Jump to content

Should Brylin's #18 be up in the rafters?


Rock
 Share

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, andy said:

Number retirement is for truly special players.  They're rare.  Brylin just isn't that.  When you think of any of those cup teams, how many players do you think about before you get to him? 

If you combine all 3 teams, there’s probably 20 people you think of before him. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, mfitz804 said:

If you combine all 3 teams, there’s probably 20 people you think of before him. 

If Brylin didn’t happen to be in the right place at the right time (playing on all three Cup winners), no one’s talking about his number going up.  For some reason some fans see that he’s part of a very small club in Devils history, and equate that with him being much more important and special than he really was.  And you and others are right…there’s plenty of guys who come to mind ahead of Sergei, as far as Cup contributions go…just because most of them were here for “only” one or two Cups doesn’t mean Brylin somehow meant more in the grand scheme.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Parise was a great player for 6 years, made one improbable cup run, but mostly accomplished nothing other than multiple first round playoff exits. Missed a season with injury, signed a one year deal just to show other teams what he can do, and then he left. 

That’s not Ring of Honor worthy to me. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Lateralous said:

I haven’t seen him mentioned but how about Langenbrunner for ring of honor?  He was key to the 3rd cup, spent a lot of years here and was captain for a while.  

There are other names I would put ahead of him (Holik, McKay, MacLean,  Driver, to name a few). 

Wasn’t there also something inauspicious about his exit from NJ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Jerrydevil said:

Zach was the most electric player we've ever had not named Ilya Kovalchuk. That's why I throw his name out there. 

Key word “was.” Jack is more naturally skilled than Parise. If Jack entered the NHL at age 21 like Zach did, he would have probably lit it up immediately. Hell, Zach only put up 33 points in 81 GP his rookie season.

I always looked at Parise as more of hard working out-compete you kind of player. Whereas Jack is more of a super dynamic type. Idk that Jack will ever put up a 40+ goal season like Zach did (he was just so good at scoring those dirty goals), but I think he will be a consistent 80+ point guy once he hits his prime. Zach “only” did that twice in 16 years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Nicomo said:

Key word “was.” Jack is more naturally skilled than Parise. If Jack entered the NHL at age 21 like Zach did, he would have probably lit it up immediately. Hell, Zach only put up 33 points in 81 GP his rookie season.

I always looked at Parise as more of hard working out-compete you kind of player. Whereas Jack is more of a super dynamic type. Idk that Jack will ever put up a 40+ goal season like Zach did (he was just so good at scoring those dirty goals), but I think he will be a consistent 80+ point guy once he hits his prime. Zach “only” did that twice in 16 years. 

I would add to that, so what if he was “electric”? He was a good player, at times a great player. For six seasons plus one 13 gamer that he was injured for most of. 

The Ring of Honor should be meant for people who meant a lot to the franchise. Good as Parise may have been, sorry, he was a blip in our history. No cups, only one deep playoff run I believe. 

Meanwhile, there’s guys who played on the three Cup winners and all of those other years where the team was dominant. There’s probably more guys I would put in ahead of Parise than I would put in ahead of Brylin. 

And I would certainly put Brylin in, with like 20 years of dedicated service to the franchise, before a guy who played a grand total of 502 regular season games before bouncing in what I consider a pretty sh!tty manner. 

I’ll leave the Jack comparison alone, I think I’ve made my position clear on that. 

Edited by mfitz804
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ll throw my boy Whitey out as a RoH guy. 743 reg season GP, 111 playoff GP, career +74, 2 Stanley Cups, wore an A for parts of 4 different seasons, and he gave a freaking EYE for this team! He obviously didn’t get the attention that Stevens, Niedermayer, and Rafalski got (understandable), but he was a tough son of a bitch that really personified those shutdown defenses. I know some people tend to remember him more for the end of his time in NJ, but up until that last year or two he was always pretty damn good. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Nicomo said:

I’ll throw my boy Whitey out as a RoH guy. 743 reg season GP, 111 playoff GP, career +74, 2 Stanley Cups, wore an A for parts of 4 different seasons, and he gave a freaking EYE for this team! He obviously didn’t get the attention that Stevens, Niedermayer, and Rafalski got (understandable), but he was a tough son of a bitch that really personified those shutdown defenses. I know some people tend to remember him more for the end of his time in NJ, but up until that last year or two he was always pretty damn good. 

Perfect example of a guy to put in the Ring of Honor. Unsung, perhaps, but everything you said, he was. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny I was thinking “I know there’s some unsung D who was here for quite some time and quietly did a solid job for many years, that I’m not thinking of”.  That would be Whitey.  Perfect RoH guy.

I’d put Langs in for general body of work + his contributions to the 2003 Cup run.  Devils don’t win that Cup without him.

Despite giving the Devils his best years, Zach’s a no for me, but I can see why some would want to put him in.  Only problem with that is then suddenly maybe a guy like Kirk Muller should be in too.  Like I said previously, I think the Devils can be more generous with RoH inductees, but I wouldn’t want them to go overboard with it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Colorado Rockies 1976 said:

Funny I was thinking “I know there’s some unsung D who was here for quite some time and quietly did a solid job for many years, that I’m not thinking of”.  That would be Whitey.  Perfect RoH guy.

I’d put Langs in for general body of work + his contributions to the 2003 Cup run.  Devils don’t win that Cup without him.

Despite giving the Devils his best years, Zach’s a no for me, but I can see why some would want to put him in.  Only problem with that is then suddenly maybe a guy like Kirk Muller should be in too.  Like I said previously, I think the Devils can be more generous with RoH inductees, but I wouldn’t want them to go overboard with it.

Kirk Muller is a good comparison there. 

Parise: 410 points in 502 games

Muller: 520 points in 556 games

Muller was a Captain, star player, and left the team badly. Ditto for Parise. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Nicomo said:

I’ll throw my boy Whitey out as a RoH guy. 743 reg season GP, 111 playoff GP, career +74, 2 Stanley Cups, wore an A for parts of 4 different seasons, and he gave a freaking EYE for this team! He obviously didn’t get the attention that Stevens, Niedermayer, and Rafalski got (understandable), but he was a tough son of a bitch that really personified those shutdown defenses. I know some people tend to remember him more for the end of his time in NJ, but up until that last year or two he was always pretty damn good. 

Colin White is a good one- good call. Absolutely worthy of the ROH.

Edited by MadDog2020
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Colorado Rockies 1976 said:

I’d put Langs in for general body of work + his contributions to the 2003 Cup run.  Devils don’t win that Cup without him.

He was so damn good that year. Interesting question, say there was some unwritten rule back then that the Conn Smythe absolutely cannot go to a player from the losing team, who would you have given to? It obviously would have been between Marty (7 shutouts .934 sv%), Langs (1st in goals with 11 & tied for 1st in points with 18 with a bunch of clutch goals including 4 game winners), or Niedermayer (tied for 1st in points and was our best player a lot of those games). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Nicomo said:

He was so damn good that year. Interesting question, say there was some unwritten rule back then that the Conn Smythe absolutely cannot go to a player from the losing team, who would you have given to? It obviously would have been between Marty (7 shutouts .934 sv%), Langs (1st in goals with 11 & tied for 1st in points with 18 with a bunch of clutch goals including 4 game winners), or Niedermayer (tied for 1st in points and was our best player a lot of those games). 

Damn good question.  I’d say Langs by the slimmest of margins.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Nicomo said:

It obviously would have been between Marty (7 shutouts .934 sv%), Langs (1st in goals with 11 & tied for 1st in points with 18 with a bunch of clutch goals including 4 game winners), or Niedermayer (tied for 1st in points and was our best player a lot of those games). 

1.65 GAA for Marty as well. 3 of those 7 shutouts were in the finals. 

If I recall correctly, the bulk of Langenbrunner’s scoring was in the early rounds and not so much in the semis and finals. 

I give the edge to Brodeur. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, mfitz804 said:

1.65 GAA for Marty as well. 3 of those 7 shutouts were in the finals. 

If I recall correctly, the bulk of Langenbrunner’s scoring was in the early rounds and not so much in the semis and finals. 

I give the edge to Brodeur. 

That’s accurate re:  how Langs’ production was distributed, but he scored two big goals in Game 7 of the ECF.  But of three players Nicomo mentioned, probably can’t go wrong with any of them winning, and that’s what the 2003 team was all about…they were truly a TEAM.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, mfitz804 said:

1.65 GAA for Marty as well. 3 of those 7 shutouts were in the finals. 

If I recall correctly, the bulk of Langenbrunner’s scoring was in the early rounds and not so much in the semis and finals. 

I give the edge to Brodeur. 

2 goals in the conference finals game 7 against OTT, who was the President’s Trophy winner that year, and as Gomez just mentioned on Spittin Chiclets who ever won that series was probably winning the Cup. And 2 goals in a game 5 win against Anaheim in the finals. The only person who scored as many clutch goals during that run was Jeff Friesen. 

Really tough call though. I think you can make a case for any of the 3. I just wish Marty would have won it because it’s literally the only thing missing from his resume. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Nicomo said:

2 goals in the conference finals game 7 against OTT, who was the President’s Trophy winner that year, and as Gomez just mentioned on Spittin Chiclets who ever won that series was probably winning the Cup. And 2 goals in a game 5 win against Anaheim in the finals. The only person who scored as many clutch goals during that run was Jeff Friesen. 

Really tough call though. I think you can make a case for any of the 3. I just wish Marty would have won it because it’s literally the only thing missing from his resume. 

Yeah, not saying it isn’t close. 

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.