Colborne is really good. Looks to be another big-bodied center like Antropov and could be another Getzlaf, although that is a big stretch. Kulemin actually has a lot of talent and could be a 30g 30a player. Gunnarsson looks to be like another Andy Greene, another good not great defender. Scrivens is a really good goalie prospect close to being NHL ready.
- nocupslugs

see at least you know what your talking about *no sarcasm intended*.

i agree with you besides the kulemin and colborne comparison. Bergfors has not amounted to what kulemin has done statistically and colborne is the better prospect 1st rounder than cormier. Gunner compared to oduya are roughly the same tho gunner more defensive.
- Mapleleafs_91

Yeah, I agree. But Parise is also the better player than Kovalchuk.

see at least you know what your talking about *no sarcasm intended*.
- Mapleleafs_91

Too much hockeybuzz causes too much knowledge about players and prospects. Its sickening. Its gotten to the point where I can pretty much name at least 10 players on every team and at least 5 prospects for that team.

Yeah, I agree. But Parise is also the better player than Kovalchuk.
- nocupslugs

cant really say that... kovalchuk had six 40 goal+ seasons with five seasons of averaging 80+ points in total. ---------- parise had 2 good seasons

cant really say that... kovalchuk had six 40 goal+ seasons with five seasons of averaging 80+ points in total. ---------- parise had 2 good seasons
- Mapleleafs_91

Any team would trade more for Parise then they would for Kovalchuk.

Any team would trade more for Parise then they would for Kovalchuk.
- nocupslugs

Well yeah big named players are harder to acquire now

Done.... over payment for a rental. Too bad you aren't the leafs GM.
- zach parise9

Anyone that views Parise as a "rental" is not worth a conversation. Parise is not a rental from the Devils point of view. If 29 other teams view him as a rental then they may as well hang onto him until the summer, because under those circumstances that is whats best for the franchise.

The Devils are trading Parise as though he'll be playing 8 years for his new team. That's the premise of the conversation.

Otherwise it doesn't make any sense for New Jersey.

Anyone that views Parise as a "rental" is not worth a conversation. Parise is not a rental from the Devils point of view. If 29 other teams view him as a rental then they may as well hang onto him until the summer, because under those circumstances that is whats best for the franchise.

The Devils are trading Parise as though he'll be playing 8 years for his new team. That's the premise of the conversation.

Otherwise it doesn't make any sense for New Jersey.
- njdevils350

- nocupslugs

why?

Is Colborne that good? Kadri, Kulemin, Gunnerson, Scrivens are all average... Kadri has some potential but with Henrique's emergence, i'm not interested in another developing player. Parise is a top tier player. Unless we're getting a top tier prospect, i'm not interested
- MartysBetter88

Kadri and Colborne are pretty good prospects. That offer is good enough for Parise in my opinion. He would be a rental.

why?
- njdevils350

Any team is going to pay the same anyways. If a team were to trade for Parise, it would be for a run and to have the advantage of negotiating rights...

Anyone that views Parise as a "rental" is not worth a conversation. Parise is not a rental from the Devils point of view. If 29 other teams view him as a rental then they may as well hang onto him until the summer, because under those circumstances that is whats best for the franchise.

The Devils are trading Parise as though he'll be playing 8 years for his new team. That's the premise of the conversation.

Otherwise it doesn't make any sense for New Jersey.
- njdevils350

This makes no sense. Unless you are trading him and he agrees to a contract it is as a rental. You aren't going to get the value you would if he was already signed.

On the bright side, on TG's last blog, the Devils talked exclusively about going to the net for second and third chances. Finally, someone said something to them.

This makes no sense. Unless you are trading him and he agrees to a contract it is as a rental. You aren't going to get the value you would if he was already signed.
- zach parise9

It actually makes a lot of sense. If you can't get value for him, then you just try to sign him and take the 6 million in cap space if you lose out. It's just like in baseball when a team chooses to hang onto a player in July when they can't get proper trade value. Sometimes you're better off taking the draft pick. (Baseball teams surrender future first round picks when they sign certain "tiered" free agents)

Look at what the Devils gave up for Kovalchuk. That was after Kovlachuk rejected an extension.

Any team is going to pay the same anyways. If a team were to trade for Parise, it would be for a run and to have the advantage of negotiating rights...
- nocupslugs

Then there is no point in trading him.

It actually makes a lot of sense. If you can't get value for him, then you just try to sign him and take the 6 million in cap space if you lose out. It's just like in baseball when a team chooses to hang onto a player in July when they can't get proper trade value. Sometimes you're better off taking the draft pick. (Baseball teams surrender future first round picks when they sign certain "tiered" free agents)

Look at what the Devils gave up for Kovalchuk. That was after Kovlachuk rejected an extension.
- njdevils350

If Lou is going to trade him without trying to sign him that is stupid. He obviously will want to retain him. It isn't just cap space we have to replace our best player by trade likely or just try to sign lesser players. Teams aren't going to give up what they would for a signed Parise. He is a rental for half a season. Still would get a good return. And who knows if he hasn't rejected an offer? We probably will never know. This is the organization run by Lou, nothing gets leaked. I'm not going to be a homer and think we are going to get an insane offer that is ridiculous. Being realistic. With that said I don't think he gets traded.

If Lou is going to trade him without trying to sign him that is stupid. He obviously will want to retain him. It isn't just cap space we have to replace our best player by trade likely or just try to sign lesser players. Teams aren't going to give up what they would for a signed Parise. He is a rental for half a season. Still would get a good return. And who knows if he hasn't rejected an offer? We probably will never know. This is the organization run by Lou, nothing gets leaked. I'm not going to be a homer and think we are going to get an insane offer that is ridiculous. Being realistic. With that said I don't think he gets traded.
- zach parise9

You're not making much of an effort to listen. Parise is not likely to sign an extension with anyone this season.

That is completely different than publicly rejecting an extension and forcing the organizations hand as Kovalchuk did.

Therefore, there is no reason to treat Parise like a rental.

If you can't get proper value for him, you do everything you can to sign him when he hits free agency. And he will hit free agency.

And they could less him for nothing.

Obviously, that's the risk involved. But, since there has been no public dissent between the player and the team, it seems clear that it's a risk worth taking.

On the bright side, on TG's last blog, the Devils talked exclusively about going to the net for second and third chances. Finally, someone said something to them.
- nocupslugs

let's see if they start to get it. maybe parise will start to score again, i think he forgot how he gets most of his goals

let's see if they start to get it. maybe parise will start to score again, i think he forgot how he gets most of his goals
- shvingter88

Actually, I looked at all of his goals when I was bored over the weekend and they are all like his traditional goals. The problem we have is screening the goalie. You need to do that to get point shots through into the net. If an NHL goalie sees the puck, he will save it and push it towards a safe area. If he can't, he just has to pray that it hits him and bounces to a safe area. We need to do a better job at having the forwards and the defensemen in sync. The defensemen needs to read the situation. If the guy on the left point has the puck and there is guys coming out of the right circle, he needs to shoot it to the right side of the goalie once the first player crosses the goalies face. The trailing players get the rebound, and the first guy goes for a tip or deflection.

Taormina does this the best out of our defensemen, he gives the forwards a chance to deflect and tip the shot.

Actually, I looked at all of his goals when I was bored over the weekend and they are all like his traditional goals. The problem we have is screening the goalie. You need to do that to get point shots through into the net. If an NHL goalie sees the puck, he will save it and push it towards a safe area. If he can't, he just has to pray that it hits him and bounces to a safe area. We need to do a better job at having the forwards and the defensemen in sync. The defensemen needs to read the situation. If the guy on the left point has the puck and there is guys coming out of the right circle, he needs to shoot it to the right side of the goalie once the first player crosses the goalies face. The trailing players get the rebound, and the first guy goes for a tip or deflection.

Taormina does this the best out of our defensemen, he gives the forwards a chance to deflect and tip the shot.
- nocupslugs

i guess since he doesn't have many goals on the season it seems as though he isn't scoring the typical parise way. just something i'm creating in my mind. glad i have people that get bored enough to do the research for me because i sure as heck wasn't.

i guess since he doesn't have many goals on the season it seems as though he isn't scoring the typical parise way. just something i'm creating in my mind. glad i have people that get bored enough to do the research for me because i sure as heck wasn't.
- shvingter88

I think the thing was Oduya and Martin were really good chemistry wise with them for those goals and often times they shot it so that Parise could deflect it, tip it, get rebounds. Our defensemen don't have the chemistry with our forwards like they used to. However, I'd agree Parise needs to get more. But at this pace, it looks like we will have like 6 30 g 30 a players and one 30g 12 a player.

Actually, I looked at all of his goals when I was bored over the weekend and they are all like his traditional goals. The problem we have is screening the goalie. You need to do that to get point shots through into the net. If an NHL goalie sees the puck, he will save it and push it towards a safe area. If he can't, he just has to pray that it hits him and bounces to a safe area. We need to do a better job at having the forwards and the defensemen in sync. The defensemen needs to read the situation. If the guy on the left point has the puck and there is guys coming out of the right circle, he needs to shoot it to the right side of the goalie once the first player crosses the goalies face. The trailing players get the rebound, and the first guy goes for a tip or deflection.

Taormina does this the best out of our defensemen, he gives the forwards a chance to deflect and tip the shot.
- nocupslugs

It's not that easy. There are things you're not account for.

1a.) If you shoot from the left point to the right of the goalie (goalie point of view) then the goalie really isn't changing his angle and nothing is likely to happen regardless.

1b.) If you shoot left to right from the players point of view (far side of the net) it would be extraordinarly difficult to get a shot through to the crease. defenseman would be playing the "back door" pass as the puck is being rotated to the point, so they would already be in position to block shots and disrupt screens in front.

2.) To completely screen out a goalie, you have to change his angle multiple times to get him moving and somewhat out of position. If he's not moving much, he'll most likely see it, if he doesn't see it he'll definitely be square to it and it wont matter.

3.) Point shots are very easy to control as far as rebounds. Easy to just put in the corner for any goalie. Most "point rebounds" are actually shots that dont get through and take a good bounce.

I'm just trying to articulate that it's not NHL 12 on All Pro mode. It's much more difficult than you realize.

It's not that easy. There are things you're not account for.

1a.) If you shoot from the left point to the right of the goalie (goalie point of view) then the goalie really isn't changing his angle and nothing is likely to happen regardless.

1b.) If you shoot left to right from the players point of view (far side of the net) it would be extraordinarly difficult to get a shot through to the crease. defenseman would be playing the "back door" pass as the puck is being rotated to the point, so they would already be in position to block shots and disrupt screens in front.

2.) To completely screen out a goalie, you have to change his angle multiple times to get him moving and somewhat out of position. If he's not moving much, he'll most likely see it, if he doesn't see it he'll definitely be square to it and it wont matter.

3.) Point shots are very easy to control as far as rebounds. Easy to just put in the corner for any goalie. Most "point rebounds" are actually shots that dont get through and take a good bounce.

I'm just trying to articulate that it's not NHL 12 on All Pro mode. It's much more difficult than you realize.
- njdevils350

You missed my key point. If the goalie is screened, he can't see the puck and he can't control the rebound. You shoot it in the rebound-prone areas, low on the ice to the edge of the pad. If you have Poni standing right in front of you, you can't see the puck at all. If you get a guy in front of the net, that disrupts one defensemen who will most likely try to get the guy out from the front of the net. Will we get a bounce every time? No, but those are more high percentage plays than the stuff we are doing.

You missed my key point. If the goalie is screened, he can't see the puck and he can't control the rebound. You shoot it in the rebound-prone areas, low on the ice to the edge of the pad. If you have Poni standing right in front of you, you can't see the puck at all. If you get a guy in front of the net, that disrupts one defensemen who will most likely try to get the guy out from the front of the net. Will we get a bounce every time? No, but those are more high percentage plays than the stuff we are doing.
- nocupslugs

I completely understand your "key point." I'm also going out on a limb and saying you havn't played much goalie before.

What I'm telling you is that it usually takes 3-4 very good and quick puck rotations and angle changes to get the goalie into a scenario where he "can't see." from the Goaline straight back to the point the goalie can still see no matter if Ponikarovsky is in front. You just look around him.

With one guy (front side of the play) in front the backside defenseman usually has a clear view to block shots across the crease. 4 guys in front (2 and 2) it's not getting through.

And "edge of the pad" would just be a bad rebound by the goalie. Just like when they kick it out into the slot by accident. Just a bad play. Because if you're on youre angle and you have a shot going to the "edge of the pad" you slightly turn your leg parallel to the side boards (not exactly parallel before some freaks out at me. Just bend your knee a little) and the puck is in the corner. No problem.

Im just saying it's not easy. It's more a matter of skill than scheme.

I completely understand your "key point." I'm also going out on a limb and saying you havn't played much goalie before.

What I'm telling you is that it usually takes 3-4 very good and quick puck rotations and angle changes to get the goalie into a scenario where he "can't see." from the Goaline straight back to the point the goalie can still see no matter if Ponikarovsky is in front. You just look around him.

With one guy (front side of the play) in front the backside defenseman usually has a clear view to block shots across the crease. 4 guys in front (2 and 2) it's not getting through.

And "edge of the pad" would just be a bad rebound by the goalie. Just like when they kick it out into the slot by accident. Just a bad play. Because if you're on youre angle and you have a shot going to the "edge of the pad" you slightly turn your leg parallel to the side boards (not exactly parallel before some freaks out at me. Just bend your knee a little) and the puck is in the corner. No problem.

Im just saying it's not easy. It's more a matter of skill than scheme.
- njdevils350

Unless the goalie peaks around the player exactly before the shot, he doesn't have a good chance at that. Also, many times a goalie peaks around the player and the puck goes in the net.

I look at Ference's goal against us. On that play, as soon as the puck got to Ference, Paille made a bee-line to screen Marty and look what turned out to it. I don't see our forwards doing the same as much as it should be done.