Devils team discussion (news, notes and speculation) - offseason edition

[hidek91]

24 year old 40 goal scorers are always available (also on pace for 50 in the shortened year btw), I forgot lol. DeBrincat's play style is tailor made for Jack Hughes. I'll be fine with whatever they do but I'm sick of people just dismissing players that are elite talents because somehow we have them on our roster or have to wait for them? This team is in no position to wait another 3-5 years for guys in their top 6 to develop. Their goaltending shit the bed last year when massive improvement could've been made which I totally understand but you just can't tell a fanbase who's seen 1 playoff win in 10 years to wait a little longer. Now if you told me that they should do something stupid and trade the 2nd overall for J.T Miller? I'd laugh in someone's face.

So the goal is to have competitive first-round exits rather than building a contender?

Also what's the point of trading elite picks/prospects for "win now" pieces, when you have holes in your bottom six and completely messed up goaltending situation?

If the Devils trade away pieces with potentially very good cap hit to quality ratio (e. g. #2 pick) and add expensive pieces that will soon require their UFA contracts, they'll hit the salary cap limit without having the top 5 roster in the league. And I thought that the whole point of suffering is to build a contending core, not to dig yourself into the hole with panic moves because the fanbase got impatient.

 

[glenwo2]

So the goal is to have competitive first-round exits rather than building a contender?

Also what's the point of trading elite picks/prospects for "win now" pieces, when you have holes in your bottom six and completely messed up goaltending situation?

If the Devils trade away pieces with potentially very good cap hit to quality ratio (e. g. #2 pick) and add expensive pieces that will soon require their UFA contracts, they'll hit the salary cap limit without having the top 5 roster in the league. And I thought that the whole point of suffering is to build a contending core, not to dig yourself into the hole with panic moves because the fanbase got impatient.

Some out there believe Instant Gratification is more important than Long-term success.

To get that Long-term Success, it takes TIME and PATIENCE.

Some don't want that.

Some want it NOW.


Plus, as you said, we have a Goaltending situation to resolve.

 

[hidek91]

I think lots of people here over value potential vs guarantee. Can Slaf be great? Yes. Can he bust ? Yes. There has been plenty of top 5 picks that have turned out poorly, Slaf could 100% be one of those. I'm fine with Devils drafting him, but to say he's more valuable than a 2 time 40 goal scorer at the age of 24, is just ignoring the bust potential for Slaf. He is FAR from a sure thing/can't miss prospect.

What you're saying is true, Slafkovsky or any other prospect picked at #2 can bust, with that being said:

1) The risk of a total bust isn't that big specifically for 2nd overall draft picks. I can think of Murray and Patrick in recent years, did I forget somebody?

2) In the league with a hard salary cap, you have to take a "cap hit" variable into account. I know that this is not the problem for Devils yet, however it will be when and if they start to contend and this causes us to not compare apples to apples here:

a) DeBrincat, while sure thing, costs 6.4M for 2022/23, then has to be qualified and basically paid UFA money, while,
b) Slafkovsky would get an ELC and then would be under a team control for at least his 2nd contract.

Noone of that matters if Slafkovsky busts, however the problem is that if you want to contend you need to both build a great core and have it on affordable contracts. This is why even if in a vacuum a star player is more valuable than elite pick or prospect, in reality teams not managed by Lou don't give up latter for the former. All successful teams are examples of this.

3) A variable that doesn't matter if Slafkovsky busts but he's 5,5 years younger than DeBrincat, which affects the long-term outlook of the trade, swapping a younger player for an older one changes the window of contention even if we ignore contracts completely. DBC will statistically exit his prime when Slaf will be just starting his. If he was the last piece that we needed to become a contender then it wouldn't be a problem but I'm not that optimistic about the current quality of our roster.

 

[theoptimist]

We don’t like short people. Just say it…

 

[hidek91]

We don’t like short people. Just say it…

We don't like short-sighted people when it comes to choosing the correct strategy

 

[glenwo2]

We don’t like short people. Just say it…

Depends on what part of them you're referring to.

Short Arms?

Short Legs?

Short....ahem....

 

[theoptimist]

I am very impatient and I would trade the #2 just to make the playoffs next year with Debrincat.

Phew ok I said it

 

[SKNJD9]

Slafkovsky is kind of a unicorn, I don't know where I'd put the comparison. He's the first 6'4-220 forward I've seen since Jagr who offered the best combination of puckhandling/playmaking in the entire draft class, and he's also elite in hockey IQ. He's tremendous along the boards and down low, and I think we saw in the WC what an incredible ability he has as a net-front presence to create rebounds, screens and deflections. His shot has improved remarkably over the past year and a half where I think this might have the potential to develop into yet another near-elite tool. His skating is excellent for any size, but rare for a 6'4 player of his powerful physique.

Stylistically, I don't like comparing Kakko to Rantanen or Slafkovsky, because Kakko is more north/south and likes to play downhill, while both Rantanen and Slafkovsky are more versatile, liking to mix up a finesse east/west game with the situational ability to power to the interior. This is why I bring up Jagr -- while by no means would I compare anyone to the great #68, Slafkovsky does offer the best combination of puck protection/hands I've seen since perhaps Jagr. If the opposition gets caught with the wrong defense match-up against him, Slafkovsky can just seemingly play "keep away" at will while he waits for a lane to open.

I've also seen Slafkovsky compared to Svechnikov, but I don't like it because Svechnikov is more aggressive, both physically and in his general shoot-first mindset. Slafkovsky's mix of vision and wing-span sometimes makes me think "young Joe Thornton, but on the wing" but I'm not sure that encapsulates it well, either.

So, to answer your question, I won't answer your question. Slafkovsky is truly a unique talent. But what's best about him is that his ability to open up space and draw defenders down low will serve as the absolutely perfect compliment to Hughes and Bratt, who are as good as any NHL tandem at utilizing space outside the circles and up high. It's kind of a match made in heaven... no pun intended because this is, after all, the Devils.


Your friendly neighborhood draft writer STI pimped all year long for K'Andre Miller, as you might recall.

My only issue with Slaf from what I've watched..which is not nearly as much as you have tbf. Is his game sense / iq when he doesn't have the puck. He seemed slow to read an react off the rush when he wasn't the puck carrier. Seeing how much we try to generate offense off the rush it's the only thing that gives me pause on him

 

[MartyOwns]

the only way i’m trading the pick is if someone massively overpays, and debrincat (and his upcoming new contract) isn’t it

 

[BurntToast]

I love Slaf, Cutter, Jiříček, but I would have to trade 2OA for any 40 goal scorer. I would rather give Smith+Holtz( possible 40 goal scorer) and a 2/3 combo and still draft one if the 3.

 

[AfroThunder396]

I'm not really interested in trading the pick. But if the deal was 2 OA for DeBrincat straight up I'd probably do it. People really underrate how talented and consistent he is as a goal scorer.

 

[Mr Bojanglez]

ughhh. Not happy with this one.

DeBrincnt - great talent, great player.

But him lined up next to Jack Hughes looks like 2 kids in a trenchoat trying to get into an R-rated movie.

In a vacuum I am not happy. If this trade occurs along with signing some larger Free Agents.... maybe it can work.

 

[ChicksDigTheTrap]

I do not view Pagnotta as a great source. Even if someone views him as a reliable source, this is what he said.

This is going to be a player that a lot of teams that are looking for offence are going to be calling Chicago about,” Pagnotta said, “One team that I’m very curious to see if they do fully engage is the New Jersey Devils. They’ve got that second-overall pick in play, they want to bring in somebody that is controllable that they can slot into their lineup and have an immediate impact. That’s something to watch to see if the New Jersey gets in on the action on DeBrincat.”

Hawks gauging trade interest in DeBrincat — The Fourth Period

Alex DeBrincat will be highly coveted this summer as the Blackhawks entertain trade calls.

www.thefourthperiod.com

 

[TheUnseenHand]

Everyone is linking us to everything simply because we have the assets necessary to make it happen. Not because there is legitimate reason to believe it will.

 

[MVP Zacha]

Is he your first dog? He’s adorable.

No, we had 2 Corgis but both passed away last year.

 

[NjDevsRR]

But him lined up next to Jack Hughes looks like 2 kids in a trenchoat trying to get into an R-rated movie.

 

[Mr Bojanglez]

The day that meme becomes unfunny... well I don't want to see that day.

 

[Triumph]

The only virtue I can think of to e.g. 2OA for DeBrincat is if the cap jumps a tremendous amount in 2024-25. If you cap yourself out in 2024 and the cap goes up $12M, you have a lot of room to play around with and one more need filled, whereas Slafkovsky will have to be signed under the new cap number. Still, though, agents know this is happening and may be cautioning clients against signing long-term as a result.

 

[billingtons ghost]

I'm not wrong at all. You're misrepresenting what I said and not understanding the argument. I'll quote an earlier post below:


I never said it's not a skill. In fact, just the opposite. Winning faceoffs is a fairly repeatable skill. The best in the game can hover around 60%. The point is, that 60% (at the absolute best) doesn't mean very much because you're still going to lose 40% of them. Having Jordan Staal take that crucial faceoff because he's your best option makes sense, but he's still going to lose 45% of the time. It's basically a coin flip, it's not something you should weigh heavily in your evaluation. Most guy's true talent on faceoffs is closer to 50/50, literally a coin flip. You can't game plan around that.

Nico Hishier's value has not improved because of his faceoff-winning ability. That's just categorically wrong. He's an effective all-around two-way player, that's why he's good. The faceoffs are literally the least important part of his game.

And look at Colorado. They're a terrible faceoff team. They're also elite. I wouldn't give faceoff-winning ability one second of thought in roster construction.

You guys all fall into the classic stats trap by applying a long term trend statistic to single event outcome. If you tallied up all of the shots Steph Curry took from three point range over his lifetime in practice and in games, it would be less than 50% by a long shot and probably something like 5%. You simply CANNOT take that information and apply it like you are applying FW% here. At the end of a game it sure af matters whether you cover Steph Curry or not bc he's going to sink that thing in a clutch situation and you will lose. Can't you guys get it thru your skulls that yeah, Bergeron or Staal are going to lose 45% over a season, but in a clutch spot with your playoffs on the line, against an inferior player in the dot he might win 100% and tip the balance of the game. That's almost exactly what happened during Rangers Pens, if you weren't watching.

It's not OMG MOST IMPORTANT THING IN THE WORLD. but the way you guys @Captain3rdLine @Zajacs Bowl Cut trivialize and discount bc the stat somehow gives you false confidence s just flat out incorrect and a classic failure to analyze how statistics work. Period.

 

[My3Sons]

No, we had 2 Corgis but both passed away last year.

My condolences on your losses but I’m sure this little guy will fill your heart. My oldest son’s college sweetheart had a corgi and she was very smart and very engaging and a whirling dervish of energy. Our male golden retriever woukd put her head in his mouth to play with her and she always loved that. Lots of effort to keep up with a herding dog. They are great companions.

 

[Triumph]

You guys all fall into the classic stats trap by applying a long term trend statistic to single event outcome. If you tallied up all of the shots Steph Curry took from three point range over his lifetime in practice and in games, it would be less than 50% by a long shot and probably something like 5%. You simply CANNOT take that information and apply it like you are applying FW% here. At the end of a game it sure af matters whether you cover Steph Curry or not bc he's going to sink that thing in a clutch situation and you will lose. Can't you guys get it thru your skulls that yeah, Bergeron or Staal are going to lose 45% over a season, but in a clutch spot with your playoffs on the line, against an inferior player in the dot he might win 100% and tip the balance of the game. That's almost exactly what happened during Rangers Pens, if you weren't watching.

It's not OMG MOST IMPORTANT THING IN THE WORLD. but the way you guys @Captain3rdLine @Zajacs Bowl Cut trivialize and discount bc the stat somehow gives you false confidence s just flat out incorrect and a classic failure to analyze how statistics work. Period.

This is absurd, there is absolutely no chance that Bergeron is winning 100% of his faceoffs in any position, much like star basketball players do not hit all of their clutch shots, they just get remembered for the ones they hit and forgotten for the ones they miss. But with faceoffs especially, it's just a fairy tale belief. Bergeron went 14-13 in Game 7 this year. Jordan Staal went 60% in Game 7 against the Bruins, 55% against the Rangers.

 

[NJDevs26]

Comparing three point shots to faceoff wins is jumping the shark. It's like comparing a three-run HR to throwing a single strike in baseball. Three point shots is the highest scoring play in basketball, a faceoff win leads to two seconds of possession in hockey.

If you even shoot 33% from three point range that's 3 points every three possessions - and Curry is obviously higher than that but even at 33%, you need to shoot 66% from two-point range (2 out of 3) to pass that, which usually doesn't happen unless you get layups, hence why so much of the modern NBA is about creating open three pointers and iso layups while the mid-range jumper has all but disappeared.

 

[Captain3rdLine]

You guys all fall into the classic stats trap by applying a long term trend statistic to single event outcome. If you tallied up all of the shots Steph Curry took from three point range over his lifetime in practice and in games, it would be less than 50% by a long shot and probably something like 5%. You simply CANNOT take that information and apply it like you are applying FW% here. At the end of a game it sure af matters whether you cover Steph Curry or not bc he's going to sink that thing in a clutch situation and you will lose. Can't you guys get it thru your skulls that yeah, Bergeron or Staal are going to lose 45% over a season, but in a clutch spot with your playoffs on the line, against an inferior player in the dot he might win 100% and tip the balance of the game. That's almost exactly what happened during Rangers Pens, if you weren't watching.

It's not OMG MOST IMPORTANT THING IN THE WORLD. but the way you guys @Captain3rdLine @Zajacs Bowl Cut trivialize and discount bc the stat somehow gives you false confidence s just flat out incorrect and a classic failure to analyze how statistics work. Period.

lol what?
That Steph Curry comparison is horrendous. You just compared faceoffs to not guarding Steph Curry. He’s actually a career 42.8 3 point shooter. You leave him open and let him take 30+ 3s he’s probably dropping at least 40 points on you if not more. That would be much more comparable to just leaving Ovechkin open for 1 times all game lol.

And yes there is specific situations where a faceoff can have an affect on the game but 99% of the time faceoffs aren’t far off a coin flip and have little actual affect on the outcome of the game apart from a few extra possession starts in a game with hundreds of possession changes.

And Bergeron isn’t gonna be a 100% faceoff man in clutch situations nor is that single faceoff gonna tip the balance of any game. If it comes down to the final minute and there’s a big ozone faceoff. Yes that faceoff is now important but what’s far more important is what you do if you win it or even if you lose it because that is the harder part. You win quite a few ozone faceoffs throughout a game. In that situation while the faceoff plays a role, what happens after is still far more important.

Terrible argument. Period.

 

[NJDevs26]

This is absurd, there is absolutely no chance that Bergeron is winning 100% of his faceoffs in any position, much like star basketball players do not hit all of their clutch shots, they just get remembered for the ones they hit and forgotten for the ones they miss. But with faceoffs especially, it's just a fairy tale belief. Bergeron went 14-13 in Game 7 this year. Jordan Staal went 60% in Game 7 against the Bruins, 55% against the Rangers.

Especially when Bergeron's also going up against other elite centers and 'faceoff specialists' in the playoffs.

 

[NjDevsRR]

Y’all talking forwards and I am here patiently waiting for a goalie.