mouse

While I'd like to see us commit 100% to Schneider, Marty has played the Rags well this year. If you're gonna give him a game, that's not a bad time to do it.

If we're going to credit the coach, Renney turned them into a consistent playoff team expected to do big things. In fact, Renney was fired partially because of the bloated expectations fans and front office had about a team that was, in reality, a bubble team. Torts took over, did some good things, and they remained a bubble team. If you want to give anyone credit for making them a consistent playoff team (and they still haven't taken the next step, conference final appearance notwithstanding), it's Lundquist giving them a chance to win every game (this year being the exception). Makes it a whole lot easier to make the playoffs if your scorers can go cold and you can still win.

If he's money, we could legit be rolling 3 lines when Elias gets back. Keep the Zajac and Henrique lines together, throw Bernier back up on the Elias line, where he did fairly well, see if Sislo can stick as a 4th liner.

That's a good couple days, though I'm not a fan of Jolly Pumpkin. It's a bit of a hike, even for Michigan people, but if any of you guys are ever in Traverse City, Right Brain and Terra Firma are 2 of my favorite breweries in the country. Neither has very wide distribution, but they're totally worth a trip. Doesn't hurt that Traverse City/Sleeping Bear Dunes are beautiful.

But he expected too much with Johnny Mac too, imo. That locker room was a disaster. Not just Langs, but there was a reason Lou wanted to break up the vets on that team. I don't want this to turn into a Langs bash fest (or a fight over him either), so I'll leave it at that. Much as I've had issues with him (and unlike some other guys, I think I was right to have issues), he was one of my favorite Devils for a long time for good reason, and much as I don't love him the way I used to, i still have huge respect for the guy, and wish him success and happiness in the future.

IMO Langs time isn't easy to capture. The great moments (most of the time, especially '03 and ZZPops, in a big way after Marty got hurt) were really great, but the last year or so was really bad, made worse because he was the captain. In the end, I can't ignore either. He was one of my favorite Devils for a long time, but he'll never be one of my all time favorites again. I still wish him the best, and I'm grateful for all he did right.

If anyone's interested, High Point's releasing their eis bock this weekend. They do this maybe once a year, and it's supposed to be great. I haven't tried it yet, but I'm excited. They open at 1 on Saturday. They'll fill growlers, but no more than 2 liters.

But Devils fans get a bad rap because of attendance, while we keep hearing how great Canadian hockey fans are. IMO if the Sens need to play entertaining hockey to fill their building, their market is no better than ours, yet we take sh!t for attendance all the time. Not saying that's changing, just, like everybody else on here, sick of the double standard.

+ 1. Didn't think to mention this, but imo most real fans are excited by their team, no matter what type of game they play. If Sens fans only want to watch scoring, they're not real fans. If the Sens are winning, the fans should be happy, and butts should be in seats. They're not, so Melnyk feels the need to bash someone else.

Based on nothing, I'd guess he sits until the Olympics, plays for Switzerland, and comes back for us.

This. I'm not saying these Devils are great, or fun to watch, but I hate the misconception that low scoring is boring. I've seen some great, competitive hockey games in which the defense and goaltending dominated. I've been excited by pitcher's duels in baseball, slugfests in football, and soccer games, which are low scoring in general. I've also been bored by high scoring games in every sport. Low scoring is not necessarily low quality. It takes some brains to appreciate defense, so clearly Melnyk is an idiot.

A ton going on here, so I'm not going to try to address each post, but just put some of my thoughts down. First of all, I'm liberal, and unashamed, but also enough of a cynic to question everything I've been told, by my family, professors, the media, and politicians, so I don't believe I've been brainwashed, and find it a pretty poor argument that both sides make against each other anyway. My thoughts are not a result of some massive trick, and I don't believe those of my rivals are either. Let's move past that stupidly disrespectful argument, because it detracts from real issues. I attended a Catholic school in Newark. The students were mostly black and hispanic, and from Newark and the surrounding area (Irvington, East Orange, etc), though there have always been some suburban white kids (including me) as well. It has a long history of successfully educating Newark students, when many Newark schools have failed, and very few alumni have been involved in criminal activity. Most of us are working to support our families, though many of my classmates, including some highly intelligent college grads, are working low paying, retail type jobs. IMO my classmates are not better people than those Newark residents who were not fortunate enough to attend my school, and are in much worse shape (criminals, jail, dead), or worse people than those who were fortunate enough to grow up in wealthy suburbs and have higher paying jobs. I believe that education is one of many factors that can contribute to people's success and morality (or lack thereof), and I believe that Newark's long history of poor education (some of the worst in the country) is one of many factors that has contributed to its problems. I believe in personal accountability. I know that we were taught to take responsibility for our actions, that doing the right thing always matters, and that our future success was our problem, and I have many close friends who chose to be "above the influence." I also know that that influence is more powerful in poor cities like Newark, where criminals become wealthy and comfortable, while hard working parents qualify for food stamps, regardless of their best efforts. I believe that, while we would like our country to be a meritocracy, it isn't, that too often, it isn't what you know, it's who you know, and if you're poor and a minority, you will struggle to get a job in a society that remains dominated by rich whites. I am a teacher, and I believe I am qualified. I got my job not because of my qualifications, but because my dad was friends with a principal. One of my black friends has been a sub for years, because he doesn't have the same connections I did. This is real, and it is serious. America has a long history of institutionalized racism and classism that have created a ton of fvcked up situations. I don't deny that certain poor, black people have made them worse, but those of us who have been fortunate enough not to have been born at the bottom of the race/class totem pole need to acknowledge that 1) we are fortunate and 2) some of our good fortune is at the expense of others. It remains a whole lot easier to stay ahead than to get ahead. I don't know how to fix this problem, especially because I'm not willing to excuse certain people's behavior, but it's an issue that affects a ton of people, and it's egotistical, misinformed, and mean spirited to simply blame them for problems that go way beyond them. While I believe that education matters, I do not believe in throwing money at the problem. I work for the NYC department of education, and none of the money we've spent has benefitted my classes. In fact, due to budget cuts, we have fewer teachers and bigger classes, though our school gets grant money to put in more computers, or run a couple of BS pilot programs. So when we say Newark schools have spent more money, we don't know if that money is being spent in useful ways or not. One thing I will say in Newark's defense is that a few Newark public schools are receiving national recognition, something that would have been unheard of 10 years ago. It is way too soon to see the effects of that progress. The students who graduated after said progress have not graduated college yet, so we don't know what they will do with that education, or if their positive influence will make a difference on future students. I'm willing to withhold judgment on Newark schools for a couple more years. The money they've spent recently may still be worth it. It may take a generation for this to really matter, which is obviously frustrating for everyone, but it takes time to fix years of fvck ups. As for gentrification, there is a tough balance to strike. Ideally, Newark will be able to use the revenue generated by the downtown to improve education and law enforcement throughout the city without kicking out the residents. A vast majority of Newarkers are good, hardworking people who happen to be poor. They deserve to live in safe communities, to send their children to good schools, and to have the opportunity to break the cycle of poverty and violence that have plagued Newark for generations. If Newark gentrifies at their expense, and they are simply forced to move to places like Irvington, who the fvck cares that the Devils have a nice arena? Most of Newark's people deserve better than they have gotten, and the arena can help that. I agree that certain parts of the city need to be blown up. It's why I was fine with the James Street projects being knocked down, but Newark's leaders need to be careful to represent the constituents they have rather than the ones they want.

Sort of? DeBo's justification for not playing him (which I sort of agree with, though it's weird, and only holds water for a couple more days) is that he's not sharp yet, and the other 6 guys are playing well. If Larsson gets a week of practice at full speed, and he's still sitting, then I have a problem.

Kleefense!

I'm not impressed with our wingers, so it would have to be Ovie or Kane. I don't love Ovie's maturity, and I think Kane's an a$$hole, but we need scoring from the wings, so each would solve a ton of problems. If I was starting from scratch, I would take Crosby in a second, much as I hate him.

Hoping for the best, but I don't see him being more than a 3rd pairing/7th d guy. He got passed by Merrill and Gelly this offseason despite having more experience and no minor league option.

Huge announcement! Devils just picked up Urbom off waivers! Prep for the Cup parade.

I've never liked the way the refs handle the Devils, partially because our guys don't dive or embellish like Crosby/the Canes do. IMO it hasn't been any worse the past 2 seasons, though. We've just played worse, so we remember the calls more.

Knew he was going, but I'd have loved to see Jagr get some rest. Also, with the age of some of that team, why not just dust Hasek off?

I've always been on the learn in the NHL side, but we need points to make the playoffs, and that means we need the best 6 guys out on d, especially with the injuries at forward. Right now, Gelly isn't one of the best 6. If DeBo decides to take a chance, I'm more than on board, but I wouldn't force him to, and I'd rather Gelly get playing time in Albany than sit in the press box here. Course, he's back now, so we'll see what happens.

Sent down is better than scratched, but they need to make a trade and get him back, especially when Larsson is healthy and they can put them together again.

Gio's outplayed Tedenby. I'm hoping he rides the pine for Lokti when the team is healthy, but Tedenby has nothing to do with that. If anything, it helps Ryan Carter, who is better than Gio AND Tedenby.

Which is why no one with a brain should judge a player based on Therrien, positively or negatively.

That's fair, but IMO the best dman in a draft is often not as good as people hope. Guys like Nieds and Stevens don't come along every year. If Larsson went first, and developed into a top pairing guy, even a boring one, I'd be happy. I think he may be that good in a year or two, and he went fourth.

I've always hated this knock. Good d-men often DON'T stand out. Most of the time, if you notice a d-man, it's because someone scored. Not every time, but enough. I'd love to go through an entire game without once commenting on the d. Unless you're capable of game changing hits like Stevens (and can do that without getting yourself out of position), or rushes like Rafalski or Nieds (and I always felt Rafalski was slightly overrated because of this, he wasn't the best positionally on d), you can be excellent at your job, as long as you're boring. When I played, most of our best d were understated guys who put in shifts and got off the ice. The dudes who tried to do too much usually ended up getting beat.