NJDevs4978 Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Honestly, the decision to not play Gelinas was moronic. We SUCK at scoring. Play him instead of Fraser or Harrold (or dress 7 D) and give him bottom six minutes. It's idiotic what they did. That 5-3 tonight is totally different with Gelinas on it. How much scoring ineptness does it take to finally get him in there on a regular basis? Instead we play Fraser 20 minutes a night. It's not like they even play him on the PP anymore though But yeah, as much as I hate the let's lose mentality I wouldn't mind a couple losses if it weans the staff off this 'play for now and get vets in the lineup at all costs mentality' that gives me Pete flashbacks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATLL765 Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 (edited) This game was embarrassing. Cory was unbelievable and the team couldn't do anything all night. They had so much trouble getting out of the d-zone and skating through the neutral zone that the Pens barely had to skate the full 200' to re-enter our zone and maintain offensive pressure. I really don't understand the thought process behind playing both Harrold and Fraser. Harrold hasn't looked much better, if he even has been better at all, than Helgeson had when he played. I'd much rather have Helgeson and Gelinas in over these two guys. Harrold taking that high sticking penalty with about 3 minutes left in the game doesn't help either. I understand the fear of having 5 young guys on the back end all at once, but how much worse would that really be over having Fraser and Harrold in the lineup at the same time? LOL. I loved that film. I think it's really underrated. When Jim Carrey sings White Rabbit in the party scene it absolutely kills me. It's hilarious.EDIT: Just caught an interview with Kunitz on NHL Tonight from right after the game where he was asked about what it's like to play a team that likes to trap so much..... Edited January 31, 2015 by ATLL765 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devilsrule33 Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 It's not like they even play him on the PP anymore though But yeah, as much as I hate the let's lose mentality I wouldn't mind a couple losses if it weans the staff off this 'play for now and get vets in the lineup at all costs mentality' that gives me Pete flashbacks. Flashbacks? Stevens had the idea to throw Larsson into the fire. It's been a success (and the injury to Severson made that decision very easy for him). Other than Larsson continuing to grow and getting chances to play through his mistakes, there has been no changes, and mostly the same problems. Either people don't care anymore because it isn't Pete or most people are just tired of this team and the same issues. Fraser is the physical defenseman the coaches love (the Salvador replacement). He's playing minutes over other young defensemen. Sestito was getting minutes over Josefson for a while until everyone got healthy where they had no choice. Ryder is getting scratched. Some veterans are getting too many minutes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 (edited) Flashbacks? Stevens had the idea to throw Larsson into the fire. It's been a success (and the injury to Severson made that decision very easy for him). Other than Larsson continuing to grow and getting chances to play through his mistakes, there has been no changes, and mostly the same problems. Either people don't care anymore because it isn't Pete or most people are just tired of this team and the same issues. Fraser is the physical defenseman the coaches love (the Salvador replacement). He's playing minutes over other young defensemen. Sestito was getting minutes over Josefson for a while until everyone got healthy where they had no choice. Ryder is getting scratched. Some veterans are getting too many minutes. I think we're happy that it appears that we're getting something close to what we thought we were getting when we drafted Larsson. I'd like to think there's more there with Gelinas, but it seems doubtful. No one is under any illusions that this team is going anywhere this year at least, so you'd think there would be every incentive to start Gelinas over Fraser or Harrold, especially if the coach is also the GM and is looking to showcase assets. So at this point, if someone is sitting it isn't because Lou wants toughness or leadership. It just means after some early promise you're not that good. Happened with Tedenby and many others. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Edited January 31, 2015 by Daniel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BostonNala370 Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 (edited) Wow, how sad! 14 shots on goal! TWO 5 on 3s ZERO points! This no talented offense is sicking. What is Cory thinking? He played lights out and can't get a win! He's a great goalie wasting his time, but he is making money without the record. I bet the record means as much as the money. The Devils need someone that can find talent through the draft, FA and trades not someone that collects old players and non talented has beens Edited January 31, 2015 by BostonNala370 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATLL765 Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Wow, how sad! 14 shots on goal! TWO 5 on 3s ZERO points! This no talented offense is sicking. What is Cory thinking? He played lights out and can't get a win! He's a great goalie wasting his time, but he is making money without the record. I bet the record means as much as the money. The Devils need someone that can find talent through the draft, FA and trades not someone that collects old players and non talented has beens What exactly do you want? We picked 29th and 30th in the two years following our SCF appearance. We've managed to draft a number of quality defenseman, 3 of whom are doing pretty well in the NHL at the moment and others like Gelinas, Hrabarenka, Santini, Helgeson and Scarlett all show enough promise that I think we can realistically hope to see at least 1-2 of them become NHL quality defenseman. LL hasn't been beaten in a trade in a while unless you count the Loktionov for Ruutu trade a loss, which is debatable given that Loktionov isn't paying in the NHL anymore. His only real mistakes have been in FA and it's not like he had many other options to try to put together a winning team, his gambles just didn't work out. Even if they had, we'd still have the issue of the lack of forward prospects in the system. However, going forward, it's looking like we'll be drafting in the top 10, if not the top 5 this year and it's entirely likely that we'll be drafting in the top half of the draft next year as well unless the defense takes a real step forward and our 1st rd pick this year can step into the NHL right away and make an impact. Even then we might still need someone like Boucher to show they belong in the NHL as well to give our offense enough of a boost to make the team competitive. So with that in mind, why don't we give LL another year or two to show us if he can still build a winner before throwing him under the bus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BostonNala370 Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 What exactly do you want? We picked 29th and 30th in the two years following our SCF appearance. We've managed to draft a number of quality defenseman, 3 of whom are doing pretty well in the NHL at the moment and others like Gelinas, Hrabarenka, Santini, Helgeson and Scarlett all show enough promise that I think we can realistically hope to see at least 1-2 of them become NHL quality defenseman. LL hasn't been beaten in a trade in a while unless you count the Loktionov for Ruutu trade a loss, which is debatable given that Loktionov isn't paying in the NHL anymore. His only real mistakes have been in FA and it's not like he had many other options to try to put together a winning team, his gambles just didn't work out. Even if they had, we'd still have the issue of the lack of forward prospects in the system. However, going forward, it's looking like we'll be drafting in the top 10, if not the top 5 this year and it's entirely likely that we'll be drafting in the top half of the draft next year as well unless the defense takes a real step forward and our 1st rd pick this year can step into the NHL right away and make an impact. Even then we might still need someone like Boucher to show they belong in the NHL as well to give our offense enough of a boost to make the team competitive. So with that in mind, why don't we give LL another year or two to show us if he can still build a winner before throwing him under the bus. I spoke strictly about the offense. Ruutu was a bad move, period. I don't think Boucher will make it. There is zero offensive players in Albany. Like I said we need someone to get the job done sooner than later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATLL765 Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 I spoke strictly about the offense. Ruutu was a bad move, period. I don't think Boucher will make it. There is zero offensive players in Albany. Like I said we need someone to get the job done sooner than later. There's nothing that points towards Boucher not being able to make it to the NHL. He's having another solid season in Albany despite a very slow start. I still think he has the potential to be a 2nd line LW that can put up 20-25 goals and maybe 40-50 points on a regular basis. Similar numbers to Henrique even though he's not as good a skater, he has a better shot and vision in the offensive zone. You can make the argument that taking on Ruutu's salary wasn't worthwhile, but he's definitely been more productive than Loktionov was in his time with NJ. I think Ruutu could be even more productive if he was given more ice time, preferably ice time that's currently being given to Zubrus. You're right about the lack of forward prospects, but again, this is hugely influenced by picking so low in the 1st round so often. LL hasn't had many opportunities to draft high end forwards since things began to decline in NJ. Had either Parise OR Kovy stayed, this would be a much more competitive team right now and since they left, LL hasn't had much time to rebuild the offense. With things clearly not going well and the likelihood that we'll be drafting in the top 10 this year and maybe even next year, I think LL deserves the chance to show if he can find a quality forward with a high pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDevs4978 Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Flashbacks? Stevens had the idea to throw Larsson into the fire. It's been a success (and the injury to Severson made that decision very easy for him). Other than Larsson continuing to grow and getting chances to play through his mistakes, there has been no changes, and mostly the same problems. Either people don't care anymore because it isn't Pete or most people are just tired of this team and the same issues. Fraser is the physical defenseman the coaches love (the Salvador replacement). He's playing minutes over other young defensemen. Sestito was getting minutes over Josefson for a while until everyone got healthy where they had no choice. Ryder is getting scratched. Some veterans are getting too many minutes. There's really no point of them sitting Gelinas, at least not until Severson comes back if he ever does. And I get playing Fraser when you had a million guys on IR but why is he still here over a guy like Hegelson who might actually have a future and can fill that role? Overplaying Fraser and putting Harrold back in the lineup smacked of 'oh boy, we won a couple games...maybe we can get back in the race with a couple more by playing vets'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Helgeson isn't an NHL defenseman either so I have no problem with Fraser over him - Fraser's a one year mistake, Helgeson's something it could take years to get rid of if he's improperly valued. I don't know how they are blind to the fact that Fraser is terrible, that's what I really don't understand. There was yet another hilarious moment in last night's game where Zidlicky saw that Fraser was open-ish but knew that he's terrible so he just tried to keep the puck himself and do some weird circling manuever in his own zone. Oh, and in case you were wondering, the Devils get 32% of the shots when Mark Fraser's on the ice. They're sitting Gelinas probably because Oates doesn't trust him to run his power play, and they're not wrong on that, because Gelinas is not a smart player. And he's also terrible in the D zone. I'm just not sure how that much experience around an NHL rink misses the fact that Fraser is worse than Gelinas at everything except hitting guys, or maybe they're not missing that at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATLL765 Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 (edited) There's really no point of them sitting Gelinas, at least not until Severson comes back if he ever does. And I get playing Fraser when you had a million guys on IR but why is he still here over a guy like Hegelson who might actually have a future and can fill that role? Overplaying Fraser and putting Harrold back in the lineup smacked of 'oh boy, we won a couple games...maybe we can get back in the race with a couple more by playing vets'. I agree. I don't think Fraser is any better than Helgeson and they play a very similar game, so I don't see any reason to play him over Helgeson. You're right about Harrold over Gelinas too. We're out of the playoff race, there's barely a 1% chance we make it. So with that in mind, we might as well play Gelinas to see if he can start to round out his game if he's given a bit more ice time and responsibility. Helgeson isn't an NHL defenseman either so I have no problem with Fraser over him - Fraser's a one year mistake, Helgeson's something it could take years to get rid of if he's improperly valued. I don't know how they are blind to the fact that Fraser is terrible, that's what I really don't understand. There was yet another hilarious moment in last night's game where Zidlicky saw that Fraser was open-ish but knew that he's terrible so he just tried to keep the puck himself and do some weird circling manuever in his own zone. Oh, and in case you were wondering, the Devils get 32% of the shots when Mark Fraser's on the ice. They're sitting Gelinas probably because Oates doesn't trust him to run his power play, and they're not wrong on that, because Gelinas is not a smart player. And he's also terrible in the D zone. I'm just not sure how that much experience around an NHL rink misses the fact that Fraser is worse than Gelinas at everything except hitting guys, or maybe they're not missing that at all. You're right about Helgeson not being all that good, but I don't think he's any worse than Fraser and at least Helgeson is young enough that there's the chance he could improve. Fraser is what he is at this point. Edited January 31, 2015 by ATLL765 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfitz804 Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Fraser isn't there to play hockey. He's there to hit people. He's moderately good at that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Fraser isn't there to play hockey. He's there to hit people. He's moderately good at that. You can't play a player like that on defense in the 2015 NHL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neb00rs Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 You can't play a player like that on defense in the 2015 NHL. This. He makes us even slower than we already are, adds nothing to our puck-moving or scoring ability, and to be quite honest, is not even that much of a physical presence. The only special skill he really seems to have, is the ability to trip over his own skates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coldply123 Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 You can't play a player like that on defense in the 2015 NHL. That's the problem. Our GM, Head Scout, and coaches plays it like its 1995. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William D'Aquila Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 That's the problem. Our GM, Head Scout, and coaches plays it like its 1995. sure bruv. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SterioDesign Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 That's the problem. Our GM, Head Scout, and coaches plays it like its 1995. wouldn't say 95 but post 05 lockout for sure. Lou never adjusted and never understood that loyalty and his oldschool ways are not working anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfitz804 Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 You can't play a player like that on defense in the 2015 NHL. That's the problem. Our GM, Head Scout, and coaches plays it like its 1995. This. He makes us even slower than we already are, adds nothing to our puck-moving or scoring ability, and to be quite honest, is not even that much of a physical presence. The only special skill he really seems to have, is the ability to trip over his own skates. I don't disagree, but that's what his job is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 That's the problem. Our GM, Head Scout, and coaches plays it like its 1995. I don't think you could play a player like that in 1995, though I thnk the gap between the Mark Frasers of the world and skilled defensemen has increased in the intervening years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.