Confirmed with Link: Devils re-sign Blake Coleman (3 years, $1.8 AAV)

billingtons ghost

Registered User
Nov 29, 2010
10,576
6,835
I thought he could be a fourth line regular, but that was four years ago. I gave up on him completely two years ago.

Outside of hall and Nico, he might have been our most consistent forward this year. No one could've called that.
 

NJ DevLolz

The Many Saints of Newark
Sep 30, 2017
4,570
5,399
Was anybody actually really high on Coleman before last year? I know a couple were. @Aethon is the only one that I can think of off the top of my head. I think most thought he'd be 4th line call up fodder at best.
@Jason MacIsaac has been high on him, but I don't know if he has made his opinion known on this website
 

JimEIV

Registered User
Feb 19, 2003
66,190
28,540
@Jason MacIsaac has been high on him, but I don't know if he has made his opinion known on this website
I really enjoy reading his take on prospects. In fact, I find myself agreeing with his take on prospects most of the time. That's going back to when we drafted Zajac and that Ranger poster Jonathan would come to this board to tell us how Stafford was the reason for Zajac's succes at UND even before that probably.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Comparison Ford

Triumph

Registered User
Oct 2, 2007
13,534
13,911
Judging Gibbons' play solely by points scored is not understanding Gibbon's play.

He was awful territorially as well. I don't have the numbers but he was around 40% after he returned from injury. That's not going to get it done. I still would've considered bringing him back at that price, but a repeat of that would've been disastrous.
 

JimEIV

Registered User
Feb 19, 2003
66,190
28,540
I just hate the idea of "odds" in terms of prospects.

Using the success rates of other players to gauge the potential of a completely different player?

Right now between Bratt, Wood, and Coleman, 25% of our fwd's are guys who the odds said would never become NHL'rs.

Butchers rookie season would have been way down the odd's list. Greene's career would never have happened, Lovejoys neither. Meanwhile a 1st rounder like John Moore, odds were much better for him.
I always found it immensely fun to predict/project what prospects would be become...I always thought that was the main purpose of this board...It's why I initially came here...To me, regurgitating stats and probabilities is a cowardly way join in on the conversation...Cause you can never be wrong...You just predict most will fail and leave yourself an out "There's always a chance".......

You don't have look in-depth or have innate sense of what what makes a player good, you just play the percentage and poo-poo everything.
 

Triumph

Registered User
Oct 2, 2007
13,534
13,911
I always found it immensely fun to predict/project what prospects would be become...I always thought that was the main purpose of this board...It's why I initially came here...

Sounds good. Me too.

To me, regurgitating stats and probabilities is a cowardly way join in on the conversation...Cause you can never be wrong...You just predict most will fail and leave yourself an out "There's always a chance".......

Is it any more 'cowardly' than just blandly assuming the best for everyone, regardless of performance or capability, and then saying 'Aw geez' when it doesn't work out? You just predict everyone will succeed and then when it doesn't work out for most guys, hide behind hope? We're all Devils fans here, we all want the team to win and to draft and develop good players. I like thinking about the team's future. I also hope everyone succeeds but I know that most players will not make the NHL, even if they play well at lower levels.

You don't have look in-depth or have innate sense of what what makes a player good, you just play the percentage and poo-poo everything.

I get to see Devils' prospects maybe two or three times a year and that is if they are any good. If they don't make the WJCs or play for a major college program or end up in the Memorial Cup, I'll usually see them 0 times. I don't get a chance to watch the AHL team very often. I'm not going to make wild predictions based on these viewings because I don't put much stock in one or two observations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jersey Fresh

Missionhockey

Registered User
Jul 6, 2003
9,006
386
New Jersey
Visit site
I just hate the idea of "odds" in terms of prospects.

Using the success rates of other players to gauge the potential of a completely different player?

Right now between Bratt, Wood, and Coleman, 25% of our fwd's are guys who the odds said would never become NHL'rs.

Butchers rookie season would have been way down the odd's list. Greene's career would never have happened, Lovejoys neither. Meanwhile a 1st rounder like John Moore, odds were much better for him.

I think you can end the discussion right there.
 

Missionhockey

Registered User
Jul 6, 2003
9,006
386
New Jersey
Visit site
I always found it immensely fun to predict/project what prospects would be become...I always thought that was the main purpose of this board...It's why I initially came here...To me, regurgitating stats and probabilities is a cowardly way join in on the conversation...Cause you can never be wrong...You just predict most will fail and leave yourself an out "There's always a chance".......

You don't have look in-depth or have innate sense of what what makes a player good, you just play the percentage and poo-poo everything.

Furthermore, you can literally apply that logic to any player that's not a first round pick. Everyone knows that odds of making the NHL decrease dramatically after the first round and even more in round 2.

It's better to go case by case than draw a bright line.
 

Triumph

Registered User
Oct 2, 2007
13,534
13,911
Furthermore, you can literally apply that logic to any player that's not a first round pick. Everyone knows that odds of making the NHL decrease dramatically after the first round and even more in round 2.

It's better to go case by case than draw a bright line.

When has anyone on this board done this in a prospect discussion other than the times when people talk about trading away or trading for draft picks? Once a pick is made and turned into a prospect, I'd say the discussion is generally positive and this fact is not cited.
 

Missionhockey

Registered User
Jul 6, 2003
9,006
386
New Jersey
Visit site
When has anyone on this board done this in a prospect discussion other than the times when people talk about trading away or trading for draft picks? Once a pick is made and turned into a prospect, I'd say the discussion is generally positive and this fact is not cited.
That was in reference to this post.

Went back in time and took a glance at this thread from a few years ago: https://hfboards.mandatory.com/thre...ping-with-gusto.2034477/page-3#post-114298047

Some nice gems that aged well in there:

This is an ongoing thing. People have written off Mcleod because his point per game isn't as high as they like and they just lump him in with a bunch of failed prospects. There's rarely ever any analysis on his usage in junior, injuries, tournament schedules, etc.

This basically comes down to the fact that these are people, not statistics.
 

JimEIV

Registered User
Feb 19, 2003
66,190
28,540
Sounds good. Me too.



Is it any more 'cowardly' than just blandly assuming the best for everyone, regardless of performance or capability, and then saying 'Aw geez' when it doesn't work out? You just predict everyone will succeed and then when it doesn't work out for most guys, hide behind hope? We're all Devils fans here, we all want the team to win and to draft and develop good players. I like thinking about the team's future. I also hope everyone succeeds but I know that most players will not make the NHL, even if they play well at lower levels.



I get to see Devils' prospects maybe two or three times a year and that is if they are any good. If they don't make the WJCs or play for a major college program or end up in the Memorial Cup, I'll usually see them 0 times. I don't get a chance to watch the AHL team very often. I'm not going to make wild predictions based on these viewings because I don't put much stock in one or two observations.
Blindly assuming anything is wrong.
I think most judgement should be reserved until someone sees a players a couple of times. And yes I do believe 2 or 3 times is enough. If you see a player at a lower level 2 or 3 times and he doesn't make an impression in some way, that has usually a pretty good indication that the player is fighting an uphill battle.

I haven't seen much of anyone from this draft and you'll notice there are almost zero comments from me anywhere about any of them.

I also wouldn't conflate a fan hoping vs a fan doing an honest analysis of the players skill set...there have been a million failures that I hoped would succeed even if the likelihood was extremely low.
 

devilsblood

Registered User
Mar 10, 2010
29,567
11,838
To Mission's post above.

I think McLeod is a good example.

No his stats are not what you'd hope considering his draft position. And at the time I would have taken Brown, but McLeod's physical attribute's, most specifically his speed (but also his size), is the thing I've always hung my hat on when I look at that pick. I won't worry so much about his points because I know he fits exactly what we want to do. Which goes back to the point above about environment. We want to play fast, he plays fast.

I think his compete level is supposed to be a strong point as well, which is as big a key as the speed itself, so he fits right in that Wood, Coleman, even Taylor Hall, mold. But time will tell if and when that compete level is ready for NHL hockey.

I thought a negative on McLeod's ledger was a lack of puck skills, but in the scrimmage he had a couple moments where his hands looked really slick. Anecdotal sure, but still something which impressed me. I do think working on his shot mechanics will be key.

End of the day, he like all prospects, and even current NHL players, he needs to improve, he needs to develop his skills, develop a better understanding of the game.

Back to Coleman, as an example, was able to make significant jumps in his development. He did it when he went from 16 points to 92 points in the USHL. He did it when he went from .5 ppg to a point per game in the college, and he did it this past season in the NHL. His first 50 or so games in the league he had 6 points. In his next 50 ish he had 20.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Darkauron

JimEIV

Registered User
Feb 19, 2003
66,190
28,540
I don't think those 12 mintues a night over 23 games at the tail end of 2016-17 season mean much. Funny though as fresh faced rookie with zero NHL experience he still started in the defensive zone 60% of the time. As a percentage it was 7th on the team. Welcome to the NHL.

But I think it's completely misleading to say that he sucked or even that he had a jump. You had a bottom 6 that was largely void of offense and where getting hammered every night.

8 guys of 36 skaters used on the team had 50% or better CF%. And 5 of the 8 were Ben Thompson, Kapla, Auvitu, Bennett and Prout...not even NHL players! So to judge 23 games from a 4th line rookie at the tail end of a season that long been packed in before Coleman arrived makes little sense to me.
 

Triumph

Registered User
Oct 2, 2007
13,534
13,911
Blindly assuming anything is wrong.

I actually meant 'blandly' assuming, because that's uninteresting if you just prop everyone up until they don't make it.

I think most judgement should be reserved until someone sees a players a couple of times. And yes I do believe 2 or 3 times is enough. If you see a player at a lower level 2 or 3 times and he doesn't make an impression in some way, that has usually a pretty good indication that the player is fighting an uphill battle.

Or you can just look at the stats, which at least for forwards will likely tell you as much about this as seeing them 2 or 3 times will. But it is more fun to watch them, certainly, and the stats are far from perfect.

I also wouldn't conflate a fan hoping vs a fan doing an honest analysis of the players skill set...there have been a million failures that I hoped would succeed even if the likelihood was extremely low.

I'm not quite sure what this means. I think pretty much any analysis on here, including mine, is going to be 'dishonest' - we all want the players to succeed, and so we see the good in their game and downplay the bad.
 

Triumph

Registered User
Oct 2, 2007
13,534
13,911
I don't think those 12 mintues a night over 23 games at the tail end of 2016-17 season mean much. Funny though as fresh faced rookie with zero NHL experience he still started in the defensive zone 60% of the time. As a percentage it was 7th on the team. Welcome to the NHL.

But I think it's completely misleading to say that he sucked or even that he had a jump. You had a bottom 6 that was largely void of offense and where getting hammered every night.

8 guys of 36 skaters used on the team had 50% or better CF%. And 5 of the 8 were Ben Thompson, Kapla, Auvitu, Bennett and Prout...not even NHL players! So to judge 23 games from a 4th line rookie at the tail end of a season that long been packed in before Coleman arrived makes little sense to me.

He had a miserable Corsi Rel and could not finish. His 'defensive zone start' is probably a result of his line being hammered and not anything the coach was doing. As for the season being 'packed in', if his linemates were in his boat, you would think they would be busting their ass to prove they were worth considering for the NHL team next season - his most common linemates were Wood, Smith-Pelly, Pietila, Noesen, Bennett, Lappin. This isn't a list of guys who have an NHL spot sewed up.
 

glenwo2

LINDY RUFF NEEDS VIAGRA!!
Oct 18, 2008
52,060
24,347
New Jersey(No Fanz!)
I thought he could be a fourth line regular, but that was four years ago. I gave up on him completely two years ago.

Outside of hall and Nico, he might have been our most consistent forward this year. No one could've called that.

And it must have came as a pleasant shock to see him come out of nowhere like he did...
 

Arthur Morgan

Registered User
Jul 6, 2016
8,112
5,427
Toronto
www.youtube.com
You are?

But aren't you a Maple Leafs fan? :huh:


Or did you also "lose a bet"? ;)


Regardless, it's indeed a very team-friendly deal and I'm thrilled to have Blake "John Madden 2.0" Coleman in the Devils fold for the next 3 years. :pickle::pickle::pickle::pickle:
Yes a Huge Leafs fan. but as a Dynasty Owner Im thrilled about this.
I actually own Coleman, Hischier, Palmieri
I like alot of other NHL teams though. who couldnt like the Devil's. awesome name, logo, jersey. Hall is a beast.
I pretty much like every NHL team other than Boston, Montreal and Ottawa. or well not as much Ottawa anymore. kinda feel bad for them right now lol
 
  • Like
Reactions: glenwo2

JimEIV

Registered User
Feb 19, 2003
66,190
28,540
Not sure why anyone was down on him really? Throw out this season...

At the end of his collage career he was the mvp of the tournament on a National Championship team in the spring of 2015.

In the fall of 2015 he played 14 games in Albany, had 7 points and right before Thanksgiving he had a season ending shoulder injury...in a game he was the first star with 2 goals and and an assist (if memory serves me right)

2016 he starts the season in Albany and leads the team in scoring the entire time he's there. He gets his first shot with the Big Team January 12th 2017

To the point of his first call up, the extent of his pro career is 66 AHL games and he produced 46 points (.70 ppg) 23G + 23 A and a +/- of +26

Before this season his total Pro body of work was 66 AHL games and 23 NHL games. 89 games or a season worth of hockey...final judegment on that would seem premature to say the least.
 

Triumph

Registered User
Oct 2, 2007
13,534
13,911
Not sure why anyone was down on him really? Throw out this season...

At the end of his collage career he was the mvp of the tournament on a National Championship team in the spring of 2015.

He was 23 when he did that. 84 players played in the NHL in 2014-15 who are listed as being age 23. It's right around a forward's scoring peak.

In the fall of 2015 he played 14 games in Albany, had 7 points and right before Thanksgiving he had a season ending shoulder injury...in a game he was the first star with 2 goals and and an assist (if memory serves me right)

He was 24. 90 players played in the NHL in 2015-16 who are listed as being age 24. It's an NHL forward's scoring peak season.

2016 he starts the season in Albany and leads the team in scoring the entire time he's there. He gets his first shot with the Big Team January 12th 2017

To the point of his first call up, the extent of his pro career is 66 AHL games and he produced 46 points (.70 ppg) 23G + 23 A and a +/- of +26

Before this season his total Pro body of work was 66 AHL games and 23 NHL games. 89 games or a season worth of hockey...final judegment on that would seem premature to say the least.

You look at forwards that old with those results and most of them don't make the NHL full-time. Coleman's an exception. He's got himself a 3 year deal which he deserves. He worked hard, got another chance, and stuck. It doesn't happen for a lot of guys his age.
 
  • Like
Reactions: My3Sons

JimEIV

Registered User
Feb 19, 2003
66,190
28,540
He was 23 when he did that. 84 players played in the NHL in 2014-15 who are listed as being age 23. It's right around a forward's scoring peak.



He was 24. 90 players played in the NHL in 2015-16 who are listed as being age 24. It's an NHL forward's scoring peak season.



You look at forwards that old with those results and most of them don't make the NHL full-time. Coleman's an exception. He's got himself a 3 year deal which he deserves. He worked hard, got another chance, and stuck. It doesn't happen for a lot of guys his age.
Most of them don't come from Texas either. What's your point?

None of that addresses his ability, skill level, compete or really anything of significance...it's really nonsensical to talk about the averages without addressing what the player is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Missionhockey

Triumph

Registered User
Oct 2, 2007
13,534
13,911
Most of them don't come from Texas either. What's your point?

My point is that players Coleman's age were in the NHL already. They left school early and got signed to pro deals. Only 76 26 year olds played in the league this season, but 90 24 year olds played in 2015-16. His age cohort is already leaving the NHL.

None of that addresses his ability, skill level, compete or really anything of significance...it's really nonsensical to talk about the averages without addressing what the player is.

Coleman's college numbers are not impressive. They're very good, but they don't scream NHL player - plenty of guys with those numbers don't make it. And having a big year in the AHL as a 25 year old is really not a big deal at all, lots of 25 year olds do and almost none of them make the NHL - many of them have already had their best chance at an NHL job. Furthermore, plenty of players have his compete level and don't make it, because it takes more than compete level to make the NHL. Blake's got skills, and it did not show in 2016-17.

But all of this is distracting from Coleman himself, who I think might have room to grow after last season.
 

My3Sons

Nobody told me there'd be days like these...
Sponsor
I'm curious if Coleman developed his skill level in some different fashion last year or if he just became confident and that was enough to allow him to use skill he already possessed. If the latter, find some way to transfer Coleman's brain into PZ. Maybe like they did in Young Frankenstein. It seemed to work for Peter Boyle.
 

devilsblood

Registered User
Mar 10, 2010
29,567
11,838
Not sure why anyone was down on him really?


...final judegment on that would seem premature to say the least.
I was pretty down on him after last year. Very unimpressive in his first go in the NHL. So yeah, his lead up #'s were good, but some guys don't translate, I thought that may have been the case with Coleman.

But that is very different then a final judgement. Which points to my thought that, if you have a player under contract, there is always time for him to take a step fwd.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad