Devils 2020-21 team discussion (news, notes and speculation) - part XIV

[Blackjack]

My idea for this has been that if the puck goes past the goal line during the offensive zone possession, usually indicating a cycle happened after the zone entry and the offside didn't directly lead to a rush that scored the goal, then offside review isn't applied.

Still not perfect but better than goals being called back because 45 seconds earlier a player was a bit offsides.

You're fixing a problem that doesn't need to be solved, and you're introducing another wrinkle and layer of complexity, now you're going to have coaches reviews to determine if the puck crossed the goal line after a successful offside challenge.

Look at it this way, you're taking away goals scored after a player was a hair offside, right? But aren't there also plays that onside, but wrongly blown dead for offside, where the attacking team would have scored if the play hadn't stopped? What are you doing to restore those goals? How does it make the game more fair to only solve half the problem? At this point you should just let each period proceed for 20 minutes uninterrupted, and then with video review you can carefully determine when the play actually should have stopped for the first time, rewind the clock to that point, and then start again, and maybe a few days later you'll have gotten all the way through the game. The offside rule is absolutely incongruous with the way the game is actually played and officiated. Missed calls are not rare or even particularly remarkable, they happen all the time, they lead to goals all the time. They prevent goals that would have been scored all the time.

 

[None Shall Pass]

I'm not worried about Goose and Palms in a new system for the 1st ten games of the season. After that, as far as I'm concerned, everyone is fair game.

It is nice to not have a D-man to criticize, though. Even Tennyson has been holding his own.

 

[Hisch13r]

Blackwood gud

 

[JimEIV]

You're fixing a problem that doesn't need to be solved, and you're introducing another wrinkle and layer of complexity, now you're going to have coaches reviews to determine if the puck crossed the goal line after a successful offside challenge.

Look at it this way, you're taking away goals scored after a player was a hair offside, right? But aren't there also plays that onside, but wrongly blown dead for offside, where the attacking team would have scored if the play hadn't stopped? What are you doing to restore those goals? How does it make the game more fair to only solve half the problem? At this point you should just let each period proceed for 20 minutes uninterrupted, and then with video review you can carefully determine when the play actually should have stopped for the first time, rewind the clock to that point, and then start again, and maybe a few days later you'll have gotten all the way through the game. The offside rule is absolutely incongruous with the way the game is actually played and officiated. Missed calls are not rare or even particularly remarkable, they happen all the time, they lead to goals all the time. They prevent goals that would have been scored all the time.

The thing that really bothers me is how after the fact some of these instances have been. The zone was gained and 3 or 4 other actions have taken place sometimes....I mean there is a dude in a zebra shirt standing right at the freaking blueline and if he had no problem at the time it happened it should be the end of the discussion.

 

[JimEIV]

Blackwood gud

I bet Subban played 25+ minutes in both games

 

[britdevil]

The thing that really bothers me is how after the fact some of these instances have been. The zone was gained and 3 or 4 other actions have taken place sometimes....I mean there is a dude in a zebra shirt standing right at the freaking blueline and if he had no problem at the time it happened it should be the end of the discussion.

It’s f***ing ridiculous. You’d think this league would want as much offence as possible.

 

[The Devil In I]

You're fixing a problem that doesn't need to be solved, and you're introducing another wrinkle and layer of complexity, now you're going to have coaches reviews to determine if the puck crossed the goal line after a successful offside challenge.

Look at it this way, you're taking away goals scored after a player was a hair offside, right? But aren't there also plays that onside, but wrongly blown dead for offside, where the attacking team would have scored if the play hadn't stopped? What are you doing to restore those goals? How does it make the game more fair to only solve half the problem? At this point you should just let each period proceed for 20 minutes uninterrupted, and then with video review you can carefully determine when the play actually should have stopped for the first time, rewind the clock to that point, and then start again, and maybe a few days later you'll have gotten all the way through the game. The offside rule is absolutely incongruous with the way the game is actually played and officiated. Missed calls are not rare or even particularly remarkable, they happen all the time, they lead to goals all the time. They prevent goals that would have been scored all the time.

Fully agree, the rule has 100% costed the fans more goals that really should have counted than it has reversed Duchene-level blatantly offside goals. I just think it's more likely at this point that the league will keep the review rule than scrap it altogether, so just looking for ways to decrease the amount of goals being absurdly called back.

Like the Russia-Canada WJC offside review where even the announcer said something like - "oh come on, do you even remember the zone entry on that play?"

 

[Blackjack]

The thing that really bothers me is how after the fact some of these instances have been. The zone was gained and 3 or 4 other actions have taken place sometimes....I mean there is a dude in a zebra shirt standing right at the freaking blueline and if he had no problem at the time it happened it should be the end of the discussion.

Honestly, I don't care if the goal is scored off the rush itself. Hockey officiating is imperfect, it is impossible to get all the calls right. Look at some of the penalty calls last night. Those don't lead to goals? Your second comment is right on the money, the linesman is standing right on the damn blueline, for him to miss the call generally means that any offside must have been extremely marginal, and far less likely to impact the outcome of the play than other calls that are much more likely to be missed.

 

[Better Call Sal]

I'll be that guy and say I don't think Palms is a guy who shouldn't be on the PK. What I will say is echoed by what Ruff indicated, which is that the players on the PK as a whole have not been making good reads on when to be aggressive and when to be more passive.

I think special teams is really hard to perform at a high level without constant, endless practice. I'm sure things will come around.

I'm glad they gave a different look on the PP by putting Palms on his offhand wing (which worked very well in the past). It led to the goal with him finding Hughes and Jack finding Wood. Which led to all of us finding wood.

 

[Blackjack]

Fully agree, the rule has 100% costed the fans more goals that really should have counted than it has reversed Duchene-level blatantly offside goals. I just think it's more likely at this point that the league will keep the review rule than scrap it altogether, so just looking for ways to decrease the amount of goals being absurdly called back.

Like the Russia-Canada WJC offside review where even the announcer said something like - "oh come on, do you even remember the zone entry on that play?"

I think people need to start openly trashing the rule every chance they get. They got rid of the crease rule, didn't they? Every time this stupid ass rule takes away a goal (or even just delays a game), people need to be loudly reminded that's it's a moronic rule that should have been removed years ago. That's why I really appreciate the Rangers writer mentioning it in his piece. It needs to be hammered over and over again what an awful rule it is. Here are his comments.

Hughes made a pass from behind the net to Subban, whose long shot through screens by Palmieri and Lindgren found the net before Georgiev moved. Rangers coach David Quinn, who is 2-for-2 on challenges, claimed offside and video review proved Palmieri was in the zone ahead of the puck, so the goal was wiped out. The offside had nothing to do with the goal. It’s an asinine rule. Hundreds of calls are missed in the course of a game, including dozens of offside calls, but it’s reviewable because a goal was scored? Just stupid. Blackwood then stopped Trouba at the buzzer.

If Mika Zibanejad is injured, Rangers will be hard-pressed to endure his absence

 

[HBK27]

WTF, we’re on a condensed schedule and we have close to week off after our game on Thursday?

Is it just me or do we get screwed more often then not with the schedule on a yearly basis?

Huh? Devils play Sunday and Tuesday after tomorrow's game.

 

[Guttersniped]

Gusev can be deadly below the hash marks but he's off to a slow start and Boston certainly did not leave much ice to work with. He whiffed on that wide open net that could have made a difference but you know, season opening jitters and all.

He requires play drivers to use his only asset, which is an accurate shot from most anywhere below the dots. Otherwise he's generally a soft and not particularly speedy player, though somewhat shifty east/west. If he's not getting set up for scoring chances though, he's generally not bringing a whole lot to the lineup.

He needs play drivers to be useful, period. And that's coming from someone who liked what he brought last year since this team has been desperate for goal scorers for years now.

I hate to break to you, I don’t know the accuracy part, he seems like a playmaker and volume shooter. You’re talking about a guy who’s stat line in KHL the season before he came over was: 62 GP 17G 65A 82pts.

Now that season in KHL he shot 8.8%, while his KHL career average was 11.4%. Gusev shot 8.2% last season, with 7.2% 5v5 and 12.20% on the PP, which isn’t bad but isn’t the stuff of a NHL sniper.

 

[Nubmer6]

I'll be that guy and say I don't think Palms is a guy who shouldn't be on the PK. What I will say is echoed by what Ruff indicated, which is that the players on the PK as a whole have not been making good reads on when to be aggressive and when to be more passive.

I think special teams is really hard to perform at a high level without constant, endless practice. I'm sure things will come around.

I'm glad they gave a different look on the PP by putting Palms on his offhand wing (which worked very well in the past). It led to the goal with him finding Hughes and Jack finding Wood. Which led to all of us finding wood.

Ya. I'm not sure why they didn't have Palms on the off-wing all along.

In fact, on PP2 I'd have Subban in that spot. I don't like him shooting bombs from the point, but from the left circle it could work pretty well. Pop Vats (when he gets here) and Severson on the top for PK 1 and 2, Hughes and Gusev for the playmaker on the RWs, Hischier and Bratt as bumpers, and Sharangovich and Wood or Zacha at the net front to screen and dig pucks off the boards from behind the net.

 

[Hisch13r]

I'll be that guy and say I don't think Palms is a guy who shouldn't be on the PK. What I will say is echoed by what Ruff indicated, which is that the players on the PK as a whole have not been making good reads on when to be aggressive and when to be more passive.

I think special teams is really hard to perform at a high level without constant, endless practice. I'm sure things will come around.

I'm glad they gave a different look on the PP by putting Palms on his offhand wing (which worked very well in the past). It led to the goal with him finding Hughes and Jack finding Wood. Which led to all of us finding wood.

That was his strong side. Not his off wing

 

[Zajacs Bowl Cut]

WTF, we’re on a condensed schedule and we have close to week off after our game on Thursday?

Is it just me or do we get screwed more often then not with the schedule on a yearly basis?

what? They play tomorrow, Sunday, then Tuesday again

 

[Goptor]

WTF, we’re on a condensed schedule and we have close to week off after our game on Thursday?

Is it just me or do we get screwed more often then not with the schedule on a yearly basis?

Wouldn't you consider this helping the Devils with Bratt, Hischier, and Vatanen yet to join the team?

 

[captainscott]

Fully agree, the rule has 100% costed the fans more goals that really should have counted than it has reversed Duchene-level blatantly offside goals. I just think it's more likely at this point that the league will keep the review rule than scrap it altogether, so just looking for ways to decrease the amount of goals being absurdly called back.

Like the Russia-Canada WJC offside review where even the announcer said something like - "oh come on, do you even remember the zone entry on that play?"

its a dumb rule unless the idea is to make the league more boring and frustrating.. I don't really care if my team gets scored on because of a mili second instance that didn't effect the play.. this is stupid and needs to go.. start reviewing every play like the NFL...

 

[captainscott]

I think whats impressed my about Lindy Ruff most so far is his willingness to put the young players out there in all situations.. Hynes in a million years would have never started his 4th line in the defensive zone draws... good for ruff and I think he has picked the exact right players to be playing so far..

 

[Guttersniped]

Wouldn't you consider this helping the Devils with Bratt, Hischier, and Vatanen yet to join the team?

It’s not true so there’s no help there, as someone else said we play two days later on Sunday. I don’t see any breaks longer three days.

This does make wonder how exactly the NHL is going to find time for Dallas and other teams to make up missed games but I’m not Commissioner so I guess I won’t worry about it.

 

[Better Call Sal]

That was his strong side. Not his off wing

Dur, that's right, thank you. That's what happens when I'm not thinking while typing.

I knew what I meant, but dummied what I actually was trying to say.

 

[captainscott]

Koukkanen has been better than Boqvist to my eye. Boqvist is a total non factor without the puck and plays soft. Koukkanen has been way more effective in all 3 zones. The scoring will come.

Boqvist doesn't play soft. yes he may be in the conversation to come out when the others return.. but he is playing solid hockey and within his role on the zajac line... im not criticizing you but too many people don't know the finer points of the game.. same ones that think zacha...mcleod and wood stink.. they don't every player has a role. Boqvist plays plenty heavy and has been solid.. in his role through 3 games

 

[captainscott]

I totally 100% disagree with basically every word of this.

me too .. Boqvist is incredibly responsible player all over the ice.. he for sure is not the first guy coming out of my lineup

 

[captainscott]

Nikita Gusev was one of the best 5 on 5 playmakers in the entire NHL last season...and that is WITH him struggling for the first month or two.

Yes, he has struggled for the first few games of this year...no doubt. But those insinuating that he is the worst player on the team or whatever are out to lunch.

yeah he has offensive skill I wouldn't worry about gusev.. the best part about this is the devils are going to have to scratch 2 pretty good forwards soon.. that tells me we have actually NHL good depth.. on ice not on paper.. I think we actually have a good hockey team ..

 

[Darkauron]

Also I remember us saying that we expect games to be a bit messy with a lot of goals for and against this season, but at least they would be entertaining! It certainly was last night. But man...thank god I am not board out of my mind like I was with Hynes' system.

 

[HBK27]

The one benefit of having Nico and Bratt out is that it may help us out when it comes to the expansion draft by getting Bastian, Kuokkanen and McLeod into games.

All 3 players came into this season needing to play 27 games in order to qualify as the 2 forwards NJ has to leave unexposed.

If the expansion draft were held today, the Devils would theoretically protect Nico, Bratt, Johnsson, Zacha, Wood, Sharangovich and Palmieri but wouldn't have any forwards with the games played requirements available to expose. If Palmieri gets traded that could open up a spot for McLeod - but we'd still need at least Kuokkanen and Bastian hit the 27 games played mark this season or risk exposing a player they'd rather protect.

Injuries throughout the season should make this easy enough for those players to hit, but will be worth watching if the team stays healthy for a long stretch. Of course there may also be a trade option to get some plug that meets the requirement right before the expansion draft, but may not want to have to rely on that and waste an asset in the process. This is probably why the Rangers signed Kevin Rooney to a 2-year deal. He only needs 5 NHL games this season to qualify as one of their exposed forwards.

If it came down to it, I also wonder if Zajac would sign a one-year extension and be one of the exposed forwards knowing there's little chance he actually gets claimed.