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

[Emperoreddy]

Speculation

Vancouver wowser.

Demko for the 2OA.

I have been against every 2OA trade, but this one would put the Devils on the road to bigger and better things!

Can't believe JR even entertains that long enough to even think about it.

Canucks would say no. Demko has to be on their never trade list.

 

[bossram]

Uh, no bc I said FO% is a shit stat a bunch of times and during the game Ray Ferraro went into detail about which side the faceoff was on would matter as to who would take it, and that having Copp available to take faceoffs was big bc it'd allow Zib, a better fo guy to be a shooter.

FO% is stupid bc a faceoff at center ice counts the same as one on the PK or PP or with 1minute left.

The impact was that the Rangers tied the game at one with the Vatrano goal. Kinda pokes holes in your argument.

So you have Copp's faceoffs stats on the left side of the ice facing a right-handed center with 7 minutes left at hand then, correct?

Zib also wasn't the one shooting here. Your argument is that you need elite faceoff guys to win 100% of key draws. What do you count as a key draw? Also, a goal is a goal at any time in the game. If Igor doesn't stand on his head, that isn't a "key draw" or a "key goal". The game is out of hand. What if that play happens in the first period? Is that not a key faceoff because it's not on the PP or PK or with 1 minute left? Your definitions are arbitrary and you can pick and choose what you want to count.

Copp takes that same faceoff 50 times in a season, and it only results in that one goal (which is really the scale we're talking about), how crucial is it to send out your 42% centerman in that situation?

 

[Emperoreddy]

If anything was learned from these playoffs is that goaltending is hyper important and can take even a mediocre/bad 5 on 5 team through multiple rounds

 

[Triumph]

I made the argument that faceoffs are a skill and not meaningless. To say they are meaningless or split some dumb hair with 'nearly meaningless' is a baseless argument. On the PP, the Lightning just had 40 s straight of attack time bc they won the faceoff. They lost a second one and chased for twenty seconds. Thanks for your brilliant analysis that FOGOs don't exist. No one claimed they did or should.
Winning a draw is a skill that can win a game in the right situation. You boys don't have a counter for that argument so keep throwing up strawmen and arguing something else instead.

Winning a draw cannot win a game. It can help win a game, with other stuff happening. It cannot win a game. I'm not throwing up strawmen, understand what a strawman is. Faceoffs are barely a skill because the difference between the best and worst is not very large, and the effect of them for the best or worst players at them is a few goals for or against a year, even though top players will take well over 1000 faceoffs in a season. That's it, a few goals.

 

[Bleedred]

Agree to disagree. I have watched every game that kid played from his first game in Utica until this season. He has given one of the worst NHL teams since he got there a chance to win in nearly every game he's played since he got there. He is the real deal and no other goalie the Devils end up with next season will be as good.

Fair enough. I don’t think he’s available though. The Canucks are probably looking to keep him.

I just don’t see them wanting to get rid of him unless they really wanna just bottom out. They showed they could be competitive after Boudreau was hired.

I think in that division they should be able to get into the playoffs. Travis Green really has my convinced he’s one of the worst coaches we’ve seen in the NHL in the last few years.

 

[billingtons ghost]

So you have Copp's faceoffs stats on the left side of the ice facing a right-handed center with 7 minutes left at hand then, correct?

Zib also wasn't the one shooting here. Your argument is that you need elite faceoff guys to win 100% of key draws. What do you count as a key draw? Also, a goal is a goal at any time in the game. If Igor doesn't stand on his head, that isn't a "key draw" or a "key goal". The game is out of hand. What if that play happens in the first period? Is that not a key faceoff because it's not on the PP or PK or with 1 minute left? Your definitions are arbitrary and you can pick and choose what you want to count.

Copp takes that same faceoff 50 times in a season, and it only results in that one goal (which is really the scale we're talking about), how crucial is it to send out your 42% centerman in that situation?

Wut? That was never my argument.

My argument is that it is better to have players in your team who are good at faceoffs so they can play in any situation. Copp has played every forward position this season, but he also won 377 faceoffs which was a factor in the team going out and getting him.

Could it be that Gallant trusted him to win that faceoff?

Are you insinuating that coaches never think about who is taking the draw? That would be a particularly silly statement, no?

It's almost as gift as saying winning a faceoff 'isn't a skill'.

 

[Captain3rdLine]

Wut? That was never my argument.

My argument is that it is better to have players in your team who are good at faceoffs so they can play in any situation. Copp has played every forward position this season, but he also won 377 faceoffs which was a factor in the team going out and getting him.

Could it be that Gallant trusted him to win that faceoff?

Are you insinuating that coaches never think about who is taking the draw? That would be a particularly silly statement, no?

It's almost as gift as saying winning a faceoff 'isn't a skill'.

Huh? But he lost more than he won this season.

And no he wasn’t out out there to win the faceoff. He was on the second wave of the powerplay. It might’ve just so happened that he was the best faceoff man on the second unit but he certainly wasn’t out out there for the faceoff.

 

[billingtons ghost]

Winning a draw cannot win a game. It can help win a game, with other stuff happening. It cannot win a game. I'm not throwing up strawmen, understand what a strawman is. Faceoffs are barely a skill because the difference between the best and worst is not very large, and the effect of them for the best or worst players at them is a few goals for or against a year, even though top players will take well over 1000 faceoffs in a season. That's it, a few goals.

Uh I don't even know what that could possibly mean. And what's funny is that you somehow believe that because over a whole season of facing all the centers in the NHL, an elite league, that FO% WOULDN'T eventually regress to close to 50% for all...but to say 'there isn't a big difference' is ludicrous.

And one those 'few goals' you mention could happen like they did tonight, in the playoffs.

I'd much rather have a Horvat out there with his career playoff 59% than Chytil with his 32%... And before you@ me about sample size, Chytil took 140+ faceoffs and lost nearly 100 of them.

 

[ZachaFlockaFlame]

Speaking of centers, how about Paul Stastny for the 3C and possibly pushing Boqvist to 4C/McLeod out of the lineup? Then again not sure how smart it is to splurge on a bottom 6 center with the goaltending issue + getting a winger in UFA.

 

[Jack Be Quick]

Winning a draw cannot win a game. It can help win a game, with other stuff happening. It cannot win a game. I'm not throwing up strawmen, understand what a strawman is. Faceoffs are barely a skill because the difference between the best and worst is not very large, and the effect of them for the best or worst players at them is a few goals for or against a year, even though top players will take well over 1000 faceoffs in a season. That's it, a few goals.

Then perhaps the NHL should just move to a soccer sort of model. Toss the puck in from the end boards if you had control. Maybe an NBA version? Whistle blown, you start with the puck from your own end.

What are you talking about man?

The puck being dropped, the location, and the participants matter. Every single pro coach agrees on this. Otherwise, why don't they just concede and set up for the next play?

Uh I don't even know what that could possibly mean. And what's funny is that you somehow believe that because over a whole season of facing all the centers in the NHL, an elite league, that FO% WOULDN'T eventually regress to close to 50% for all...but to say 'there isn't a big difference' is ludicrous.

And one those 'few goals' you mention could happen like they did tonight, in the playoffs.

I'd much rather have a Horvat out there with his career playoff 59% than Chytil with his 32%... And before you@ me about sample size, Chytil took 140+ faceoffs and lost nearly 100 of them.

I want my likes back so bad.

 

[Jack Be Quick]

Weird



Listen to the color guy, I'm pretty sure he's forgotten more about hockey than many of us know.

 

[Jack Be Quick]

Huh? But he lost more than he won this season.

And no he wasn’t out out there to win the faceoff. He was on the second wave of the powerplay. It might’ve just so happened that he was the best faceoff man on the second unit but he certainly wasn’t out out there for the faceoff.

Then why was he taking it?

 

[MadDevil]

Okay, now post videos of a team winning the faceoff and not scoring a goal.

 

[Jack Be Quick]

Agree to disagree. I have watched every game that kid played from his first game in Utica until this season. He has given one of the worst NHL teams since he got there a chance to win in nearly every game he's played since he got there. He is the real deal and no other goalie the Devils end up with next season will be as good.

Have you not read the newer most fantabulous and updated testament?

Mr. Daws is not only the forgotten son of Abraham, but he's on a mission to express intently that he's far beyond a fallen angel or merely a blasphemer.

The Devil is just a word to this young man.

 

[Jack Be Quick]

Winning a draw cannot win a game. It can help win a game, with other stuff happening. It cannot win a game. I'm not throwing up strawmen, understand what a strawman is. Faceoffs are barely a skill because the difference between the best and worst is not very large, and the effect of them for the best or worst players at them is a few goals for or against a year, even though top players will take well over 1000 faceoffs in a season. That's it, a few goals.

Making a timely hit, blocking a shot, creating a turnover. "Barely skills" that I'm sure only account for a few goals per year.

Outside of hfkshxpxiur%%% what exactly do you value in a hockey player?

Okay, now post videos of a team winning the faceoff and not scoring a goal.

No.

More to the point, why?

 

[Jack Be Quick]

Speaking of centers, how about Paul Stastny for the 3C and possibly pushing Boqvist to 4C/McLeod out of the lineup? Then again not sure how smart it is to splurge on a bottom 6 center with the goaltending issue + getting a winger in UFA.

He wins over 56% of the faceoffs he takes and only scores 20 or so goals.

Zacha's disappointed father is what I'd call him.

 

[Peter Sidorkiewicz]

Speculation

Vancouver wowser.

Demko for the 2OA.

I have been against every 2OA trade, but this one would put the Devils on the road to bigger and better things!

Can't believe JR even entertains that long enough to even think about it.

Demko is a .915 save goaltender. Yes better than what we currently have but hardly stellar stats to warrant trading the 2nd overall.

When we traded for Schneider he had a career average .930.

 

[NJDevs26]

If anything was learned from these playoffs is that goaltending is hyper important and can take even a mediocre/bad 5 on 5 team through multiple rounds

And also reinforced that there aren't actually many difference-making goalies in the NHL - i.e. the entire Western playoffs, and the rest of the East outside of Tampa and the Rangers.

 

[NJDevs26]

No.

More to the point, why?

Because that happens far more often than teams scoring a goal direct off a faceoff win. For every goal scored right off a faceoff when the other team doesn't touch the puck, there are like ninety-nine other times where the puck gets cleared or changes possession at least once after the faceoff before a goal.

*cue the Sykora goal in the 2003 SCF being posted any minute now, since you guys are gonna find every example of goals off faceoffs as confirmation bias

People are mostly arguing semantics anyway. It's not that the people who say faceoffs are unimportant on the whole don't admit there are certain situations where they can be more important. It's more because the ones who think they're really important are greatly overexaggerating said importance (and the ability to control the odds), because it leads to a goal on a very small percentage of plays with there being a one faceoff margin over every ten draws between even the best and worst faceoff guys.

 

[AfroThunder396]

I think the point is that if you're in a position where one faceoff is the difference between winning and losing, it probably means you've made a multitude of mistakes earlier in the game to put yourself in such a precarious situation.

And so those previous mistakes should probably get your attention, not the thing that is essentially a coin flip.

 

[SteveCangialosi123]

Didn’t Bellemare lose the faceoff? He was 52% this year, over 60% the previous year. Good faceoff guys will lose plenty too. I don’t get fixating on such an unimportant thing.

 

[Triumph]

Then perhaps the NHL should just move to a soccer sort of model. Toss the puck in from the end boards if you had control. Maybe an NBA version? Whistle blown, you start with the puck from your own end.

Faceoffs are literally the most boring hockey play so this would be great. Chances go in off faceoffs at a ridiculously low rate, faceoffs in the neutral zone are awful (typically if the offense wins, they dump the puck in, seldom retain control), plus there's all of the jockeying and kicking guys out and arguing about why he's getting kicked out and false starts. It will never happen, but yeah, I definitely think there is a better way to start play than a faceoff.

What are you talking about man?

The puck being dropped, the location, and the participants matter. Every single pro coach agrees on this. Otherwise, why don't they just concede and set up for the next play?

Every single pro coach agrees on this because, and let's get this straight, IT IS SOMETHING THEY CAN CONTROL. They get to pick who goes out there for the faceoff (usually). The issue is that it's not something that you can typically have a large edge at, and even if you do, it doesn't matter a whole lot! People talk about faceoffs like winning them means possession in a sport like basketball or even soccer, but possession in hockey at even strength is typically very short-lived. It matters more on the PK or the PP, I agree.

Since we're posting dumbass faceoff wins, here's a faceoff loss:

 

[MadDevil]

I think the problem is some are focused on the importance of an individual faceoff versus the importance of faceoffs over the course of a season or series. Yes, a faceoff at a certain point in a game can be important, but overall they're not as important as some people think they are. If something happens like 1% of the time over the course of hundreds of faceoffs, overall it's not that much of a factor. If that 1% chance event is a game tying or winning goal, it's much more important to that individual game.

Also, winning the faceoff is just one part of gaining possession. You can win a bunch of draws but if you then turn the puck over or lose a bunch of puck battles, what does it really matter if you won the faceoff? Conversely you can lose a bunch of draws but if you then create turnovers or win a bunch of puck battles, does it really matter if you lost the faceoff?

 

[MartyOwns]

how are you nerds STILL talking about faceoffs lol

 

[Triumph]

Uh I don't even know what that could possibly mean. And what's funny is that you somehow believe that because over a whole season of facing all the centers in the NHL, an elite league, that FO% WOULDN'T eventually regress to close to 50% for all...but to say 'there isn't a big difference' is ludicrous.

Bergeron is at 58.7% for his career (from 2007-08 on), I'm going to assume that's the best active rate. This means that despite him being the best in the world at this, his edge is that he wins around 13 out of 22 faceoffs, which means that he loses 9 of them. Yeah, I wonder how losing faceoffs clean versus not matters, and all of that stuff, but it stll means he's losing 9 faceoffs out of 22 he takes.

And one those 'few goals' you mention could happen like they did tonight, in the playoffs.

Oh, cool. I didn't know they had playoff goals off faceoffs, thanks for enlightening me.

I'd much rather have a Horvat out there with his career playoff 59% than Chytil with his 32%... And before you@ me about sample size, Chytil took 140+ faceoffs and lost nearly 100 of them.

Great. Chytil's line was by far the Rangers' best in the playoffs. Chytil himself was the only Ranger to finish in the black in xGF%, he was +9 in shots on a team that was -112 overall. So yeah, he would've done better if he could win more faceoffs, but the Rangers using him 13 minutes a game was probably because of faceoffs in part, and that was bad management.