Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Now They've Screwed Spurs, UEFA Willing To Review Rule

The 1995 New Jersey Devils: Good but Not Great (Until the Playoffs)

In the comments to Friday's post about Neal Broten, I made the following statement:

I would disagree that the 1995 Devils were spectacularly deep or all that talented, at least comparison to other teams in that season. They were good, but not great.

The problem here is that I didn't provide any evidence to back that up.  It was just my remembrance of that lockout-shortened 1994-95 season.  Since I've been looking back at the team's history over the past week or so, let's look at how the New Jersey Devils did in the regular season and the playoffs back then.   Of course, it was a successful season: the New Jersey Devils won their first Stanley Cup. They won all of their series in less than 7 games, sweeping the Western Conference champions, the Detroit Red Wings.  You can't ask for much more than that.   However, the team wasn't as excellent during the season; and relied on several players to get hot in the playoffs to get to the top of the mountain.

Star-divide

As per Hockey-Reference, the New Jersey Devils finished the 1994-95 with a record of 22-18-8. Their 52 points tied them with Washington in the Atlantic Division. In the conference, the Devils were fifth in the East ahead of the Capitals due to New Jersey's head-to-head record. In the league, the Devils were ninth overall.

I could end it here and say, there you are: good, but not great in the season.  The season got them a fifth seed in the East, which started them on the road for every round.   Then they got hot and went on an epic quest for the Cup.  However, there's a lot more to dig through to get a sense of how the team did in the shortened season.

First, there are the goals for and against totals. The Devils didn't score a lot of goals relative to the league, a seemingly common occurrence for this franchise.  They scored 136 goals, which was 7 below the league average of 143 and tied them with Washington for 15th in the league.  The defense made up for the lackluster offense. The team allowed only 121 goals, the fifth fewest in the league and well below the league average of 143.   In terms of total goals in a game, Hockey-Reference calculated them at 5.33 - the fourth lowest total in the league.  The trap plus offensive struggles meant that games against New Jersey were relatively stingy.

Second, let's look at special teams.  The Devils have struggled mightily on the power play back in 1994-95.  They were dead last in power play goals scored with 22 (NHL average: 37); dead last in power play opportunities with 164 (NHL Average: 209); and somehow not-dead-last-but-not-far-off-at-23rd in conversion rate with 13.41%.   Even way back then, the Devils just didn't get enough man advantages.  The penalty kill fared far better than the power play.  The Devils were excellent when it came to goals allowed on the PK with 28, tied with Detroit and Toronto for second fewest in the league.  They were the most disciplined team in the league by far with only 149 power play opportunities against. However, the success rate didn't rank highly despite these low numbers. The Devils' finished at 81.21%, for 16th in the league and just below the league average of 82.27%.   The Devils clearly got most of their scoring (and most of their allowed goals) at even strength; and liked to keep the game in general at evens, too. 

Third, let's check out more detailed standings.  Due to the lockout, the NHL played a 48-game season where teams would only play other teams in their own conference.  While the league had 26 teams, the Eastern Conference had two more teams than the Western Conference.  Therefore, so the schedule was spread thinner for New Jersey and along with the rest of the East.  So in addition to getting the chance to go up against teams like Ottawa, the Islanders, and Tampa Bay; the Devils had 3-4 games with their opponents as opposed to 4-5 for those Western Conference teams.

Hockey-Reference has a good breakdown of split records. The Devils were a great home team, their 14-4-6 record was the fifth best in the league.  I guess the Brendan Byrne Arena was a fort in addition to being cavernous?  They weren't so great on the road, though: they went 8-14-2.  Relative to the rest of the league, it was 18th; but it's not good to drop 14 out of 20 games on the road in general regardless of league ranking.  It's also rather surprising since the Devils were extremely good on the road in the postseason.

With respect to divisional breakdowns, the Devils did better in the Atlantic at 12-8-4 (fifth in the East) than they did against the Northeast at 10-10-4 (eighth in the East).  This shouldn't be so surprising since the Northeast was a stronger division than the Atlantic.  Quebec and Pittsburgh ruled the Northeast and were buoyed by Boston (led by their power trio of Adam Oates, Cam Neely, and Ray Bourque), Buffalo (led by Dominik Hasek being Dominik Hasek). Whereas the Atlantic was led by Philly and the Devils and Caps were the only other teams to top 50% in terms of points percentage.

The monthly records at Hockey-Reference give an overview of how they did throughout the season. The Devils struggled in January, were above average in February, and were mediocre in March.  Their performance in April was what propelled them to a second place finish in the Atlantic and a #5 seed in the East. They went 8-4-2, the third best record in the league in April.   Ignoring their one loss in May - they played one game - the Devils did go into the playoffs on an upward trend.  As we know now, the best was yet to come.

Lastly for team record and stats, let's briefly look at how the Devils did against various opponents.  The good news was that they smashed the Rangers (3-0-1), beat up on Ottawa (3-0-0) and Florida (3-1-0), they went undefeated against Hartford (1-0-2), and their 3-1-0 record over Washington got them Boston instead of Buffalo in the first round.    The bad (and in retrospect, surprising) news is that the Devils were winless against Pittsburgh at 0-1-2; struggled with division dwellers Tampa Bay (1-2-1) and the Islanders (1-1-2); and were decisively beaten in the season series' with Boston and Philadelphia (1-3-0 each).   I'm sure back in early May, many Devils fans weren't happy that the team had to take on the B's in the first round of the playoffs. 

Moving on to player stats, the Devils weren't that impressive.   Martin Brodeur was the definitive starter in 1995, playing 40 out of the team's 48 games. He posted a save percentage of 90.2%, good for 16th in the league out of goalies who played at least 20 games (28 total) per Hockey-Reference.  Considering the save percentages of most of the other non-Hasek goalies, Brodeur didn't do too bad.  He just wasn't exceptional and carried the team on his back through the season.  Current goalie coach Chris Terreri was the backup, appeared in 15 games, and put up a save percentage of 90%.  Again, not bad, but not great.

The skaters weren't much more impressive.  Jacques Lemaire emphasized the neutral zone trap, everyone bought into the system, and it was sensible since many of the players were defensive-minded players.  Stephane Richer did quite well, as his 23 goals were the 14th most in the league (tied with two others) and his 39 points ranked him tied for 46th.   However, no Devil really came close to Richer's production.  John MacLean hit 30 and hit only 17 goals and 29 points.  Third on the team in scoring was Neal Broten, who caught fire in New Jersey but definitely was beyond the prime of his career.  That he finished third on the team in regular season scoring speaks volumes about the team's struggles on offense.  

Looking down the roster at Hockey-Reference, names stand out with stat lines that didn't look great even in a shortened season.  Claude Lemieux, who was a prime producer for the Devils in prior seasons, struggled with only 6 goals and 13 assists in 45 games. Scott Stevens was still leading the blueline and wrecking fools; but he was unable to put up points like he did in 1993-94. Bill Guerin, Bobby Holik, Brian Rolston and Scott Niedermayer would go on to have very productive careers; but they were still quite young at the time.  Therefore, they chipped in more so than carry the team offensively.  Bobby Carpenter, Bruce Driver, and Tommy Albelin started showing signs of age in general, so they dropped off into more defensive roles.  The combination of all of this resulted in a team that really had to rely on it's defense to win games because their offensive production was limited.  I would have loved to know their Corsi figures to see who was driving play and being unproductive and who was just unproductive.  Still, while this roster was good enough to win a Cup, it's easy to see why they struggled on offense and relied on defending to make it through the season and through the playoffs.

So what happened in the playoffs?  Well, quite simply, the Devils got hot. 

First and foremost, the goalie got hot.  Martin Brodeur showed the entire hockey world that he was quite good, as he posted a 92.7% save percentage. According to Hockey-Refence, that save percentage would be the best out of all regular goalies in the 1995 playoffs.  His 3 shutouts - all against Boston in the first round - also led all playoff goalies. Based on his game log at Hockey-Reference, the only time he may have had any struggles came against Philadelphia, with two consecutive games of 3+ goals allowed.  He would follow those up with superior performances.

Second, Claude Lemieux became a beast.  He was used in a shadowing role.  Lemaire would match up his line against the opponent's top line whenever possible, and Lemeiux's job was to cover the other team's best winger. Against Boston, that was Cam Neely. Against Pittsburgh, that was Jaromir Jagr. Against Philadelphia, that was John LeClair.  Against Detroit, I think it was Keith Primeau.  Lemaire figured that with Lemieux struggling to score during the season, he can still be valuable by shutting them down.  Yet, Lemieux exploded for 13 goals and 3 assists in the playoffs.  He didn't just cover the opposing winger, he torched them en route to goals.  He was lethal on the counter-attack, especially against Pittsburgh against whom he tallied 6 of his 13 goals.  Lemieux won the Conn Smythe for his efforts, fully deserved given that he burst into flames after a plodding season.

Third, other skaters got hot and found the net more often.  John MacLean made an impact away on a line outside of Lemieux and Richer.  He went from 29 points in 46 season games to 18 points in 20, finishing just behind Broten and not too far from Richer.  Randy McKay was middling during the season with 5 goals and 7 assists in 33 games.  He sparkled on the Crash Line with 8 goals and 4 assists, shooting at a wondrous 26.7%.  Defenseman Shawn Chambers was acquired during the season and put up only 2 goals and 5 assists in 21 games. In the playoffs, Chambers doubled his goal total and contributed 5 helpers in 20 games. Scott Niedermayer didn't get hot until the final 6 games of the playoffs, when he put up 1 (very sweet) goal and contributed 6 assists.  Neal Broten remained hot.  When players like this "step up" in these situations, at this time of the season, it's enough to help propel a team against competition who did better overall in the regular season.

Fourth, let's give some respect to Jacques Lemaire. I don't know if coaches can get hot, but he certainly did a great job against his opponents from bench-to-bench.  His decision to use Lemieux as a shadow turned out better than anyone could have expected.  Rolling four lines helped the team stay relatively fresh and catch opponents in bad match-ups, which helped the Crash Line excel.   The entire team committed to the trap and reliant on the counter-attack; there was little need for adjustment or a change in general tactics in the postseason.  Their strong defending and transition game made them a pain to play against during the season.

Throw in the fact that Brodeur got hot, Lemieux got hot, Broten stayed hot, and other skaters got hot, and the Devils became incredibly dangerous to play against.  That's how a team that went 8-14-2 on the road in the regular season, went a remarkable 10-1 on the road in the playoffs - starting each series  That's how a team that went a combined 2-7-2 against Boston, Pittsburgh, and Philadelphia - all would be described as bad match-ups - went 12-4 against them in May and June.  That's how a team that averaged 2.83 goals per game in the season, averaged 3.35 goals per game in the postseason - with only one game (Game 4, OT win over Boston) where the Devils failed to score 2 or more goals in the playoffs. The Devils were a good enough team to get into the postseason, with strengths and flaws like any team.  Unlike any team, several Devils got hot which helped minimize those flaws and strengthen their current identity.  Largely as a result from that, the Devils managed to dispose of four teams who did better than them in the regular season and did so in under 7 games for each opponent.  That's usually the equation for playoff success: do well enough and then get hot in some way or form to obtain success.

I wouldn't describe the 1995 New Jersey Devils as a weak team that won the Cup.  They had to overachieve and punch above their weight.  They wouldn't have gotten where they went without Brodeur, Lemieux, Broten, Richer, MacLean, McKay, Niedermayer, etc. getting or staying hot.  They relied on a tactic that other teams just struggled with even though they've seen it since 1993-94; and the aforementioned hotness made them lethal. Their power play was horrid and their offense overall was below league average until the playoffs. Yet, they didn't just barely make the playoffs or get pounded by every other team in the East in the regular season.  They were good at home and their defense kept them in many of their games (though close games often didn't go their way).  They didn't need to drag any of their playoff series to 7 games and hope on some breaks to get ahead.   The 1995 New Jersey Devils were relatively good, but they weren't one of the East's top teams, much less in the league.  They just played like they were elite in the post season; which is how they should be remembered.

What did you remember from the 1994-95 New Jersey Devils season and playoffs?  Would you agree with my point that they were good, but not great relative to the rest of the league, despite winning the championship? If not, why?  What about the 1995 Devils surprised you the most between the season and the playoffs (e.g. difference in road record, record against opponents, actual goal scoring etc.)?  Do you see some parallels from that team and recent Devils teams? Please leave your answers and other thoughts about the 1995 Devils in the comments. Thanks for reading.

Comment 33 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

I remember being 2 years old and not knowing anything about hockey

But in all seriousness, the rise of the Devils, mixed with the fact that I was growing up about 10 minutes away from the Meadowlands, was the main reason I became a Devils fan. Even though I do not remember Doc’s famous “The Championship to New Jersey” call, I still get goosebumps when I hear it b/c of its significance to the franchise.

by David Fine on Sep 4, 2011 5:29 PM EDT reply actions  

The Lockout and Brodeur

I really think the lockout helped the Devils in this situation. I think the shortened season benefited for teams like the Devils who maybe weren’t the best in the league and were a bubble team to get into the playoffs. If there was a full season teams in the east could have pulled further away and what not and the Devils not being the best team in the East benefitted greatly from having a “good first half of the season”. It kept Marty fresh and allowed him to play almost all of our games without being tired in the playoffs. That’s what I think helped us the most. He didn’t have very good numbers in the regular season but his SV% went way up and his GAA went way down. I don’t even think Claude Lemiuex deserved the Conn Smythe over Marty. Claude Lemiuex is kind of a douche anyway and I never liked him as a Devil so maybe i’m biased.

I have a hard time defending players like Lemiuex, Avery, Cooke, Simon, Ruutu, and Carcillo. They really don’t belong in the NHL for the stuff they pull. But that’s a different discussion all together.

by Mr. Boom on Sep 4, 2011 7:04 PM EDT reply actions  

serioiusly???

How dare you sir put Lemiuex’s name in comparison to the cockroach named Avery???

by poros all star on Sep 4, 2011 8:12 PM EDT up reply actions  

Well it’s not so much what he did while in New Jersey it’s what he did when he was on the Avs. I think his game deteriorated so he pulled some stunts on the ice to even up the playing field.

by Mr. Boom on Sep 4, 2011 11:34 PM EDT up reply actions  

If there was a full season teams in the east could have pulled further away and what not and the Devils not being the best team in the East benefitted greatly from having a "good first half of the season". It kept Marty fresh and allowed him to play almost all of our games without being tired in the playoffs. That’s what I think helped us the most. He didn’t have very good numbers in the regular season but his SV% went way up and his GAA went way down

If Brodeur’s numbers during the regular season weren’t good, then how is that evidence that he benefited from the shortened season, much less have it be a benefit for the Devils? Especially it wasn’t until the final full month of the season that the Devils actually pulled away from their opponents?

I don’t even think Claude Lemiuex deserved the Conn Smythe over Marty. Claude Lemiuex is kind of a douche anyway and I never liked him as a Devil so maybe i’m biased.

Well, Brodeur certainly had a good case for Conn Smythe with his 92.7% save percentage. I think Lemieux got the edge since his goal scoring was that important and he did it while defending against top players throughout the postseason.

I think you are. I wouldn’t compare Lemieux to a fourth-liner or a goon either. The guy was a top-two line forward with an excellent shot, who was quite productive in his career until 2000 or so. Unlike Avery, Simon, Ruutu, Carcillo, etc.; Lemieux was a very, very good hockey player.

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 Sep 4, 2011 11:46 PM EDT up reply actions  

How can any Devils fan not like Claude?

That is amazing, a Conn Smythe winner who helped us win 2 Cups and also many huge GW goals as a Devil.

The Devils are Jersey's Team, all of New Jersey

by Real Big Devils Fan on Sep 5, 2011 12:36 PM EDT up reply actions  

Agreed, That and on top of the fact that the game was a lot rougher then it is today. Claude was not unique at all. For just about every questionable dirty thing he may have done. He usually received one in return or someone did.

It is not even comparable.

by NJDOhio on Sep 5, 2011 1:15 PM EDT up reply actions  

I think you missed it John

John,

I usually defer to you and agree with most of your analysis, but I digress.

The 1995 Devils (really no need to add the 1994 there) were just a contiuation of the red hot team that finished second overall in the 1993-94 season, where they took the Presidents’ trophy winning NY Rangers to OT of Game 7 of the Eastern Conference Finals. They blew the league away in goals and nearly had 9 guys with 20 goals or more.

Had the Devils been able to close it out at home in Game 6 or win in OT in Game 7, this Devils’ team would have been the defending champions (I also think they would’ve beat Vancouver in less than 7).

In Heaven, the 1995 Devils Stanley Cup VHS, I believe Scott Stevens says that the 94 loss was what they needed to learn how to win. I think he nailed it.

The “good” Devils team in 1995 was a team that I just saw slow out of the gate because they had an emotional year beforehand and the long layoff rattled the young team a little. There were missing elements. As John pointed out, Broten helped get some of that fire back. He was a veteran that steadied the ship. And when the playoffs came . . . boom!

Hockey historians credit the trap, but I believe they highly underrate the fact this team got so close a year prior and was hungry to capture it again. How else do you describe their playoff dominance? So many tick-tac-toe passes and setups this year.

Go back and look at the goals from these playoffs and compare them to 2000 & 2003. The neutral zone trap can’t explain the offensive finesse.

Sure they would miss the playoffs in 1996 (not by much) but as the regular seasons of 97 – 01 prove, 1994 marked the beginning of a potential dynasty. From 1994 – 2003 the Devils had a combination of amazing to great regular seasons with mixed playoffs results (if you call 3 Stanley Cups that). 2002, I really feel they got hosed too and would’ve gone deeper. Lemaire’s system can’t explain it all.

Instead I would title the post: The 1995 Devils: The team that overcame lockout hangover and nearly started a dynasty.

I have respect for most sports fans with 2 exceptions: NY Ranger fans who grew up in New Jersey, and Dallas Cowboy fans who can't name the capital of Texas.

by Cherno77 on Sep 4, 2011 8:38 PM EDT reply actions  

I don't think I missed anything.
The 1995 Devils (really no need to add the 1994 there) were just a contiuation of the red hot team that finished second overall in the 1993-94 season, where they took the Presidents’ trophy winning NY Rangers to OT of Game 7 of the Eastern Conference Finals. They blew the league away in goals and nearly had 9 guys with 20 goals or more.

That is true about 1993-94. The 1995 team didn’t score nearly as many goals as the 1993-94 team; so I don’t see how you can call them a continuation. Moreover, the 1995 Devils were 15-13-6 before going on a strong April run to pull themselves away from the many teams surrounding them in the East. The Devils didn’t pick up where they left off in 1994, in 1995 season.

In Heaven, the 1995 Devils Stanley Cup VHS, I believe Scott Stevens says that the 94 loss was what they needed to learn how to win. I think he nailed it.

What does that even mean? The Devils didn’t know how to win hockey games until they lost Game 7 to Our Hated Rivals?

I’ll humor the notion with this question: if it’s all about knowing “what it takes,” then shouldn’t the team have asked former Stanley Cup winners Stephane Richer, Claude Lemieux, or even Jacques Lemaire all about that? Along with Bobby Carpenter and Neal Broten, since they both were on teams that got to the Stanley Cup Finals and lost? If not, then why?

Hockey historians credit the trap, but I believe they highly underrate the fact this team got so close a year prior and was hungry to capture it again. How else do you describe their playoff dominance? So many tick-tac-toe passes and setups this year. Go back and look at the goals from these playoffs and compare them to 2000 & 2003. The neutral zone trap can’t explain the offensive finesse.

The neutral zone trap isn’t inconsistent with offensive finesse; so I don’t really understand how that historians are wrong here. If anything, the trap allowed the Devils to hit opposing teams on the counter-attack in transition repeatedly. Claude Lemieux used to full advantage against Pittsburgh among his 6 goals in that series against them.

Instead I would title the post: The 1995 Devils: The team that overcame lockout hangover and nearly started a dynasty.

Sure, if you ignore what was recorded and ignore the definition of dynasty – extended and consistent excellence, which doesn’t mix with winning a Cup and then not making the playoffs the next season.

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 Sep 4, 2011 11:40 PM EDT up reply actions  

John,

You’re a hard stats guy and you really can’t argue against some numbers. But you can interpret those numbers in different ways. And hard numbers crunching can’t explain some intangibles.

For example this article after the Oilers won their Stanley Cup:

The mega-talented Oilers, however, learned a valuable lesson immediately after getting swept in the Final a year earlier when their young stars — Wayne Gretzky, Mark Messier and others — walked by the New York locker room. The Islanders were not so much celebrating as much as they were recuperating with numerous ice bags on their battered bodies after hoisting their fourth straight Cup around the ice. The recognition of needing to sacrifice and endure whatever pain it required to let their formidable talent prevail in the end galvanized Edmonton one year later.

Then, there’s the Penguins who lost the year before to win it.

And it was Stephane Richer who said he spent all summer thinking about that 1994 loss, could that explain why he lead the Devils in scoring?

While I’ll cede some points, I don’t think you can dismiss some intangible factors that may have contributed to the 1995 run.

I have respect for most sports fans with 2 exceptions: NY Ranger fans who grew up in New Jersey, and Dallas Cowboy fans who can't name the capital of Texas.

by Cherno77 on Sep 5, 2011 12:35 AM EDT reply actions  

But what you cite as intangible factors make no actual sense with the reality of how the team did. Oh, the Oilers and Islanders had injuries? Well, that makes them just like every other professional sports team in every season ever. What makes their playing through injuries any different from those teams who had players who done so but didn’t win the championship? Oh, the Penguins lost the year before to win it? Well, how come the Penguins were able to do to that, but not the Canucks after 1994, or Boston after 1990, or the North Stars after 1991, or any other team that loses in the SCF or ECF/WCF and doesn’t return to either?

I think Richer led the Devils in scoring because he was a scorer who stayed healthy, didn’t get suffer from awful luck or what-have-you like Lemieux, and had the good fortune to stay consistent.

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 Sep 5, 2011 10:40 AM EDT up reply actions  

What makes their playing through injuries any different from those teams who had players who done so but didn’t win the championship? Oh, the Penguins lost the year before to win it? Well, how come the Penguins were able to do to that, but not the Canucks after 1994, or Boston after 1990, or the North Stars after 1991, or any other team that loses in the SCF or ECF/WCF and doesn’t return to either?

Because the Devils and Penguins where more exceptional of a team then the others?
I think you just killed your argument here John.

by NJDOhio on Sep 5, 2011 1:19 PM EDT up reply actions  

Because the Devils and Penguins where more exceptional of a team then the others?
I think you just killed your argument here John.

No, he didn’t. Your argument is circular. ‘These exceptional teams won the Stanley Cup because they were exceptional’.

There are plenty of teams that didn’t lose deep in the playoffs and won the Stanley Cup the next year. There are plenty of teams that lost a Cup Final or in the Conference Final and never came close to returning.

Driving Play - The Blog with Three First Lines

by Triumph44 on Sep 5, 2011 1:35 PM EDT up reply actions  

These exceptional teams won the Stanley Cup because they were exceptional

I said more exceptional.

There are plenty of teams that lost a Cup Final or in the Conference Final and never came close to returning.

Exactly.

You could say the team wasn’t that good and just got hot at the right time or You could say they under performed early in the year and finally straightened out at the right time.

I remember feeling the team was under performing in the early part of the season rather then just “Getting Hot”. Considering it was pretty much the same team (minus Bernie Nicholls and Viacheslav Fetisov) as the one that did so well the year before.

Cause if your going to say they might not have been that great just got hot at the right time. Then I guess they where hot all of 1994. Because it was pretty much the same team.

by NJDOhio on Sep 5, 2011 7:16 PM EDT up reply actions  

The Devils didn’t pick up where they left off in 1994, in 1995 season.

They won went to the Conference Finals both years.

If anything, the trap allowed the Devils to hit opposing teams on the counter-attack in transition repeatedly.

Well said, ceded.

Sure, if you ignore what was recorded and ignore the definition of dynasty – extended and consistent excellence, which doesn’t mix with winning a Cup and then not making the playoffs the next season.

I did say nearly on dynasty. Fact is, because of the Devils records in the 1990s & 2000s, they’ve been the 2nd most successful team during that span, after the Red Wings.

And as a final note on the intangibles, could the Devils have won in 2000 with Robbie Ftorek? Again, no numbers to possibly prove or disprove this, but getting beyond the numbers and remembering the atmosphere is important. Possibly examining the NYT archives of what was being written might help explain why this “good but not great” team won?

I have respect for most sports fans with 2 exceptions: NY Ranger fans who grew up in New Jersey, and Dallas Cowboy fans who can't name the capital of Texas.

by Cherno77 on Sep 5, 2011 12:49 AM EDT reply actions  

They won went to the Conference Finals both years.

I have respect for most sports fans with 2 exceptions: NY Ranger fans who grew up in New Jersey, and Dallas Cowboy fans who can't name the capital of Texas.

by Cherno77 on Sep 5, 2011 12:50 AM EDT up reply actions  

The 1993-94 team went 47-25-12, with the second best home record in the league and the sixth best road record. They led the Eastern Conference with 306 goals scored and only Detroit scored more than them in the entire league. The Devils finished just behind Buffalo in goals allowed with 220. Only the Rangers put up more points than the Devils during the regular season in the NHL. The 93-94 Devils were one of the best teams in the entire league. Nobody but the Rangers could touch them in the Atlantic and only Pittsburgh came close to reaching the Devils’ record. And it still took the Rangers 7 games and overtime to beat NJ in 1994. Those Devils were playing at an elite level.

The 1995 Devils were definitely not one of the best teams in the league. They needed a hot April to guarantee a playoff spot. They needed Neal Broten playing on fire to bolster their offense, which still finished below average in the league. Those Devils didn’t even get home ice in the playoffs, much less get to second place in the East & the league. They were not elite.

I don’t see how anyone can say the 1995 Devils picked up where the 93-94 Devils left off because those two teams were very different in terms of performance.

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 Sep 5, 2011 10:47 AM EDT up reply actions  

As I see it, the 93-94 Devils belong with the 2009 Bruins and 2007 Sabres as good teams who rode the shooting percentage train. It’s a shame we don’t have better numbers from back then, but the Devils outshot other teams by 200 overall, and outscored them by about 100 at even strength.

It’s possible that shooting percentage was more of a skill back then (the 80s Oilers didn’t outshoot opponents by much either), but the team wasn’t a top offensive club the year before or the year after.

Driving Play - The Blog with Three First Lines

by Triumph44 on Sep 5, 2011 11:00 AM EDT up reply actions  

Bigger picture

What I’m trying to say with perspective:

1994 – 2003 was an extremely successful time in Devils history. This period can perhaps be looked upon like the late 90s – early 2000 New York Yankees or the 2007 – current day Philadelphia Phillies. They didn’t win every year, but were either wildly successful in the regular season or playoffs (or both) with the exceptions of a couple off years.

I feel that you’re trying to downplay that. Like these 1995 Devils came out of Left Field or something? They didn’t. What they did in 1995, should have been no surprise considering what they did they year before in the playoffs.

Now what woke them up? Spring? Neal Broten? Lemaire? Brodeur’s play? Who knows?

Maybe it was playing a weak Boston team in the first round who had Blaine Lacher as their starting goalie? Then, the confidence came back?

Sure they choked the next year, but they topped the Eastern Conference the next three. 1995 wasn’t a blip in Devils history. It was the start of a very talented core, which would go on to have some great following seasons.

I have respect for most sports fans with 2 exceptions: NY Ranger fans who grew up in New Jersey, and Dallas Cowboy fans who can't name the capital of Texas.

by Cherno77 on Sep 5, 2011 11:00 AM EDT up reply actions  

haha, like a journalist has any clue why hockey teams win or lose.

Driving Play - The Blog with Three First Lines

by Triumph44 on Sep 5, 2011 10:26 AM EDT up reply actions  

Definitely impressed with Richer

Despite my feelings here, I have to give you credit on your Richer post. Not only was this guy the Devils leading scorer in 1995, he was talking the talk and skating the skate:

With six games left in the regular season he said this:

We’ve had a lot of guys in and out all year because of injuries,” he said. "But we’re all back and even with what happened against Tampa Bay, I believe we’re all back to thinking we can win every night and we can beat anybody.

Richer said he has studied the opposition and come to the conclusion that “we have pretty much everything to win the Stanley Cup as long as we stay away from injuries.”

My emphasis on the bold.

I have respect for most sports fans with 2 exceptions: NY Ranger fans who grew up in New Jersey, and Dallas Cowboy fans who can't name the capital of Texas.

by Cherno77 on Sep 5, 2011 1:05 AM EDT reply actions  

So teams are better when they're fully healthy. That's...not news to anyone.

Plus, a lot of those injuries were seemingly minor in terms of impact on the team. A quick look at Hockey-Reference shows that 5 players played the full season, 14 played more than 40 out of 48 games, and both Broten and Chambers played their entire tenure after. More importantly, those 14 were important players to the team: Richer, Lemieux, Stevens, Brodeur, Niedermayer, MacLean, etc. Sure, there were other injuries, but it wasn’t like the core was decimated until May 1995 where everyone got together and played.

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 Sep 5, 2011 10:51 AM EDT up reply actions  

i find it really cool how lemiuex and richer won the cup with a young marty brodeur just like they did with a rookie patrik roy in 86’. those french canadiens know how to win cups

by Zubrus on Sep 5, 2011 8:52 AM EDT via iPhone app reply actions  

What Year Were You Born?

I had a huge comment that I decided not to post that was more critical of this blog and your aimless use of statistics (like the ridiculous Corsi). However, I realized I could have summed it up with one question: what year were you born?

I ask because the above piece could only have come from someone who did not watch one single hockey game that season.

by blecavs on Sep 5, 2011 11:25 AM EDT reply actions  

i’m not john, but i’d say i watched 30 games that year and the vast majority of the playoff games. the 95 devils weren’t a great team, they were a very good team that got ridiculously hot at the right time.

Driving Play - The Blog with Three First Lines

by Triumph44 on Sep 5, 2011 11:45 AM EDT up reply actions  

I had a huge comment that I decided not to post that was more critical of this blog

Sorry to hear that you decided to not post the “comment” you “had.”

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 Sep 5, 2011 11:56 AM EDT up reply actions  

I think a better description

would be that they were a very talented team that didn’t play up to their potential until late in the season and the playoffs. They may have indeed been a great team (it usually takes that to win the Cup), but their regular season performance was simply good.

Go Devils
Go Jets
Need to lose weight?

by FrankG929 on Sep 5, 2011 4:50 PM EDT reply actions  

Agreed. Considering it was essentially the same team from 1994 I would say they just under performed early in the season.

by NJDOhio on Sep 5, 2011 7:19 PM EDT up reply actions  

1994 & 1995

First off, my memory was having been lucky enough to invest $$$ in buying third & fourth round Devils playoffs tickets (strips, I recall), and going to game #4 vs. Detroit for the cup alone, since none of my friends could go. Then selling the extra game #4 ticket to a son & Dad who traveled from Michigan just to see the game. They gave me free beer, free food…we tailgated together and had fun. Paid me double face value for one ticket, so I was going into the cup game for free. Then a friend of theirs called up and was able to get them four tickets for free to the game. They then sold my ticket (along with another one they scalped off someone else), got the four free ones at will call, and sold the 4th free one then and there…and split the money with me! I got paid to watch the Devils win the Cup! Afterwards in the parking lot mayhem that ensued, I got word that the team was heading back to Daneyko’s MezzNotte restaurant w/the cup, etc. to party…so I rounded up a dozen or so friends and we ambushed team members as they left the place that night…very late, but one of the greatest times of my life. And yes, I got to touch the cup that night. Awesome. At roughly age 21/22, like a kid in a candy store!

Now…the prior year was the antithesis. I recall how the Devils had a stellar season only to lose to Messier and the Rangers. Although it’s not quantitative, I remember being a believer over the next few years that the Devils cruised through the 94-95 season, however brief it was (due to the lockout), because they had learned that the regular season didn’t matter…in the end, the Cup is all that matters. That is why they steamrolled everyone in their wake. I think they learned a valuable lesson the year before. They exhausted themselves physically, mentally & emotionally throughout 93-94. In 94-95, the memory remained, but they didn’t dwell on it and rot…instead, they used it as a lesson learned.

Just my 2 cents….

by Keith Puzio on Sep 5, 2011 10:27 PM EDT reply actions   1 recs

Good story

Nice story Keith. That really was sweet. I unfortunately, have a sour story relating to 1995.

I was at Game 3 vs. Boston
And Game 3 vs. Pittsburgh
I gave tickets to Game 4 to my next door neighbor because it was Senior Prom Night.
Went to all the home games vs. Philly
Went to Game 3 vs. Detroit
Because I had family in Chicago, and my same aged cousins and I were all having HS graduation parties, I gave my Game 4 ticket to that same next door neighbor, thinking they’d never sweep the Red Wings.

Spent many years with that hanging over me. Game 5 in 2000, Game 6 in 2001, finally only could get one ticket to Game 7 in 2003. Vindication.

I have respect for most sports fans with 2 exceptions: NY Ranger fans who grew up in New Jersey, and Dallas Cowboy fans who can't name the capital of Texas.

by Cherno77 on Sep 6, 2011 8:55 AM EDT up reply actions  

My take on the ‘95 team is that the prior season primed them for a Cup run. The team had a lot of talent but were not heralded because they were the area’s “other club.” At the heart of the team were veterans who realized after losing in ’94 what was needed to go all the way. They were led by a coach who is a brillant tactician, a man who changed how his club played against each opponent, to take their game plan away and make them play his.

The goal of the club in the shortened season was to make the playoffs and take it from there. Some teams are designed for the playoffs and the ‘95 Devils were that team. Lemaire gave them their game plan in each series and they executed it to a “T”. They proved what Lou says about winning; "It’s not the best team that wins championships, it’s the team that plays best as a team that wins." And the ‘95 Devils did just that. It was not a case of key players getting hot, rather it was a case of a team coming together to play as a team. After New Jersey won game two in Detroit, a fellow worker in our company’s Detroit office sent me the sports page of the Detroit Free Press. The sportswriter predicted that the Devils would win the Cup in four games, saying that the Red Wings had done everything they could to beat New Jersey, and couldn’t do it.

There is a major difference between the regular season and the playoffs. The players mindset is different too. And you can’t discount the strategy of the coach and how he gets his players ready for the grind that leads to hoisting that silver chalice.

There have been so many “upsets” in sports championships for us to understand that a team’s performance during the season is not always a portend of how they will play in the playoffs. The ’95 Devils were not the best team in the league going into the post-season, but they certainly were during it.

by Barry G on Sep 6, 2011 2:47 AM EDT reply actions  

=/
Quite an argument.
I don’t have much to add to this, except to say that I also think that it may not exactly have been the same team going from one season to the other, but that perhaps it may have gotten hot, but did so due to the fact it was able to straighten things out and return to its previous dominance in the game.

Now, that being said from somebody who is too young to remember those seasons, I have of course heard many things about the Neutral Zone Trap, and how we so famously used it under Lemaire. I do have a general idea of it and how it works, but is it possible for somebody to post a more definitive definition of this please? Thanks.

by NJGuy on Sep 6, 2011 8:32 AM EDT reply actions  

There are plenty of videos out there if you want to google/youtube it. Like this one.

Essentially what you want to do is force the player with the puck toward the left or right boards by staying in the middle of the ice and cutting off passing lanes to other offensive players. If it works the puck carrier finds himself along or toward the boards with no one to pass to (Essentially trapped) and either has to try and dump the puck in or make a very difficult pass across the rink to the more open opposite side.

That is probably not a good explanation. If I was you I would go and watch some of the videos. It is hard to explain without diagrams.

by NJDOhio on Sep 6, 2011 5:08 PM EDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about the New Jersey Devils! New here? Check out the Rules and Guidelines before posting.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

The_official_web_site___new_jersey_devils_small
FOR THE LOVE OF THE DEVILS...PLEASE DON'T SELL YOUR TICKETS TO RANGERS FANS

Recent FanPosts

Tdevilsg_small
GAME SIX SIGN IN
Small
A Paean to Ilya Kovalchuk
A_s_game_small
Game 6 tickets
31519_397927484582_78722009582_3938348_414926_n_small
Goal Bar Seats
Small
Games Played in the Conference Playoffs: A History Lesson
Small
Line Changes...Again
Small
Cup or Bust?
Claude_small
Post your press conference question(s) for John Tortorella here.
Pig_face_small
Mar-ty, Hen-ke
Small
Top Secret Agent or Cranky Middle Aged Man?

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

joomla visitors

Managers

Stanley_cup_and_you_-_sbn_small John Fischer

Authors

Puddy_small Tom Stivali

Marty_sbetter_small Matthew Ventolo

Zidlickymania_small Kevin Sellathamby

1729_small Matt Evans SNC