Devils 2017-18 team discussion (player news and notes) IV - March to the Trade Deadline

Status
Not open for further replies.

SteveCangialosi123

Registered User
Feb 17, 2012
28,171
48,607
NJ
It makes me giggle hysterically when I see some people here still trying to argue that Ben Lovejoy is one of the top 6 options to play defensively.
He's had a pretty good season, I'm not sure what's so funny? Ben "He's getting completely sheltered" Lovejoy is starting in the dzone 64.5% of the time. And he's been a positive possession player (3.7 CF% rel). Santini is -13 CF% rel. Terribad.
 

Billdo

Registered User
Oct 28, 2008
19,484
16,390
Ocean County
It makes me giggle hysterically when I see some people here still trying to argue that Ben Lovejoy is one of the top 6 options to play defensively.

I mean he hasn’t been THAT bad. I’d much rather Santini but he wasn’t exactly setting the world on fire either.
 

devilsblood

Registered User
Mar 10, 2010
29,583
11,849
He's had a pretty good season, I'm not sure what's so funny? Ben "He's getting completely sheltered" Lovejoy is starting in the dzone 64.5% of the time. And he's been a positive possession player (3.7 CF% rel). Santini is -13 CF% rel. Terribad.
When he is with Butcher he def get's easy opposition, I don't think zone starts tell the tale of how hard the minutes are.
 

devilsblood

Registered User
Mar 10, 2010
29,583
11,849
I've been OK with Lovejoy over Santini. But there is a limit as to how long a kid should be in the press box, and I think we are very near it.

I suspect the team feels the same. One way or another I think the situation will change.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AfroThunder396

Its a Trap

Yes I’m still here to piss you off
He's had a pretty good season, I'm not sure what's so funny? Ben "He's getting completely sheltered" Lovejoy is starting in the dzone 64.5% of the time. And he's been a positive possession player (3.7 CF% rel). Santini is -13 CF% rel. Terribad.
Because every time Ben Lovejoy receives a pass there’s a greater then 65% chance he’s going to do something stupid with the puck that results in the other team taking possession. And he doesn’t understand that it’s much safer to chip the puck out of the zone off the boards instead of turning around and trying to muscle it all the way around the boards and out only for someone to stop it before it gets halfway there.

The argument that it’s fine for Lovejoy to be in there over santini because he’s “been fine” and “better then last year” is silly. He’s 33 freakin years old makes the same mistakes he does every game and is slower then molasses. If we’re going to have a slow turnover machine in the lineup I’d prefer it be a young machine that can be improved and will be contributing for years to come. Not the guy who quite frankly doesn’t belong in the league today.
 

AfroThunder396

[citation needed]
Jan 8, 2006
39,132
23,195
Miami, FL
Santini hasn't dressed for a game since January 7th, that's nearly a month. If he's not playing here he should be getting reps in Bingo. He's no longer waiver exempt next season so this is the last time we can let him work out his game in the AHL. Let him play *somewhere*, he has less than 100 games of pro experience and needs to be playing somewhere.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpeakingOfTheDevils

NJDevs26

Once upon a time...
Mar 21, 2007
67,443
31,783
Who has claimed Santini was untouchable? The main argument people are making against trading him is the D is below average while the forwards (when healthy) are above average. Trading him in a package for a forward would be adding to the imbalance. If you get a lopsided deal or are trading him to upgrade the D that’s one thing, but you can’t count on always getting lopsided deals.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MartyOwns

Bleedred

Travis Green BLOWS! Bring back Nasreddine!
Sponsor
May 1, 2011
130,385
57,853
Santini hasn't dressed for a game since January 7th, that's nearly a month. If he's not playing here he should be getting reps in Bingo. He's no longer waiver exempt next season so this is the last time we can let him work out his game in the AHL. Let him play *somewhere*, he has less than 100 games of pro experience and needs to be playing somewhere.
He’s not still waiver eligible next year? I figured he had one more year to go, unless he passed some game mark, whatever that mark is.

I do agree though. I don’t like that he hasn’t played since January 8th. Hynes is the one who put him in that top pairing role to begin with.

I’m fine with sending him to Bingo, but not fine with him just sitting up here and not playing.
 

devilsblood

Registered User
Mar 10, 2010
29,583
11,849
Because every time Ben Lovejoy receives a pass there’s a greater then 65% chance he’s going to do something stupid with the puck that results in the other team taking possession. And he doesn’t understand that it’s much safer to chip the puck out of the zone off the boards instead of turning around and trying to muscle it all the way around the boards and out only for someone to stop it before it gets halfway there.

The argument that it’s fine for Lovejoy to be in there over santini because he’s “been fine” and “better then last year” is silly. He’s 33 freakin years old makes the same mistakes he does every game and is slower then molasses. If we’re going to have a slow turnover machine in the lineup I’d prefer it be a young machine that can be improved and will be contributing for years to come. Not the guy who quite frankly doesn’t belong in the league today.
As a form of development I'm OK with giving a young guy a stretch to catch his breath, watch the game, practice, get his confidence up. Is it that big a deal if a young player only plays 60-70 games in a season? No I think that is fine for development.

Is that what coaches are doing? Like with Severson and Zacha, I think it is.

Now as per playing Santini the most difficult minutes a d-man can get, have him struggle, then bench him for a long stretch? That seems like an odd development path, and I wonder if the development of Santini was factored into him playing those tough minutes for so long while getting shelled.
 

devilsblood

Registered User
Mar 10, 2010
29,583
11,849
He’s not still waiver eligible next year? I figured he had one more year to go, unless he passed some game mark, whatever that mark is.

I do agree though. I don’t like that he hasn’t played since January 8th. Hynes is the one who put him in that top pairing role to begin with.

I’m fine with sending him to Bingo, but not fine with him just sitting up here and not playing.
Did we burn a year of waiver eligibility when he played that one game at the end of the 15-16 season?
 

Hischier and Hughes

“I love to hockey”
Jan 28, 2018
9,408
4,357
Santini hasn't dressed for a game since January 7th, that's nearly a month. If he's not playing here he should be getting reps in Bingo. He's no longer waiver exempt next season so this is the last time we can let him work out his game in the AHL. Let him play *somewhere*, he has less than 100 games of pro experience and needs to be playing somewhere.

While I agree, I think some coaches take stock in players practicing with and having the amenities of an NHL club.
 

135ace

Registered User
Mar 18, 2015
1,734
850
I thought it was 10 too. I thought he burned a year of the elc with that game. But wasn't sure.

That’s if it’s early in the season. Past a certain date even 1 games burns a year. The Canucks did it with Boeser last year as he played like 4-5 games at the end of the season.
 

devilsblood

Registered User
Mar 10, 2010
29,583
11,849
That’s if it’s early in the season. Past a certain date even 1 games burns a year. The Canucks did it with Boeser last year as he played like 4-5 games at the end of the season.
are you talking elc year or waiver year?
 

Jets012

Registered User
Oct 19, 2015
3,258
1,844
Send Santini to the AHL already. He really has no place on the team the rest of the season. Might as well get minutes and hope he can rekindle his form from last year
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad