D.

 

Larsson had a solid game and he deserves and needs to be playing regularly so I want him to stay in the line up. We all know I'm not a huge fan of Zidlicky - moreso because I think Gelinas could make the jump, playing on the 3rd pair and getting PP minutes, but Zidlicky is in to stay even though he's a rollercoaster of giveth and taketh.

 

I will say this, if he's not waived, Harrold should absolutely be the 7th D and only play due to injury or if one of the other 6 really falls of form. Even if they waived Harrold, I'd hate to see any of Fayne, Larsson, or Gelinas as the 7th D. Really have to think that if they want Gelinas on the roster they'll have to move someone and I think Fayne would be the most likely to move unfortunately.

[Steadevils]

I think the Gelinas-Larsson pairing should stay together for a few games. Gelinas played loose and confident, the way we are all waiting for larsson to play. Maybe some of that young confidence will brush off on his linemate.

[Pepperkorn]

Actually Tri, this was PDB's reasoning:

 

“Harry’s played some good hockey for us,” DeBoer said. “I think he was fantastic early. He’s not a big guy. I think sometimes the grind levels his play off a little bit and we’re just going to take a step back here and put some fresh legs in.”

 

So bringing up Larsson's +/- and using it to identify weak play isn't consistent with his need to play Harrold.  Larsson had some struggles, but why bring up the +/- when "good hockey" Harrold has a worse number? 

Well -- now this is tough because I rather agree with you to the point about DeBoer. 

 

To the point about defence moving forward and the reason Harrold was benched...well, I think some things can't be said. 

 

For me, DeBoer kind of didn't make clear sense.  That's not typical.  I'm just thinking someone else's words were  inserted into DeBoer's points, he was sharing someone else's point of view, hence the contradiction.  I can't be sure about that, but DeBoer normally has quite clean comments.  It reads like someone won an arguement - it may well be just an internal debate DeBoer has been having with himself he's still not ready to give up on.  Or it could be exterior forces hes finally having to take into account.

[Triumph]

Actually Tri, this was PDB's reasoning:

 

“Harry’s played some good hockey for us,” DeBoer said. “I think he was fantastic early. He’s not a big guy. I think sometimes the grind levels his play off a little bit and we’re just going to take a step back here and put some fresh legs in.”

 

So bringing up Larsson's +/- and using it to identify weak play isn't consistent with his need to play Harrold.  Larsson had some struggles, but why bring up the +/- when "good hockey" Harrold has a worse number? 

 

'His play has leveled off' - is that not an indication that his play is worse?

[Pepperkorn]

'His play has leveled off' - is that not an indication that his play is worse?

and there's that too 

[2ELIAS6]

I think the Gelinas-Larsson pairing should stay together for a few games. Gelinas played loose and confident, the way we are all waiting for larsson to play. Maybe some of that young confidence will brush off on his linemate.

i liked the two of them together as well looked pretty good and i think they both need to stay in the line up get them to start growing

[Derlique]

The problem with having Larsson play with Greene is that they are always going to be the ones taking on tough minutes.  No shame giving him weaker opponents and letting him gain confidence that way

[EdgeControl]

IMO, Larsson played one of his most solid games against the bruins, yeah he got caught sleeping on that "post pattern" (football ref,) full ice flip pass. so did a few others  but other than that he played loose and confident. he used his body behind the net as well as Ive ever seen him, winning puck battles, he threw together some sweet escape moves under pressure to make clean passes. and his feet and mind were moving at a decent NHL pace  and it was an away game in boston.

I thought larsson with gelanis was a mistake, glad to be wrong!

 

well done   

 

get gelanis back up here quickly

Edited October 28, 2013 by EdgeControl

[Mike Brown]

Larsson and Gelinas has the potential to be our number one pairing.

[Marshall]

Larsson and Gelinas has the potential to be our number one pairing.

 

Yes. In 2-4 years.

[Mike Brown]

Yes. In 2-4 years.

Well in 2-4 years, I'd argue this pairing has the potential to be our Suter - Weber pairing. Right NOW I'd say it has been our best pairing. 3 games is a tiny sample size though. That's why I used the word POTENTIALLY.

[Marshall]

Well in 2-4 years, I'd argue this pairing has the potential to be our Suter - Weber pairing. Right NOW I'd say it has been our best pairing. 3 games is a tiny sample size though. That's why I used the word POTENTIALLY.

 

Eh...let them take on Greene-Fayne's assignments first (ie D-zone starts and top line forwards). They were very sheltered in their two games (not three). 

[ATLL765]

Well in 2-4 years, I'd argue this pairing has the potential to be our Suter - Weber pairing. Right NOW I'd say it has been our best pairing. 3 games is a tiny sample size though. That's why I used the word POTENTIALLY.

And I'm a potential billionaire.

Making judgements like this based on a couple games is nuts. Lots of call ups play well then level out after the excitement wears off. Obviously Gelinas looked good, but was that him playing over his head for 3 games? Something that most NHL players can do at times. I'll wait until he gets a few more games in before placing him and Larsson in the argument for best d-pairing in the league.....

[Mike Brown]

And I'm a potential billionaire.

Making judgements like this based on a couple games is nuts. Lots of call ups play well then level out after the excitement wears off. Obviously Gelinas looked good, but was that him playing over his head for 3 games? Something that most NHL players can do at times. I'll wait until he gets a few more games in before placing him and Larsson in the argument for best d-pairing in the league.....

 

I said best pairing on the Devils, not best pairing in the league.

[DevsMan84]

And I'm a potential billionaire.

Making judgements like this based on a couple games is nuts. Lots of call ups play well then level out after the excitement wears off. Obviously Gelinas looked good, but was that him playing over his head for 3 games? Something that most NHL players can do at times. I'll wait until he gets a few more games in before placing him and Larsson in the argument for best d-pairing in the league.....

This is probably the smartest approach to take.

Remember when in 2010-11 after a few games people were calling Taormina our next Rafalski?

[ATLL765]

This is probably the smartest approach to take.

Remember when in 2010-11 after a few games people were calling Taormina our next Rafalski?

Yes, yes I do.

 

I said best pairing on the Devils, not best pairing in the league.

I quoted what you said in my post, I know how to read and Gelinas and Larsson were not our best pairing. My comment was more directed at how silly it was to say that they have the potential to be a Suter-Weber level pairing based on their play in 3 games where they were very protected in their match ups.