Jump to content

GDT : Bruins @ Devils - 7:00 PM - MSG+2, NESN


Devs3cups
 Share

Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, mfitz804 said:

 Assumed as much, was just pointing it out.

In that picture, Hall is already in the net having tried to kick the puck out. While it’s clearly not in right there, there’s no possibility that was the original position of th3 puck. That’s where it was kicked to. 

I'm not doubting the ref, but I do find it strange the ref reviewed it.  If the puck was over the line, and it was seen by the ref in real time, there's no need to take it to review.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, sundstrom said:

they want my money - its now time to do something to fvcking earn it.

i was honestly not renewing 3 years ago when i was tired of the gionta's and ruutu's and tootoo's and then they brought in shero and that was enough for me to say - i'll stick for the plan.

and ray started building and i can't argue with any decision until 6 weeks ago. even the ones that have not worked out like future coach ben lovejoy - i understood the idea (even though i hated it from jump street).

but for those saying "hey, we're overachieving - don't get mad when they regress." - i'm not mad because the team is regressing. I am not mad because guys w/ ridiculous shooting percentages didn't maintain it. i'm not mad because we're not pdo'ing our way to the top of the league. i am mad because it's being allowed to happen without attempts to limit the regression or maintain an uphill trajectory. i'm mad that they are going to waste an MVP year from Taylor Hall with fvcking festering boils that they won't do something about.

is it really that hard to not let goaltending torpedo you? it would be one thing if cory were healthy and this was happening. like marty's last year, sometimes the guy that HAS to play goal is going to suck and you're stuck. But since cory has been hurt for a month, the devils should be beholdant to NOONE. KK has been dogsh!t this year - 7 of 18 games over .900. That's the kind of thing that gets you punted out of the league forever no matter how good your emoji game is. start the carosel until you find someone that sticks. and if you can't, ok, you tried. vegas went through 5 goaltenders this year. they're out there.

how long do i have to watch andy greene be a fvcking shell of himself and get caved in consistently and quite possibly singlehandedly ruin steve santini as an nhl'er.  it's a hard move, no doubt. but you put his ass on the 3rd pair and that's where he stays. the rest of your d aren't very good - well hey uncle fester, how about getting your forwards back to help on defense?

do fvcking something.

Bryce kind of just faded away because of an injury that I don't think they thought was career ending at the time when he started to play like Greene, people were calling for the letter to be ripped off.  I do think it's more detrimental to have a guy like Greene wearing the C than not having one at all.  The sooner they give it to Hall the better.  It's unfortunate if it has to wait until next season.  And if they don't make that change going into next year they're going to drive more people away.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Forgot to mention on the way home Chico and Matt were saying the ref never pointed at the net signaling it was a goal and after they said that I don't remember him pointing either so how the hell did that even get called a goal on the ice to begin with? 

I was wondering the same thing watching at home- he never pointed, but then all of a sudden he's over at the replay area announcing 'the play's under review, call on the ice is a goal'. HUH?! YOU NEVER SIGNALED GOAL YOU a$$holE.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, sundstrom said:

they want my money - its now time to do something to fvcking earn it.

i was honestly not renewing 3 years ago when i was tired of the gionta's and ruutu's and tootoo's and then they brought in shero and that was enough for me to say - i'll stick for the plan.

and ray started building and i can't argue with any decision until 6 weeks ago. even the ones that have not worked out like future coach ben lovejoy - i understood the idea (even though i hated it from jump street).

but for those saying "hey, we're overachieving - don't get mad when they regress." - i'm not mad because the team is regressing. I am not mad because guys w/ ridiculous shooting percentages didn't maintain it. i'm not mad because we're not pdo'ing our way to the top of the league. i am mad because it's being allowed to happen without attempts to limit the regression or maintain an uphill trajectory. i'm mad that they are going to waste an MVP year from Taylor Hall with fvcking festering boils that they won't do something about.

is it really that hard to not let goaltending torpedo you? it would be one thing if cory were healthy and this was happening. like marty's last year, sometimes the guy that HAS to play goal is going to suck and you're stuck. But since cory has been hurt for a month, the devils should be beholdant to NOONE. KK has been dogsh!t this year - 7 of 18 games over .900. That's the kind of thing that gets you punted out of the league forever no matter how good your emoji game is. start the carosel until you find someone that sticks. and if you can't, ok, you tried. vegas went through 5 goaltenders this year. they're out there.

how long do i have to watch andy greene be a fvcking shell of himself and get caved in consistently and quite possibly singlehandedly ruin steve santini as an nhl'er.  it's a hard move, no doubt. but you put his ass on the 3rd pair and that's where he stays. the rest of your d aren't very good - well hey uncle fester, how about getting your forwards back to help on defense?

do fvcking something.

How do we know shero is not trying to get someone but there's nothing available at a decent price? We got Lack, that's something. We can't just be reactionary and stray away from our plan and mortgage our future, for what? maybe squeezing in? 

People here need to remember that we've been through horrible years BECAUSE we blindly went all out for the playoffs every season without looking out for the future, no matter how unrealistic it was. THAT'S the reason our prospects pool was absolute sh!t (well Conte was another big reason) and that we lost god knows how many assets "going all out". We can't repeat that mistake

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mikepeluso8 said:

Patty was a grinder...Patty got the job done...he was nowhere near the talent level of Hall, sorry...Hall flashes and flashes and flashes again...Hall is an absolute pleasure to watch...

Patty a grinder? huh?

40 minutes ago, NJDevs4978 said:

lol you can't tell jack from a still shot that was likely a second or two before the play ended.  Lack himself didn't really argue the play.  He knew he fvcked up.  I mean there's five seconds left, just fall on the puck if you're that unsure about playing it.

Actually, it's the only shot we actually have of the puck. So it is significant, because if I was the ref I'd say to myself, "Well the only evidence we have is that it didn't cross the line." And c'mon now, you're making big assumptions when it comes to what Lack was thinking. I thought he looked confused as fvck, like, "Wtf is going on? A goal just happened? On us?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, SterioDesign said:

How do we know shero is not trying to get someone but there's nothing available at a decent price? We got Lack, that's something. We can't just be reactionary and stray away from our plan and mortgage our future, for what? maybe squeezing in? 

People here need to remember that we've been through horrible years BECAUSE we blindly went all out for the playoffs every season without looking out for the future, no matter how unrealistic it was. THAT'S the reason our prospects pool was absolute sh!t (well Conte was another big reason) and that we lost god knows how many assets "going all out". We can't repeat that mistake

all out? i'm not asking for all out.

i specifically said NOT to do that.

lack was a move to dump prout - that was not done with cory/KK in mind or actually improving the goaltending.

find a goalie - they're out there. if it costs you a 4th round pick, so be it.

give Q a shot 3 weeks ago.

that's what I'm asking for.

and how do i know ray isn't trying? because he hasn't said he is. if there's anything ray has been, it's been transparent. he doesn't drop names, but he clearly let's people know what he's thinking.

he's said he's not going to make a rental move or mortgage the future. he says he's sticking with what he has. that means he's not looking to fix anything because he either doesn't think it's broken or doesn't think it's time to fix it. that's fine. i don't think it's time anymore to give my money until ray puts a team out there that warrants me spending it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Neb00rs said:

Patty a grinder? huh?

Actually, it's the only shot we actually have of the puck. So it is significant, because if I was the ref I'd say to myself, "Well the only evidence we have is that it didn't cross the line." And c'mon now, you're making big assumptions when it comes to what Lack was thinking. I thought he looked confused as fvck, like, "Wtf is going on? A goal just happened? On us?"

You really think the ref didn't have a better replay than a still shot from the internet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, sundstrom said:

they want my money - its now time to do something to fvcking earn it.

i was honestly not renewing 3 years ago when i was tired of the gionta's and ruutu's and tootoo's and then they brought in shero and that was enough for me to say - i'll stick for the plan.

and ray started building and i can't argue with any decision until 6 weeks ago. even the ones that have not worked out like future coach ben lovejoy - i understood the idea (even though i hated it from jump street).

but for those saying "hey, we're overachieving - don't get mad when they regress." - i'm not mad because the team is regressing. I am not mad because guys w/ ridiculous shooting percentages didn't maintain it. i'm not mad because we're not pdo'ing our way to the top of the league. i am mad because it's being allowed to happen without attempts to limit the regression or maintain an uphill trajectory. i'm mad that they are going to waste an MVP year from Taylor Hall with fvcking festering boils that they won't do something about.

is it really that hard to not let goaltending torpedo you? it would be one thing if cory were healthy and this was happening. like marty's last year, sometimes the guy that HAS to play goal is going to suck and you're stuck. But since cory has been hurt for a month, the devils should be beholdant to NOONE. KK has been dogsh!t this year - 7 of 18 games over .900. That's the kind of thing that gets you punted out of the league forever no matter how good your emoji game is. start the carosel until you find someone that sticks. and if you can't, ok, you tried. vegas went through 5 goaltenders this year. they're out there.

how long do i have to watch andy greene be a fvcking shell of himself and get caved in consistently and quite possibly singlehandedly ruin steve santini as an nhl'er.  it's a hard move, no doubt. but you put his ass on the 3rd pair and that's where he stays. the rest of your d aren't very good - well hey uncle fester, how about getting your forwards back to help on defense?

do fvcking something.

I understand the anger, but that's just how it goes - Goaltending can torpedo you, it happens around the league every year, some team is good except for the goalie.  The Hurricanes have been doing it year in and year out for ages.  Leafs went through a stretch in the late 00s.  The Devils went through it for 2 years here, one of which they ruined by running Brodeur out there for 30+ games while they had a great goalie on the bench, something which is far worse than is going on right now.  

Vegas went through 5 goalies - one of them they claimed off waivers at the beginning of the season, one of them they had in expansion, one of them was godawful and put up sub Kinkaid numbers, one of them got hurt immediately, and the other was a guy from the WHL who was taken in the 7th round of this year's draft who they brought up because the organization literally had no other goalies under contract.

All of the Devils' goalies have been garbage this year besides Schneider.  Appleby and Blackwood have been terrible and are why Binghamton is in the toilet.  Almost no goalies move during the season - Pickard moved before training camp, Wedgewood moved after camp, Lack was traded, Niemi went to two different teams, Zatkoff was lost on waivers, I think - I'm sure I'm missing some other goalie transactions around the league but not a lot has happened - it's hard to find help for cheap, because the incentives aren't there.  Why would an organization trade a 3rd goalie for cheap?  Only when, as in the Devils' case, they thought they had 2 other guys who could step in.  

Eddie Lack looked like a guy who's played 15 games so far this year.  He was rusty.  He made some decent stops but also made some horrendous misplays.

Also, Steven Santini was really bad this year, and I'm not convinced that he will ever be good.  He skates well for a big guy.  That's about it.  His play with the puck is Lovejoyesque, and that's not how the league is going.  He did okay in the Lovejoy role last year playing mostly with Merrill.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, NJDevs4978 said:

You really think the ref didn't have a better replay than a still shot from the internet?

I don't really know what the ref had. I do know that we had an over the net replay though, and that replay showed absolutely no evidence whatsoever that the puck crossed the line. None. The puck wasn't even visible.

As a matter of fact that "goal" boggles my mind so much I have been trying to come up with a way to justify it but I just can't. Here's the possibilities I've thought through:

1. The ref saw the puck cross the line on the ice but forgot to point at the net. The replay didn't show anything but the ref was sure and convinced the other refs to agree. 

2. The refs didn't see the puck at all but the Bruins argued harder than the Devils and so they figured the Bruins must have scored because they seemed so adamant. Unfortunately, this Devils team doesn't get on the refs at all.

3. There's an a$$hole Rangers fan in the booth in Toronto who "kindly" suggested to the refs the "right" call to make.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, sundstrom said:

all out? i'm not asking for all out.

i specifically said NOT to do that.

lack was a move to dump prout - that was not done with cory/KK in mind or actually improving the goaltending.

find a goalie - they're out there. if it costs you a 4th round pick, so be it.

give Q a shot 3 weeks ago.

that's what I'm asking for.

and how do i know ray isn't trying? because he hasn't said he is. if there's anything ray has been, it's been transparent. he doesn't drop names, but he clearly let's people know what he's thinking.

he's said he's not going to make a rental move or mortgage the future. he says he's sticking with what he has. that means he's not looking to fix anything because he either doesn't think it's broken or doesn't think it's time to fix it. that's fine. i don't think it's time anymore to give my money until ray puts a team out there that warrants me spending it.

The Lack move was absolutely done in mind with improving the goaltending in Binghamton, which up to that point had been deplorable. Naturally Lack got hurt right away and has barely played since that move, but so it goes.  I do not think that move was simply getting rid of Prout, because Lack costs considerably more money.  [EDIT:  This isn't true, I forgot that Carolina is retaining salary on Lack]

All you'll get for a 4th round pick is more of the same.  You want Chad Johnson or Markstrom or Nilsson, or any one of the guys who have similar numbers to Kinkaid?  It's just throwing dice and hoping the result is what you want.  It's doing something for the sake of doing something, asking a goalie coach to fix more guys who are clearly flawed.  Goaltending's not cheap.

Edited by Triumph
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Neb00rs said:

I don't really know what the ref had. I do know that we had an over the net replay though, and that replay showed absolutely no evidence whatsoever that the puck crossed the line. None. The puck wasn't even visible.

As a matter of fact that "goal" boggles my mind so much I have been trying to come up with a way to justify it but I just can't. Here's the possibilities I've thought through:

1. The ref saw the puck cross the line on the ice but forgot to point at the net. The replay didn't show anything but the ref was sure and convinced the other refs to agree. 

2. The refs didn't see the puck at all but the Bruins argued harder than the Devils and so they figured the Bruins must have scored because they seemed so adamant. Unfortunately, this Devils team doesn't get on the refs at all.

3. There's an a$$hole Rangers fan in the booth in Toronto who "kindly" suggested to the refs the "right" call to make.

The ref absolutely pointed at the net during that play.  I didn't see evidence it was definitely in, but it also seemed like it must've been.  I don't know how he ever saw the puck cross the line because it's invisible from all camera angles, but it also was probably in the net. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Triumph said:

The ref absolutely pointed at the net during that play.  I didn't see evidence it was definitely in, but it also seemed like it must've been.  I don't know how he ever saw the puck cross the line because it's invisible from all camera angles, but it also was probably in the net. 

now you're gonna ruin the whole thing.  The scenario you describe would seem to be rather reasonable.  Especially if the starting point for the other side of the argument is the referee never pointed to the net. If he did that's a game changer for this whole issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Triumph said:

The ref absolutely pointed at the net during that play.  I didn't see evidence it was definitely in, but it also seemed like it must've been.  I don't know how he ever saw the puck cross the line because it's invisible from all camera angles, but it also was probably in the net. 

I'm going off of hearsay on the pointing so perhaps it happened. But, when you say, "it was probably in" I'm not sure what that's supposed to mean. Like, "if we do the calculations"? Last time I checked, if you can't see the puck, you can't call it a goal. And Lack's glove certainly wasn't over the line enough to assume beyond a reasonable doubt that the puck was in. I actually thought it was the opposite.Yeah, the call on the ice was goal, so they needed evidence to overturn that. But the on ice call was as mystifying as it gets based on the replay. There's no real justifying that call unless some new replay comes out that shows us something different. Do they have some replay in Toronto that holds the secret? Maybe, but it doesn't do me any good unless I see it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Neb00rs said:

I'm going off of hearsay on the pointing so perhaps it happened. But, when you say, "it was probably in" I'm not sure what that's supposed to mean. Like, "if we do the calculations"? Last time I checked, if you can't see the puck, you can't call it a goal. And Lack's glove certainly wasn't over the line enough to assume beyond a reasonable doubt that the puck was in. I actually thought it was the opposite.Yeah, the call on the ice was goal, so they needed evidence to overturn that. But the on ice call was as mystifying as it gets based on the replay. There's no real justifying that call unless some new replay comes out that shows us something different. Do they have some replay in Toronto that holds the secret? Maybe, but it doesn't do me any good unless I see it.

The way replay is done in the NHL is that the call on the ice stands unless there is evidence to overturn that call.  There wasn't evidence to overturn it, I can tell you that - if you don't know where the puck is on the replay, which I certainly didn't, how do you know it's definitely not a goal?  The standard isn't to not rule things goals unless there's evidence they are.  Based on how the play looked to me, I think Lack jammed the puck up at the side of the goal past the goal line, and it was probably in.  I don't know how the ref on the ice ruled it a goal, and I doubt we'll ever know that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Triumph said:

I understand the anger, but that's just how it goes - Goaltending can torpedo you, it happens around the league every year, some team is good except for the goalie.  The Hurricanes have been doing it year in and year out for ages.  Leafs went through a stretch in the late 00s.  The Devils went through it for 2 years here, one of which they ruined by running Brodeur out there for 30+ games while they had a great goalie on the bench, something which is far worse than is going on right now.  

Vegas went through 5 goalies - one of them they claimed off waivers at the beginning of the season, one of them they had in expansion, one of them was godawful and put up sub Kinkaid numbers, one of them got hurt immediately, and the other was a guy from the WHL who was taken in the 7th round of this year's draft who they brought up because the organization literally had no other goalies under contract.

All of the Devils' goalies have been garbage this year besides Schneider.  Appleby and Blackwood have been terrible and are why Binghamton is in the toilet.  Almost no goalies move during the season - Pickard moved before training camp, Wedgewood moved after camp, Lack was traded, Niemi went to two different teams, Zatkoff was lost on waivers, I think - I'm sure I'm missing some other goalie transactions around the league but not a lot has happened - it's hard to find help for cheap, because the incentives aren't there.  Why would an organization trade a 3rd goalie for cheap?  Only when, as in the Devils' case, they thought they had 2 other guys who could step in.  

Eddie Lack looked like a guy who's played 15 games so far this year.  He was rusty.  He made some decent stops but also made some horrendous misplays.

Also, Steven Santini was really bad this year, and I'm not convinced that he will ever be good.  He skates well for a big guy.  That's about it.  His play with the puck is Lovejoyesque, and that's not how the league is going.  He did okay in the Lovejoy role last year playing mostly with Merrill.  

Tri - you've been with me for as long as anyone here. You know how I roll. There are guys that I will never support and some I'll never sour on. I can be irrational sometimes but for the most part, I get what's going on. You know and I know I'm not some facebook yahoo who thinks marty today is still better than cory and that we should get Lou back because "Cupz!"

I don't know why tonight snapped it for me - i mean, they were absolutely putrid last night. they've had games where they didn't show up this season. they've had other losing streaks. maybe it's just the snowball effect of the losing streak. maybe it honestly just knowing that they're staring at winning like 6 games for the rest of the season and they repeat the 2nd halves of the last 5 years. the 5 emails over the last 3 days reminding me to reup for next year haven't helped either.

sure they were the better team 5 on 5 and cordell can wow me about how vatanen was the second coming of bobby orr with his corsi and +/- but in the end, they still fvcking lost to a team that basically just showed up. yeah sure, goal one is "young players" nico and meuller fumbling the puck into their own net. but cagey vets aren't the answer to that. not being fvcking stupid is the answer to that. eddie lack is rusty. fine. but you've played goal before tonight. you know how much time is left in the period. just sit on the fvcking puck.

you're battling to try and get the game to at least OT to stop a losing streak and get points yet your #1 pair and #1 defensive center can't successfully play the puck on the wall or defend and lead to the shot that goes in. but hey, it's been happening plenty this season.

all i can say is i am STILL fvcking furious and I didn't even watch most of the game (I was at dinner for my mother in law's birthday). maybe i'll calm down tomorrow - we'll see.

in my life, there is my family first. then there is my company and the people that work there. then there is this stupid fvcking team. it's irrational and it makes no sense. but i've invested way too much for way too long. like the line in bronx tale, "mickey mantle doesn't give a sh!t about you." that's right - so fvck these guys until they want to figure it the fvck out.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Triumph said:

The way replay is done in the NHL is that the call on the ice stands unless there is evidence to overturn that call.  There wasn't evidence to overturn it, I can tell you that - if you don't know where the puck is on the replay, which I certainly didn't, how do you know it's definitely not a goal?  The standard isn't to not rule things goals unless there's evidence they are.  Based on how the play looked to me, I think Lack jammed the puck up at the side of the goal past the goal line, and it was probably in.  I don't know how the ref on the ice ruled it a goal, and I doubt we'll ever know that.

That's what I'm saying. The call on the ice was what was most mystifying, based on the replay we saw afterwards, because it seems that at no point was the puck visible. Obviously, the ref thought he saw it cross the line and called it a goal, and then was adamant about it despite the replay showing nothing. Again, unless a new replay comes out it will remain a bad call to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Triumph said:

 

All you'll get for a 4th round pick is more of the same.  You want Chad Johnson or Markstrom or Nilsson, or any one of the guys who have similar numbers to Kinkaid?  It's just throwing dice and hoping the result is what you want.  It's doing something for the sake of doing something, asking a goalie coach to fix more guys who are clearly flawed.  Goaltending's not cheap.

Yes - i want to throw dice for not that much. yes i will try a 4th round pick to get someone and hope we catch lightning in a bottle. KK sucks. this is a known. Lack, as far as I'm concerned, has one more game to show he doesn't suck or it's onto the next.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, sundstrom said:

all i can say is i am STILL fvcking furious and I didn't even watch most of the game (I was at dinner for my mother in law's birthday). maybe i'll calm down tomorrow - we'll see.

lol well all I have to say is I'm glad you didn't see most of the game then.  I was at the game and beside myself like I haven't been since the stupid Florida playoff game in 2012.  If it isn't the team no-showing a game it's them giving away a game they should win with utter stupidity like tonight, or the refs taking it away.  It's just one thing after another now, and it seems like the gods hate Taylor Hall.

Edited by NJDevs4978
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.