Tallinder and a 4th for a 6th makes zero sense
- shvingter88

What kills a team is not its lack of talent as the NHL has its fair share of it, but its liabilities. Sometimes getting rid of people alone makes a team better.

Case in point: Devils sack Langenbrunner, Arnott, and Rolston. Did they need the picks? Well Langenbrunner and Arnott still had trade value. Did they need Steckel? No, Hunter? No. And they make the Finals the next year. Palmieri, Josefson, and Tedenby aren't exactly superstars, yet Devils were winning with them and losing with the other guys.

Tallinder gets a blood clot... Devils finally get into a comfortable playoff position, making it as far as second in the conference at some point, and go on to the stanley cup finals.

But yet, my excel spread sheet which tells me he's a liability, and this second reason for substantiating the argument to get rid of him (they make the finals) isn't enough. No, instead, he STILL must have trade value with his 6 assists and -12 stat in those 42 games played last year! Did I offend you because you saw him make a good first pass out of the defensive zone and decided from on now that he's a good player?

And those guys (Arnott, Langenbrunner) get replaced by rookies. When they trade Langenbrunner, they start to go on a mean streak, winning a ton of games. Why? Cuz unfortunately for Langenbrunner, he no longer fit the team and the style the team plays. Stats may tell selective truths, but then, what are you using as a gauge?

Are you still going to make fun of the spreadsheets after they continue to substantiate my statements? And when I criticized the Zidlicky deal, I'm still waiting for him to be the power play quarterback he was supposed to be. Did the Devil's power play even improve from this time last year? Those two d-men for all their production cost the team 8 million bucks.

It makes financial sense to move him. It makes statistical sense to move him (if he's a liability). And given that they win more without him than with him, it makes sense to the team to move him. What they get back? Who cares? Sacrificing a fourth for a sixth? Oh no, 4th round picks only have about a 12% chance to make the NHL and 6th rounds aren't much worse.

Does it still not make sense to you?

What kills a team is not its lack of talent as the NHL has its fair share of it, but its liabilities. Sometimes getting rid of people alone makes a team better.

Case in point: Devils sack Langenbrunner, Arnott, and Rolston. Did they need the picks? Well Langenbrunner and Arnott still had trade value. Did they need Steckel? No, Hunter? No. And they make the Finals the next year. Palmieri, Josefson, and Tedenby aren't exactly superstars, yet Devils were winning with them and losing with the other guys.

Tallinder gets a blood clot... Devils finally get into a comfortable playoff position, making it as far as second in the conference at some point, and go on to the stanley cup finals.

But yet, my excel spread sheet which tells me he's a liability, and this second reason for substantiating the argument to get rid of him (they make the finals) isn't enough. No, instead, he STILL must have trade value with his 6 assists and -12 stat in those 42 games played last year! Did I offend you because you saw him make a good first pass out of the defensive zone and decided from on now that he's a good player?

And those guys (Arnott, Langenbrunner) get replaced by rookies. When they trade Langenbrunner, they start to go on a mean streak, winning a ton of games. Why? Cuz unfortunately for Langenbrunner, he no longer fit the team and the style the team plays. Stats may tell selective truths, but then, what are you using as a gauge?

Are you still going to make fun of the spreadsheets after they continue to substantiate my statements? And when I criticized the Zidlicky deal, I'm still waiting for him to be the power play quarterback he was supposed to be. Did the Devil's power play even improve from this time last year? Those two d-men for all their production cost the team 8 million bucks.

It makes financial sense to move him. It makes statistical sense to move him (if he's a liability). And given that they win more without him than with him, it makes sense to the team to move him. What they get back? Who cares? Sacrificing a fourth for a sixth? Oh no, 4th round picks only have about a 12% chance to make the NHL and 6th rounds aren't much worse.

Does it still not make sense to you?
- archromat

can you elaborate?

can you elaborate?
- shvingter88

I'm sure if we trade Tallinder at the very least we can get back a bottom-six NHL player. Tallinder still has value in this league. Something along the lines of Halischuk for Tallinder, Cleary for Tallinder, or even Drew Miller for Tallinder I would prefer before trading him and a pick to get an even worse pick.

what are you stupid we should trade tallinder plus our best prospect for a 7th round draft pick just to get rid of both of them.

What kills a team is not its lack of talent as the NHL has its fair share of it, but its liabilities. Sometimes getting rid of people alone makes a team better.

Case in point: Devils sack Langenbrunner, Arnott, and Rolston. Did they need the picks? Well Langenbrunner and Arnott still had trade value. Did they need Steckel? No, Hunter? No. And they make the Finals the next year. Palmieri, Josefson, and Tedenby aren't exactly superstars, yet Devils were winning with them and losing with the other guys.

Tallinder gets a blood clot... Devils finally get into a comfortable playoff position, making it as far as second in the conference at some point, and go on to the stanley cup finals.

But yet, my excel spread sheet which tells me he's a liability, and this second reason for substantiating the argument to get rid of him (they make the finals) isn't enough. No, instead, he STILL must have trade value with his 6 assists and -12 stat in those 42 games played last year! Did I offend you because you saw him make a good first pass out of the defensive zone and decided from on now that he's a good player?

And those guys (Arnott, Langenbrunner) get replaced by rookies. When they trade Langenbrunner, they start to go on a mean streak, winning a ton of games. Why? Cuz unfortunately for Langenbrunner, he no longer fit the team and the style the team plays. Stats may tell selective truths, but then, what are you using as a gauge?

Are you still going to make fun of the spreadsheets after they continue to substantiate my statements? And when I criticized the Zidlicky deal, I'm still waiting for him to be the power play quarterback he was supposed to be. Did the Devil's power play even improve from this time last year? Those two d-men for all their production cost the team 8 million bucks.

It makes financial sense to move him. It makes statistical sense to move him (if he's a liability). And given that they win more without him than with him, it makes sense to the team to move him. What they get back? Who cares? Sacrificing a fourth for a sixth? Oh no, 4th round picks only have about a 12% chance to make the NHL and 6th rounds aren't much worse.

Does it still not make sense to you?
- archromat

Although I don't agree, I understand the idea of trading away Tallinder and addition through subtraction. But what on God's green earth is behind the idea of trading a 4th rder for a 6th? Seriously, what is the reasoning there? Tallinder alone is worth a 2nd or 3rd rounder in today's league in which defensemen have inflated value, is that 4th for a 6th an incentive for someone to pick up Tallinder? He's not that much of a burden, teams would love an experienced Dman with size

anyone else have a heightened awareness to the Hamilton/Larsson comparison? I've wondered ever since the draft who will pan out to be the better dman.. or who was the better choice at the time of the draft. With Hopkins, Landeskog, Huberdeau gone.. Larsson was the best choice.. but should we have traded down for Hamilton? Only time will tell, but so far he's playing as advertised last year.. and Larsson played as well as we thought too. Both smart players, Hamilton just seems more aggressive, more grit.. Larsson is more of a Lidstrom. I just hope Larsson pans out to be the better choice.

Lets see how Matteau and Anderson fair tonight. Big game. huge game.

What kills a team is not its lack of talent as the NHL has its fair share of it, but its liabilities. Sometimes getting rid of people alone makes a team better.

Case in point: Devils sack Langenbrunner, Arnott, and Rolston. Did they need the picks? Well Langenbrunner and Arnott still had trade value. Did they need Steckel? No, Hunter? No. And they make the Finals the next year. Palmieri, Josefson, and Tedenby aren't exactly superstars, yet Devils were winning with them and losing with the other guys.

Tallinder gets a blood clot... Devils finally get into a comfortable playoff position, making it as far as second in the conference at some point, and go on to the stanley cup finals.

But yet, my excel spread sheet which tells me he's a liability, and this second reason for substantiating the argument to get rid of him (they make the finals) isn't enough. No, instead, he STILL must have trade value with his 6 assists and -12 stat in those 42 games played last year! Did I offend you because you saw him make a good first pass out of the defensive zone and decided from on now that he's a good player?

And those guys (Arnott, Langenbrunner) get replaced by rookies. When they trade Langenbrunner, they start to go on a mean streak, winning a ton of games. Why? Cuz unfortunately for Langenbrunner, he no longer fit the team and the style the team plays. Stats may tell selective truths, but then, what are you using as a gauge?

Are you still going to make fun of the spreadsheets after they continue to substantiate my statements? And when I criticized the Zidlicky deal, I'm still waiting for him to be the power play quarterback he was supposed to be. Did the Devil's power play even improve from this time last year? Those two d-men for all their production cost the team 8 million bucks.

It makes financial sense to move him. It makes statistical sense to move him (if he's a liability). And given that they win more without him than with him, it makes sense to the team to move him. What they get back? Who cares? Sacrificing a fourth for a sixth? Oh no, 4th round picks only have about a 12% chance to make the NHL and 6th rounds aren't much worse.

Does it still not make sense to you?
- archromat

Two things. First, the Devils made it to the finals with Zidlicky, which is the argument you are making against Tallinder. I don't think you can argue against both of them given the basis of your argument against Tallinder.

Second, I'm not convinced that Tallinder's absence was a cause and effect situation in regard to the team's success. I think they simply got comfortable playing the system and gained continuity through last year's mass of injuries as the season wore on.

And I say this as a guy who is not a huge fan of either guy. But the Devils' shots against numbers are excellent this year and were very good last year. And they play a much better positional game than 80-85% of the league's teams. And this is with a more aggressive system than they have had in the past. I think Tallinder is fitting in that mold just fine, and I think Zid is much better in his own end and more conscientious than he was when he came to us last year.

barch looked offensively knowledgeable on that shift which confuses me.

Moose has been great. Only reason it is tied. Need to have a better 2nd period.

Pretty safe period. Two big chances yielded each of which could have been goals. The rest of the period was pretty tight.

Chico's twitter handle should be @IDidn'tSeeIt

Any time a forward falls down and is next to a defenseman, it's a penalty.

What did Fayne do there? The Bruins player was pulling him, and then fell to draw a penalty.

Clarkson is doing a good job raising his value in a contract year.

Any time a forward falls down and is next to a defenseman, it's a penalty.

What did Fayne do there? The Bruins player was pulling him, and then fell to draw a penalty.
- _Zippy_

They made it up. Phantom call on Paille.

Clarkson is doing a good job raising his value in a contract year.
- rmdevil313

he wants out

our PP looks better tonight.. Volcheknov making some good D plays. Mottau not getting as many minutes as I had hoped. He'll be sent back. He's going to be a top 6 player for us in the future tho.

anyone else notice this ahole?

still can't find a LW for Kovy. freaking Parise . Tedenby is in Albany, Matteau is going to go back, they've tried Josefson, Carter, Zubrus.. Elias never worked. Zubrus is our best bet but the Zubrus-Elias-Clarkson line looks good. We're 1 Parise away from being elite. makes me crazy. Henrique should come back and bring a similar boost. Can Hedberg start every game? wow

anyone else notice this ahole?

- shvingter88

What am I looking at?

O Tedenby, where art thou... The only instance we'd need him for

What am I looking at?
- _Zippy_

lucha libre

I know we lost but that was the best 60 minutes we put together so far this year. We didn't get the goals but Tuukka was playing great. I'm really happy with the point and I hope we build on this game.

lucha libre
- shvingter88

Guy in the sweatshirt in the bottom left is pretty good too.

Guy in the sweatshirt in the bottom left is pretty good too.
- Pomegrant

the lack of women is telling

Been noticing that refs are calling goaltending interference any time the goalie is touched even if it's incidental contact. Seems pretty stupid to me.