Jump to content

GDT: Devils @ Creamsicle Wannabe Aviators - 30 Nov @ 7p


jagknife

Recommended Posts

You know my rule: new GDT when we win immediately following, don’t touch my damn title, just tell me and I’ll edit, LETS fvckING GO DEVILS

ITS SCHMID’S NET, LINDY

Jack is getting back to opening month form (not like he’s ever really fallen off)

Smith has become productive. Not gonna lie, loved the shift leading to the fight and aside from the penalty, I didn’t hate his game.

Give torts some more nightmares and crush them!

AGAIN, LFGD

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, jagknife said:

And a good gameday morning to everyone…

… except Lindy, cause you know he’s trying to find a way to justify starting VV tonight…

LFGD

I want Schmid to start both tonight and tomorrow.

BUT, if Lindy (and possibly Fitz) is going to insist upon VV getting one of these two games, I'd much rather it be against the Sharks.  For one, not only have they yet to win a road game...that team has managed just SIX GOALS IN NINE ROAD MATCHES!  The Sharks have been outscored 39-6 in those games.  If that's not the game to give VV, I don't know what it is.

But I still say to give Schmid both of these and see if they help to get him on a roll.   

Edited by Colorado Rockies 1976
  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Colorado Rockies 1976 said:

I want Schmid to start both tonight and tomorrow.

BUT, if Lindy (and possibly Fitz) is going to insist upon VV getting one of these two games, I'd much rather it be against Sharks.  For one, not only have they yet to win a road game...that team has managed just SIX GOALS IN NINE ROAD MATCHES!  The Sharks have been outscored 39-6 in those games.  If that's not the game to give VV, I don't know what it is.

But I still say to give Schmid both of these and see if they help to get him on a roll.   

I don't think there's any chance Schmid gets both. But yeah, I agree, it would make the most sense to give him the nod tonight and VV tomorrow.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Colorado Rockies 1976 said:

I want Schmid to start both tonight and tomorrow.

BUT, if Lindy (and possibly Fitz) is going to insist upon VV getting one of these two games, I'd much rather it be against the Sharks.  For one, not only have they yet to win a road game...that team has managed just SIX GOALS IN NINE ROAD MATCHES!  The Sharks have been outscored 39-6 in those games.  If that's not the game to give VV, I don't know what it is.

But I still say to give Schmid both of these and see if they help to get him on a roll.   

 

15 minutes ago, NJDfan1711 said:

I don't think there's any chance Schmid gets both. But yeah, I agree, it would make the most sense to give him the nod tonight and VV tomorrow.  

Division games matter more, we cannot afford to keep lose ground

AS today

VV tomorrow if we HAVE to

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, jagknife said:

 

Division games matter more, we cannot afford to keep lose ground

AS today

VV tomorrow if we HAVE to

Yeah Schmid tonight for sure.  There's just no defending putting in VV tonight.  Devils gave him 15 appearances over the first quarter of the season to try to get him on a roll...depending on what happens, they can revisit righting him later, but for now it's like we're all pretty much saying...Schmid's done just enough (.917 save% over his last 5 games) to get a batch of games here.  I wouldn't go to VV again until 12/9 (Calgary).  Give him a bit of a break and see how it goes.

After this back-to-back, Devils get three days off, as they head to Canada (with a game in Seattle as well).  Their next back-to-back is 12/9 - 12/10 (Calgary, then Edmonton).  That's why I go with VV on 12/9.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, RunninWithTheDevil said:

I would love to dominate the flyers tonight and absolutely destroy the sharks tomorrow. My luck, they'll lose both games by 2 goals. 

I really want 3 points minimum out of these two games.  Anything less is going to be disappointing.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No i'm not ; ) 

Just like everybody else i wish that Akira could be our future and steals us some games right now ... But for reason i couldn't explain, I have absolutely no faith in him right now.
And i have zero once of hate in me .. I'm not build that way ; ) 

  • EvilHeart 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, moustic said:

No i'm not ; ) 

Just like everybody else i wish that Akira could be our future and steals us some games right now ... But for reason i couldn't explain, I have absolutely no faith in him right now.
And i have zero once of hate in me .. I'm not build that way ; ) 

Not literal hate but having no faith in a guy, despite the stats, for "reasons I couldn't explain" is the definition of a hater. You're drinking the anti-Akira-aid my guy! You're a hater, embrace it 😂 we love you anyway.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • EvilHeart 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, moustic said:

I hope you are all right and i'm super wrong but seriously ... I have no faith in Akira ! (yeah yeah i saw the stats but still) 

Nevermind, whoever is in the net.. Go Us and hope for the best ! 

It's not really about right vs. wrong, good vs. evil, heh heh.

We kinda know how Fitz wants to do things...I think the only way he ever pay$ up for a goalie is if such a netminder came up as a Devil on an ELC and then proved to be so good (with many prime years left) that Fitz would have no choice but to pay him, or if some stud who was 26-28 became available via trade.  I do think he's really trying to avoid tying up too much of his cap at the goalie position though...he decided that he would rather pay Bratt and Timo and still have money to extend Dawson, and later Luke.  His cap model simply didn't leave room to pay goalies, and not really much room to make changes if VV and/or Schmid faltered; basically, he bet on them both to be the same cost-effective tandem that they were last season.  And given how he wanted to allocate his available cap space, I understood it at the time.

It's not so much that I and others are thinking "VV and/or Akira are absolutely the guys!"; it's more that right at this moment it's "Akira's been pretty good lately, let's see if he can build off it, especially with VV struggling."  We simply thought that last year saw both of them do enough to get another shot this year to show the same.  If Fitz decides that he needs to tweak his goaltending, as we've been over, it will be tricky...the cap space isn't there, and at the moment (especially with the injuries) there's not quite the depth to move higher-salaried played to take on salary.  What would be ideal is if the Devils had a close-to-ready kid ready to join the fray...but they don't.      

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Colorado Rockies 1976 said:

It's not really about right vs. wrong, good vs. evil, heh heh.

We kinda know how Fitz wants to do things...I think the only way he ever pay$ up for a goalie is if such a netminder came up as a Devil on an ELC and then proved to be so good (with many prime years left) that Fitz would have no choice but to pay him, or if some stud who was 26-28 became available via trade.  I do think he's really trying to avoid tying up too much of his cap at the goalie position though...he decided that he would rather pay Bratt and Timo and still have money to extend Dawson, and later Luke.  His cap model simply didn't leave room to pay goalies, and not really much room to make changes if VV and/or Schmid faltered; basically, he bet on them both to be the same cost-effective tandem that they were last season.  And given how he wanted to allocate his available cap space, I understood it at the time.

It's not so much that I and others are thinking "VV and/or Akira are absolutely the guys!"; it's more that right at this moment it's "Akira's been pretty good lately, let's see if he can build off it, especially with VV struggling."  We simply thought that last year saw both of them do enough to get another shot this year to show the same.  If Fitz decides that he needs to tweak his goaltending, as we've been over, it will be tricky...the cap space isn't there, and at the moment (especially with the injuries) there's not quite the depth to move higher-salaried played to take on salary.  What would be ideal is if the Devils had a close-to-ready kid ready to join the fray...but they don't.      

Schimdo is the kid at the moment. 23 is a young goalie. Still 2-3 years away from what should be his best hockey or prime years. The next kid is Tyler Brennan and he's at least 2 years away from a sniff at a chance unless we hit the goalie injury lottery and have to use 8 different goalies in a single year. 

 

I think I'm with Lindy. Still use them both in rotation and favor Schmid a little for now until VV gets his game back. 

Edited by RizzMB30
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, RizzMB30 said:

Schimdo is the kid at the moment. 23 is a young goalie. Still 2-3 years away from what should be his best hockey or prime years. The next kid is Tyler Brennan and he's at least 2 years away from a sniff at a chance unless we hit the goalie injury lottery and have to use 8 different goalies in a single year. 

 

I think I'm with Lindy. Still use them both in rotation and favor Schmid a little for now until VV gets his game back. 

I suspect VV will get the Sharks game most because of how little that team has scored on the road.  Basically as a pure “try to build VV’s confidence” measure.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, NJDevils1214 said:

I wish Fitz could have found a way to keep Zetterlund.(wrong thread but yea)

Why though?  He's scored a little for the Sharks this year, but he's also getting more ice time out of sheer necessity (the way that some grinders wind up scoring 15 goals for an expansion team, because they're getting Top 6 minutes).  He's already 24 years old.  I don't think anything would be wildly different if he was still here...guys like Zetterlund and Boqvist just didn't do enough to stick around, given where this team is trying to get to.

Nothing against him, but if he's part of a deal to bring in a guy like Timo (who's less than three years older than Zetterlund), I make that deal every time.    

  • Like 3
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...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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