Confirmed with Link: Devils Re-sign Matteau

[Maine Fan]

It sticks, since we wound up with picks #29 and #30 in 2012 and 2014 instead of no pick in 2012 and #10 in 2014. Only time will tell if they could have wound up with a REALLY good player at #10, but if Matteau and Quenneville both develop into solid pros then Lou actually gets justified in the end for a contreversial move.

And we should care of this because ????

 

[Bleedred]

This thread just scared the **** out of me.

I read the title as ''Devils sign Morrow'', Even though I have been reading this thread for days now.

 

[Mr Bojanglez]

I'd be extremely surprised if Matteau even comes close to Bernier's career production or the amount of games Bernier has played. Not that they are similar players but Josefson's AHL production is miles ahead of Matteau's as well(Josefson had 40 in 60 and Matteau has 53 in a 128 games).

Bernier had a couple of decent PPG seasons, but ultimately wasn't ever a huge contributor. Your point is taken, though, in that I'm selling Bernier a bit short. At this point in his career I think Matteau replaces him.

As far as Josfeson there isn't a comparison, really. Matteau strikes me as the kind of guy that will put up the same kind of points. I feel like he's always going to be about 25-30 point player, whether its the QMJHL or the NHL.

It sticks, since we wound up with picks #29 and #30 in 2012 and 2014 instead of no pick in 2012 and #10 in 2014. Only time will tell if they could have wound up with a REALLY good player at #10, but if Matteau and Quenneville both develop into solid pros then Lou actually gets justified in the end for a contreversial move.

I guess you're right, but we did manage to get a pick back was my point. Maybe its apples to pineapples.

I think I prefer the path we took. At least we can agree that the stigma sticks.

 

[njdevils1982]

This thread just scared the **** out of me.

I read the title as ''Devils sign Morrow'', Even though I have been reading this thread for days now.

you need to start drinking again……it would then make sense that you cant remember what you read

 

[NJDevs26]

I guess you're right, but we did manage to get a pick back was my point. Maybe its apples to pineapples.

I think I prefer the path we took. At least we can agree that the stigma sticks.

Don't get me wrong, I'll never understand Lou taking such a high risk with no guarantee of keeping a first-rounder unless there was some under the table deal that they'd get something back after the lockout and not have to lose a first-rounder.

As bad as 'trading' #10 for Matteau/Quenneville might be, trading #10 for just Matteau would have been far worse.

 

[Zippy316]

Don't get me wrong, I'll never understand Lou taking such a high risk with no guarantee of keeping a first-rounder unless there was some under the table deal that they'd get something back after the lockout and not have to lose a first-rounder.

As bad as 'trading' #10 for Matteau/Quenneville might be, trading #10 for just Matteau would have been far worse.

In hindsight it looks bad.

However, I think Lou was under the mindset that a #29 pick is better than a pick 20-25 a year or two later. We know how that turned it with the two seasons following, but I don't think Lou planned on being as bad as the Devils were.

We will never know what Lou knew, but I would assume he wouldn't keep the pick if he knew Kovalchuk was gone the next off-season. Lou believed the team would remain competitive and therefore would rather have a year or two development of a prospect versus a similar prospect a year or two down the road lacking in that development. The teams we had with Kovalchuk added would've certainly been challenging for the playoffs. Kovalchuk on the team would've put everyone in their right roles, drastically changing the entire team dynamic.

Again, if we want to play the hindsight game, you can say it's stupid. I'm sure the same people that bring this up will bring up the fact that Lou/Conte passed over Simmonds for Hoeffel, etc. But you can't do that, especially if the picks at least had justifiable reason. I'm not talking about picking Nagy in the fifth round. But Tedenby versus Carlson -- you couldn't have predicted how that would've turned out.

 

[Emperoreddy]

Don't get me wrong, I'll never understand Lou taking such a high risk with no guarantee of keeping a first-rounder unless there was some under the table deal that they'd get something back after the lockout and not have to lose a first-rounder.

As bad as 'trading' #10 for Matteau/Quenneville might be, trading #10 for just Matteau would have been far worse.

Don't like opening this can of worms, but there is a lot of hindsight involved. I don't think Lou thought coming out of the 2012 Finals run that by the time we would have to forfeit the pick we would have a 10th overall two years down the line because who predicted all the events that followed.

I mean you look at the lock out year the team could of easily been a playoff team. A lot of things went wrong that year injury wise. Zubs still had life in his legs and the team missed him during his injury. Then the Marty injury pretty much sunk the team and then Kovy got hurt which ended the season pretty much.

Anyway there were bits and pieces that made it seem Lou thought he could get the pick back and that is why he waited. That and he seemed to think a prospect immediately was more valuable then one two years down the line (this is again assuming we are picking in the teens or 20s).

I don't think it an easy choice either way, but we ended up with two prospects instead of one at 11. See what happens with Matts and JQ before the jury of HF renders its verdict.

Edit: Zippy kind of ninjaed me there.

 

[NJDevs26]

In hindsight it looks bad.

However, I think Lou was under the mindset that a #29 pick is better than a pick 20-25 a year or two later. We know how that turned it with the two seasons following, but I don't think Lou planned on being as bad as the Devils were.

I figured on it being 16-20 at the time, but losing Parise was huge. They missed the playoffs when Parise wasn't there in '10-11 though a million other things happened that season too.

I just never treated the 'two year headstart of development' thing as a big deal, especially when you're dealing with a low first-rounder and figured there was next to no chance the pick we gave up would be 29 or 30. Another school of thought at the time was Lou was hoping one of the goalies (Vasilevsky/Subban) would drop to that point, and a lot of recent Devil history would have changed if that happened

But yeah even though I see Matteau's celing as a 3rd-4th liner the history really starts getting written this year now that he's on the big team and likely in the lineup.

 

[Zippy316]

Don't like opening this can of worms, but there is a lot of hindsight involved. I don't think Lou thought coming out of the 2012 Finals run that by the time we would have to forfeit the pick we would have a 10th overall two years down the line because who predicted all the events that followed.

I mean you look at the lock out year the team could of easily been a playoff team. A lot of things went wrong that year injury wise. Zubs still had life in his legs and the team missed him during his injury. Then the Marty injury pretty much sunk the team and then Kovy got hurt which ended the season pretty much.

Anyway there were bits and pieces that made it seem Lou thought he could get the pick back and that is why he waited. That and he seemed to think a prospect immediately was more valuable then one two years down the line (this is again assuming we are picking in the teens or 20s).

I don't think it an easy choice either way, but we ended up with two prospects instead of one at 11. See what happens with Matts and JQ before the jury of HF renders its verdict.

Edit: Zippy kind of ninjaed me there.

Yeah. We kind of just said the same thing there.

I still like the future of this team regardless, especially when you factor in the 2016 draft. We are likely to add another prospect just as good if not better than Zacha. That will give us two legit prospects to anchor this team around. If you can have Matthews-Zacha down the middle, guys like Matteau, Coleman, Quenneville, Kujawinski, etc. will fall into the right roles, rather than being thrusted into roles they aren't capable of handling.

But yeah even though I see Matteau's celing as a 3rd-4th liner the history really starts getting written this year now that he's on the big team and likely in the lineup.

I feel like people are really down on Matteau. To me, I see him taking on a role like Joel Ward. He might not be the most skilled guy in the world, but he's got enough skill in him to compliment skilled players. He's a pretty good skater and loves to play physical.

He seems like the perfect guy to compliment Cammalleri-Zajac, just for an example. If you have to, you can have him just play on a bruising third line. That's essentially what Joel Ward did. At times, he was opposite Ovechkin on the first line and at other times, he was on a line with Chimera, Fehr, Beagle, and they were just physically dominant.

 

[Oneiro]

People talk about Matteau as a bottom six player, but I don't agree (if he succeeds at the NHL level). Yeah, he's somewhat physical but I don't see that as the main facet to his game at all.

The guy is a lot more crafty in the way he moves than a normal grinder type. If he ever puts up points, it will be on a line with someone who draws the coverage and then he capitalizes on the soft ice. Either a smarter or weaker Hartnell comes to mind. We'll see which one. Maybe on a good team a Hartnell-type is a 3rd liner, sure. But not on this team.