The Three Tests For Peter DeBoer

[ATLL765]

Bad?  Yeah probably.  But those contracts as not nearly as bad as other contracts that a lot of other teams have.  We got rid of a potential awful contract this summer with Kovy's retirement so the Devils really do not have contracts I would say that are that terrible.

 

IDK I have a feeling the Devils won't be using a buyout next year.

 

Nothing concrete, just have a feeling.

I think we'll pass on using that amnesty buyout as well. Even though we have deeper pockets now with the new owner, Volch will only have 1 year left on his deal and do recall that Douglas Murray got traded at the deadline last year and for a 2nd was it? He's not exactly a speedster either. I think LL might be able to swing a deal to get rid of Volch....if he waives his NTC. Although if he can't get Volch to waive it, maybe they just use the buyout. That and one of the young guys would have to steal the spot from Volch for him to be bought out.

Plus, other than Volch, who really has a plausible chance at being bought out? I don't think there's really another candidate. Maybe Zajac if he has the worst year in the history of the NHL and puts up 3 points. Barring that, I don't think anyone really needs to be bought out.

[NJDevs4978]

I actually like Harrold a great deal and I think his age and journeyman history play heavily into the interwebs' poor image of him.

 

He's not a great defenseman.  He's not usually a trainwreck (though the game in Tampa last year was terribad), but he gets exposed if he's in the lineup for too long like he was the second half of last year - remember he hasn't played any prolonged stretch as a Devil other than that second half of last season.  His only plus attribute is puck-moving - though he doesn't actually shoot the puck at all, and Zidlicky/Greene/Larsson are fine enough at puckmoving and you have Zajac supposedly playing the point on the PP too so that's even less of a need to have Harrold but here he is back in the lineup again, and probably playing over Larsson on the PP again as well as chaining Fayne to the bench indefinitely.  

Edited October 2, 2013 by NJDevs4978

[NewarkDevil5]

Harrold is not as good as Fayne, he's a fine 7th D who can move the puck a little bit.  

 

ND5:  You forgot Damien Brunner - Brunner should be playing the point on PP2, probably.

Fine, throw him in there and give the hook to Andy Greene.

 

In all actuality, I'd like to see the Devils find a way to phase out Zidlicky because I consider him a major liability at even strength and a hazard even on the powerplay.

Edited October 2, 2013 by NewarkDevil5

[NLinfante]

I'm a fan of Harrold, but I realize that I'm biased because I've been cheering for him for almost 10 years.

 

My main addition here is that the grass is always greener when it comes to defensemen. When Zid chips in offensively like he did in the playoffs two years ago, people talk about how important it is to have offensive contribution from the back end. When he gets burned defensively because he gets caught behind the opposition's net, people complain and talk about defensive responsibility. The same goes for Volch and Sal. When they're out there finishing checks and throwing themselves in front of shots, we praise them. When they look slow, we blame them for being old and washed-up D-men who cant move the puck or ignite the offense.

 

The fact of the matter is, there simply arent that many D-men in the league that can do both at an high level we expect. Anyone who knows anything about hockey knows how much harded it is to stand out on D than as a F (look at the NHL draft for your proof). The closest thing we have in my opninion is Andy Greene...there simply arent that many Weber's and Chara's out there. Consequently, PDB has to do his best to come up with a nice mix of defensive toughness/shot blocking as well as PMD and scoring. I dont necessarily disagree with any of the board's assessments on our current starters, but I'm not sure what some people expect as an alternative. Ultimately, I think Fayne and Harrold are servicable players with pros and cons, but it's up to PDB to decide who is in and who isnt.

 

Trade or buyout Sal and Volch and bring up Merril and Gelinas? Caveat emptor.

Edited October 2, 2013 by NLinfante

[Daniel]

The Devils were very lucky to finish as high as 6th in 2011-12 because of their mediocre goaltending and hilarious shootout luck.  That team could've easily missed the playoffs.

 

Ok, but they did make the playoffs and.  And then, they went to the SCF.  Call it luck or whatever, it just doesn't call for Marty losing starts to Hedberg, or speak to whether the Marty factor intimidates coaches. 

 

Did Brodeur ever get sat down when he was playing poorly?  Again, how often would Brodeur play poorly, get yanked from a game, and not start the next game, even if the backup had been slated to play that game?

 

Sat down in favor of whom?  Jan Danis? Hedberg? Corey Schwab? Clemnensen? Weekes?  We'll see if I'm wrong, but now that you have another goalie that actually is very good (and perhaps one of the top five in the league) I do not see PDB taking away predetermined starts from Schneider to give Marty a chance to "get his confidence back" or "get back into a rhythm". 

[NewarkDevil5]

Ok, but they did make the playoffs and.  And then, they went to the SCF.  Call it luck or whatever, it just doesn't call for Marty losing starts to Hedberg, or speak to whether the Marty factor intimidates coaches. 

 

 

Sat down in favor of whom?  Jan Danis? Hedberg? Corey Schwab? Clemnensen? Weekes?  We'll see if I'm wrong, but now that you have another goalie that actually is very good (and perhaps one of the top five in the league) I do not see PDB taking away predetermined starts from Schneider to give Marty a chance to "get his confidence back" or "get back into a rhythm". 

 

I would say John Vanbiesbrouk was a good backup that even in his advanced years could be relied upon. Mike Dunham was a really good backup goalie too. Those were really the glory years for Marty, though. He didn't really have as many horrible games in those days.

[ATLL765]

Fine, throw him in there and give the hook to Andy Greene.

 

In all actuality, I'd like to see the Devils find a way to phase out Zidlicky because I consider him a major liability at even strength and a hazard even on the powerplay.

Zidlicky's whole purpose is to be on one of the PP units and provide offense. If we take him out of the PP, what is the point of paying the man? Might as well trade him for a 7th at that point.

[Triumph]

The Devils' PP has been much better with Zidlicky than without him.  He makes mistakes but he generates shots way better than someone like Larsson or Greene.

[Bartholomew Hunt]

Harrold is not as good as Fayne, he's a fine 7th D who can move the puck a little bit.

ND5: You forgot Damien Brunner - Brunner should be playing the point on PP2, probably.

Why would brunner play the point?

And how do you figure the devs were lucky to finish 6th 2 years ago? That sounds like something the ny post or espn would say. They had an underrated team and brodeur was solid in the regular season and very good in the playoffs.

Edited October 3, 2013 by Bartholomew Hunt

[NLinfante]

I wouldnt say they were lucky or unlucky; they finished where they did and that's the end of the story.

 

However, their shootout record was very, very good, like 80% or something insane like that because Kovy was unstoppable.

[Colorado Rockies 1976]

Why would brunner play the point?

And how do you figure the devs were lucky to finish 6th 2 years ago? That sounds like something the ny post or espn would say. They had an underrated team and brodeur was solid in the regular season and very good in the playoffs.

 

Devils went 12-4 in the shootout that year.  If one wants to argue that shootouts are based 100% on luck, then I guess one could rule that the Devils could have just as easily gone 4-12 in such games...but they had a guy who had suddenly become an automatic in Kovy, and a couple of other guys who had always been very good in shootouts in Parise and Elias.  And Brodeur has always played well in them too, so I can't really make a case for the Devils being much worse than 8-8 in the shootout that year with bad luck.  And the teams behind them finished 10 points back.  So even with a little worse luck, Devils probably still would've been sixth. 

 

I've pointed it out before, but over Brodeur's last 50 or so games (regular season and playoffs combined) in 2011-12, he put up a save% in the low .920s.  Before that stretch, he was pretty shaky...November (.886), December (.899) and January (.897) were all pretty bad...compare that with January (.924), March/April (.921) and the playoffs (.917...was .922 until that Game 6 SC Finals trainwreck game).  He was really two goalies that year...one that looked like he might be finished, and one that suddenly had something left...seemingly out of nowhere.  

[NewarkDevil5]

The Devils' PP has been much better with Zidlicky than without him.  He makes mistakes but he generates shots way better than someone like Larsson or Greene.

 

The Devils' PP was much better with Kurtis Foster than it was without him. Doesn't make him a good defenseman. I really hold my breath every time I see Zidlicky on the ice, including on the PP. I'm too lazy to look up the stats, but I want to say that he's been on the ice for quite a few SH goals against.

[NewarkDevil5]

Zidlicky's whole purpose is to be on one of the PP units and provide offense. If we take him out of the PP, what is the point of paying the man? Might as well trade him for a 7th at that point.

 

Kinda my point. Problem is he's got a NTC.

[Daniel]

Kinda my point. Problem is he's got a NTC.

 

He's on a one year deal, and he's a better bet than Urbom, Merrill and Gelinas.  If you don't like Zid's defensive snafus, you're not going to like the growing pains that any first year NHL defenseman is going to have.

Edited October 3, 2013 by Daniel

[Triumph]

Devils went 12-4 in the shootout that year.  If one wants to argue that shootouts are based 100% on luck, then I guess one could rule that the Devils could have just as easily gone 4-12 in such games...but they had a guy who had suddenly become an automatic in Kovy, and a couple of other guys who had always been very good in shootouts in Parise and Elias.  And Brodeur has always played well in them too, so I can't really make a case for the Devils being much worse than 8-8 in the shootout that year with bad luck.  And the teams behind them finished 10 points back.  So even with a little worse luck, Devils probably still would've been sixth. 

 

I've pointed it out before, but over Brodeur's last 50 or so games (regular season and playoffs combined) in 2011-12, he put up a save% in the low .920s.  Before that stretch, he was pretty shaky...November (.886), December (.899) and January (.897) were all pretty bad...compare that with January (.924), March/April (.921) and the playoffs (.917...was .922 until that Game 6 SC Finals trainwreck game).  He was really two goalies that year...one that looked like he might be finished, and one that suddenly had something left...seemingly out of nowhere.  

 

I mean, this is sort of a silly analysis - the Devils lost Parise, who wasn't that good in the shootout in 2011-12, and they went 2-7 last year.  It can happen to anyone.

 

Something that has always fascinated, or maybe irratated, me about Zidlicky and his relationship with Devils fans is that for years all everyone wanted the Devils to trade for was a puck-moving, offensive-minded defenseman, now that we finally have one, one that does his job well and provides a lot of offense from the backend, people hate him and question his style of play. He's a fvcking PMD people, you get what you ask for and as far as PMD's go, he's a damn good one.

 

I loathe the term PMD but yes, this was inevitable.  What about that slick move against the Flyers the other night?  Okay - that was preseason.  How about this one?   

- Andy Greene could maybe do something like this.  How about this one from last year?  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fx-FauQ_aN4

 

He drives play forward.  Yes, there are defensive gaffes.  Yes, sometimes he's overaggressive.  He's willing to shoot the puck and can pass it at the point too.

 

BehindTheNet has him on the ice for 3 short handed goals last year 5 v 4, 25 over the last 6 years:  http://www.behindthenet.ca/nhl_statistics.php?s=1&f1=2012_s%202011_s%202010_s%202009_s%202008_s%202007_s&f2=5v4&f3=MAREKZIDLICKY&c=0+1+2+3+7+8+11+12+13+14+15+16+21+22+29+30+32+33+34+45+46+63

Edited October 3, 2013 by Triumph

[Pepperkorn]

Trauma only possible conclusion to be drawn from these observations regarding DeBoer's coaching.

 

Basically it says he coaches on a strictly individual basis, in a complete vacuum.

 

So really he just has to do one thing.  Get a better sense of the big picture and not assume if he's got a bunch of character guys working at their maximum in their current given circumstances the team will be winners.

 

It's nice to have old projects -- but when they get that old, they're supposed to have reached a certain point.  Giving old plodding but maybe success projects ice time over exciting developing talent is ... well, I find it hard to see the winning recipes there.

 

With that said -- I'm not sure it's the case.  We have to see how this team hits the season.  I can't guess based on the pre-season because I'd have sent different players packing. 

 

I will say: Refusing to pay an NHL salary in the AHL is playing your obstacle, not going for your objective.   Yes -- I can see some fiscal arguments you can attach to different situations - as in not over paying for a stud.  BUT it's not the same as paying extra to get a liability off your revenue generating team.  If you have a weak player on your major revenue generator - you won't win as much or as surely, you therefore won't sell tickets.  If you send him down, BOTH teams improve therefore revenue will go up for BOTH teams.  I'm just saying.  The argument is BS

[Colorado Rockies 1976]

I mean, this is sort of a silly analysis - the Devils lost Parise, who wasn't that good in the shootout in 2011-12, and they went 2-7 last year.  It can happen to anyone.

 

Parise was for 8-for-16 in 2011-12...50%.  (Kovy was a ridiculous 11-for-14 and Elias was 6-for-12...suffice it to say when your top three shooters go 25-for-42 in the shootout, you're going to win a lot of them.) 

 

So 8-for-16 is not that good...REALLY?!  At least know what the fvck you're talking about before going into full-on "I know all" mode next time. 

Edited October 3, 2013 by Colorado Rockies 1976

[NLinfante]

CR and Tri, remember not to take your helmets off or you're gonna get an extra 2 minutes.

[Colorado Rockies 1976]

CR and Tri, remember not to take your helmets off or you're gonna get an extra 2 minutes.

 

Lol, admittedly that was funny.

[NJCroMag]

Deboer?  Taking tests?

 

I wanna see the guy who wouldn't take the test!

 

[storms off, channeling inner Kurt Russell]

[Triumph]

Parise was for 8-for-16 in 2011-12...50%.  (Kovy was a ridiculous 11-for-14 and Elias was 6-for-12...suffice it to say when you're top three shooters go 25-for-42 in the shootout, you're going to win a lot of them.) 

 

So 8-for-16 is not that good...REALLY?!  At least know what the fvck you're talking about before going into full-on "I know all" mode next time. 

 

Fair - I remember some on the board complaining about how he was predictable in the shootout, but I should've remembered the people who were doing it.  That doesn't change my central point which is that the shootout is an incredibly high variance contest.  The Tampa goalies in 2006-07 had a higher save percentage in the shootout than in all situations.  Kovalchuk was a lifetime awful shooter, he blows up in 2011-12, he's awful in 2012-13.  etc.

[Colorado Rockies 1976]

Fair - I remember some on the board complaining about how he was predictable in the shootout, but I should've remembered the people who were doing it.  That doesn't change my central point which is that the shootout is an incredibly high variance contest.  The Tampa goalies in 2006-07 had a higher save percentage in the shootout than in all situations.  Kovalchuk was a lifetime awful shooter, he blows up in 2011-12, he's awful in 2012-13.  etc.

 

Kovy wasn't really awful in 2012-13...the sample size was pretty puny (he went 2-for-6).  But yeah, he was definitely nothing special in the SO before 11-12.

 

Kovy's never seeming to miss in the shootout made the fans' standards for every Devil rather silly.  I think Parise missed a few in a row, and some fans wanted him benched.  It was actually people saying that that prompted me to start the whole "Devils really are awesome in shootouts" thread.  It was getting to the point where the Devils weren't allowed to lose one without a lot of complaining.  Last year was the Devils' first bad year since the SO's implementation. 

 

Yes, there is variance, but there are also some guys who have been consistently good in it (like Parise...32 shootout goals on 69 shots for his career), and some goalies as well (like Lundqvist).  The randomness of the event for each team stems from the fact that a GM is never going to target goalies and/or shooters who are consistently proficient in it, and bring them onto his team for that reason.  You just hope that your best players happen to be strong in them (BTW, Lundqvist is at .763 in save% for his career in SOs, Brodeur is at .706.  Schneider?  Just .628.)  

Edited October 3, 2013 by Colorado Rockies 1976

[nessus]

Well, not even game 1 and PDB is already looking like he may fail #3.

[Mike Brown]

There's no reason at all Fayne shouldn't play.  The guy is good.

[lazer]

doesnt kovy doing well in the SO prove how lucky the devils were in 11-12?

 

i think it was motivation spurred by big contracts and potential bankruptcy = chemistry =

 

luck = confidence;

 

too bad the luck ran out