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

[Hockey Sports Fan]

My extremely lukewarm take is the hardest thing to play against is a well coached team. I hope we get to see one of those again some day.

 

[TheUnseenHand]

Not in the context Fitzgerald has been talking about it. He would never use the term "soft" to describe his team...when he has been talking about getting tougher to play against he clearly and unequivocally means getting tougher, meaner and nastier.... he's said it, he's used those words and words like them over and over... I'm not making it up.

I'm telling you I think Bratt did that last year even if he wasn't a face puncher... I even think Fitz would say that.

 

[dgibb10]

i'm still catching up, but are we saying we want guys who take a lot of penalties now?

Someone has to replace Kevin Bahl and Brendon Smith in that role (sitting in the penalty box)

 

[Cheddabombs]

Someone has to replace Kevin Bahl and Brendon Smith in that role (sitting in the penalty box)

It makes you hard to play against when you're taking penalties. Literally, hard to play against someone that can't take a shift!

 

[Forge]

Man, I really hope for Jim's sake that this team is never good. I don't ever want a person to be as miserable as that would make him

 

[dgibb10]

It makes you hard to play against when you're taking penalties. Literally, hard to play against someone that can't take a shift!

Although from another perspective, penalties get basically evened out regardless of what you do, so the penalties smith and bahl took will unfortunately just get called on other people.

The more disciplined you are, one of 2 things happens. either you get less PPs, or more ticky-tack calls against you.

 

[Monsieur Verdoux]

I am happy the Devils didn’t over react with another bad contract. I think Tatar and his contract is a win-win for both parties.

I think Fitzgerald kind of did overreact and then he gave a 3-year deal to Noesen. He was big game hunting and then Marchessault chose the Predators. I'm not sure if Fitzgerald didn't have plan B, or why he decided to sign a slow 3rd/4th liner who needs so much sheltering. And the Devils already have similar player in Bastian. Of course, Noesen is better than than him, but not by much.

I also have hard time to believe there were a lot of teams lining to sign that 3-year and 2.75M AAV deal with Noesen. So Fitzgerald could've waited if Noesen accept a 2-year deal with lower AAV. If it had not worked out, it wouldn't have been a big loss. My biggest complain here is that I hate when GM's overpay third and fourth line guys. That's the Jim Benning way to do business, and I don't want any of that to the Devils.

Other than that, I have really liked what Fitzgerald has done this offseason. Markström, Pesce, Dillon and Cotter are all good or even great additions, and Tatar is also cheap and understandable experiment for the Devils.

 

[Nocashstyle]

Some of the argument being made here

 

[Zajacs Bowl Cut]

Man, I really hope for Jim's sake that this team is never good. I don't ever want a person to be as miserable as that would make him

when they were good 2 seasons ago, he was barely ever around.

 

[SJinNewJersey]

when they were good 2 seasons ago, he was barely ever around.

There are posters who only show up in the GDTs when the team is losing.

 

[Forge]

Oh no...

 

[Blackjack]

Oh no...

Losing 11OA for 77 games of Jacob Markstrom gonna hit like

 

[tailfins]

It’s a term that people get to define for themselves in different ways and rarely is the definition discussed and agreed upon before the conclusions are thrown around.

Despite the backlash against Jim, I think it's actually pretty simple.

Look at the scores of the Cup finals that Florida won:

3-0 (empty net)
4-1 (empty net)
4-3
2-1

Florida scored an average of 2.75 non-empty net goals per game in the games they won. They were playing against some of the most gifted offensive players in the history of the sport.

"Hard to play against" is a phrase used to mean someone who can help you win those kinds of games.

Barkov is hard to play against. He has a total of 148 PIMs in his career. But, he is always in the right spot defensively, hard to move, hard to take the puck away from, and determined to drive to the center of the ice / toward the net. He's not someone who'll get intimidated by dirty play (remember Messier's cross check vs Gilmour).

Of course, physical intimidation can be part of being hard to play against. If you make the other guys scared to come into the middle or scared enough that they rush, that can work too.

Intimidation through speed could work too. Turn people into grenade handlers because they need to move the puck before they can process what's happening.

I think it's fair to say that the Devils - outside of a burst in 2022-2023, haven't shown a consistent ability to be hard to play against. Their reputation is of a team that's interested in cherry picking, stretch passes, and making pretty plays. Make them work, and they fold. That's what needs to change.

 

[Triumph]

I think Fitzgerald kind of did overreact and then he gave a 3-year deal to Noesen. He was big game hunting and then Marchessault chose the Predators. I'm not sure if Fitzgerald didn't have plan B, or why he decided to sign a slow 3rd/4th liner who needs so much sheltering. And the Devils already have similar player in Bastian. Of course, Noesen is better than than him, but not by much.

I also have hard time to believe there were a lot of teams lining to sign that 3-year and 2.75M AAV deal with Noesen. So Fitzgerald could've waited if Noesen accept a 2-year deal with lower AAV. If it had not worked out, it wouldn't have been a big loss. My biggest complain here is that I hate when GM's overpay third and fourth line guys. That's the Jim Benning way to do business, and I don't want any of that to the Devils.

Other than that, I have really liked what Fitzgerald has done this offseason. Markström, Pesce, Dillon and Cotter are all good or even great additions, and Tatar is also cheap and understandable experiment for the Devils.

I don't really understand the sheltering argument with Noesen. Yeah, Noesen faced weaker opposition than most 'Canes forwards, but he also dominated those minutes - he has the highest xGF% among forwards on that team over the last two seasons.

I also do not believe that there weren't other teams interested in Noesen. There is so much cap space available right now. There are teams who just plain missed on a lot of the stuff they might've wanted to do. The 3rd year is quite bad, I agree, but that's usually the cost of doing business. I'd rather have Noesen for this season than try to find a cheaper version of him.

Also I don't believe that Noesen is destined to be a 3rd or 4th line player, at least not this season. He could see significant time with Hughes.

 

[megajake]

Comparing Noesen to Bastian is laughable. Bastian might be out of the league by the trade deadline. Getting 2.75 over 3 years for a very good 3rd liner is an overpayment? Heck, he can even slot into a Jack/Bratt line and be very effective. Dude played on the first unit of a powerplay for the Hurricanes as well.

 

[My3Sons]

Despite the backlash against Jim, I think it's actually pretty simple.

Look at the scores of the Cup finals that Florida won:

3-0 (empty net)
4-1 (empty net)
4-3
2-1

Florida scored an average of 2.75 non-empty net goals per game in the games they won. They were playing against some of the most gifted offensive players in the history of the sport.

"Hard to play against" is a phrase used to mean someone who can help you win those kinds of games.

Barkov is hard to play against. He has a total of 148 PIMs in his career. But, he is always in the right spot defensively, hard to move, hard to take the puck away from, and determined to drive to the center of the ice / toward the net. He's not someone who'll get intimidated by dirty play (remember Messier's cross check vs Gilmour).

Of course, physical intimidation can be part of being hard to play against. If you make the other guys scared to come into the middle or scared enough that they rush, that can work too.

Intimidation through speed could work too. Turn people into grenade handlers because they need to move the puck before they can process what's happening.

I think it's fair to say that the Devils - outside of a burst in 2022-2023, haven't shown a consistent ability to be hard to play against. Their reputation is of a team that's interested in cherry picking, stretch passes, and making pretty plays. Make them work, and they fold. That's what needs to change.

You provide more than one definition of hard to play against. There is no wrong answer. It’s just that people at times stake out dramatic ground and others can’t be sure what they are basing their position on when there isn’t an agreed upon working definition. I think there multiple ways to be hard to play against and a good team will blend those multiple approaches.

 

[youryeah]

Oh no...

I like the graphic because it shows the devils at the top of the metro division

 

[Rhodes 81]

If Tatar doesn't work out I would go so far as to guarantee that Noesen spends more than a few games in the top 6. If Tatar is still good with Nico that becomes harder to see happening because I don't see Noesen beating out Palat and Mercer to the last top 6 spot consistently.

 

[My3Sons]

If Tatar doesn't work out I would go so far as to guarantee that Noesen spends more than a few games in the top 6. If Tatar is still good with Nico that becomes harder to see happening because I don't see Noesen beating out Palat and Mercer to the last top 6 spot consistently.

I imagine the team hopes Noesen is playing on the fourth line since that means other players have pushed him there.

 

[JimEIV]

Noesen in the top 6 is gross.

If Noesen is the top 6 for any amount of time we should trade Mercer.

Immediately

 

[TrufleShufle]

You provide more than one definition of hard to play against. There is no wrong answer. It’s just that people at times stake out dramatic ground and others can’t be sure what they are basing their position on when there isn’t an agreed upon working definition. I think there multiple ways to be hard to play against and a good team will blend those multiple approaches.

The way it was originally brought up, it has one definition. It's bordering, if not fully, into cognitive dissonance territory now. People are terrified that if they admit this team by and large is not "hard to play against" in the sense it was originally brought up, they would be saying the team sucks, so they convince themselves of different meaning so they can go "LOL WUT?!." Which couldn't be further from the truth. Team is great, but there is a lot of great teams out there and you want an edge in as many categories as possible.

Instead of saying something rational like, "yea but what we lack in that category we will make up for 10 fold in others." Or "we can look to add that at the deadline if it looks like it is an issue through out this season," people pretend not to understand it's original meaning so they don't have to address/admit what's actually being said.

 

[Triumph]

If Tatar doesn't work out I would go so far as to guarantee that Noesen spends more than a few games in the top 6. If Tatar is still good with Nico that becomes harder to see happening because I don't see Noesen beating out Palat and Mercer to the last top 6 spot consistently.

I'm not so sure about this. I can see Tatar-Hischier-Meier/Bratt-Hughes-Noesen/Palat-Haula-Mercer as a top 9.

 

[My3Sons]

The way it was originally brought up, it has one definition. It's bordering, if not fully, into cognitive dissonance territory now. People are terrified that if they admit this team by and large is not "hard to play against" in the sense it was originally brought up, they would be saying the team sucks, so they convince themselves of different meaning so they can go "LOL WUT?!." Which couldn't be further from the truth. Team is great, but there is a lot of great teams out there and you want an edge in as many categories as possible.

Instead of saying something rational like, "yea but what we lack in that category we will make up for 10 fold in others." Or "we can look to add that at the deadline if it looks like it is an issue through out this season," people pretend not to understand it's original meaning so they don't have to address/admit what's actually being said.

As always part of thr issue is we are looking at subjective opinions. Even with a definition you can argue whether it’s good enough or whatever fuzzy evaluation you want to use. Unless you can find some objectively tracked empirical data it’s just personal observation.

 

[JimEIV]

As always part of thr issue is we are looking at subjective opinions. Even with a definition you can argue whether it’s good enough or whatever fuzzy evaluation you want to use. Unless you can find some objectively tracked empirical data it’s just personal observation.

It's not subjective... it's not mine or your definitions...

It's what Fitz means when he says over and over that he wants to be tougher to play against.

He's told us what he means many different times.

It seems many want to make it ambiguous as to not address the reality of our softness.

 

[TrufleShufle]

As always part of thr issue is we are looking at subjective opinions. Even with a definition you can argue whether it’s good enough or whatever fuzzy evaluation you want to use. Unless you can find some objectively tracked empirical data it’s just personal observation.

That is 100% true, but I tried to make it as simple as possible with the Brad Marchand/Jack Hughes example. One is "hard to play against", the other is insanely difficult to play against and way better at hockey. Was met with "simply means big." That's what's telling me people are actively ignoring what is being said.