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

[NJDevs26]

what's up with all the 'nO gOaLiEs oVeR 30' posts? that's a really dumb edict.

also, wood would have been good to re-sign, but not to that contract. signing him to that would have been a lou move, which is the absolute last thing this team needs.

Because people get the willies about Cory's career ending in his early 30's - plus Crawford retiring, Bernier getting hurt, etc - and are gunshy about any older goalies now. But I agree older goalies per se aren't the issue, the issue is if you have to pay one a ridiculous extension like Hellybuyck last offseason or potentially Saros or Ullmark this offseason. Trading for one as a one-year rental isn't ideal (neither is the big extension), that's why Markstrom as a two-year rental makes a bit more sense.

 

[NJDevs26]

Yeah, I dunno. I've never seen anyone defend it in that way before, but I'll take your word for it. Right now the strongest defense of palat usually comes down to his underlying numbers still being good and him just not being the biggest problem on the roster.

And nobody said that Wood is trash. I said that he is what he always has been. He hasn't really changed since going to Colorado. If you didn't want to sign him at the end of last season, there's no reason to regret that stance or change your opinion just because he scored an overtime goal. He's not suddenly a substantially better player that the team should have re-signed.

Nah I've seen that defense...I don't think 100% of the posts using it were entirely serious but I've seen that posted unironically here a number of times. The more common defense of Palat's deal is 'it hasn't hurt us yet, we have cap space' which sort of misses the point these were supposed to be the best two years of his deal and instead he's just been meh other than one great moment, and the leadership aspect certainly didn't kick in this year.

Now we're facing the last three years of his deal when we have less cap space and he's closer to being washed without getting much benefit the first two. He was injured before our early-season winning streak last year so it's not even like you can attribute the breakout to having him around.

 

[Rhodes 81]

I think it's pretty easy decision to keep Roy and let Stephenson walk for the Golden Knights.

I mentioned it yesterday, but I think the interesting question for them is if they're better off trading Karlsson to keep Marchessault. They will still have solid center depth with Eichel, Hertl, and Roy. Trading Karlsson in addition to letting Martinez walk should give them enough space to keep Marchessault if he's willing to take a discount and then they just have to figure out filling their roster with cheaper versions of Stephenson, Mantha, and Carrier. They don't really have anyone else to re-sign that they would want to keep.

 

[woody footbreaker]

I think it's pretty easy decision to keep Roy and let Stephenson walk for the Golden Knights.

bring back and marchessault and stephenson is their top priority and i hope you´re right and they cant afford to sign both, so we can get chandler signed. roy is signed until 26-27.

 

[Omar Little]

Would love Karlsson or Roy

 

[TrufleShufle]

They have there uses but they're lazy in the sense of forum arguments or political discourse.

Sometimes absolutely, but far more often than not, it's calling out hypocrisy.

Stating a fact in way that it helps make your point in a positive or negative way when you have shown to have never have looked at that fact in positive or negative way, (or even worse the opposite) in other scenarios and are just doing it now to "win" a debate or blindly defend yourself because you backed yourself into a corner should be called out.

Someone who throws around the term "whataboutism" more than the average person, seems to point to a person who often talks out of both sides of their mouth and using that term has become a safety net to not need to address it.

 

[Forge]

Nah I've seen that defense...I don't think 100% of the posts using it were entirely serious but I've seen that posted unironically here a number of times. The more common defense of Palat's deal is 'it hasn't hurt us yet, we have cap space' which sort of misses the point these were supposed to be the best two years of his deal and instead he's just been meh other than one great moment, and the leadership aspect certainly didn't kick in this year.

Now we're facing the last three years of his deal when we have less cap space and he's closer to being washed without getting much benefit the first two. He was injured during our early-season winning streak last year so it's not even like you can attribute the breakout to having him around.

Yeah, I think that would be a silly defense of the contract. But there are all sorts, no doubt.

At the time we signed it, it wasn't really an overpay per the contract projections put out, but not really one I would have liked for us to sign and it always seemed like a deal that was going to age poorly.

I'm mostly just hoping that he can be a 4 million dollar player for as long as we have him, which honestly isn't that difficult given current market. He becomes tradeable after next year, so we'll see how he does.

 

[Monsieur Verdoux]

bring back and marchessault and stephenson is their top priority and i hope you´re right and they cant afford to sign both, so we can get chandler signed. roy is signed until 26-27.

I'm not a fan of Stephenson's next contract. He was also really underwhelming in the playoffs.

 

[MartyOwns]

I don't think anyone is saying they object to a goalie over 30 in the abstract. The only thing I see are a number of posters (including me) who are concerned with the idea of giving a goalie an 8 year extension that only kicks in when the goalie is over 30. I just think that is desperation to sign a goalie who has yet to play for the team to a long extension during what are almost certainly his declining years, but I understand others may not be bothered by that.

oh i’ve seen plenty of that. ‘don’t trade 10OA for a 30 year old goalie’. as if we should be getting a young goalie we can grow into vs an established guy who can easily get this team to a playoff spot.

your position seems reasonable though.

 

[Zacha37]

x.com

x.com

Wonder if this has any substance. Would absolutely love Brady on this team.

 

[forceten]

x.com

x.com

Wonder if this has any substance. Would absolutely love Brady on this team.

Not for what they're suggesting.

 

[SteveCangialosi123]

I would absolutely not trade Nemec for Brady. I could easily see that being a horrendous mistake.

 

[Unknown Caller]

Not for what they're suggesting.

Yeah Nemec for Tkachuk is not happening.

 

[tailfins]

Yeah but the Nosek signing was pretty lauded at the time. It was unfortunate that injuries derailed his whole season. I’m not sure he even played a single fully healthy game. Ohh well.

At least Lazar was able to prove his value as a good everyday 4th liner.

I liked the Nosek signing in theory. I thought of him as a LH McLeod backup vs a Wood replacement though. Nosek was pretty clear that he preferred playing center vs wing. And he's definitely not particularly physical. Nosek has had 2 fights per hockeyfights.com. Wood has had 16 - and Wood has gone with some pretty notable middleweights.

Losing Wood meant losing someone who could respond in kind when things get a little nasty - and sometimes who'd initiate the nastiness themselves.

Fitz didn't really fill that void this year and I think that's why people are looking for the Devils to bring in Trenin or similar players this off season.

 

[Zacha37]

Their hypotheticals are always wild and never realistic/related to any “proposals” they’ve been hearing about, but I do think we would have pieces to entice Ottawa if the opportunity presented itself. Obviously no Nemec, but I can imagine Mercer+10oa would be on the table. I also could see something around Bratt. I’ve suggested it in here a while ago and there weren’t many fans, but I feel like Fitz would make that swap any day of the week, even if we had to slightly add.

 

[kiwidevil]

I'm not a fan of Stephenson's next contract. He was also really underwhelming in the playoffs.

He had a bad year apparently, which coincided with Stones absence. So the theory is Stone carries him, which doesn't sound unreasonable.

 

[Mgd31]

The "RumorBoyz" are idiots

 

[guitarguyvic]

I’m so sick of pundits speculating that the devils will trade their top assets for below value. They are either total f***ing morons or think that their audience is. STFU already

 

[Xirik]

was watching CBC news and the Leafs came up and they brought in a Woman *gasp* and most of what she said made sense. I then looked at her name and something in the back in my brain perked up.

She's the Luke Hughes girl!

Rachel Doerrie!


BLAST FROM THE PAST!

 

[Ripshot 43]

Never change guys… never change

 

[Devs3cups]

Yeah, Nemec isn’t moving and Tkachuk isn’t moving, so it’s a non starter already lol.

 

[MasterofGrond]

Everybody spends the year bitching about our forward defense, definitely time to acquire a dude worse than anybody in our top 6 at it

 

[Rhodes 81]

In a fantasy land where Tkachuk was being traded, I think the most I'd offer is Mercer+2025 1st or Holtz+10OA+some other B grade asset. I'd move Luke Hughes before I moved Nemec.

Great player, but he's not that great.

 

[Devils731]

The problem with a lot of people kind of formulating rumors is that they just look at players but often don’t take age, salary, nor contract status into a severe enough account.

 

[Oneiro]

Nemec will be so much more valuable than Tkachuk, no one makes that trade. Not to mention cost controlled years given up and 8M+ for a guy who will be a third liner by the end of the deal? Nah. If they were to trade Bratt for him, we'd be a worse team.

The qualities you want from Tkachuk can be had every summer on July 1st. You just have to watch how much you pay for it.