New Jersey Devils (Team/Player Discussion)-Offseason FA and trade talk Part XIIX

[apice3*]

This year is so big for Larsson. I'm pretty confident this will be the year that tells us everything we need to know.

Disagree. Most two-way guys don't start sniffing their potential until their mid to late 20's, right around the time they approach UFA. I expect this to be a big year for Henrique. Larsson, I think, still has plenty of time before he starts fully developing. Most people here are going to be upset about it, but that's just how two-way D-men develop. They have to learn to play both sides of the puck at an elite level.

 

[Richer's Ghost]

Roy's last game was 10 years ago. A decade. Brodeur is still playing, and has 20 years under his belt. But he's not a generational talent. Of course not.

That's all I meant. I'm not trying to bring up the stupid debate.

Same thing with Orr. He played in the 60's for **** sakes. Nobody actually watched him then. Lidstrom DESERVES to be a generational talent, under HF's own template.

10. Generational Talent - a player for the ages, one who can do things with a puck that no other player would even contemplate doing. Very, very few players will be deserving of this rating, probably one per decade.

You're not, but just watch... anytime Roy and Marty are whispered in the same breath, a flood out outsiders comes along and we got ourselves a scene from Roadhouse in no time. I think there's a bot on the interweb or the NSA that actively scans for those two names in proximity to each other and sends out alerts.

 

[ThePSEGPowerPoster]

Disagree. Most two-way guys don't start sniffing their potential until their mid to late 20's, right around the time they approach UFA. I expect this to be a big year for Henrique. Larsson, I think, still has plenty of time before he starts fully developing. Most people here are going to be upset about it, but that's just how two-way D-men develop. They have to learn to play both sides of the puck at an elite level.

Do you see Lou trying to lock him up for 8-9 years before he breaks out big? I know it's an incredible risk but it might prove to be quite the bargain especially with the cap going up.

I agree with you on the development of 2-way D-men, and agree with Afro's post on the last page, and I do think that's what will happen with Adam. Though if he surprises me I'll take it .

Sidenote: Was there any truth to the rumor that he was told not to shoot the puck last year?

 

[Zajacs Bowl Cut]

I think there's a line between downplaying and overstating. Saying "anyone who loses 60% of face-offs can't be a top-line center" is overstating the importance of face-offs, and ignoring chemistry, vision, skating, defense, and everything else under the sun.

Saying that face-off's don't matter is downplaying the importance of faceoffs.

Saying that Loktionov, or anyone's face-off %, is a concern but it doesn't necessarily preclude him from playing on a line with "top-lien talent" is somewhere in the middle.

I really don't think so.

 

[Feed Me A Stray Cat]

Disagree. Most two-way guys don't start sniffing their potential until their mid to late 20's, right around the time they approach UFA. I expect this to be a big year for Henrique. Larsson, I think, still has plenty of time before he starts fully developing. Most people here are going to be upset about it, but that's just how two-way D-men develop. They have to learn to play both sides of the puck at an elite level.

I understand defensemen take longer to develop, however it won't take six or seven years for Larsson's offense to come around.

 

[ThePSEGPowerPoster]

I really don't think so.

Agree to disagree. I just think dismissing a Ryan Nugent Hopkins, for example, from playing on a top-line just because of his face-off troubles is pretty damn tough for me to accept. Given how good he is at everything else.

 

[SteveCangialosi123]

I understand defensemen take longer to develop, however it won't take six or seven years for Larsson's offense to come around.

Agree. If Larsson doesn't show something offensively within the next 3 or 4 years he won't ever most likely. Part of Larsson's appeal during the deaft was his nhl readiness, so how could that be true and then it take 6 or 7 for him years to improve offensively?

 

[apice3*]

I understand defensemen take longer to develop, however it won't take six or seven years for Larsson's offense to come around.

Since Larsson broke into the league at 18, I think he'll be closer to the mid-20's than late. Maybe like 24, 25 years old which puts us around 2016. I don't believe Larsson is going to start showing his potential until then.

 

[JimEIV]

That's where I pump the breaks my friend. At 20, I can't say that that'll be the case with him. Granted I admit I'm very skeptical of young players and very cautious in passing judgment. Just like I'm not ready to dub Henrique a future captain/franchise player, I'm not ready to bury Lokti or Larsson or Teddy or JaJo just yet.

20 or not...A true #1 shows flashes that we haven't seen yet. And if we don't see them after 3 years they most likely will never come...You don't see many true #1 late bloomers they show flashes from early on, that I don't believe I have seen from Larsson yet.

All of those players are very different situations ...Tedenby is a bust, there is no way around that. He has no redeeming qualities to keep himself in this league...It sucks I know, but that is the reality. He can't score at a high level and never has, his defensive game is terrible, his hockey sense is nonexistent, his size and strength are a major problem. The only thing that can keep in this league is scoring and he never has really done that better than anyone else at any level.

 

[Devils Insiders]

Patrik Elias

It's finally Friday! Before you enjoy your weekend, check out our player preview of the great Patrik Elias.

http://devilsinsiders.com/2013/08/23/player-previews-part-5-patrick-elias/

Can Elias lead the team in points this season?

 

[Zajacs Bowl Cut]

Agree to disagree. I just think dismissing a Ryan Nugent Hopkins, for example, from playing on a top-line just because of his face-off troubles is pretty damn tough for me to accept. Given how good he is at everything else.

for a #1 center to be ~40% on faceoffs, he better be putting up some MONSTER numbers to justify that. and that isn't going to happen with Loktionov.

 

[apice3*]

Do you see Lou trying to lock him up for 8-9 years before he breaks out big? I know it's an incredible risk but it might prove to be quite the bargain especially with the cap going up.

I'm not sure if Lou is going to be around when Larsson starts hitting UFA but I'm willing to bet whoever it is will try to lock him up. D-men like him never hit the market. Even Bogosian, who is a comparable type of player and has been more of the disappointing top 5 drafted D-men in recent years was locked up long term by Winnipeg.

Agree to disagree. I just think dismissing a Ryan Nugent Hopkins, for example, from playing on a top-line just because of his face-off troubles is pretty damn tough for me to accept. Given how good he is at everything else.

RNH is one of the most overrated players in the league.

Look at the Cup winning teams since the 04 lockout and look at their faceoff rankings:

Chicago vs Boston - 10th vs 1st
LA vs NJ - 7th vs 29th
Boston vs Vancouver- 5th vs 1st
Chicago vs Philly - 3rd vs 13th
Pittsburgh vs Detroit - 19th vs 1st
Detroit vs Pittsburgh - 1st vs 30th
Anaheim vs Ottawa - 6th vs 3rd
Carolina vs Edmonton - 5th vs 2nd

16 teams have played in the Cup finals since the 04 lockout. 12 of them were top 10 in faceoffs. Of the remaining 4, two were low seeds that went onto Cup runs, two were Pittsburgh and they have the Crosby factor.

Faceoffs are the single most under-appreciated aspect of hockey. When you win faceoffs, you maximize offensive possessions and minimize defensive possessions. That's crucial.

 

[Feed Me A Stray Cat]

for a #1 center to be ~40% on faceoffs, he better be putting up some MONSTER numbers to justify that. and that isn't going to happen with Loktionov.

Monster numbers?

I don't think he needs monster numbers. If he's a 55 point guy with okay defense, that's acceptable at 40% faceoff.

 

[ThePSEGPowerPoster]

for a #1 center to be ~40% on faceoffs, he better be putting up some MONSTER numbers to justify that. and that isn't going to happen with Loktionov.

Well now we're having an entirely different discussion. Here's how we've progressed:

CereberalGenesis says, and I'll paraphrase, "[if you lose 60% of your face-offs you can't be a top-line center.]"

I say "[Well, that's a lazy way of looking at it. Putting Lokti aside, you're ignoring x, y, z]"

We discuss overstatement/understatement for a bit. You agree with his original premise.

Yet now, you seem to be disagreeing. You seem to accept a circumstance where a guy can be poor in the circle and yet play on a top line.

The discussion hasn't really ever been about Lokti (because as I've said before I don't believe this team has a "first-line center" because we don't line our guys up that way). It resulted from a guy dismissing anyone who was poor in the circle from being on the top-line. Which is where Wilson and RNH examples come in.

It's actually a very similar argument to what guys use to bring down Zajac.

Generic Main Board Troll: "Travis Zajac can't be a first-line center because he doesn't put up points."

Devils Fan: "Well, what about his defense, his faceoff proficiency, and everything else he does well."

Troll: "Points! Points! Points! Points! You Trap! Points!"

 

[Zajacs Bowl Cut]

Monster numbers?

I don't think he needs monster numbers. If he's a 55 point guy with okay defense, that's acceptable at 40% faceoff.

but a 55 point guy with OK defense is not acceptable for a #1 center.

plus he isn't going to be that anyways.

 

[Feed Me A Stray Cat]

I'm not sure if Lou is going to be around when Larsson starts hitting UFA but I'm willing to bet whoever it is will try to lock him up. D-men like him never hit the market. Even Bogosian, who is a comparable type of player and has been more of the disappointing top 5 drafted D-men in recent years was locked up long term by Winnipeg.



RNH is one of the most overrated players in the league.

Look at the Cup winning teams since the 04 lockout and look at their faceoff rankings:

Chicago vs Boston - 10th vs 1st
LA vs NJ - 7th vs 29th
Boston vs Vancouver- 5th vs 1st
Chicago vs Philly - 3rd vs 13th
Pittsburgh vs Detroit - 19th vs 1st
Detroit vs Pittsburgh - 1st vs 30th
Anaheim vs Ottawa - 6th vs 3rd
Carolina vs Edmonton - 5th vs 2nd

16 teams have played in the Cup finals since the 04 lockout. 12 of them were top 10 in faceoffs. Of the remaining 4, two were low seeds that went onto Cup runs, two were Pittsburgh and they have the Crosby factor.

Faceoffs are the single most under-appreciated aspect of hockey. When you win faceoffs, you maximize offensive possessions and minimize defensive possessions. That's crucial.

The studies done on faceoffs show that they're not very important in the regular season (which uses way more samples of data than simply looking at who made the Stanley Cup the last 10 years). Maybe the dynamic of the game changes a bit in the postseason, however I wouldn't assume the correlation you're showing to be very relevant.

 

[ThePSEGPowerPoster]

16 teams have played in the Cup finals since the 04 lockout. 12 of them were top 10 in faceoffs. Of the remaining 4, two were low seeds that went onto Cup runs, two were Pittsburgh and they have the Crosby factor.

Faceoffs are the single most under-appreciated aspect of hockey. When you win faceoffs, you maximize offensive possessions and minimize defensive possessions. That's crucial.

Great post and I honestly didn't recognize the pattern. I agree with you 100%. However I just don't feel comfortable precluding a guy from playing on X line because his % isn't above X, for example. Other teams have found ways around it (letting a wing who is good in the circle take face-offs, for example).

But great post.

 

[apice3*]

Are you suggesting that 75% of teams to make the Cup finals since the rule changes having top 10 faceoff ranks is a coincidence? I find that very hard to believe, especially if you eliminate Pittsburgh because of the Crosby factor.

 

[JimEIV]

: "Points! Points! Points! Points! You Trap! Points!"

I really think that just about sums up the mainboard on the Devils.

 

[ThePSEGPowerPoster]

but a 55 point guy with OK defense is not acceptable for a #1 center.

plus he isn't going to be that anyways.

Again, I'm bordering on redundancy, no one has talked about Loktionov here. It's just a general discussion on whether a 40% face-off% automatically precludes a guy from being a top-line center (as CereberalGenesis said and you seemed to agree with).

Loktionov isn't a first-line center on this team because we don't set up our lines that way. And if we did, he certainly wouldn't be either. It would go to Zajac, we can all agree there.

But if you could just understand that when someone churns out their opinion on lines and sticks Lokti up top it does not mean we think he's a first-line center. We're just guessing how PDB is going to balance this lineup because that's what he will do.

It's like the mainboard argument that we have no offense "because Devils fans are chalking up Loktionov as a first-line center." Face. To. Keyboard. with those guys.

 

[ScottyK]

I think larsson showed some flashes of brillance his rookie year along with some mistakes too. He hasn't been the same since that PK hit but I'm excited for this year to see what he can do

 

[Zajacs Bowl Cut]

Larsson was so much better positionally this past year than he was as a rookie. I think that is something to build on.

 

[Richer's Ghost]

Foot work and shot release and we're almost there...

 

[JimEIV]

I think larsson showed some flashes of brillance his rookie year along with some mistakes too. He hasn't been the same since that PK hit but I'm excited for this year to see what he can do

I agree. I was especially surprised to see how well he did in his rookie season a long the boards and in physical situations...He surprised me quite a bit in that regard for an 18 year old.

 

[Feed Me A Stray Cat]

Are you suggesting that 75% of teams to make the Cup finals since the rule changes having top 10 faceoff ranks is a coincidence? I find that very hard to believe, especially if you eliminate Pittsburgh because of the Crosby factor.

It definitely could be.

"Teams that made the cup finals" is a very limited sample pool. Your sample size is 16 over the last eight seasons. That's not enough to tell you anything of value really.

In a world where faceoffs did not matter at all, you would expect five to six (33%) of the 16 teams to be top 10 in faceoffs. It's very conceivable that pure chance allowed an extra six top 10 faceoff teams into the cup.

Faceoffs definitely do matter, but they're not a determining factor in success. Perhaps it's something that gives two equal teams an edge in one case or another.