Jump to content

Photo

MacLean has been fired. Confirmed on NJ.com


  • Please log in to reply
295 replies to this topic

#281 HellOnICE

HellOnICE

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,657 posts

Posted 24 December 2010 - 10:49 AM

Tri, i don't understand where finishing last overall impacts next season?
  • 0

#282 Triumph

Triumph

    A Legend

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 27,420 posts

Posted 24 December 2010 - 10:52 AM

Tri, i don't understand where finishing last overall impacts next season?


All sorts of ways.

1: The longer the team goes playing terribly, the more likely the players on the team are terrible players.
2: Everyone's trade value goes right into the toilet, gutter, or wherever one's least valued items are thrown.
3: Psychologically, I think it would be healthier for this team to start winning. This team isn't getting broken up, and for the most part, it's a bunch of NHL players on this team - they're not going away.
  • 0

http://drivingplay.blogspot.com - The blog with three first lines
 


#283 ghdi

ghdi

    General Manager

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,393 posts

Posted 24 December 2010 - 10:55 AM

Tri, i don't understand where finishing last overall impacts next season?


I think it impacts in some ways. Free Agents may not want to come here. Guys with NTCs on other teams that we may vie for may not accept a trade to us because of being perceptibly inept. The fact that we have the most unstable coaching position in all of sports also hurts.

Finishing last doesn't "look good" especially when you look at who is on the roster. Its not a young team and the young guys we do have don't seem to be progressing the way they have on other squads.

I'm looking forward to Jamie leaving and seeing what he has to say after he's been gone. The split will be amicable, but I think the aftermath won't be.
  • 0

#284 NJDevs4978

NJDevs4978

    A Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,936 posts

Posted 24 December 2010 - 12:32 PM

Absolutely agreed with the last two posts, that's why I :rolleyes: at the tanking talk. Especially considering how indignant we get as a fanbase when the Penguins actually did tank to get Mario.
  • 0
"The Devils have high standards, that's the difference. We have a standard to live up to every year, and a couple of teams in our area don't have the standards we do." - Pat Burns

The New Jersey Devils win Stanley Cups everywhere:
-NHL record for most road wins in the playoffs - 10-1 in '95 and 10-2 in '00
-NHL record for most home wins in the playoffs - 12-1 in '03

#285 Dadds

Dadds

    Senior Devil

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 991 posts

Posted 24 December 2010 - 12:39 PM

so many coaches so few years
  • 0
"I think I'm going to become a Devils fan so they start never winning again." A sad flyers fan

"**** this. NJ might as well be allowed to build a brick wall in front of the net and let Marty sit on the bench. Would be no difference" A sad penguins fan

#286 HellOnICE

HellOnICE

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,657 posts

Posted 24 December 2010 - 01:22 PM

All sorts of ways.

1: The longer the team goes playing terribly, the more likely the players on the team are terrible players.
2: Everyone's trade value goes right into the toilet, gutter, or wherever one's least valued items are thrown.
3: Psychologically, I think it would be healthier for this team to start winning. This team isn't getting broken up, and for the most part, it's a bunch of NHL players on this team - they're not going away.



The more likely the players become terrible players or are continue to be terrible players?

Our players have a value already, and it's not likely to change drastically unless we start winning every game, which it won't. If Jacques can make them start playing better, fine, but there's no way to measure the value of our players. GMs know what these guys bring.

My point is everything resets back to zero when the season ends and our draft pick being the highest it can be is BENEFICIAL to this organization whether we keep that pick or trade it. The story changes from losing to hope for next year once the season ends and the roster/coach starts to take shape.

In the long run it's probably better for us finish as low as possible. However you can't aim for that, it either happens or it doesn't. We've clearly already built a team that sucks. It wouldn't surprise me if we started to get rid of the deadwood, replacing them with AHLers - that we'd start being more compeitive.

Of course it would be psychologically better for the team to start winning. "Team being broken up" is general. Clearly there'll be player moves...most likely.

You can't PURPOSEFULLY tank - that's crazy and you really can't do that anymore than what we've already been doing. We put together a sh!tty team that loses, what more else do we need to do to make that happen. You're not suggesting we trade players to win NOW - that would be crazy. So HOW can we insure this team start winning to better the psyche? In the long run it doesn't matter.

All I'm saying is - I really don't care if this team starts winning or not. I root for them to win every game. I'm not one of those who cheer when they are getting scored upon MANTA :koolaid: Tanking is clearly not what I am saying.

If the goal is to get better. For me, that starts with getting better players. Finishing last usually increases those chances either by that #1 pick or via trade.
  • 0

#287 HellOnICE

HellOnICE

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,657 posts

Posted 24 December 2010 - 01:26 PM

I think it impacts in some ways. Free Agents may not want to come here. Guys with NTCs on other teams that we may vie for may not accept a trade to us because of being perceptibly inept. The fact that we have the most unstable coaching position in all of sports also hurts.

Finishing last doesn't "look good" especially when you look at who is on the roster. Its not a young team and the young guys we do have don't seem to be progressing the way they have on other squads.

I'm looking forward to Jamie leaving and seeing what he has to say after he's been gone. The split will be amicable, but I think the aftermath won't be.


Free agents aren't banging down the door unless their name is Tallinder and we give them stupid contracts.

You know, an FA, may look at our team and go "Yea they finished last, but they have some great players and they just got a number 1/2 overall pick - they might turn it around quickly like Philly." Having the number one pick is sexier than having the 10th pick.

Look good? Who cares. These guys don't look at the standings, they look at the team. If Zach looked at our players and thought we'd have a chance to turn around quickly - he might stay. Those chances increase at getting the number one overall pick.
  • 0

#288 devilsrule33

devilsrule33

    A Legend

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,936 posts

Posted 24 December 2010 - 01:50 PM

All sorts of ways.

1: The longer the team goes playing terribly, the more likely the players on the team are terrible players.
2: Everyone's trade value goes right into the toilet, gutter, or wherever one's least valued items are thrown.
3: Psychologically, I think it would be healthier for this team to start winning. This team isn't getting broken up, and for the most part, it's a bunch of NHL players on this team - they're not going away.


I think there is some truth to this, but a lot of it isn't. A losing culture is dangerous. Losing can take its toll on a lot of good players. You see it in the NBA with teams like the Clippers, or in the NFL in the past with the Lions and Raiders. But I don't think finishing bottom 3 is the end of the world for this team.

Win or lose, the value for half this team has dropped dramatically. Clarkson has gone from a guy that every team loved to a player that most teams wouldn't dare touch. Rolston...well the only way he is being traded is if some team needs him for salary cap purposes or what not. He is finished as an NHL player pretty much. Not trading Tallinder, Zubrus etc anyway.

I'm not worried about anyting psychologically, really just point #1. The main thing is that a ton of the players have come from a winning culture. This is an absolute awful season for guys like Marty, White and Patty who have experienced so much winning in the past. To a lesser extent guys like Zajac, Volchenkov, Greene, Zubrus have been on winning regular season teams throughout their career. No way they accept this moving forward. So either these guys are washed up and suck or things change. But at the same time we have seen for the last 82 games that there are a lot of problems. Finishing 5-6 games over .500 isn't going to make me think differently about half this team.

Luckily Parise has been out all year during this disaster. I think he's going to come back at an elite level, especially after missing a year. The bonus is he only experienced the losses from afar. He isn't going to be mentally hurt by this awful year. I think just Parise being back gives Travis a serious boost. Kovalchuk has come from losing cultures his entire career. Not sure if that works well for us or not. They still have a whole bunch of young guys coming in.

We all have different opinions, but I still think getting a top 2 pick outweights finishing stronger down the stretch and getting a 6-7th pick like Florida/Phoenix gets every year. Maybe it will be a serious wake up call to Lou. Because right now he thinks that under a veteran coach they can get a lot better, and he obviously thinks this team is a lot better than their record shows, which I am not sure is the case. Individual players, sure...but as a team, I don't know.

Reality is that the Devils have dug themselves so deep that they have room to play a lot better, and still finish bottom 2-3.
  • 0

logokx.jpg

"The Stanley Cup has fallen from the Stars. The new millennium has its first Stanley Cup Champion, and it's the New Jersey Devils." Mike Miller calling the Devils winning the Stanley Cup.

"It goes to the captain and then there are handoffs during a skate around the ice" Mike Emrick as Scott Stevens is being presented the Stanley Cup.


#289 HellOnICE

HellOnICE

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,657 posts

Posted 24 December 2010 - 01:55 PM

Which is by fine by me DR. Win a little bit finish in the bottom 4 or 5. DO NOT, finish 10th that's fvcking terrible.
  • 0

#290 Triumph

Triumph

    A Legend

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 27,420 posts

Posted 24 December 2010 - 04:12 PM

i don't have time to answer this in full, but patches o'houlihan made the best post in this thread, and i suggest you guys go back there and read it.
  • 0

http://drivingplay.blogspot.com - The blog with three first lines
 


#291 devilsrule33

devilsrule33

    A Legend

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,936 posts

Posted 24 December 2010 - 04:48 PM

i don't have time to answer this in full, but patches o'houlihan made the best post in this thread, and i suggest you guys go back there and read it.


I can't tell you how the top 10 picks rate. I don't know if it is top heavy in the first 5 and then it goes downhill, or if the top 3 are weak compared to past years, but 5-10 is very strong. I'm not worried, however, about the large cap hit or an extra year early entering the UFA market to be honest. If you are getting a very good player, it's worth it in the long run. Say you draft a player like Stamkos where you are paying a ton of money, and he sucks in the first year or has a hard time adapting. But you clearly saw how dangerous he became in year 2 and now year 3. He's now a hell of a bargain, and we'll probably be locked up well before he becomes a UFA like all of these early draft picks have in the past. Not saying a top guy will be anywhere near Stamkos good. Eric Staal is another example of a guy who struggled in year 1 and exploded in year two. I don't think that first year hurt anyone.

If we get a defenseman, I definitely think you don't go go that route though.
  • 0

logokx.jpg

"The Stanley Cup has fallen from the Stars. The new millennium has its first Stanley Cup Champion, and it's the New Jersey Devils." Mike Miller calling the Devils winning the Stanley Cup.

"It goes to the captain and then there are handoffs during a skate around the ice" Mike Emrick as Scott Stevens is being presented the Stanley Cup.


#292 Marshall

Marshall

    Head Coach

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,315 posts

Posted 24 December 2010 - 05:43 PM

^^Staal having a 100-point season in year two was largely helped by the fact that it was his third year as a pro - he spent his second professional year in the AHL during the lockout.
  • 0

Winner of the 2009-10 Slava Fetisov Award For Best International Poster
Winner of the 2011-2012 RD Avatar Award
believe2.jpg

www.numerartovertag.wordpress.com - An NHL Blog (in Swedish)


#293 Triumph

Triumph

    A Legend

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 27,420 posts

Posted 24 December 2010 - 09:10 PM

I can't tell you how the top 10 picks rate. I don't know if it is top heavy in the first 5 and then it goes downhill, or if the top 3 are weak compared to past years, but 5-10 is very strong. I'm not worried, however, about the large cap hit or an extra year early entering the UFA market to be honest. If you are getting a very good player, it's worth it in the long run. Say you draft a player like Stamkos where you are paying a ton of money, and he sucks in the first year or has a hard time adapting. But you clearly saw how dangerous he became in year 2 and now year 3. He's now a hell of a bargain, and we'll probably be locked up well before he becomes a UFA like all of these early draft picks have in the past. Not saying a top guy will be anywhere near Stamkos good. Eric Staal is another example of a guy who struggled in year 1 and exploded in year two. I don't think that first year hurt anyone.

If we get a defenseman, I definitely think you don't go go that route though.


again, same time constraints, but there is not a stamkos-level player in this draft. oh boo hoo he scores 25 goals in his first season and then becomes a top 10 player in the NHL. eric staal took advantage of the ridiculousness of the 05-06 season which isn't coming back. there isn't this sort of player in this draft. and again, THE BONUS CUSHION IS OFF. you don't seem to comprehend how serious a problem this is.
  • 0

http://drivingplay.blogspot.com - The blog with three first lines
 


#294 LucifersDog

LucifersDog

    Broken Record

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,786 posts

Posted 25 December 2010 - 04:01 PM

I am sorry but my mentality is you play to win or improve the team by allowing rookies to gain experience and play to win.
  • 0

#295 Triumph

Triumph

    A Legend

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 27,420 posts

Posted 25 December 2010 - 05:25 PM

The more likely the players become terrible players or are continue to be terrible players?


both, obviously. i don't think anyone is as bad a player as they've shown this season.

Our players have a value already, and it's not likely to change drastically unless we start winning every game, which it won't. If Jacques can make them start playing better, fine, but there's no way to measure the value of our players. GMs know what these guys bring.


some of them just need a market of 1 team, but sucking won't help us find them that new home.

My point is everything resets back to zero when the season ends and our draft pick being the highest it can be is BENEFICIAL to this organization whether we keep that pick or trade it. The story changes from losing to hope for next year once the season ends and the roster/coach starts to take shape.


like i said, o'houlihan already pointed out that finishing 1st overall may not be good. one reason is that teams are pressured to put in the 1st overall pick right away - the last 1st overall pick who didn't play in the nhl the season after being drafted (lockout excepted) is chris phillips. a first overall pick taking up 4 million on the cap is a disaster.

i also don't think that everything goes back to zero after the season ends. most of the players on the team right now are going to be on this team next season.

In the long run it's probably better for us finish as low as possible. However you can't aim for that, it either happens or it doesn't. We've clearly already built a team that sucks. It wouldn't surprise me if we started to get rid of the deadwood, replacing them with AHLers - that we'd start being more compeitive.

Of course it would be psychologically better for the team to start winning. "Team being broken up" is general. Clearly there'll be player moves...most likely.

You can't PURPOSEFULLY tank - that's crazy and you really can't do that anymore than what we've already been doing. We put together a sh!tty team that loses, what more else do we need to do to make that happen. You're not suggesting we trade players to win NOW - that would be crazy. So HOW can we insure this team start winning to better the psyche? In the long run it doesn't matter.

All I'm saying is - I really don't care if this team starts winning or not. I root for them to win every game. I'm not one of those who cheer when they are getting scored upon MANTA :koolaid: Tanking is clearly not what I am saying.

If the goal is to get better. For me, that starts with getting better players. Finishing last usually increases those chances either by that #1 pick or via trade.


already addressed most of these points above. in the long run it does matter. why do you think detroit manages to convince just about everyone to take a pay cut to go there or stay there? because it's a well run organization that wins a lot and that people want to play for. the devils used to be this kind of a place, and it's very hard to compete in this league without talking people into taking pay cuts. there's not many secrets in NHL free agency. there's not many opportunities to trade anymore - the last substantial non-'deadline' move the devils made was the petr sykora trade. entry level contracts are huge, but 2nd and 3rd contracts are enormous as well. a losing culture is not going to help this. and the quicker the losing culture gets turned around, the better it is for everyone. like i already posted, it's going to be extremely difficult to finish 10th. the team needs to forget about the maclean era and believe that they are capable of winning - it's going to be these guys here next year.
  • 0

http://drivingplay.blogspot.com - The blog with three first lines
 


#296 Colin226

Colin226

    Hall of Famer

  • Contributor
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,165 posts

Posted 26 December 2010 - 09:51 AM

Posted Image
  • 0
Posted Image
Season Ticket Holder since '08 - '09
Section 226 - Row 2 - Seats 15 and 16

Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users