Well -- if I want to be thinned skinned about it, Marty for sure intended to imply he'd rather be on playoff team and he doesn't see this team getting there. He makes it sound like he asked for the trade because the Devils weren't committed to winning. Clearly, he feels if they were, he'd be seeing more ice time. That's the worst take I can put on his quote.
But the reality of it is, he wants to paint himself as someone who is in control. In control of his career and being held back unfairly from taking control of his life on the ice.
Dude is not in control of several things and he has to admit this - he can't regain control until he faces certain facts. He doesn't not have control of his sight. He does not have control of his reaction time. He does not have control of his body. These things are going to do what they want, not what he wishes they'd do. They have changed and to have a few good years left you have to take time to change with them and not do it in the limelight squealing about how others are stopping you from doing what you've got to do.
You play on your own time if you don't get the start. If you need to play every game to keep in your groove, you find a way to recreate it. You can't learn on ice it's costing the team and that can't happen. The team can't afford for you to find some groove you have no concept of how to find. After 40 nothing "just clicks" Just trust people Marty. Just trust people. They never lied to you before - they dont think old guy can't cut it they SEE OLD GUY CAN'T CUT IT. So trust them PLEASE. You are the one betraying a trust no one else.
Guys are so NOT like women. All his buddies see the way things are but know how guys are and think poor guy is just fvcked. they dnt help him out and try to help him through it -- they just assume he won't hear. because he's a dude. Has Jagr said -- this is why I went to overseas - to make a nice transition away from the spotlight. Marty you can't do that. You're not a forward. You're a goalie -- you have nothing that anyone will LET you hide behind. There is no more Stevens Dano Neidermayer to cover your ass in transition periods or weak moments. and you're NO HELP refusing to admit weakness.
whatever. People are frustrated at your lack of trust and refusal to see YOU are the betrayer here. No one has betrayed you except that they gave you all the rope you asked for.
Posted by Pepperkorn
on 16 January 2014 - 09:30 AM
oops. Can you undo my +1 up there (lest someone thinks someone actually agrees with me )? I hit it trying to fix my Jammie typo....
AND - in closing
Jamie was a great hockey player and did what he thought was best. I'd trust him to lead any team I was responsible for even now. I really loved watching him play and having him on the team. I sincerely hope he has a great retirement and no regrets.
Posted by Pepperkorn
on 16 January 2014 - 09:20 AM
AND I DO!!!! And I tie Kovy MAKING THAT CHOICE back to fvckING LANGENBRUNNER!!!
HOW CAN YOU SAY THE ENTIRE MACLEAN THING ISN"T ON JAMIE?!?!???!?!??!
AHHHHHHH!!!!! Lemaire doesn't retire without that fvcknut COMPLETELY messing with the team psyche!
WHY DO YOU ALL THINK LEMAIRE RETIRED!??????
Dear lawrd -- I posted before I finished the thread and saw where we all tried to take it.... no.
Jamie. It's all Lou, allowing the Jamie thing to spin completely out of control. Do you not see how this sort of thing fvcks with the very foundation of a system like Lou's? Trust is HUGE. Jamie betrayed the trust Lou gave him, in the worst most damaging way possible. He turned it on it's head and said: because you're making these decisions (which we know were actually on the right track), we can no longer trust you. TRUST WAS DESTROYED BY LANGENBRUNNER AND UNTIL EVERYONE IS GONE FROM THOSE DAYS, IT WILL ALWAYS BE WEAK. THIS is what I always write about - this is LOSERVILLE. This is that intangible LOSER thing I keep writing about.
Yes - the team has to shake it off -- people have to shake the lessons history has given them off. Lou is very conservative and hence we have some really slow shaking off. It's why I'm glad Parise is gone. Although if he had stayed it would have meant the Langenbrunner legacy was gone actually. Pretty much only Parise had that power to rid the team of that and keep them winners get them back to mental confidence. But it's done. The team had to be taken down to bare bones square one and that's where we are.
fine whatever. I may be over-stating to a point - but if you do not understand the string of actions then you can't understand why the team is where it is -- what it is coming out of and why it is. It's a waste of a valuable lesson. Hmeh - but you know -- people waste history continually. I'm not goign to let it die a quiet re-written death though
Posted by Pepperkorn
on 23 October 2013 - 10:02 PM
Well, I didnt expect him to be an ass, not in the public eye anyhow. He's always very balanced. He dips a toe in to see what sort of reaction he gets. When it's positive he pushes further as with Queen Henry's pads . He wants to be loved and respected and he's a reader and manipulator of people - its the nature of the position.
He tried a little outrage -pretty quickly he saw it was flying with no one. Fans are not being gracious about his fall, because they fear his ego will misread their melancholy/nostalgia for actual support. If he's going to bounce back he'll need fan support. Tantrums, self-righteous whining, this is no way to curry favor and get his way. I'm not saying he's being dishonest or manipulative - he just sees things clearly - he has to be truthful if he hopes to be treated fairly (which means given the unearned benefit of the doubt when push comes to shove - shee-it he sees Gionta keep playing, day in day out ).
I also don't think it's eating him up inside. He's OLD. That's the only thing that will bug him at the end of the day and he's not that kind of person. He'll find stuff to like about being old. He'll be agitated and frustrated but nothing will eat away at his soul. Man, how pathetic do you think he is? So dramatic
Posted by Pepperkorn
on 12 October 2013 - 08:27 AM
I don't knwo what to say -- no it's not that big a deal but I think there might be a team mindset - a very stubborn one.
How is Sal's refusing to cover the open guy, but stick to his own despite the fact Zids was already doing the wrong thing any different from our coaching staffs entire style? It's the same. It's EXACTLY what DeBoer is doing. It's sticking brainlessly to a CLEARLY losing plan and refusing to change things up mid-stream for the sake of a win. personally I dont find that admirable discipline. I find it bullsh!t and illogical and self-destructive. Discipline is POINTLESS if it's self-destructive. You;re learning to self destruct not how t be disciplined
I love exposing problems but this team isn't fixing them once they've been exposed - that is the concern. They have a history of not learning from past mistakes which I find concerning personally.
I think there is something going on keeping the energy down. A sort of forced dicipline that isn't coming naturally and I dont see that it will -- and it's dragging the team down. Slow and tired is a mental issue. These guys are professional athletes and they are conditioned well -- slow and tired doesn't figure in. Yes they're on a west coast road trip. Yes normally it's far to early to be concerned. but these are the same problems from last year following them into this year is the thing. Pre-season was high energy with all the young blood. This team is sapping the life out of everyone and ... there needs to be something done. Nothing big, nothing heavy handed -- but something a little more obvious and something different than past failed solutions.
This formula is not winning as is -- it needs tweaks, obvious tweaks nit little adjustments while staying the (do you understand it is a losing?) course.
Basically I think what I'm saying is IF the coaching formula was a success you'd SEE buy-in. It woudl be something visual, not audio. Nothing is being fixed - just spoken of. No the team isn't clueless, no they aren't on the wrong page or different pages.
Also Henrique and Zajac ARE finding their groove. they are really our most important parts - and aside from Andy greene their is no equivalently relevant part on our D. Fayne shoudl be but -- you know if you just dont like him get rid of him. how long before you get that this technique isn't working? WHY did you hold on to him -- just because Talinder left? I mean -- I'm just curious.
I dont think it's Stevens in the sense that he's making the wrong calls. i think it's Stevens in the sense he's not taking the lead. Gretzky never had to be coached - that is why he was a sh!tty one -- he spoke his own language only. Stevens was coached and learned - he speaks the language of several coaches and quite clearly knew how to listen and change even when he wasn't sure. He was OK with trusting someone else's sight. SOOOO maybe his weakness is not trusting his own in a new situation. He's not speaking up during games we all see that. He's not accepting his role in SUPPORT of his core. He's not offering managerial support to his charges. That would be my guess. Lou needs to have lunch with him and ask for what he woudl do -- and the answer you want to hear is something different. You want Stevens to actually hear the question not try to solve the problems through the I work under Pete's lens. You have various coaches for the differences they bring. If Stevens is the guy being too heavy handed then DeBoer isn't doing HIS job. What I'm sayign here is they can't be on the same page as it stands - they need to help eachother out of this blind spot. Being so nice together is not exposing the problems it's covering then up.
it sounds counter to my hating the fact that this team is just an huge exposed mess and they wont fix it because the guys aren't getting it - so just leave the big gaping wound until it's healed by magic? Well that's no solution either.
ehhh fvck it... I have my own life to get on with.
Yeah -- this is that bad. Nothing so far proves to me that any steps have been made to fix anythign -- waiting ten games with these problems is stupid. They're old problems everyone knew about. Basically the inaction tells us fans they are unfixable and that's why everyone is freaking out.
and fvck it all I cant waste my time thinking it through further
Posted by Pepperkorn
on 09 October 2013 - 01:32 PM
Calling up players does not equal a better team most likely. We all understand that.
As fans I think we feel we have a losing formula at play. It's not the losing, it's the apparent inaction that gets everyone in an uproar.
It has been proven that these passable vets are not able to finish, and it feels like alternatives are not being considered.
It's exciting to watch prospective players because there is so much to see and understand and fix. There is potential and that's motivational, energizing. These go-to vets who you know can't CAN'T bring anything new or fresh to the table -- watching that is like praying that something will change. It's very passive. One also gets the feeling they're dragging down hope -- the hope that the few new pieces will motivate them. Well, obviously the new guys trust these old static vets because they tend to adopt the stolid mind-set. Particularly when someone like Fayne - you feel like he's penalized for his freshness. He's far from passionate but it feels like he is compared to the rest. You also ask yourself how it is that Schneider could do his job so well in front of these AHL defence core that was our pre-season D. Stevens was animated behind the bench in pre-season. True they aren't showing him now but -- the passion is just not with this team. Bad desperation a la Gio is what I see. Is someone mistaking that crisis mode for passionate play? The result is for sh!t -- could be worse -- so the team is playing for loser points?
It's just not engaging. They players aren't. And how can a team win without any kind of engagement?
Posted by Pepperkorn
on 07 October 2013 - 08:11 AM
I for one need to STFU about poor old Sal. He clearly sees and understands the big picture. If it appears to my untrained eye he's unable to uphold his end of the bargain on ice, I clearly don't know what I'm seeing. He's much more savy than I give him credit for - I finally had to listen to old video and post-game shows and thing. Even if I missed the specifics in the old games he referred to, he made decent sense. Maybe he's just innocuous when he does well.
Posted by Pepperkorn
on 15 September 2013 - 07:31 AM
Hey I was Sean Brown's keeper - I have pretty decent recall about this. When Larry came in full time Sean sank like a stone :even: and It really was almost a gag he was played that way. he was amazing for a very brief time there. He just really responded so well... OK but that is BEYOND the old news I complain about these days
I absolutely think Stevens has a hand in the defence. One problem is he has no idea as to his own intellect and vision. It sounds like he himself thinks it was his "toughness" that made him who he was on ice. Well -- he's wrong if that's what he thinks -- as wrong as everyone else. You knwo it's nice to have a gimmick to point to especially when what you have is, for you, unteachable. He's got to learn to see what lemaire sees and teach it BETTER than Robinson can. Don't like -- undoable - well then I guess you ought to go hunt full tiem then huh? They need more guidance in wise toughness. and they need to listen.
Now I have to make snicker doodles for meeting... grr totally over slept today and it's the first day of First Day school... gggrrr! And I'm probably totally wrong -- but I like mouthign off all the same