Lundqvist Happens: New Jersey Devils Succumb Despite Outplaying New York Rangers in 3-1 Loss
Losing to a rival hurts. It's not just another loss. It's a loss to a team whose fanbase will lionize it and use it for bragging rights until the next game. It's a loss to a team who we despise, so seeing them benefit from the game instead of the team we love is a disappointment at best.
That all said, I can't get really angry or despondent about tonight's 3-1 loss to the New York Rangers. Believe it or not, the New Jersey Devils put out their best effort all month. Yes, even better than the 3-0 win over Phoenix, where the Coyotes were just way sloppier than the Devils. No, tonight, the Devils came out strong, they didn't relent after the first goal allowed, they didn't relent after the Rangers went up 2-1 in the second period, and they didn't give up on the game. They were only "done" with 6 seconds left, after the game-icing empty net goal. Tonight, the Devils were aggressive, they initiated plays, and they sliced through the Rangers defense to put up 44 shots on net according to the game summary. There was one team who dominated 5-on-5 play, and it was the home team who out-shot the Rangers 37-20 at evens per the event summary. The Devils put up a performance that would win hockey games way more often than not.
The main reason why the Devils did not win and why the Rangers did was Henrik Lundqvist. He was brilliant. The Devils attacked him from all different angles, all different situations save for shorthanded ones, and Lundqvist either came up big or he was fortunate to not have one of the many rebounds the Devils got to end up in his net more than once. I understand he's on a rival, but you have to respect quality when you see it and he was both great and lucky tonight. The Rangers skaters should be treating Lundqvist to whatever he wants, be it steaks, seafood, or soup. Lundqvist was the reason the Rangers did get blown out of the Rock, much less get the two points.
Moral victories don't mean much in the standings. On the other hand, this season is lost for New Jersey anyway, so it's nice to at least have some consolation out of the game. The Devils outplayed their opponents for the first time in a while and the only reason why they didn't win was because their goalie was hot and the Devils remain the unluckiest team in the NHL. After all, he game winning goal was a Michal Rozsival shot going wide that went off Andy Greene's elbow and in. Rangers fans who are honest with themselves will agree it was a fluke.
The main point is that while losing to this team sucks, how the Devils played can and should be appreciated. If this is a sign of things to come, the wins will eventually come and luck will finally turn New Jersey's way. I have a few more things to say about tonight's game along with a video of the game's highlights from NHL after the jump.
To really hammer home the point of how well the Devils did tonight, I would like to let you know about this blog George Ays maintains: Tracking the NY Rangers. Ays has been recording scoring chances for each Rangers game; here's his count from tonight's game. As the tagline says: "The numbers don't lie. They just don't agree with you;" and such the Devils really rolled the Rangers. The Devils out-chanced the visitors 22-9 at even strength among 26-15 overall. If you wanted to see New Jersey crash the net, they did that. If you wanted them to set up the perimeter shot, they did that too. The issue for New Jersey's offense tonight wasn't their shot selection. Just that Lundqvist was fantastic and the Devils remain unlucky; especially Jason Arnott, who had a shot at an empty net deflected away by Artem Anisimov's stick and another later that was either deflected high or just shot high.For a break down of the count from the Devils perspective, George was kind enough to run the script again. Here's the count for the individual Devils. Among them all, Mattias Tedenby was one of the Devils stand outs. He was on the ice for 11 chances at even strength, 14 total, and was counted for creating 6 total (1 was a missed shot). Tedenby had a great night with Ilya Kovalchuk and Travis Zajac, and the scoring chance counts further justifies this feeling beyond just having 5 shots on net and an assist on Zajac's goal-mouth scramble goal. Thanks, George.
Given the large disparity in shots, the Devils clearly dominated at Corsi per Time On Ice's shots. Despite the Devils having a net Corsi of +22, only three Devils had low Corsi nights: Rod Pelley (0), Adam Mair (+1), Tim Sestito (0). All three seemed decent enough, they skated hard, they threw plenty of hits, but they didn't create too much: only 3 shots on net total among the three of them. In fact, Mair was one of two Devils who didn't have a shot on net - more on the other guy a little later.
The head to head 5-on-5 ice time chart from Time on Ice may explain why their Corsi was a bit low. Mair, Pelley, and Sestito - and I'll group those three together since Lemaire got them together the most - were used largely against the lower lines on New York. Jacques Lemaire didn't stick to straight match-ups, so they got minutes against Ruslan Fedotenko and Brian Boyle among other Rangers. It just so happens that those two were the most prolific Ranger shooters: Fedotenko put 4 on net and Boyle put up 6 on net, including the Rangers' first goal. Yes, those two alone represented 10 out of the Rangers' 26 shots tonight, so whoever was out against them (e.g. Anton Volchenkov) was going to be pinned back a little more than they'd like. Admittedly, I'm not sure whether they saw enough of them to drive it down; but given their lack of offense, it's not going to take much to have the Corsi hang low.
Vladimir Zharkov, on the other hand, registered no shots on net, but did quite well with a +8 Corsi in his first NHL game this season. Zharkov looked great with David Clarkson and Dainius Zubrus, often going in first on the dump-and-chase which set up several cycles. He was only on the ice for 5 shots against while being present for 10 shots by his teammates in 8:01 of even strength ice time. Lemaire felt confident enough in the speedy winger's play to give him significant power play time. That's quite impressive for such limited minutes. Yes, it's only one game, but it's a sign he belongs in New Jersey. I hate to be an "I told you so," but I told you so.
Overall, I can't really fault the offense for not putting up more than one goal - not tonight. What was interesting was how it took the Rangers two periods before trying to stop the dump-and-chase and to tighten up their own positioning. The Devils, who have struggled when they have tried to chase pucks all season, were actually succeeding with that strategy en route to their 36 shots in the game's first 40 minutes. I was surprised that the Rangers didn't figure that out sooner; I'm sure John Tortarella did and let his players hear about it - even with a 2-1 lead.
The only time where the Devils' offense wasn't rampaging was on the power play. Granted, you want to set up a good shot on a power play instead of bombing away; but it was a bit tepid tonight. Over 8 minutes, the Devils only got 6 shots on net. They still ran the umbrella, but I got a sense that they were "hanging on to their sticks too tight," especially on the ones in the third period. I also didn't understand why Ilya Kovalchuk was on for every second of those man advantages. Yeah, he was having a good game and he's an amazing shooter, Lundqvist made some nice sprawling saves on some Kovalchuk slapshots, but he could have been given a little rest on some of them. If only so the Devils didn't throw the fourth line out there after the power play.
At least the other half of special teams was solid. The penalty kill held the Rangers to only 6 shots across 8 minutes of power play time, including 4 straight because Arnott decided that arguing with the ref on a ticky-tack was smart (it wasn't). The Devils were aggressive when necessary, passive when the Rangers were just looking to settle, and cleared the puck consistently well. Again, amid all the things that have went awry this season, the penalty kill has been the most consistently good thing about this season.
What was surprisingly good was the defense. Again, the Devils held the Rangers to only 26 shots, but they were smart about it. They didn't turn the puck over to hang Martin Brodeur out to dry. They communicated with each other. They didn't do needless things. They were focused and it showed. The checks were strong and clean, particularly the one Matthew Corrente threw at Sean Avery. They even held Marian Gaborik to only 2 shots on net. Yes, I'm praising the Devils defensive effort for doing what they are supposed to do; but given the last 5 games (all losses), it's a definite step in the right direction. The breakdowns were few and far between, and when that happened, Brodeur rose to the occasion.
Admittedly, Brodeur didn't start off the game so well. Brodeur over-committed on the make-shift 2-on-1 by Boyle and Fedotenko, giving Boyle a great angle to shoot at the far post. Brodeur tried to reach back, couldn't, and so not long after Zajac's goal did it get tied. If Brodeur put himself in better position, then he'd stop it easily. That said, Brodeur got stronger as the game went on and played more like, well, Brodeur. He made several "big saves" when the Rangers set up a great shot or on a rebound that the Devils defenders didn't swarm. Funny how he got beat on a shot he should have stopped early, but he stopped all the other ones where the Rangers probably should have scored. Again, the only other time he was beat was on a literal fluke: a Michal Rozsival shot that was going wide hits off the elbow of Andy Greene - who otherwise had a very fine game - and goes shortside. It's right there in the game highlights per NHL.com:
Throughout the other games in December, we've seen the Devils shoot themselves in the foot, they get down on themselves, and the offense really only shows up in the third period when the other team has just about won the game. While it extends the losing streak to 6, tonight was different. I hope it's because of what Lemaire's been doing with this roster since being named the interim head coach; then I have reason to believe for better times ahead. It's important that the Devils come away from tonight's 3-1 loss to Our Hated Rivals that they can play solid defense, their goaltender will make big saves as needed, they can be initiators, and they don't have to be down in the game before launching lots of shots on the goaltender. That's big considering how the last 3 months have went for the Devils.
Hence, I can't get mad over the effort I saw tonight despite the disappointing result. Lundqvist and bad luck happens. Repeat the positives, improve the negatives (e.g. don't clear it over the glass, Zajac; don't chirp at the refs, Arnott), and success will come. Such is life.
That's my take on the game. What's your take? Who do you think did well for either side? Who do you think stunk it up for either side? Do you think the Devils will build on this game as I hope? Please leave your answers and other thoughts on tonight's game in the comments. Thanks to all who commented in the Gamethread; and thank you, the best Devils fans on the Internet, for reading.
51 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
It’s certainly a shame that such a well-played game was decided by such a wacky bounce on the Roszival goal. Our Devils actually looked like a competent professional hockey team out there. It was nice to see hustle and good, hard checks being thrown.
So worst Devils month ever (regardless of what happens Friday)? Bring on January. Bring on 2011.
1995 - 2000 - 2003
Two practices with Lemaire....
Its amazing how different this team looked compared to pretty much every other game this season…The biggest difference from just the eye test was their transitional game out of their own zone…Even when they had won games under Maclean, I still don’t think they played this well…I missed a handful of games up to this point, but I honestly thought this was the best game they have played this season
Having said that, we have seen this before where the devils put in a solid effort or actually get a win and follow it up with a stinker. I think we will know more by Sunday after the devils play back to back games.
If they can continue with these types of efforts, then I think there is hope to not only end the second half of the season with a winning record, but build for next year.
i have to say that i hated langenbrunners game tonight. his passes were off, and on one occasion the puck went right past him and he didnt even realize as he was looking in the completely wrong direction. Overall though I think you hit the nail right on the head John. I though Tedenby shouldve gone high as he was making his approach and he tried going 5-hole and it didnt work but he’ll learn you need to go high on lundqvist. I also need to give big props for Zubrus for fighting. Boyle and several other Rangers, namely Emminger were getting away with a lot of holding and elbowing and Boyle finally got matched up with someone close to his own size. I think Boyle won the fight overall, but it was nice to see Dainius sticking up for everyone.
I think you might be giving lundqvist too much credit. While the shots were many beside tedenbys breakaway and kovys shots the chances were far and between and the devils didn’t have that great of a 3 rd
yeah outshot 9-7, the rangers clamped down on them, and the 4 minute penalty was the main reason why i think.
by poopydoodie11 on Dec 30, 2010 12:51 AM EST up reply actions
Too much credit? He made 43 saves tonight and 25 of them were scoring chances. They weren’t far and few between unless you were watching some other game.
Devils in my heart! Devils in my mind! Devils in my eyes! Devils until I die!
In Lou We Trust - The New Jersey Devils SBN Blog
by John Fischer on Dec 30, 2010 9:44 AM EST up reply actions
Just looking at the shots on goal per ESPN Gamecast, the Devils had about 16 in and around the net. The 3rd period wasn’t as good but the Rags sat back after their 4 minute PP.
These are just shots on goal though, they had plenty of chances with wide shots. Lundqvist was very good, but he didn’t make any stellar saves. He was the only reason they won. I think Marty had a couple saves that were better: Avery right at the crease was the best of the night, and the one timer on the PP (don’t know who shot that one).
In Lou We Trust: SBN Blog of the New Jersey Devils
"Hockey is the only job I know where you get paid to have a nap on the day of the game." - Chico Resch
by Matthew Ventolo on Dec 30, 2010 10:51 AM EST up reply actions
Arnott unsportsmanlike
After hearing the things that the Pens and Caps players say to refs after penalties I wonder what Arnott said to get the extra 2 minutes…
24/7 has proven to me that the refs arbitrarily hand out the extra 2 when they feel like.
There is nothing quite as satisfying as out running security after you've punched out a Flyers fan!
"I was in the moment, and the moment said smack you." - Bruce Willis
by slackdog_rm on Dec 30, 2010 12:12 PM EST up reply actions
What A Difference A Coach Makes
I know it’s just one game, but for once this season the Devils looked like an NHL team. The defense was particularly good. They played with confidence and the pairings worked well. Anton Volchenkov seemed to finally be playing his game. Not only was he hitting any Ranger within range, but each hit hurt the intended victim. They were slow getting up and going to the bench, and more than one guy bailed when he saw Anton coming.
Tedenby had a wonderful game, and if you noticed that almost every time he was on the ice with Kovalchuk, Ilya gave him the puck to penetrate the Rangers defense, and the kid did the job. My wish (and others) of having Zharkov on the squad was finally realized. Is it a coincidence that a guy who played 40 games for Jacques last season, gets called up after Lemaire has the time to run practices? And the absence of Brian Rolston did make the team better and more effective.
Hopefully, what we witnessed tonight is a sign of things to come. I assume that Jacques told the team that he is only here for the remainder of the season so he doesn’t care about any consequences resulting from players not listening to him. As Lou showed with Rollie, Jacques is here to stay, but are the guys in the locker room?
One Complaint
With four minutes remaining in the game, the Devils trailing by one goal, they draw a power-play. Their previous two power-plays were mostly ineffectual and this would be their best opportunity to score the game-tying goal. Why did Lemaire not take the opportunity to call time out and have Adam Oates come up with a plan for the Devils to execute? We’ve seen this work before for countless teams. The timeout eventually used with 15 seconds left was meaningless since the Rangers still got the EN goal.
Great effort by the whole team, but I think this game was still winnable until the moment we went on that final power play without taking a timeout first.
In retrospect, I agree – the timeout should have been used there. The Rangers inadvertently helped NJ with a timeout with over a minute left, though, so that was enough time to draw up the 6-on-5 situation.
Devils in my heart! Devils in my mind! Devils in my eyes! Devils until I die!
In Lou We Trust - The New Jersey Devils SBN Blog
by John Fischer on Dec 30, 2010 9:45 AM EST up reply actions
I honestly thought the Devils called the timeout w/ one minute left before it was announced. The Rangers fan sitting near me was upset that Torts was helping us out by letting Kovy get back on the ice.
There is nothing quite as satisfying as out running security after you've punched out a Flyers fan!
"I was in the moment, and the moment said smack you." - Bruce Willis
by slackdog_rm on Dec 30, 2010 12:18 PM EST up reply actions
They played for 58 minutes
While most of the game was well played by the Devils, they absolutely let up after Zajac scored. They sat back and let the Rangers take it to them for 2 shifts then a miserable play by elias combined with a miserable change led to the 1st goal. Andy Greene got unlecky on goal number 2 so no fault there. Other than that they played a great game.
And I note, worst hand pass call ever with 15 seconds left leading to the Rangers 3rd goal. what a joke. The refs were not good tonight.
And I note, worst hand pass call ever with 15 seconds left leading to the Rangers 3rd goal. what a joke.
The Devils were offside initially.
Devils in my heart! Devils in my mind! Devils in my eyes! Devils until I die!
In Lou We Trust - The New Jersey Devils SBN Blog
by John Fischer on Dec 30, 2010 9:46 AM EST up reply actions
If they were offside initially, why did they the faceoff come out to center ice? Because the referee made the call early. Worst case that faceoff should be at the left dot right outside the blueline. Poor call cost us a goal. Not that it matters
by kovalchuck17 on Dec 30, 2010 2:00 PM EST up reply actions
actually, worst case it is viewed as an intentional offside and the faceoff comes back to the devils zone and Brodeur has to get back in goal and again that goal likely does not happen
by kovalchuck17 on Dec 30, 2010 2:31 PM EST up reply actions
Better Effort
The team played much better tonight but at the end the same result. We look much better in the defense zone but our forwards must find a way to score more than 1 goal a game.
IT WASNT A WELL PLAYED GAME
Im so down on this team. Im a huge Devs fan and cannot belive this season. I understand we outshot the Rangers last night but WE LOST AGAIN. Scoring only 1 goal is not a well played game unless we gave up 0 and that wasnt the case. I love Marty but he has been terrible this year. It takes alot for me to write this, but its true. Marty has let up so many goals this year that just have me scratching my head. We play well, but if the opposing goalies are playing better than Marty then what good is it. Yes, we have played a litytle better with Lemaire at the helm, but we are 0-3 with him and have scored a total of 3 goals. Like I said, I love my Devs, but this team flat out sucks. I might cartch some flack for this post, but its true. I dont like even writing it and wont say it verbally, but we are not a good team struggling, this team is playing with no balls at all. Sorry guys, 9-25 record, I dont think there is an argument here.
Yes, it was a well played game.
The Devils bombed away on the Rangers, they pinned them back plenty of times and often, and if the only reason you lost was because other team’s goalie was hot, then you did what you could.
I understand you’re not happy about the loss, I’m not happy, and I don’t think anyone really is – but to say this was just another bad game is simply false.
Devils in my heart! Devils in my mind! Devils in my eyes! Devils until I die!
In Lou We Trust - The New Jersey Devils SBN Blog
by John Fischer on Dec 30, 2010 9:48 AM EST up reply actions
No it wasnt
John, never want to disagree with you as I come to this site everyday and thank you very much for flying the flag of Devil Red. But scoring 1 goal is not a well played game. No matter how well Lundqvist played. These are the Devils, 3 time cup champs and in my opinion, the best hockey Organization in the NHL. Enough with the ’we played well, moral victories". I am so sick of this team not lighting the lamp and trying to hang onto whatever dignity we have left this year. When you are 9-25 and need to turn it on, the only ’Well" played games to me are ones that add to that 9, a 3-1 loss is not. Yeah, maybe compared to the 5-1 and 7-1 thrashings, no pun intended, that we are taking, last night we played Better, but at this point to me Well Played means winning. Like I said no disrepect John, especially to you bud, but these are the Devs, not the Blue Jackets, time start winning some damn hockey games. Extremely disappointed at this team. Although I must tell you, I loved the fact that Zubbie took the gloves off last nite. That was the highlight of the game to me.
by Marty'sBetter on Dec 30, 2010 9:59 AM EST up reply actions
But scoring 1 goal is not a well played game.
So it comes down to goals. To play well, one must score a lot? Everything else is immaterial?
Enough with the ’we played well, moral victories".
The Devils have had very few of those games. Considering the previous 5 games and how bad each were, this was a 100 times better to watch and appreciate.
I am so sick of this team not lighting the lamp and trying to hang onto whatever dignity we have left this year.
I wish they could score lots of goals. They certainly put up a lot of shots intended to do that. Alas, that’s all you can control.
When you are 9-25 and need to turn it on, the only ’Well" played games to me are ones that add to that 9, a 3-1 loss is not.
I suppose we’ll have to agree to disagree. Playing well and winning hockey games are two different matters. For example, the Rangers got rolled and ended up with the win because a stray shot hit an elbow and deflected it in perfectly and they got an empty net goal to make the score look better.
Yeah, maybe compared to the 5-1 and 7-1 thrashings, no pun intended, that we are taking, last night we played Better, but at this point to me Well Played means winning.
I was comparing it to those games, amid all of the other “Devils got pantsed in the loss” games.
Devils in my heart! Devils in my mind! Devils in my eyes! Devils until I die!
In Lou We Trust - The New Jersey Devils SBN Blog
by John Fischer on Dec 30, 2010 10:09 AM EST up reply actions
.
To play well, one must score a lot? Everything else is immaterial?
Not normally, but yes, when you are 9-25, to play well, you must win. Devs lost. yes, everything else is immaterial if you dont win at this point. we are in desperation mode.
Yes, much better effort last night, ’Well played" compared to the others like you said, then I will agree with you. It just kills me that we are even having this conversation. Especially since I ran into Gary Bettman on 6th avenue the week before the season started and told him that he will be handing the cip off to Jamie this coming June, its startling that we are the worst team in hockey right now, record wise. Very frustrated.
by Marty'sBetter on Dec 30, 2010 10:18 AM EST up reply actions
Not normally, but yes, when you are 9-25
This argument is terrible. Playing well in an individual game of hockey is completely independent of the team’s record. I don’t care if the Devils were 0-81. John is simply saying that this was a much better effort than we have seen for the majority of the season.
Stop clouding your judgement with the Devil’s record. We all know it’s bad, and we’re all frustrated, but the argument that playing “well” is circumstantial is ridiculous.
If the devils were 25-9-2, this would still be a well played game.
My Expectations
are to win Hockey games. I understand what you and John are saying that we played better. But losing individual games on good nights is still bad. Reading the whole thread, I know that what he is saying, but if your fine with losing to the Rangers and Islanders by a combined 8-1 in the last week, enjoy your good efforts buddy. I want wins. A step in the right direction playing wise, yes, step in the right direction in the standings, no. I mean think about it, we are discussing the losing bad to just losing in late December. Im not OK with that.
by Marty'sBetter on Dec 30, 2010 12:49 PM EST up reply actions
The point is they looked horrendous losing to the islanders and vastly outplayed the rangers even though they lost. were the results the same? sure, but that doesnt mean the games were the same. If you expect to win then you expect the devils to put a performance on like they did against the Rangers and not like the one against the Islanders. Performances like last night’s is how the Devils will win games in the future. None of us like to see the Devils lose but it is going to happen and we have to deal with it.
by kovalchuck17 on Dec 30, 2010 5:38 PM EST up reply actions
To Marty's Better...
you sir or ma’am are just plain wrong
by kovalchuck17 on Dec 30, 2010 2:32 PM EST up reply actions
Need I say more
Atlantic GP W L OTL Pts
Pittsburgh 39 25 11 3 53
Philadelphia 36 22 9 5 49
NY Rangers 38 22 14 2 46
NY Islanders 35 10 19 6 26
New Jersey 36 9 25 2 20
Take this along with your moral victories. Just plain wrong, no Kovalchuk17, the Devs might have been plain wrong for throwing all that money at your boy. We suck this year. When we are .500, ill takle good games played that we lost, not with the standing looking like this. Much better play vs Rangers than Isles, of course, it was impossible to be worse than they were vs the Isles. Im not taking anything good out of games we lose at this point. You set your expectations, Ill set mine guy.
by Marty'sBetter on Dec 30, 2010 7:47 PM EST up reply actions
Anyone can look up the record.
I even put it in every preview, in addition to a weekly snapshot of the division.
We get it. Your whole argument is basically, “They didn’t win, ergo they sucked.” If you want to think that, fine; but there’s plenty of evidence against that. If you don’t want to recognize what was done well, then fine. Yet, you need to say much more, because you’re not really saying as much as you think you are.
Devils in my heart! Devils in my mind! Devils in my eyes! Devils until I die!
In Lou We Trust - The New Jersey Devils SBN Blog
by John Fischer on Dec 30, 2010 9:11 PM EST up reply actions
Ill sum it up
All im sayin is that we need to win games….that the only positive I get watching the post game. In my opinion, the post game with a happy Kenny, Chico and a Hockey Night Live conversation where they are talking about good sound Devil hockey. I miss that. I take a win with a decnt performance or and even not so great performance like you mentioned with Phoenix any day over a better performance when we lose.
Lets go Devs! Its not too late to rturn it around at this point. we could still be talking 1st round in April on thsi board. Not giving up on this season yet.
by Marty'sBetter on Dec 30, 2010 11:05 PM EST up reply actions
not quite turning a corner
Aside from the final score, almost every Devils fan had something to be pleased about the performance against the Rangers. I was really pulling for them throughout the game instead of focusing on boneheaded plays (which were very few). One would hope that what we saw in this game will be carried over to the next, but those hopes have been dashed before.
What I found to be most telling in this game was the Coach’s decision to use the recently called up Valdimir Zharkov on two power plays. Putting a minor league in his first NHL game of the season, on the power play, is a highly unusual move.
I believe it may say less about Zharkov and more about a message to the Team in general from their old/new interim Coach. The message being; I am going to try anything and everything to get this team to a competitive level. Nothing is carved in stone and no one will be protected if you continue to give less than 100%. Perhaps what we witnessed last night is the result of that knowledge.
he could have been given a little rest on some of them. If only so the Devils didn’t throw the fourth line out there after the power play.
I have to play the contrarian here regarding Kovalchuk on the PP. The Devils are probably going to throw out the fourth line after the PP anyhow, whether or not Ilya plays the full two. That’s what happens when you play four or five forwards on each PP unit…. the Devils use every forward from the top three lines on one unit or the other. And considering that the fourth line won’t embarass you against most opposition units (an elite line like Ovechkin-Backstrom-Semin might be the exception), I imagine Lemaire would throw them out there so he doesn’t have to play scramble drill with his lines for a few minutes.
I approve of Mark Fayne being in the press box tonight. Maybe it’s just me, but it seemed that Fayne would be responsible for a spectacular defensive gaffe on a nightly basis, whether it was leaving his guy wide open in front of the net, taking a stupid penalty, making an atrocious pass in the defensive zone, or a combination of the above. The kid certainly has potential (which Bill Parcells would say means “he hasn’t done anything yet”), and he is the only right-handed shot on the defensive unit…. but he isn’t ready for the NHL right now and continuing to play him — and play him the number of minutes Johnny Mac was prone to give him — is simply asking for games like the ones that resulted in Mac’s firing. This probably isn’t as much of an issue with Mark Fraser on the cusp of returning (Chico said he thought Friday was a possibility)…. but I liked the six men who were out there last night.
Random, semi-related thought: which forward gets bounced to make room for Josefson in the lineup when Jacob gets healthy?
Finally, I have to say that while the shots and scoring chances were lopsided in our favor, I never had the feeling the Devils were going to get that second goal. Sure, some of it is the Devils’ complete inability to score…. but I never felt that Lundqvist had to make one of those “ten bell saves” (as Chico would call them) and completely rob someone. Yes, Arnott missed an open net twice. Tedenby did once, as well, and didn’t convert on a breakaway. Otherwise, I didn’t see any situation where Henrik had to stand on his head…. and the one goal was scored off a scramble drill for a loose puck on a delayed penalty and broken play to begin with.
Agreed. Just because the season is lost, there’s no need to burn a year on a ELC when the guy can and should get top minutes in Albany.
Devils in my heart! Devils in my mind! Devils in my eyes! Devils until I die!
In Lou We Trust - The New Jersey Devils SBN Blog
by John Fischer on Dec 30, 2010 10:04 AM EST up reply actions
I would disagree only from the standpoint of trying to figure out if Josefson can be your future number 2 centre…might as well play him this season with Tedenby or Elias and get him some NHL experience against good competition.
Now of course this would be assuming they trade Arnott closer to the deadline if he asks to be dealt…otherwise, it wouldn’t be useful giving him fourth line minutes in the NHL as opposed to top minutes in the AHL.
by TexasDevilFan on Dec 30, 2010 11:44 AM EST up reply actions
If Josefson were ready tomorrow, I’d agree with the sentiment of sending him back to Albany.
That being said, Josefson isn’t ready yet. It’ll be a few weeks…. and what happens if Lou manages to move a few veterans in the next two months? Do you still keep Josefson at Albany “as not to burn a year on his ELC” if some combination of Arnott, Langenbrunner, Zubrus, and Rolston are no longer here? If there are multiple openings on the second and third lines, doesn’t it make sense to give Josefson some run there (along with Clarkson, maybe Pelley, perhaps people like Henrique and/or Palmieri) and see what you’ve got rather than waiting purely for “financial” reasons?
yes, i do, unless josefson is really tearing it up in the AHL. it could be a savings of millions on the cap in 2013-14. it could also be a huge savings in 2017-18.
What exactly would be the ramifications if say josefson plays say another 15-25 games at the NHL level? He would still be an RFA at the time his entry level contract is up…I, for one, would much rather play Josefson this year (Again, only at 2nd or 3rd line minutes at the NHL level) and “risk” having him turn out to be a great player, as opposed to going into next season hoping he can be a number two centre and find out after its too late that he is a year away.
by TexasDevilFan on Dec 30, 2010 5:05 PM EST up reply actions
Just a heads up
Sending a player to your AHL club does NOT save a year of his contract. It is used up either way.
ELC contracts only slide if the player is playing for his Junior club.
20 miles to Legoland!
by nhlcheapshot on Dec 30, 2010 2:58 PM EST up reply actions
not true, check out 9.1.d.i
“(d) (i) In the event that an 18 year old or 19 year old Player signs an SPC with a Club but does not play at least ten (10) NHL Games in the first season under that SPC, the term of his SPC and his number of years in the Entry Level System shall be extended for a period of one (1) year”
bergfors was still playing under his ELC last season, and he did not play junior hockey.
We will not know this unless Lemaire gives Fraser similar minutes. Last season, Fraser was heavily protected.
Devils in my heart! Devils in my mind! Devils in my eyes! Devils until I die!
In Lou We Trust - The New Jersey Devils SBN Blog
by John Fischer on Dec 30, 2010 10:09 AM EST up reply actions
One more thing because I forgot it in the recap
Here’s the shot chart from ESPN. Again, the Devils shot from everywhere except for inside that left circle.
Devils in my heart! Devils in my mind! Devils in my eyes! Devils until I die!
In Lou We Trust - The New Jersey Devils SBN Blog
I’m not mad, I’m not angry, I am annoyed and frustrated, I also appreciated a performance like Lundqvist’s because I have been treated to a pretty much unlimited number of gems by Devils goaltending over the past nearly two decades. The Devils got quality chances, played their most complete game of the season, put in their best effort, looked resilient, played very physical and barely took a shift off. They absolutely handled a more talented hockey team tonight.
The only thing I could blame them for is the first goal was soft, that’s Marty’s fault. As the game wore on, they should have shot higher on Lundqvist off the rush. I know they were shooting for rebounds, but they were just missing and shooting right into Lundqvist. They could have gone glove side more often, and not that they didn’t, but they needed to do it more often. Just create chaos. Maybe throw him a changeup, such as the way the Devils goal was scored, creating traffic, not going to the net after the shots. But again, no overall complaints, just observations and things that may work next time.
I am encouraged by the effort, I hate losing, especially to the Rangers, but I’ll take this effort, and if the Devils put this in on a consistent basis, they’ll finish with 30 wins this year instead of the projected 19. The question remains: Is this the Devils playing to their potential or was it a fluke that every single player played hard for one night?
DownGoesAvery. Check out my sarcastic/comedic blog: http://downgoesavery.blogspot.com/ and on Twitter (@DownGoesAvery).
In defense of Arnott
First off, the call was nonsense. I was sitting front row right there in the corner behind the net, and the call was bogus. Given the highly questionable nature of the call in a tight, rivalry type game, I don’t blame Arnott for being upset, but I can tell you he had barely opened his mouth when that incompetent ref teed him up. In the third period of a game of that intensity, the ref needs to be a little less trigger happy with the additional minor. It would be even better if the penalties he calls actually occur in the first place! Of course, that may be asking too much. I’d go along with the additional minor if Arnott was really showing him up, but that was just not the case. I’d hate to see a call like that in a more meaningful game. Heck, I hated seeing it here! That was some amateur hour officiating right there.

by 























