Daniel

If the right deal comes around, a good GM is open to trading almost anyone. And to the extent the Devils have any untouchable players, Clarkson isn't one of them, no matter how much the head coach may like him.

Yes, but the Flyers are deep enough on offense, and the common wisdom there is that a lack of quality goaltending is keeping them from winning the cup. Maybe it could have been Halak and a 2nd/1st round pick for Carter.

My link Good set of videos on how to act during police encounters. Hitting an officer, surprisingly, is not mentioned as a good idea.

I wonder if they put a call into the Flyers to see about Carter, Giroux or Van Reimsdyke?

How good are the guys Montreal got in return? (Hockey's Future is having trouble loading).

The level of whining I'm hearing makes it clear that people see him as much more than a "legit candidate." He (w)as much a legit candidate as Johnny Mac.

I'm making that interpretation given the enormous disappointment some here have shown for passing on Haviland, and the fact that someone is yelling about him being voted top assistant coach.

And even if it's gospel, Best Assistant Coach of the Year? How that anoints the guy as a can't miss coaching prospect is beyond me. MacLean's credentials are just as good, if not better.

Really, do the assistant coaches make any difference at all. I pray that's low on Lou's priority list when there are plenty of roster holes to fill.

Save percentage is the wrong metric to use here. The prediction we're trying to make is the extra number of wins. I think a goalie's win/loss record, as over-rated a statistic as it might be, is a better way to predict it. Whoever is right though, I think most people would agree that even if you take my high estimate, chances are the team will be better off in the long-run if Marty made fewer starts even if it means getting the fifth or sixth seed as opposed to one of the top 3. (As utterly disappointing as the Devils have been for the past 3 years, it would take a lot to convince even a pessimist like me that they won't be a virtual lock to at least make the playoffs all things being equal).

You're being way too generous. Danis in his starts got 7, out of a possible 12 points, against not-so-great teams. While we can assume that a goalie will tend to play better if he's playing on a more regular basis, at the same time he'll be playing better teams so the record will be about the same. I'm too lazy to do the math, I think my estimate of 5-10 more losses than had Marty made those starts is more accurate.

Why is Lou talking to the coaches on a daily basis a bad thing? I mean, Sather's aloof approach has definitely done wonders for the Rangers. And again, unless you have some evidence that Lou is commanding that coaches do this or do that (by admitting that he doesn't control the day to day operations you're more or less conceding that he doesn't) this idea that MacLean (as past coaches) will be Lou's puppet is pure bunk. (If that were the case, there would have been at least one very public dust-up a la the Davis/Lane Kiffin feud). And who are these quality back-ups that you would feel comfortable starting 20 games a year? Clemmenson obviously did well when Marty got hurt, but it wasn't too much longer before that, that there were endless complaints about the guy. Ultimately, what I think will make the difference there is the realization that it isn't totally necessary to win the division for playoff success, and that even if a giving more starts to a mediocre goalie will cost 5 to 10 wins in the regular season, the team will be better off in the long run.

What are you talking about? Lou is not Al Davis for heaven's sake. I don't recall him ever telling a coach how to run the powerplay, what line combinations to use, etc. He hires the coach, senses if things are going well, and if he doesn't, coach gets fired. I might be mistaken, but that's what a GM is supposed to do. Also, it's not a matter of working up the courage to not have Marty play so many games. Contrary to the bizarre rumors people have been pimping here, Marty doesn't run the team, and there is no evidence that he makes implicit ultimatums to play as much as he does. The simplest explanation for why he plays so much is that he's been a great goalie and that for the most part, his back-ups aren't nearly as good. It worked for a long time when the Devils were winning cups, and when he was younger. The results obviously haven't been as good for the past few years, and he's getting older. So eventually it should, and I predict, probably will change.

If he brings the same static powerplay where players seem to be anchored to a particular spot in the zone, then there will be a problem, no matter how well it worked in Lowell. NHL caliber goalies will stop the vast majority of shots outside the slot, especially when there's a good chance we won't have anyone decent on the point taking those shots. I would have been disappointed in Therrien. Hitchcock would have made me thrown up in my mouth.

As per my earlier post, isn't he the architect of the powerplay the Devils have been running for the past couple years? My point was to question why some people just seem to be fond of bringing in "new blood" for its own sake. That description fits Sutter to a t.

Sutter was definitely "from the outside", and we all know he's done a bang up job as an NHL head coach. And actually if you buy into the fact that MacLean was the de facto coach when Lou fired Julien, he would be the last one to get the team past the first round. The thing that worries me most about him is that he'll keep the same anemic powerplay that he appears to be the architect of. Also, I'm a bit puzzled by people here wanting to crown Haviland as the next Scotty Bowman. He was an assistant coach on an extremely talented team that won the Cup. You could say the same about Larry Robinson, who had very mixed results as a head coach, and was actually fired not too long into his first head coaching gig. Other than that, he had success as a minor league coach, just as MacLean has.

Let's all congratulate Marty since it was obviously his decision.

How the hell do you know one way or the other? Answer, YOU DON'T. If Vanderbeek is wrong, an arbitrator, a court, or whoever, will tell him so, and he will pay. (Yes, a decision of an arbitrator is fully enforceable). Again, this is much ado about nothing.

Since I guess this all started with my reply to the post, I'll say that people are free to blame whoever they want. Maybe they're right, maybe they're wrong, or more likely, it's all subjective. But just because someone was more directly affected by the spill/hurricane doesn't make them necessarily more qualified to judge which president did a better job with whatever. As an analogy, I would find just as useless a poll among 9/11 widows asking if they approve of how combat operations in Afghanistan are being handled.

Begs the question, no?

I imagine disputes like this come up all the time. Maybe Vanderbeek is justified in not paying, maybe he isn't. But until it looks like there will be no money to pay the city whatever it is owed, this story is a yawner.

No to all, with the possible exception of Nieds. All those numbers would have been retired already and certainly not given to several other players since they left the team. Plus, I hope we don't turn in the Rangers and have to retire a number every couple weeks to make up for the lack of a good team in the preset.

Probably has more to do with Louisiana being conservative politically, and more inclined to side against liberal politicians. Whatever the reason, really who cares. Your average Louisianian is just as qualified/unqualified to assess the effectiveness of a response that involves a thorough understanding of advanced engineering challenges.

I'm becoming more convinced that he'll end up re-signing with the Devils, or at the very least it won't be one of the other usual suspects, LA or Colorado. I think they're both looking towards the future and don't want to get straddled with a huge contract when they'll have more important players to sign (Doughty, Duschene, Statsny come to mind off the top of my head) who will command almost as much if not more than Kovalchuk during the life of his deal, although admittedly it's a little ways away. I think teams are learning that depth, a lot of $4 to $5 million players, gets you a lot farther than the big superstar, especially a guy like Kovalchuk who hasn't demonstrated that he can win. While it will be tight for the Devils for the next year or two, there isn't anyone in the pipeline besides Parise, who will be in a position to command as much as Doughty, et al. will. Plus, I'm speculating that Vanderbeek wants Kovalchuk more to attract fans. I still stick by the Islanders being serious contenders.

Until Devils fans stop the absolutely embarrassing "you suck" or "Flyers swallow" idiocy, we're not in a position to bash other teams' fans.