Fire Hynes

[Steadevils]

1 minute ago, Nicomo said:

No way you trade Palms or Vatanen. The former is our leading goal scorer, and the former is our best defenseman. 

Lovejoy is not bringing much back in return. Mojo is an interesting one, and honestly he’s be my pick if someone has to go. 

Severson has been our best defender this year in my opinion and you have to give something to get something. I actually don't want to pay Vatanen what he'll be asking for heading in to his year 30 season in 2020. I'd only trade Palms if the return also brought back offense. My thought process there is that he is at the peak of his value now off his early scoring purge. 

[Steadevils]

12 minutes ago, DJ Eco said:

There's a huge difference between trading Vatanen and trading Lovejoy dude...

Included Lovejoy because trading a well liked veteran would send a message.

[DevsMan84]

1 minute ago, Kinkyisth3b3st said:

That's dramatic hyperbole, even for you. 

You cannot name ninety fvcking NHL defenseman better than Sami Vatenen. 

He is vastly overrated by our fanbase largely because he is much better than the 6-7 guys below him on our defense depth chart.

I also said at best #4 D-man on a good team (I should clarified by a team with good D).  Teams like Nashville, Philly, Tampa, San Jose, etc.  There is a reason why Vats was the odd man out in Anaheim as he got pushed further down on their depth chart.

[mfitz804]

1 hour ago, Nicomo said:

Except Mike Keenan. All the Rags ever sucked. 😛

Fixed it. 

[mfitz804]

4 minutes ago, Kinkyisth3b3st said:

That's dramatic hyperbole, even for you. 

You cannot name ninety fvcking NHL defenseman better than Sami Vatenen. 

I couldn't name 90 defensemen period. I'd have to start sticking fake names like "Oliver Klozov" in there to complete the list. 

[SterioDesign]

14 minutes ago, Colorado Rockies 1976 said:

C'mon, the bolded is not even close to true.  Sometimes you can really be off-base man.  And when I said "like him a lot", I meant that you like his general MO and results (or what you interpret his MO and results to be).  Not like you've made that a secret. 

And like I said, yes, most of the time coaches need considerable talent to win...but we've also seen coaches that have talent, yet get in the way, or don't use it properly...not that they're to fully blame or praise when such teams win it all or fall well short, but at least some coaches manage to not fvck things up.  And as we've seen, not all coaches are an equally great fit everywhere (just like some players don't mesh with certain teams), for many reasons (talent that doesn't fit their MO, better with veterans, etc). 

then why even bring up the whole "You want to praise Shero and give him credit for every last thing he does and will obviously defend him if anyone says anything remotely critical about him"

That had NOTHING, NOTHING to do with Quenneville lol 

Why not use Hynes as an example? i've been defending him quite and a bit and a coach to coach comparison makes more sense. You "worked" the Shero thing in there for sure haha

Edited November 27, 2018 by SterioDesign

[SterioDesign]

10 minutes ago, Kinkyisth3b3st said:

If he's at-best #4 on a good team that means you think there are 93 defenseman better than he is. 

I think that's stupid. 

Can't you guys just go check out his rating on NHL19 and call it a day? The golden truth is right there for the taking lol

He's ranked #53 on dailyfaceoffs though for what it's worth lol #31 RD

 

[Nicomo]

21 minutes ago, DevsMan84 said:

I don't think either is untouchable.  Vats is at best a #4 D-man on a good team and Palms should be considered if you get a great player in return.

Outside of Hischier and Smith, I don't really have much of an issue with everybody else being available.

Vatanen is one of maybe 2 players the Devils have that isn’t completely terrible on the back end (Severson being the other). I’m not really worried where he’d be on a handful of other teams. On this team he’s extremely valuable, and I don’t see getting enough of a return to make trading him worthwhile. 

And you wouldn’t have an issue trading the reigning Hart Trophy winner? He’s only 27, he should be part of this team’s plans going forward, imo. The only reason i could see trading him is if there’s no chance of re-signing after next year. Which I don’t believe to be the case.

[Colorado Rockies 1976]

15 minutes ago, SterioDesign said:

then why even bring up the whole "You want to praise Shero and give him credit for every last thing he does and will obviously defend him if anyone says anything remotely critical about him"

That had NOTHING, NOTHING to do with Quenneville lol 

Why not use Hynes as an example? i've been defending him quite and a bit and a coach to coach comparison makes more sense. You "worked" the Shero thing in there for sure haha

I already said why I made the comparison.  Both guys had a lot of talent at their disposal, and in both cases, some choose to tone down their impacts on their teams due to that fact.  Hynes isn't a good example because he doesn't have anywhere near the talent that Q did on his teams.  Hynes is also still kind of a newbie as an NHL HC, where Q has been around for quite some time. 

I think this was an evaluation year for Hynes as well as the players, and though I think it's easy to blame the HC right away, there's enough going on that I'm not sure he's the guy who should be trying to take his team to the next level.  Though I think he's tried to hold players accountable, it's really baffling to me why Greene seems to be untouchable...I'm guessing it's because there's no obvious replacement for him, but how much more does he get to not only be bad, but get treated as though he isn't?

[NJDfan1711]

31 minutes ago, DevsMan84 said:

He is vastly overrated by our fanbase largely because he is much better than the 6-7 guys below him on our defense depth chart.

I also said at best #4 D-man on a good team (I should clarified by a team with good D).  Teams like Nashville, Philly, Tampa, San Jose, etc.  There is a reason why Vats was the odd man out in Anaheim as he got pushed further down on their depth chart.

The reason Vats was traded wasn't so much he was being pushed down the depth chart and he's some scrub d-man.  Are you forgetting we gave them a good asset in return?  We needed something, and they needed something.   We got a good defender and they got a good forward.   That trade was pretty fair, and both players were/are pretty damn good. 

[SterioDesign]

6 minutes ago, Colorado Rockies 1976 said:

I already said why I made the comparison.  Both guys had a lot of talent at their disposal, and in both cases, some choose to tone down their impacts on their teams due to that fact.  Hynes isn't a good example because he doesn't have anywhere near the talent that Q did on his teams.  Hynes is also still kind of a newbie as an NHL HC, where Q has been around for quite some time. 

I think this was an evaluation year for Hynes as well as the players, and though I think it's easy to blame the HC right away, there's enough going on that I'm not sure he's the guy who should be trying to take his team to the next level.  Though I think he's tried to hold players accountable, it's really baffling to me why Greene seems to be untouchable...I'm guessing it's because there's no obvious replacement for him, but how much more does he get to not only be bad, but get treated as though he isn't?

Still, why bring up the "You want to praise Shero and give him credit for every last thing he does and will obviously defend him if anyone says anything remotely critical about him" ? 

Edited November 27, 2018 by SterioDesign

[DJ Eco]

Vatanen is a clear-cut top line defenseman being saddled down and held back by a poor supporting cast. His stretch passes, his rushes into the zone, some of the plays he's able to create, the quality and placement of shots he gets on net begging for deflections (occasionally getting them, but not nearly often enough considering the shot quality), elite tenacity and fitness, he's a great player. He averages 23+ minutes a game and over 2 shots on goal per game.

Ducks didn't find him expendable, that's rewriting history. Their fans were upset that he was let go and still are, but they needed to give something to get something like the old cliche says; and they needed center depth. He's a 2nd line defenseman on maybe 2-3 teams in the league as superhumanly stocked at D as Anaheim or Nashville are, but he's a top-liner on most teams in the league.

I won't trade the 27 year old Sami Vatanen for anything, I don't think there are too many returns that justify giving away what he means to this defensively fragile team.

Edited November 27, 2018 by DJ Eco

[DevsMan84]

27 minutes ago, NJDfan1711 said:

The reason Vats was traded wasn't so much he was being pushed down the depth chart and he's some scrub d-man.  Are you forgetting we gave them a good asset in return?  We needed something, and they needed something.   We got a good defender and they got a good forward.   That trade was pretty fair, and both players were/are pretty damn good. 

Yeah, we gave them a guy who got pushed down on our forward depth chart last season.

[DevsMan84]

17 minutes ago, DJ Eco said:

Vatanen is a clear-cut top line defenseman being saddled down and held back by a poor supporting cast. His stretch passes, his rushes into the zone, some of the plays he's able to create, the quality and placement of shots he gets on net begging for deflections (occasionally getting them, but not nearly often enough considering the shot quality), elite tenacity and fitness, he's a great player. He averages 23+ minutes a game and over 2 shots on goal per game.

Ducks didn't find him expendable, that's rewriting history. Their fans were upset that he was let go and still are, but they needed to give something to get something like the old cliche says; and they needed center depth. He's a 2nd line defenseman on maybe 2-3 teams in the league as superhumanly stocked at D as Anaheim or Nashville are, but he's a top-liner on most teams in the league.

I won't trade the 27 year old Sami Vatanen for anything, I don't think there are too many returns that justify giving away what he means to this defensively fragile team.

2nd line defenseman so he is at best #3 D-man.  Is saying a #3 D-man is that valuable to where he is untouchable good for our long-term goals?

33 minutes ago, Nicomo said:

Vatanen is one of maybe 2 players the Devils have that isn’t completely terrible on the back end (Severson being the other). I’m not really worried where he’d be on a handful of other teams. On this team he’s extremely valuable, and I don’t see getting enough of a return to make trading him worthwhile. 

And you wouldn’t have an issue trading the reigning Hart Trophy winner? He’s only 27, he should be part of this team’s plans going forward, imo. The only reason i could see trading him is if there’s no chance of re-signing after next year. Which I don’t believe to be the case.

He also may leave us in 2 years with us getting absolutely nothing in return.  I am not saying he is Parise 2.0 in waiting, but he isn't untouchable, especially if it looks like the chances of re-signing him are slim.

[DevsMan84]

59 minutes ago, Kinkyisth3b3st said:

If he's at-best #4 on a good team that means you think there are 93 defenseman better than he is. 

I think that's stupid. 

How many good teams do you think there are in the NHL?  These days there are about 5 or so good teams, 5 or so bad teams and everyone in between is mediocre.

I think you are overreacting because of the loss last night to your most hated team.

[Nicomo]

9 minutes ago, DevsMan84 said:

Yeah, we gave them a guy who got pushed down on our forward depth chart last season.

Rico is doing well for them though. Tied for 1st in goals, 3rd in points. 

That really was a great trade for both teams. 

[mfitz804]

9 minutes ago, DevsMan84 said:

I think you are overreacting because of the loss last night to your most hated team.

Come on, anyone who follows this board KNOWS Kinky never overreacts...

 

[Colorado Rockies 1976]

Just now, Nicomo said:

Rico is doing well for them though. Tied for 1st in goals, 3rd in points. 

That really was a great trade for both teams. 

That more shows how meh offensively Anaheim has been.  Rico has been his typical OK kind of self, really...6 G and 6 A in 25 GP...he's good for about 40-50 points in any given season, and he'll likely wind up there again...only now he's pretty well-paid for it.  He was a lot more cost-effective on his last deal.  But the good news is long as he's healthy, you know what he'll give you.  He's pretty consistent. 

[mfitz804]

6 minutes ago, Nicomo said:

Rico is doing well for them though. Tied for 1st in goals, 3rd in points. 

That really was a great trade for both teams. 

I 100% did not want to get rid of Henrique, no question. But we needed defense and as they say, you have to give something to get something. Whether Vatanen is a #1, 2, 3 or 4 (which is a stupid debate, because that depends on who the other 7 on your team are, not where he is overall in the league); he's clearly a #1 on this roster), you weren't getting him without including a solid, proven player. I'd have loved to give them Andy Greene and Blandisi, but they wouldn't have taken that and would possibly have had a stroke from laughing so hard at the offer. 

Edited November 27, 2018 by mfitz804

[Nicomo]

6 minutes ago, Colorado Rockies 1976 said:

That more shows how meh offensively Anaheim has been.  Rico has been his typical OK kind of self, really...6 G and 6 A in 25 GP...he's good for about 40-50 points in any given season, and he'll likely wind up there again...only now he's pretty well-paid for it.  He was a lot more cost-effective on his last deal.  But the good news is long as he's healthy, you know what he'll give you.  He's pretty consistent. 

Yeah, only Arizona and LA have less goals. Yet they’re only a point out of 3rd place in the Pacific. Goaltending and defense I guess. 

[mfitz804]

Just now, Nicomo said:

Yeah, only Arizona and LA have less goals. Yet they’re only a point out of 3rd place in the Pacific. Goaltending and defense I guess. 

We did pretty well for years on that theory...give up less goals then you score. It's a solid plan. 

[DevsMan84]

16 minutes ago, Nicomo said:

Rico is doing well for them though. Tied for 1st in goals, 3rd in points. 

That really was a great trade for both teams. 

I agree.  Both teams made out pretty well.  However, that still won't make me think Vats is far better than what he really is (and again I think he is a fine defenseman, just not untouchable like a lot of fans make him out to be).

[mfitz804]

1 minute ago, DevsMan84 said:

I agree.  Both teams made out pretty well.  However, that still won't make me think Vats is far better than what he really is (and again I think he is a fine defenseman, just not untouchable like a lot of fans make him out to be).

The only reason I would say he might approach untouchability is because of how awful our other 7 have been. It would be moving in the wrong direction, unless you were upgrading him, of course. 

[Nicomo]

Just now, DevsMan84 said:

I agree.  Both teams made out pretty well.  However, that still won't make me think Vats is far better than what he really is (and again I think he is a fine defenseman, just not untouchable like a lot of fans make him out to be).

That’s fair. My untouchable list is Hall, Nico, Smith, so we’re not far apart. 

There’s just guys I’d really hate to part with like Coleman, Vats, Bratt, etc. 

[DevsMan84]

Just now, mfitz804 said:

The only reason I would say he might approach untouchability is because of how awful our other 7 have been. It would be moving in the wrong direction, unless you were upgrading him, of course. 

Bingo.  Did everyone think I would trade him away for peanuts or magic beans?

Just now, Nicomo said:

That’s fair. My untouchable list is Hall, Nico, Smith, so we’re not far apart. 

There’s just guys I’d really hate to part with like Coleman, Vats, Bratt, etc. 

I will admit I like Coleman.  I'd rather have him than not.  I still don't think as highly as some of you about Bratt, but he is slowly growing on me.

But your untouchable list is indeed very close to mine.