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

Status
Not open for further replies.

MadDevil

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 10, 2007
34,789
26,429
Bismarck, ND
I think "the core is soft" is mostly just a lazy reason people come up with to explain why the Leafs haven't won. I think the real reason is they haven't done a good enough job of surrounding the core with the right kind of talent/depth. Their defense sucks, Samsonov is sub .900 the last two years in the playoffs, it feels like they're always looking for grit/defense and seem to think physicality = being good defensively.

Which was mostly why I posted that Tweet. We should look at how Toronto reacted and keep that in mind when building the team around our "soft core". I don't think anybody is against adding a Coleman type or two or three to the roster. But those players don't exactly grow on trees and/or are readily available. And teams can get themselves in trouble trying to pursue that type of player.

It sucks Palat isn't like 3-4 years younger because he's a perfect example of a guy who is hard to play against without being overly physical. He's the type that can do the dirty work for our skilled guys. I'd prefer that type of player over a guy who hits a lot. I'd certainly take some of those too, and a shit stirring asshole, if they can actually play and be useful.
 

britdevil

Tea with milk...
Feb 15, 2007
26,919
14,598
UK
tough to play against - there i solved it

drake-computer.gif
 

MadDevil

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 10, 2007
34,789
26,429
Bismarck, ND

tough to play against - there i solved it
Which isn't really a problem with our core when it's healthy. A healthy Jack is tough to play against because he's Jack f***ing Hughes. Timo when healthy is tough to play against. Just because they don't physically dominate people doesn't make them not tough to play against.

I actually agree that we do need to bring in some guys that can get their noses dirty. But, similar to Toronto, that's not the core's job. Do we really want Jack or Nico trying to throw hits or mix it up physically? Sure it would be great if we had a Matthew Tkachuk who is a core piece and plays physically, or a Nate MacKinnon who can be an absolute horse, but we don't, and likely won't since those types of players are almost never available.
 

TrufleShufle

Registered User
Aug 31, 2012
8,459
14,179
Which isn't really a problem with our core when it's healthy. A healthy Jack is tough to play against because he's Jack f***ing Hughes. Timo when healthy is tough to play against. Just because they don't physically dominate people doesn't make them not tough to play against.

I actually agree that we do need to bring in some guys that can get their noses dirty. But, similar to Toronto, that's not the core's job. Do we really want Jack or Nico trying to throw hits or mix it up physically? Sure it would be great if we had a Matthew Tkachuk who is a core piece and plays physically, or a Nate MacKinnon who can be an absolute horse, but we don't, and likely won't since those types of players are almost never available.
When people say "hard to play against" they mean more Nico than they do Jack. I'm not saying one is better than the other, and most defenders would rather Nico coming down the ice on a 1v1 than Jack. But I'm just saying what most people mean when they say it.
 

Guttersniped

Satan’s Wallpaper
Sponsor
Dec 20, 2018
22,864
51,296
i am so sick of reading about toughness. you guys can't even agree on what toughness is, yet everybody has a solution. let's get a thread dedicated to toughness where you knobjobs can grunt at each other like tim allen and talk about big tough manly man things.

it's not even may yet and i want to blow my brains out lol.

Hope this helps:

FA75EA5B-DEC7-4520-BEB5-946DC7135B46.jpeg
 

Bleedred

#FIREDAVEROGALSKI
Sponsor
May 1, 2011
133,709
63,569
Hopefully they hire him asap.

He'll probably accept the coaching league minimum so thats a big bonus for Ottawa.
I'm not sure. He probably has quite the overhead after Benning and the f***in IDIOTS in Vancouver paid him $2.75 million per to coach the Canucks on his last contract from 2021.

I don't know if that was a 2 or 3 year deal or possibly even a 4 year deal, which means they or somebody is still paying him that as of next season lol.


I can't see him ever making $2.75 million in a year again. Not to be a head coach in the NHL.
 

Mr Bojanglez

Registered User
Aug 17, 2007
12,634
3,038
From Jersey w/ Love
This exchange was particularly impressively wrong.

View attachment 862661

yea. weird thing to care about right now.

should he be a nominee? Maybe / maybe not. Is he a top 5 rookie? Most certainly.

Maybe he got some 'hughes hype' to push him up - i'll give him [the complainer] that. but its not completely absurd (plus count all the stuff we fans know / saw)
 

Guttersniped

Satan’s Wallpaper
Sponsor
Dec 20, 2018
22,864
51,296
yea. weird thing to care about right now.

should he be a nominee? Maybe / maybe not. Is he a top 5 rookie? Most certainly.

Maybe he got some 'hughes hype' to push him up - i'll give him [the complainer] that. but its not completely absurd (plus count all the stuff we fans know / saw)

I’m willing to be more forthright here. Luke definitely deserves a nomination and this is a pretty strong rookie class.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad