Greene may not be getting points, but he is doing the little things right. Sure, he'll make a giveaway here and there that makes you think, man, what are you doing? BUT, those are few and far between. There's a reason why going into Wednesday's game he was the only plus on the team.
I disagree with Green being our best a lot. He has had some really bad games and the couple games he was paired with Tallinder they were god awful and terrible in our zone. Fayne in my opinion has been the most consistent by far.
How so? Tallinder has been our best defenseman, didn`t you hear?
I think this debate is pointless. Both Greene and Fayne have been solid on both ends of the ice, simple as that. They both made some mistakes here and there, especially when they were paired with "the wrong guy", but stepped up their game compared to last year (well, Greene simply had to) and that`s something (almost) nobody expected.
Good for them, good for us.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Devilsfanatic
Greene may not be getting points, but he is doing the little things right. Sure, he'll make a giveaway here and there that makes you think, man, what are you doing? BUT, those are few and far between. There's a reason why going into Wednesday's game he was the only plus on the team.
Greene may not be getting points, but he is doing the little things right. Sure, he'll make a giveaway here and there that makes you think, man, what are you doing? BUT, those are few and far between. There's a reason why going into Wednesday's game he was the only plus on the team.
To be fair to Green - it was clear the injury was affecting his performance as he has been excellent since he returned from sitting out those couple of games but before that he was all over the place. To the point where I was thankful Fraser played the Flyer game instead of Green.
How so? Tallinder has been our best defenseman, didn`t you hear?
I think this debate is pointless. Both Greene and Fayne have been solid on both ends of the ice, simple as that. They both made some mistakes here and there, especially when they were paired with "the wrong guy", but stepped up their game compared to last year (well, Greene simply had to) and that`s something (almost) nobody expected.
Good for them, good for us.
Thank you.
Honestly though we all knew what Green was capable of - we saw it that full year under Lemaire when Martin went down - Green stepped up and played his butt off and was the best dman on the team that year. If he could ever get back to that level of play it would really give our D and our O a boost in the arm as he was excellent joining the rush and on the PP that year.
Don`t want to talk about that? No one is forcing you.
Oh, I wanted to talk about it and did so. And I voiced my opinion: the mentality shared by you and some others toward NHL players icetime is uber-soft. Per your own words, it is based on dubious medical diagnosis ("I'm not a doctor; I just play one on the internet") and a slave mentality to statistics (Twenty-five minutes of TOI! Oh the horror!)....as well as a desire for NJD to conform to what is pop-u-lar among other teams and coaches, as opposed to what the coach of this team believes is the best approach.
Nobody was really sold on him going into the season
The guy had a pretty good rookie campaign and myself and a lot of others were warry as to whether or not he could continue his solid play or if last year was just a fluke
So far he's improved big time
that is not true there were plenty of people defending his ability this off season. a majority in this board were too concerned with our experience on defense citing that salvador would not return and that fayne was unproven and that larsson was a rookie
so far , fayne has played as well if not better, salvador looks fine and larsson is performing as well as could be expected. all the worry was for not. that being said it's still not a dynamic group, and lacks in many areas, but it is servicable now and if they are in position to upgrade at deadline it could be become a very solid crew
so far , fayne has played as well if not better, salvador looks fine and larsson is performing as well as could be expected. all the worry was for not.
All true. As predicted by the minority in August, this is the best NJD D corp in years (faint praise, perhaps ), as it is more mobile and has versatility than recent versions.
that is not true there were plenty of people defending his ability this off season. a majority in this board were too concerned with our experience on defense citing that salvador would not return and that fayne was unproven and that larsson was a rookie
so far , fayne has played as well if not better, salvador looks fine and larsson is performing as well as could be expected. all the worry was for not. that being said it's still not a dynamic group, and lacks in many areas, but it is servicable now and if they are in position to upgrade at deadline it could be become a very solid crew
That is pretty much what I said in my post and it wasn't about people defending his ability it was people unsure if he could continue his solid play into this season
I said Fayne had a solid rookie season but there were questions as to how Fayne would perform this year because we only saw a sample size from him (which again, was good)
Oh, I wanted to talk about it and did so. And I voiced my opinion: your mentality toward NHL players is uber-soft and amusing. Per your own words, it is based on dubious medical diagnosis ("I'm not a doctor; I just play one on the internet) and a slave mentality to statistics (Twenty-five minutes of TOI! Oh the horror!)....as well as a desire for NJD to conform to what is pop-u-lar among other teams and coaches, as opposed to what the coach of this team believes is the best approach.
We know where we both stand.
Missing the point. You did NOT want to talk about it hypothetically and that`s what I pointed out. How is my mentality uber-soft? Because in my opinion there could be some point when we might want to give him a rest? Should I assume there`s literally no way? This clearly isn`t any kind of overreaction, not sure why you have such a desire to make it look like it is.
No I`m not a doctor, but my father is and I talk to them every once in a while/enough to know their insight on this topic. Speculative? Agreed, I have no proof this is what caused him the injury. Dubious? Not so much, there`s a difference between the two. Slave mentality to statistics? How else should I say he was playing too much? Am I saying that`s what we should do just because others do it? No. Don`t put the words in my mouth.
Slave mentality to statistics? How else should I say he was playing too much?
By watching. Both of us do; you see a "clearly gassed" player (Larsson) and one who incurred injury based on too many minutes. I see a rookie looking just fine and a vet star in his prime, being challenged by his coach to deliver more across the ice. Not just put in his computer-dictated 18 minutes, compile offensive stats and go home.
But again, it's not our differing takes on these players tcondition that is the issue. It's the mentality of how to handle players.
Quote:
Am I saying that`s what we should do just because others do it? No. Don`t put the words in my mouth. Care to explain the last sentence?
No need nor desire to put words in your mouth. For they already exist, which is why I referred to them.
Post #685, in your own words (emphasis added):
Quote:
Originally Posted by Getzo5
Worry? No. Play him less and use the time for other two scoring lines that can contribute? Well, yes, that`s what coaches usually do.
By watching. Both of us do; you see a "clearly gassed" player (Larsson) and one who incurred injury based on too many minutes. I see a rookie looking just fine and a vet star in his prime, being challenged by his coach to deliver more across the ice. Not just put in his computer-dictated 18 minutes, compile offensive stats and go home.
You specifically cited what other coaches do (don't do) with regard to alloting minutes.
Yes, we see it differently, but I`m not the one pushing the opponent in the corner by using specific words or phrases ("babying", "board doctors", "uber-soft and amusing", "horror" etc.).
As for Larsson, I`m not nearly (speakes volumes) the only one who say he regressed a bit. Btw. your rhetoric has changed - perfectly fine yesterday, just fine today - and that`s what I said. (Still) fine now, possibly worse in the future - hypothetical talk. No overreaction.
I`m not a stat junkie, minutes be damned, but that`s the way to say he played more than usual. And he really did. There are many factors going into it, I get it, but at the of the day, minutes count. When you have a chance to split the TOI (with Parise back), you do it and find a different ways to get more from your star winger. Why? Because if you don`t, you risk injuries. Can I say it with certainty? Of course not, but there`s a much higher possibility and that`s all I was trying to say.
Yes I did, but does that mean what you said? No. I used it only to show I`m not the only one who thinks this way, that even NHL coaches use the same approach. Every team is different, every player is different, every coach is different. There`s no doubt about that, but principles are shared, for a reason/rightfully so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trottier
But again, it's not our differing takes on these players tcondition that is the issue. It's the mentality of how to handle players.
No need nor desire to put words in your mouth. For they already exist, which is why I referred to them.
Post #685, in your own words (emphasis added):
I'm not
Kovalchuk`s case? Pretty much, but not regarding Larsson. Our mentality (regarding Larsson) is similar if not the same right now. I was talking about the possible future, nothing more, nothing less.
You referred to them, but your interpretation was false.
Devils coach Pete DeBoer said he was “not surprised” that the NHL did not fine or suspend Myers and – utilizing his background as a lawyer – gave a measured explanation.
“I think the rule is still being defined weekly by the office and every time there’s a decision it’s an education,” DeBoer said.
So what lesson can we learn from Shanahan’s ruling on Myers’ hit?
“For me, it’s that you can make head contact and if the guy is leaning for a puck or the intent isn’t to hit the head, then it’s going to be OK,” DeBoer said. “They’re just words on a piece of paper until they’re practically applied and that’s what we’re getting on these hits. It’s a better understanding for me on what’s allowed and what isn’t.”
DeBoer wasn’t sure if that standard is a good one.
“I don’t know,” he said. “Thankfully we don’t have a serious injury on the play. I think if Zubrus wasn’t as big a guy and had been concussed, which could easily have happened, I probably would be a little more fired up about this.”
And, if Zubrus had been seriously injured, Myers might have been suspended. In borderline cases, the offending player’s track record (Myers has no prior suspensions) and whether the player who was hit was injured can be factors in the ruling.
“That’s the question. I don’t know,” DeBoer said of whether Myers would have been suspended if Zubrus had bad been injured. “I don’t believe that was part of the decision from what I read, but you wonder.”
Zubrus sounded upset at nothing happening to Myers for that play, and I don't really blame him.
You can make a case that the game is turning into a sissy sport, which is valid in my opinion, but based on the previous precedent of hits to the head - it should have warranted something.
Well when it happens to you personally, you naturally want justice for it. Only a natural reaction by Zubrus, but I don't think he should have been suspended for it. Penalized - yes.
me too but i was not ok at the time that he wasn't even warranted a penalty. it doesn't matter anymore because zubrus is ok and we won the game, but still.
), as it is more mobile and has versatility than recent versions. 
