Devils discussion (news, notes and speculation) - part III

[guitarguyvic]

The 22-23 team had a 6 game losing streak where the gave up 24 goals and only scored 12.

All teams have bad stretches and I think you shouldn’t be so confident that the 22-23 didn’t look awful at times.

I remember people going “the winning streak is long behind us, this is the real team.” type stuff, same as we get now.

Again none of this can be proven stats wise, but I distinctly remember that team playing more consistent hockey, both across all games and within games. It’s not just about wins and losses and the specific record. Nonetheless, I’m not sure how you can equate a six game losing streak to this current team having just 3 regulation wins across nearly 20 games against mostly teams that are at the bottom of the standings.

There’s always going to be at least some people who freak out about a small stretch of poor hockey. This hasn’t been a small stretch, and there’s way more people concerned now than there was then, and rightfully so.

 

[Clam Jensen]

T vs GGV, round one million!

 

[Devils731]

Again none of this can be proven stats wise, but I distinctly remember that team playing more consistent hockey

This seaon’s Devils team has not lost more than 4 in a row but that team lost 6 in a row.

Why is the consistently good team going on a losing streak longer than the inconsistent team? Why does the team whose worst stretch was better than this year’s team actually have a 6 game stretch where they were destroyed?

By your supposition, it should be the opposite way around.

 

[MasterofGrond]

This is all presumptive strawmanning. No one is saying definitively that every other good defensive team is more consistent. We can see from how much we observe this team directly that there is a wide gap between their worst hockey and their best, and that they frequently flip between these extremes not just game to game but period to period. Yes fluctuations like this are normal in hockey, but the degree and frequency can and does vary. The data is not going to capture the degree of distribution of quality of play. Dismissing our observations of it as if we’ve never watched hockey before and have never seen a more consistent distribution from past devils teams before is once again arrogant and insulting people’s intelligence. I can confidently say for example that the 2022-23 team’s worst hockey was not as bad as this team’s worst hockey…but by the same token this team’s best defense is better than that team’s who had much less structure…there’s no stat to prove it so yes that is all eye test but there’s literally nothing else at our disposal in this regard.

It is not a large leap to believe that there are at least some teams who average similarly defensive play as the devils but who distribution of quality is smaller and more consistent. Again, there are currently no hard stats to prove this or which teams those are unless you watch them as much as the devils, but it’s common sense.

Yes, but for similar level of defensive performance, being more consistent is only advantageous if you're a demonstrably better team. If you're a worse team you'd actually prefer to run hot and cold! So either the devils are objectively better than other similar defensive teams, in which case yeah it's not ideal, you'd want more consistency but it's not THAT important (since they're better overall), or they're similarly good, and it's a wash, or they're worse overall, and going shut-out/blow-out is actually improving your odds of winning a series.

The real strawman here is the effort to make up a weakness (with no supporting data) so the devils seem bad on an axis they're actually demonstrably very good on.

"2022-23's worst hockey was not as bad as this teams worst hockey"

I mean, which of those seasons involved chanting calling for the firing of the teams coach? I don't specifically recall any FIRE KEEFE chants this year do you?

 

[guitarguyvic]

Oh huh, the data isn't going to capture that. I guess you've studied the data deeply and come to that conclusion.

All this says to me is 'I watch one team'. It's hockey.



It's all just confirmation bias and recency bias. Do you really think you have a handle on how consistent Devils teams of the past were? I definitely think they were more consistent than this team, but guess what, I have no idea! And neither do you!

I saw billingtons ghost express confusion over the idea that a player coming out of the penalty box plays right wing until he can change; he thought players just skate off after they serve a penalty. I don't know why I'd dismiss his observations or insult his intelligence. Anyway he doesn't read my posts and generally I don't read his, and if you read his, you would see just as much arrogance.



I think you've forgotten the worst stretch of 2022-23 as has everyone else. You've forgotten it because the Devils mostly won during that time.



I mean, this is so easily measurable, but you just say there's no hard stats to prove this and then say it's common sense. Pretty classic stuff. My easily provable or disprovable hypothesis? No answer - it's just common sense that I'm right!

Right, it isn’t at all presumptive to tell people “I think you’ve forgotten this”. Of course, and we should all just assume our memories are off because the stats can’t capture it and well…you say so! You see, it works both ways.

But I think we got to the real core of the issue with your last sentence. You think that every bit of analysis about hockey has a “right” and “wrong” answer (like what the rule is about a player coming out of the box) when in fact much of what we discuss is subjective assessments in which data and statistics can be used as a tool to assist, not necessarily provide a concrete answer.

 

[NjDevsRR]

Exclusive | MSG Networks in talks to avoid bankruptcy — possibly with help of Amazon: sources

MSG Networks, the embattled cable TV station that airs New York Knicks and Rangers games, is in talks to reach a deal to avoid bankruptcy as soon as Friday.

nypost.com

 

[Triumph]

Right, it isn’t at all presumptive to tell people “I think you’ve forgotten this”. Of course, and we should all just assume our memories are off because the stats can’t capture it and well…you say so! You see, it works both ways.

Yes, this is correct, memory is incredibly misleading, especially with regard to things like 'how consistent was a team 2 years ago'. This just seems self-evident to me that there's no way that I could remember something like that, that all I would have is the vaguest sense probably of posts I wrote during the time, or maybe a highlight or two, or honestly numbers I'd looked up then, but I would have no idea. And I have a very strong memory, but I can't rely on it for something like that - it's just going to make stuff up.

But I think we got to the real core of the issue with your last sentence. You think that every bit of analysis about hockey has a “right” and “wrong” answer (like what the rule is about a player coming out of the box) when in fact much of what we discuss is subjective assessments in which data and statistics can be used as a tool to assist, not necessarily provide a concrete answer.

I think there are obviously degrees of rightness and wrongness in these matters but when people say things like the Devils aren't consistent or the Devils play pond hockey, they are objectively incorrect about both things as it pertains to the rest of the league, yes, absolutely.

 

[NjDevsRR]

The current Devils have only lost 1 game by more than one goal since December 10th when removing EN goals

The 22-23 Devils also only lost 1 game by more than one goal in their two month down period when removing EN goals

The 23-24 Devils, well…

 

[Better Call Sal]

Exclusive | MSG Networks in talks to avoid bankruptcy — possibly with help of Amazon: sources

MSG Networks, the embattled cable TV station that airs New York Knicks and Rangers games, is in talks to reach a deal to avoid bankruptcy as soon as Friday.

nypost.com

It would be fan-f***ing-tastic if I didn't have to shell out $100 a month for Fubo and could just watch them through Amazon for a fraction of the cost.

 

[SteveCangialosi123]

I don’t think you even need data to show that the Devils play a relatively low event style. How many boring ass games have they played this year? If that’s pond hockey, I genuinely don’t know what you’d call what other teams are doing.

 

[guitarguyvic]

Yes, but for similar level of defensive performance, being more consistent is only advantageous if you're a demonstrably better team. If you're a worse team you'd actually prefer to run hot and cold! So either the devils are objectively better than other similar defensive teams, in which case yeah it's not ideal, you'd want more consistency but it's not THAT important (since they're better overall), or they're similarly good, and it's a wash, or they're worse overall, and going shut-out/blow-out is actually improving your odds of winning a series.

I’m not following this logic fully. I’m not even sure anyone is saying that they’d rather the team be worse statistically overall in exchange for being more “consistent”.

The real strawman here is the effort to make up a weakness (with no supporting data) so the devils seem bad on an axis they're actually demonstrably very good on.

"2022-23's worst hockey was not as bad as this teams worst hockey"

I mean, which of those seasons involved chanting calling for the firing of the teams coach? I don't specifically recall any FIRE KEEFE chants this year do you?

This is misrepresenting the context at the time. Those chants happened after just two games and were the result of several years worth of frustration, it is not evidence of anything either way.

 

[Brooklyndevil]

He would be 6th on this team in goals and tied for 6 in points. He would be a good addition to the bottom 6.

I’ll take him if he can help and it doesn’t sound like we would need to give up the farm. How’s he on faceoffs?

 

[theoptimist]

I’ll take him if he can help and it doesn’t sound like we would need to give up the farm. How’s he on faceoffs?

Hasn’t taken many in his career compared to true centers like Bjugstad (cheap) or ROR (expensive).

Anyway, Thank you Fitz.

 

[JrFischer54]

i'm still shocked that someone posted this team is only 4pts better then last years team at the same time. really really really surprising. when i pretty much given up on the team in dec last year.

 

[MasterofGrond]

I’m not following this logic fully. I’m not even sure anyone is saying that they’d rather the team be worse statistically overall in exchange for being more “consistent”.

This is misrepresenting the context at the time. Those chants happened after just two games and were the result of several years worth of frustration, it is not evidence of anything either way.

They're not, but they're (you're) saying the team is actually worse than stats show because it's (allegedly) inconsistent defensively. When whether that is true, and how much that affects the team in the playoffs is a wildly open question with no data put forth to support it.

Those chants are still more data than I've been shown suggesting the Devils are a particularly inconsistent team and that this is a problem in any meaningful fashion as we look to the playoffs.

 

[NjDevsRR]

i'm still shocked that someone posted this team is only 4pts better then last years team at the same time. really really really surprising. when i pretty much given up on the team in dec last year.

That team went 17-12-3 (.578%) from mid Dec to mid Feb. They were in the playoff picture until the injuries really sunk them bad and they crashed after the outdoor gm

In the same stretch, this seasons Devils are 16-12-4 (.560 pts % )


The big difference between the two are the obvious defensive structure improvements of the group and goaltending. Offense did take a hit but id take that trade from where they were. When Nico is back and Haula is back in form, offense should be more consistent going forward.


Edit: I quickly gathered those records so it may be slightly off, but you get the point

 

[Better Call Sal]

i'm still shocked that someone posted this team is only 4pts better then last years team at the same time. really really really surprising. when i pretty much given up on the team in dec last year.

It was an entirely different type of hockey they were playing last year. We'd given up 49 more goals in that same number of games while scoring only 16 more goals than this year's team.

We also were 2 points out of a playoff spot at that record where as we're currently 3rd in the division with a 5 point lead on the next team and a 6 point lead on the playoff line.

This year's team (this month notwithstanding) is playing a much more sustainable level of hockey on the whole than last year's team. I think while we all hoped we could get it resolved last year, we knew deep down with our goaltending and defensive woes (plus injuries) that it was unlikely to catch up to the other teams that were ahead of us. Sadly, had we figured either of those out, we probably would've gotten in since only 91 points were needed to make it.

 

[tailfins]

Team reliant on young talent is inconsistent. News at 11.

This team goes as far as Jack, Bratt, and Luke takes it. Could add Markstrom to that - we'l see. Nico, Timo, Dougie, Mercer, et al. are fine - but they're not driving the bus.

Keefe has got to get Jack, Bratt, and Luke to a point where they refuse to lose two games in a row. And where they are able to do something about it.

I think the team has the desire. I just think those guys haven't unlocked their final form yet. IMO, that's why they brought Keefe here.

 

[NjDevsRR]

Also the bottom half of the Metro being weaker this season should help.

We really are only concerned about CBJ NYR NYI for Metro 3.

I believe this team fully healthy can outpace those three in the remaining 30% of the season. Especially with all the other East teams battling each other. It should keep the point totals down for the bubble teams. But obviously NJ needs to get their act together.

 

[guitarguyvic]

Yes, this is correct, memory is incredibly misleading, especially with regard to things like 'how consistent was a team 2 years ago'. This just seems self-evident to me that there's no way that I could remember something like that, that all I would have is the vaguest sense probably of posts I wrote during the time, or maybe a highlight or two, or honestly numbers I'd looked up then, but I would have no idea. And I have a very strong memory, but I can't rely on it for something like that - it's just going to make stuff up.

Yes memory can be misleading but it doesn’t automatically mean it always is. Someone like bleed clearly has a propensity to remember details that most of us don’t, do you treat his comments based on recollection the same as everyone else’s? I can tell you that I am confident in my recollections of bigger trends because they leave an indelible impression on my every season. For example, I can recall how in 2009-10 the team had an absolutely stellar record in the first half, towards the top of the league in fact. I remember thinking at the time based on my observations and the roster that they were likely playing over their heads, but still a pretty above average team. Then I distinctly remember them becoming incredibly average in the second half and changing my mind to the belief that they would likely get their ass kicked in the first round despite still finishing with a pretty good overall record.

Now, that’s a memory that can probably be verified from data we have available, but a lot of what we talk about is more subjective and without data that prove it one way or the other. I can’t definitely prove that my memory is accurate in those cases, but by the same token you cannot claim that it is definitively wrong.

I think there are obviously degrees of rightness and wrongness in these matters but when people say things like the Devils aren't consistent or the Devils play pond hockey, they are objectively incorrect about both things as it pertains to the rest of the league, yes, absolutely.

“Pond hockey” is informal language that we probably don’t even agree on an exact definition of, how can you say such a thing can be objectively incorrect when we might not even be referring to the exact same kind of observations? To me pond hockey can be about wide open defenseless hockey but it could also include just being generally sloppy and irresponsible with the puck, like amateurs might play on the pond, ya know?

 

[JimEIV]

Ottawa was too disheartening for me.

Edit:
I meant buffalo...same shit.

 

[Triumph]

Yes memory can be misleading but it doesn’t automatically mean it always is. Someone like bleed clearly has a propensity to remember details that most of us don’t, do you treat his comments based on recollection the same as everyone else’s? I can tell you that I am confident in my recollections of bigger trends because they leave an indelible impression on my every season. For example, I can recall how in 2009-10 the team had an absolutely stellar record in the first half, towards the top of the league in fact. I remember thinking at the time based on my observations and the roster that they were likely playing over their heads, but still a pretty above average team. Then I distinctly remember them becoming incredibly average in the second half and changing my mind to the belief that they would likely get their ass kicked in the first round despite still finishing with a pretty good overall record.

Bleed has an incredible memory for individual games, no doubt, and recalls seasons better than anyone here. I still wouldn't trust his memory on something like that, and he will sometimes say 'oh I thought this happened but I looked it up and actually this happened'.

Now, that’s a memory that can probably be verified from data we have available, but a lot of what we talk about is more subjective and without data that prove it one way or the other. I can’t definitely prove that my memory is accurate in those cases, but by the same token you cannot claim that it is definitively wrong.

Sure I can, because it's an accident if it's right. If I can't drill into the details 'well okay, so you say you remember X from year Y, what individual details do you remember?' and you can't answer anything definitive, your memory is basically just getting lucky. Memory isn't designed to function this way, that's why the data is so important. It doesn't forget.

“Pond hockey” is informal language that we probably don’t even agree on an exact definition of, how can you say such a thing can be objectively incorrect when we might not even be referring to the exact same kind of observations? To me pond hockey can be about wide open defenseless hockey but it could also include just being generally sloppy and irresponsible with the puck, like amateurs might play on the pond, ya know?

Re-reading it, It wasn't him who used the term pond hockey and I mostly agree with his take (although I think he exaggerates the low points of the individual players). It was someone following up on that who used that term, which to me is ridiculous.

 

[Zajacs Bowl Cut]

Team reliant on young talent is inconsistent. News at 11.

This team goes as far as Jack, Bratt, and Luke takes it. Could add Markstrom to that - we'l see. Nico, Timo, Dougie, Mercer, et al. are fine - but they're not driving the bus.

Keefe has got to get Jack, Bratt, and Luke to a point where they refuse to lose two games in a row. And where they are able to do something about it.

I think the team has the desire. I just think those guys haven't unlocked their final form yet. IMO, that's why they brought Keefe here.

I only partially agree with this, because I think that Nico is the team's most important forward since he does so much at both ends of the ice.

 

[My3Sons]

I only partially agree with this, because I think that Nico is the team's most important forward since he does so much at both ends of the ice.

He's leading the team in goals, he has the toughest matchups and he wins his minutes. He most definitely helps drive the bus as I see it. Jack is still more important in that he can create something from nothing more often than anyone else, but Hischier is more important than Bratt to me by a small margin. Markstrom is probably the single most important player on the team this season but it's a team so it's sort of irrelevant how any one player does in a vacuum. They need the entire core to drive the bus and the support guys to play their roles properly. Lately that's been inconsistent.