HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   New York Rangers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=24)
-   -   Half-season assessment (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1371477)

Chimp 03-09-2013 08:33 AM

Half-season assessment
 
So, basically half the shortened season in Bettman's special hattrick is gone. How have we faired? Here's my assessment. Scale 1-10. The grade is assessed based on overall performance and expectation. Overall performance as in how good/ bad they've performed overall and expectation is what you should expect from them (even though a good performance can somewhat also inflate the expectation grade). 5 is average.

Goalies
We have gotten just about what you could expect from our goalies, given the circumstances. I think both Hank and Biron have done what they can, considering what they have to cover for every single night.

Henrik Lundqvist: Performance: 8. Expectation: 8. Overall: 8. Sure, he's had one softie here and there, like the game winning goal against Winnipeg. He's been battling the puck here and there. But overall, he's been doing his job. Since the team debacle in the first couple of games, Hank has been back in old form and his numbers are up there. He's a .927 goalie not counting the first two games. He has allowed 4+ goals twice, all season included. There's not much to complain about. Zero shutouts, which says alot more about the team in front than Hank himself. They're not helping him out as you would hope, we've been back to playoff bubble hockey. You could argue his expectation grade should be lower, but since the team isn't playing better, it's not.

Martin Biron: x. Biron hasn't played much and it feels unfair to put a grade on that. He's had some game where he hasn't been able to shut down the lower part of the net, which I contribute more to a team playing like collective donkey ass than Biron himself. Extremely small sample, so no grade.

Defensemen
Our defense has overall been a disappointment. They aren't contributing offensively and when they try, we leave our goalie out to dry more often than not. One D has to cover for some dumb, failed pinch from the other. It's getting tiresome. They are awful at breakout passes and they aren't blocking shots anymore, but they sure as hell are still blocking our goalie's vision lane so he can't even see the puck. Something has to change, because this isn't working.

Ryan McDonaugh: Performance: 7,5. Expectation: 6. Overall: 7. McD has had great games and bad games. His breakout passes has lead to a dangerous scoring chance, you just don't know at which net. He can step up his game, but he has not been consistently dominant. His offensive contribution and pinching has been somewhat missing. Defensively, mostly solid with a couple of stinkers. He has another level and I'm sure he'll show it.

Dan Girardi: Performance: 7. Expectation: 5. Overall: 6. Girardi has been one of the worst breakout passers in the league. Defensively, when he hasn't the puck in our zone, he has mostly done his job. But for a supposed top 2 D-man, you don't get a pass in my book with a bottom 20 breakout pass. He's a +1 in total. Dan has another gear and he knows it.

Marc Staal: Performance: 8. Expectation: 8. Overall: 8. Staal has been our best defenseman according to me. He has been very solid defensively and has pinched offensively at the right occassions. Of course he was the one who had to be injured.

Michael Del Zotto: Performance: 5,5. Expectation: 4. Overall: 5. Michael has played like a double edged sword. He has dipped in blocked shots. For every smart play he does, he will make a dumbskull one that makes you cringe. He might cough up the puck at the blueline, make idiotic cross ice passes through three opponents and cost us a goal. He seems to never, ever be able to stop with his bad habits once and then. His game is effective when he's on and killing us when it's off. His defensive game is still inconsistent. I think the sword has been pointed against ourselves more this half-season than against our opponents. I have no clue why he's out on the PP. Del Zotto can play better than this.

Anton Strålman: Performance: 6,5. Expectation: 8. Overall: 7. Anton has been real solid considering what you can expect from him and is leading our defense in goals. He is playing like a top 4 D-man. He's the only D-man I want to see on the PP so far this season, the rest of them can take a hike.

Stu Bickel: Performance: 3. Expectation: 5. Overall: 4. Bickel has been bad. He can fight and take bad penalties. There ends his resumé. I don't know what Torts sees in him.

Gilroy and Eminger hasn't played that much, neither has Hamrlik. I actually thought Eminger looked like our #6, but according to Torts, apparently not.

Forwards
Again, an utter disappointment with a few exceptions. Our stars are looking like grinders and our grinders are looking like bad grinders. This can't go on either, something has to change. Gaborik's PP goal against the Isles was the first PP goal combined between Richards and Gaborik. Ridiculous.

Rick Nash: Performance: 8,5. Expectation: 9. Overall: 9. He was snakebitten but just kept going like the machine he is. With a couple of more goals at the start, his grade would've been even higher. To be a PPG player on a Rangers team speaks loads of how good he has played. He's pure danger with the puck and is together with Lundqvist the biggest contributors to this team even being in a playoff spot.

Brad Richards: Performance: 6. Expectation: 3. Overall: 4,5. I don't think I've ever seen Brad Richards having such a slow start, shortened season might have something to do with it, age, who knows? He has contributed the most to our PP by not being on it. I don't know what he does out there on most nights. He collects some assists to pad the stat sheet, that's all. Hopefully the goal last night can somewhat get him going again.

Marian Gaborik: Performance: 7. Expectation: 6. Overall: 6,5. Marian is what he is. Invisible when he isn't scoring, mainly invisible when he's scoring. His speed seems to have lost a step, his shot has lost a step and he isn't getting the chances. His goals are more the product of his teammates setting him up, than Marian contributing himself. If he's to contribute in a playoff series, roll a dice to see if he's on a streak or not. But, he still scores his goals and a goal is a goal. It's not like we have any options here, we can just pray he's on.

Ryan Callahan: Performance: 7,5. Expectation: 8. Overall: 8. You know what you get from Ryan. Hard work ethics and self sacrifice. Offensively, he can screen the goalie, he will get an easy rebound once and then, but you can't rely on him to create offense 5 on 5. An effective player in his areas, a hard working player that lacks soft hands, or at least hasn't shown them. He's potting goals that we sorely need. Ugly goals also count.

Carl Hagelin: Performance: 7. Expectation: 9. Overall: 8. This guy has been a catalyst. His speed is always there, so things will always happen on the ice when Carl is on it. The goal last night that Richards scored was a product of Carl's speed to chase down the ice. Excellent complimentary player. His shot isn't that good, his passing isn't exactly excellent, but his speed makes up for it. If he can improve his shot, he will be a dangerous player, a Gartner kind of guy.

Derek Stepan: Performance: 7. Expectation: 8. Overall: 7,5. This is where it gets difficult. I just don't know where this guy is. He's like a wild card. He has had an excellent streak, with Nash though. If he isn't playing with Nash, I don't what you can expect in the long run. He might be a second line center, but he's not in the upper echelon of second line centers yet. His passing game is solid, it's just not happening often enough. Some of you have argued he's playing the best hockey of his career. I don't know how much that has to do with putting pucks into open nets on passes received by Nash. He did manage to hit the open net though, which is alot more than you could expect from most players on this team. His offensive numbers don't have much to complain about right now, stat wise.

Bryan Boyle: Performance: 4. Expectation: 3. Overall: 3,5. He's gone this season if this debacle continues. He has gotten a fair share of ice time and has an assist and a team worst -7 to show for it. Maybe he stays as a 4th line center if we can live with the 4th line not contributing offensively, ever. On a cup aspiring team you can't live with that, so it's all about what the aspirations for this team is.

Taylor Pyatt: Performance: 5. Expectation: 7. Overall: 6. He scored three quick goals and has scored one on the next 20 games or so. Still, with this team's standard for bottom six players, he has stood out. Heck, with Brad Richards goal scoring standards this season, that's good. But on a good team? This isn't a good team right now, so we don't need to speculate.

J.T. Miller: Performance: 5. Expectation: 7. Overall: 6. Overall: "He can be a dummy sometimes". I think that is a quote that can be put on most players on this squad this season. He's doing his best and isn't neither standing out nor making a fool out of himself. Just where you would expect a rookie to be.

Darrol Powe: Performance: 4. Expectation: 5,5. Overall: 5. He is what he is. He can skate, he can hit, he can play the PK on a team that has had a shaky PK. You don't notice him out there, with the good and the bad. A warrior that will get a point when pigs fly. Again, what are the aspirations for this team? On an average team, Power has been just fine. His +/- is 0, so you cant' complain much about his play, he has done exactly what expected, just not with one single point. He kills ice time, so our top players can do the same when he gets to the bench.

Jeff Halpern: Performance: 4. Expectation: 5. Overall: 4,5. He wins his faceoffs and dumps the puck. That's Jeff Halpern. He eats ice time while the top guys rest. End of story. Likeable guy, but again, we have a plethora of bottom 6 guys who will never ever contribute offensively, how long can this team keep playing like this?

Team parts overall
Offense: Performance: 4. Expectation: 4. Overall: 4. We're 24th in the league, we have gone from 2,71 GF/ G to 2,48 GF/ G. How the hell are you supposed to win anything with a pathetic offense? I don't know. Our PP is Benny Hill Theme. We should supposedly have the top 6 to get the goals, while our offensive bottom 6 contribution is awful. 10 goals from our D, 10 goals from our PP, 7 goals from our bottom 6, where 4 of them comes from Pyatt (3 in the first four games) and the rest from players who are either injured or in Hartford. Unacceptable.

Defense: Performance: 7. Expectation: 4. Overall: 5,5. Yet again we're worse off. From a 2,22 GA/ G to a 2,39 GA/ G. Good, but not Rangers good. Our shot blocking is down, the strategy seems to be to screen Hank instead and make his life miserable. Not even our PK is like you would expect, we're losing track of positions and players all over as soon as we face a competent PP unit. We haven't consistently taken care of business. It's fairly disappointing.

Coaching staff
John Tortorella: Performance: 5. Expectation: 4. Overall: 4,5. Last season, he got out more from the team than the players on the back. This season, he's getting out less from the team than the names on the back. Last season, we were a team you hated playing against, we made our opponents earn their wins. This season, we're a cakewalk, an average team. Our record doesn't lie. We lost our warriors in trades and free agency, so we're a grinding team without grinders. It's a mess. Pathetic offense, pathetic PP, dented defense, bad transition game, bad breakout, bad, bad, bad. We have Lundqvist and Nash, that's why John still has a coaching job in New York.

Mike Sullivan: Performance: 3. Expectation: 5. Overall: 4. All hail our PP coach! Yeeaah... The reason he doesn't ge a lower grade is because it doesn't seem to matter which players are out there, which coach is here, or anything. The New York Rangers will have one of the worst Flower Plays in the league. End of story. When will they start playing the Benny Hill Theme in MSG when we get a PP, so the crowd gets at least some entertainment out of it?

edit: Alot. The numbers were somewhat in a mess, a number based on what? So I changed the criteria. I bashed some players more than they deserved. Thanks for your contributions!

Gardner McKay 03-09-2013 08:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chimp (Post 61297827)
So, basically half the shortened season in Bettman's special hattrick is gone. How have we faired? Here's my assessment. Scale 1-10.

Goalies
We have gotten just about what you could expect from our goalies, given the circumstances. I think both Hank and Biron have done what they can, considering what they have to cover for every single night.

Henrik Lundqvist: 8. Sure, he's had one softie here and there, like the game winning goal against Winnipeg. He's been battling the puck here and there. But overall, he's been doing his job. Considering he has to be the best player on the ice for us to win a game, that we're still in a playoff spot speaks volumes. He's still the backbone of this team and has been playing like that. That his numbers are suffering isn't that strange when you consider the train wreck in front of him. Hank has "Hank Mode engaged" and has shown it alot of games already, but you won't get that gear consistently before he has a real team playing in front, who will help him out instead of looking like extras. Zero shutouts. That says alot more about the team than Hank.

Martin Biron: x. Biron hasn't played much and it feels unfair to put a grade on that. But, he hasn't looked sharp, he hasn't been able to shut down the lower part of the net, which I contribute more to a team playing like collective donkey ass than Biron himself.

Defensemen
Our defense has overall been a disappointment. They aren't contributing offensively and when they try, we leave our goalie out to dry more often than not. One D has to cover for some dumb, failed pinch from the other. It's getting tiresome. They are awful at breakout passes and they aren't blocking shots anymore, but they sure as hell are still blocking our goalie's vision lane so he can't even see the puck. Something has to change, because this isn't working.

Ryan McDonaugh: 6. McD has had great games and awful games. His breakout passes leads to a dangerous scoring chance, you just don't know at which net. He can step up his game, but he has not been dominant. His offensive contribution has been missing. Defensively, mostly solid with a couple of stinkers.

Dan Girardi: 5. Girardi has been one of the worst breakout passers in the league. Absolutely brutal. Defensively, when he hasn't the puck in our zone, he has mostly done his job. But for a supposed top 2 D-man, you don't get a pass in my book with a bottom 20 breakout pass.

Marc Staal: 8. Staal has been our best defenseman according to me. He has been very solid defensively and has pinched offensively at the right occassions. Of course he was the one who had to be injured.

Michael Del Zotto: 4. Trade him while his stocks are high, because I have a feeling most consider him a top 4 D-man. He's not. His hockey IQ is awful. For every smart play he does, he will make 5 dumbskull ones that make you cringe, cough up the puck at the blueline, make idiotic cross ice passes through three opponents and cost us goals. He seems to never, ever be able to stop with his bad habits. He's not a contributor. His offensive game is a double edged sword and his defensive game is still incredibly inconsistent. Michael Del Zotto is not a core defenseman on a good team.

Anton Strålman: 6. Anton has been real solid and is leading our defense in goals. He is playing like a top 4 D-man. He's the only D-man I want to see on the PP so far this season, the rest of them can take a hike.

Stu Bickel: 2. Useless. He can fight. There ends his resumé. I don't know what Torts sees in him.

Gilroy and Eminger hasn't played that much, neither has Hamrlik. I actually thought Eminger looked like our #6, but according to Torts, apparently not.

Forwards
Again, an utter disappointment with a few exceptions. Our stars are looking like grinders and our grinders are looking like bad grinders. This can't go on either, something has to change.

Rick Nash: 9. He was snakebitten but just kept going like the machine he is. To be a PPG player on a Rangers team speaks loads of how good he has played. He's pure danger with the puck and is together with Lundqvist the biggest contributors to this team even being in a playoff spot.

Brad Richards: 3. I don't think I've ever seen Brad Richards this awful. He has no poise, he can't win pucks, he can't connect them to teammates, I don't know what he does out there. He collects some invisible assists to pad the stat sheet, that's all. Hopefully the goal last night can somewhat get him going again.

Marian Gaborik: 6. Marian is what he is. Invisible when he isn't scoring, invisible when he's scoring. His speed seems to have lost a step, his shot has lost a step and he isn't getting the chances. His goals are more the product of his teammates setting him up, than Marian contributing himself. If he's to contribute in a playoff series, roll a dice to see if he's on a streak or not. But, he still scores his goals and a goal is a goal. It's not like we have any options here, we can just pray.

Ryan Callahan: 7. You know what you get from Ryan. Hard work ethics. Offensively, he can screen the goalie, he will get an easy rebound once and then, but you will never ever be able to count on Ryan to create anything remotely offensively at all. An effective player in his areas, a hard working player that lacks the puck skill that would turn him into an elite forward.

Carl Hagelin: 8. This guy has been our second best forward and funnily enough, this 8 puts him right there in terms of grades. His speed is always there, so things will always happen on the ice when Carl is on it. The goal last night that Richards scored was a product of Carl's speed to chase down the ice. Excellent complimentary player. His shot isn't that good, his passing isn't exactly excellent, but his speed makes up for it. If he can improve his shot, he will be a dangerous player, a Gartner kind of guy.

Derek Stepan: 6. This is where it gets difficult. I just don't know where this guy is. He's like a wild card. He has had an excellent streak, with Nash though. If he isn't playing with Nash, I don't think he'll contribute much at all. He can't create offense on his own, only be in the receiving end of it. He might be a second line center, but he's not in the upper echelon of second line centers, that's for sure. His passing game is solid, it's just not happening often enough.

Bryan Boyle: 3. He's gone this season. He has gotten a fair share of ice time and has an assist and a team worst -7 to show for it. Maybe he stays as a 4th line center if we can live with the 4th line not contributing offensively, ever. On a cup aspiring team you can't live with that, so it's all about what the aspirations for this team is.

Taylor Pyatt: 7. He scored three quick goals and has scored one on the next 20 games or so. Still, with this team's standard for bottom six players, he has stood out. Heck, with Brad Richards standards, that's good. But on a good team? This isn't a good team, so we don't need to speculate.

J.T. Miller: 5. "He can be a dummy sometimes". I think that is a quote that can be put on most players on this squad this season. He's doing his best and isn't neither standing out nor making a fool out of himself. Just where you would expect a rookie to be.

Darrol Powe: 6. He is what he is. He can skate, he can hit, he can play the PK on a team that has had a shaky PK. You don't notice him out there, with the good and the bad. A warrior that will get a point when pigs fly. Again, what are the aspirations for this team? On an average team, Power has been just fine. His +/- is 0, so you cant' complain much about his play, he has done exactly what expected, just not with one single point. He kills ice time, so our top players can do the same when he gets to the bench.

Jeff Halpern: 6. He wins his faceoffs and dumps the puck. That's Jeff Halpern. He eats ice time while the top guys rest. End of story. Likeable guy, but again, we have a plethora of bottom 6 guys who will never ever contribute offensively, how long can this team keep playing like this?

Team parts overall
Offense: 3. 24th in the league, we have gone from 2,71 GF/ G to 2,48 GF/ G. How the hell are you supposed to win anything with a pathetic offense? I don't know. Our PP is Benny Hill Theme.

Defense: 7. Yet again we're worse off. From a 2,22 GA/ G to a 2,39 GA/ G. Our shot blocking is a former shelf, the strategy seems to be to make Hank's life miserable. Not even our PK is like you would expect, we're losing track of positions and track all over. It's quite disappointing.

Coaching staff
John Tortorella: 4 (and that's generous). Last season, he got out more from the team than the players on the back. This season, he's getting out less from the team than the names on the back. Last season, we were a team you hated playing against, we made our opponents earn their wins. This season, we're a cakewalk, an average team. Our record doesn't lie. We lost our warriors in trades and free agency, so we're a grinding team without grinders. It's a mess. Pathetic offense, pathetic PP, bad defense, bad transition game, bad breakout, bad, bad, bad. We have Lundqvist and Nash, that's why John still has a coaching job in New York.

Mike Sullivan: 3. PP coach. Yeeaah... The reason he doesn't ge a lower grade is because it doesn't seem to matter which players are out there, which coach is here, or anything. The New York Rangers will have one of the worst Flower Plays in the league. End of story. When will they start playing the Benny Hill Theme in MSG when we get a PP, so the crowd gets at least some entertainment out of it?

What is with all the hate? We have not been that bad. A few injuries + a lot of turn over will lead to poor chemistry and a slow start.

The only think we are lacking is depth which is scary considering injuries for us haven't been as bad as some other teams around the league.

Megustaelhockey 03-09-2013 08:56 AM

Needlessly, exceedingly negative in my opinion.

Everyone knows what the team's needs are. I'm happy to let the front office address them.

M Gaz 03-09-2013 09:20 AM

By your standards, we'd be better off trading the whole team. That's all I'm getting from this rant.

SingnBluesOnBroadway 03-09-2013 09:25 AM

Overly negative. This team is trending in the right direction. They don't need to be firing on all cylinders right now. They need to steadily improve as the season goes on. And right now, I believe they are.

Chimp 03-09-2013 09:36 AM

This is a performance card for the last 20 games or so, not a "how good is player x". If you want to hand out 10s to every player on this team for us barely and desperately managing to hold a spot @ 8th, go ahead, I won't stop you. We've performed mediocre as a team and the scores reflect that, I don't know how that can be "overly negative". Sure, it's alot of "pathetic" and "bad" out there, but then again, if a team has to rely on the same two guys every night, it is pathetic.

That I bashed some players beyond their last 20 games is because I think they should be traded specifically, because I don't believe in them. Like that Del Zotto will probably continue to be an instinctively dumb player on the ice and that some will forget that because he gets a couple of points here and there. Great pass Michael, how about the two oddman rushes you cost us earlier in the period with those cross ice passes through three opponents at our offensive blueline? Or that I don't believe Torts dump'n'grind will work, our opponents have solved us out, or worse, they're copying us and have more talent and warrior type of players.

Lundsanity30 03-09-2013 09:36 AM

Rangers looked like crap without Nash, but with him in the lineup we are a very good team. Were right there with the pack with games in hand

SingnBluesOnBroadway 03-09-2013 09:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chimp (Post 61299303)
This is a performance card for the last 20 games or so, not a "how good is player x".

Its still overly negative.

Take your assessment of Stepan. He gets a 6 when he's playing arguably the best hockey of his career. You want to attribute that to Nash. Fine. Stepan had two points in the 4 games that Nash missed and was arguably the most involved forward the Rangers had during that stretch (along with Hagelin).

Way too negative an evaluation.

Fitzy 03-09-2013 09:54 AM

Harsh on Biron and Del Zotto, I think.

dethomas07 03-09-2013 10:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NvincentYvalentineR (Post 61298257)
What is with all the hate? We have not been that bad. A few injuries + a lot of turn over will lead to poor chemistry and a slow start.

The only think we are lacking is depth which is scary considering injuries for us haven't been as bad as some other teams around the league.

hahaha seriously this is the worst assessment about players ever! Everyone on our team went through an injury bug and had hard time bouncing back.. I think everyone has had there ups and down, but it seems most ranger fans think our players have to be All stars all the time.. hockey season is full of ups and down and filled with adversity.. last month and this month we're 9-5-2 thats not terrible.. considering richards hasn't been playing well/hurt, gaborik's been mia, and nash missed 4 games.. Staals been hurt, mdz, girardi all missed games during that time.. why dont we give a proper assessment of where we're at then by just ranting that we've been terrible.. consistancy is the hardest thing in sports to have.. I think we're turning the corner.. but to say girardi cant make a break out pass, MDZ has no hockey IQ.. are you kidding me?

Championship* 03-09-2013 10:04 AM

My assessment? Not good enough.

haohmaru 03-09-2013 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Megustaelhockey (Post 61298333)
Needlessly, exceedingly negative in my opinion.

Everyone knows what the team's needs are. I'm happy to let the front office address them.

I got up to Dan Girardi, 5 and stopped reading.

zuckera1 03-09-2013 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway (Post 61299055)
Overly negative. This team is trending in the right direction. They don't need to be firing on all cylinders right now. They need to steadily improve as the season goes on. And right now, I believe they are.

I agree, as bad as Richards has been and as inconsistent as Gaborik has been, combined with the (temporary) injuries of Nash, MDZ, Callahan, and now Staal, I'm very happy to be 12-9-2. Everyone on here needs to relax a bit, we'll get in the playoffs and from there it's a whole new season.

Mio41 03-09-2013 10:21 AM

Half-season assessment, one word disappointing

Mio41 03-09-2013 10:23 AM

Cally 9 (what more do you want from him, drive the zamboni?)
Danny G 9
McD 9
Strals 8
Staal 9

Rangers Fail 03-09-2013 10:23 AM

I don't disagree with much of this. Girardi has not been very good. He has been making lots of dumb decisions. McD was playing better last year. DZ has below average hockey IQ. Richards was terribad.

However, Stepan has been a lot better than you're giving him credit for. He's been our #1 center.

Overall, there just has not been much consistency. Staal on defense and Nash up front are the only players that have been consistently good. That needs to change.

Chimp 03-09-2013 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway (Post 61299823)
Its still overly negative.

Take your assessment of Stepan. He gets a 6 when he's playing arguably the best hockey of his career. You want to attribute that to Nash. Fine. Stepan had two points in the 4 games that Nash missed and was arguably the most involved forward the Rangers had during that stretch (along with Hagelin).

Way too negative an evaluation.

Hence the wild card, I have a hard time assessing him, perhaps the hardest on the team. That his grade is on the low side is nothing I have trouble admitting. I just felt he didn't bring much to the team before he got to play with Nash. Hence it was a gut shot.
Quote:

Originally Posted by haohmaru (Post 61300539)
I got up to Dan Girardi, 5 and stopped reading.

Maybe a 5 is a little bit harsh on Dan just because I'm so disappointed in his brutal breakout pass. Maybe that's something you should accept with a stay at home D-man. So sure, I could agree Dan could deserve a 6. Other than that? Not a chance. He's a +1 in total and his breakout pass is a big part why. He hasn't been as solid defensively as one could expect from Dan either.

Also, I agree my bashing of Del Zotto was over the top, I have toned it down a little. I have seen that number 4 on the ice way, way too many times when something bad happens. So yeah, I'm probably overly negative about him right now.

Dagoon44 03-09-2013 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by haohmaru (Post 61300539)
I got up to Dan Girardi, 5 and stopped reading.

Couldn't agree more a 5 really ? This is what sets me off not everyone is a g.m.

Thank God

Riche16 03-09-2013 10:58 AM

I'd rather be 3 games over .500 plain like crap and have them turn it on in late April, May an June... Can they do that? Dunno.

Graves94 03-09-2013 11:13 AM

Chimp, your assessment is pretty good overall, a little negative, but it captures what you feel about this team, and I feel the same way.

I think we can safely say that if the team continues to play this way/style with the current personel, we're a playoff team, and that's about it (maybe win a round?)! We are def not an elite team in the East (ie. Pitts, Bos), because we don't score enough goals, our defense is playing below standards, and our special teams are avg (PP is a joke!). Imagine for a moment if Hank and Nash play avg...WOW. We'd be a real bubble team.

usernamesteph 03-09-2013 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Megustaelhockey (Post 61298333)
Needlessly, exceedingly negative in my opinion.

Everyone knows what the team's needs are. I'm happy to let the front office address them.

I'll be happy when we average over 3 goals a game

mandiblesofdoom 03-09-2013 11:41 AM

Quote:

Ryan Callahan: 7. You know what you get from Ryan. Hard work ethics. Offensively, he can screen the goalie, he will get an easy rebound once and then, but you will never ever be able to count on Ryan to create anything remotely offensively at all. An effective player in his areas, a hard working player that lacks the puck skill that would turn him into an elite forward.
I don't get why people say Callahan "lacks puck skills" or "can't create offensively." The goal he scored the other night where he did the Rick Nash break to the net was unreal. The game before that he made a very nifty move out from behind the net + perfect pass to set up Stepan (who actually scored that time).

Callahan has a lot going on besides hard work ethics. He's a great player. He seems to have the quickest reactions of any of them.

haohmaru 03-09-2013 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mandiblesofdoom (Post 61303729)
I don't get why people say Callahan "lacks puck skills" or "can't create offensively." The goal he scored the other night where he did the Rick Nash break to the net was unreal. The game before that he made a very nifty move out from behind the net + perfect pass to set up Stepan (who actually scored that time).

Callahan has a lot going on besides hard work ethics. He's a great player. He seems to have the quickest reactions of any of them.

29 goals last year, 7 this year (prorated to an 82 game schedule = 25 goals) and people continue to act like he's got hands of stone or something.

Ail 03-09-2013 11:45 AM

I think most of it is reasonable and fairly accurate.

It's definitely not the same team we saw last year, but there has been a fair amount of turnover. Aside from by-game basis thoughts, I'm reserving judgment until next season.

Pizza 03-09-2013 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chimp (Post 61297827)
So, basically half the shortened season in Bettman's special hattrick is gone. How have we faired? Here's my assessment. Scale 1-10.

Goalies
We have gotten just about what you could expect from our goalies, given the circumstances. I think both Hank and Biron have done what they can, considering what they have to cover for every single night.

Henrik Lundqvist: 8. Sure, he's had one softie here and there, like the game winning goal against Winnipeg. He's been battling the puck here and there. But overall, he's been doing his job. Considering he has to be the best player on the ice for us to win a game, that we're still in a playoff spot speaks volumes. He's still the backbone of this team and has been playing like that. That his numbers are suffering isn't that strange when you consider the train wreck in front of him. Hank has "Hank Mode engaged" and has shown it alot of games already, but you won't get that gear consistently before he has a real team playing in front, who will help him out instead of looking like extras. Zero shutouts. That says alot more about the team than Hank.

Martin Biron: x. Biron hasn't played much and it feels unfair to put a grade on that. But, he he hasn't been able to shut down the lower part of the net, which I contribute more to a team playing like collective donkey ass than Biron himself. Extremely small sample, so no grade.

Defensemen
Our defense has overall been a disappointment. They aren't contributing offensively and when they try, we leave our goalie out to dry more often than not. One D has to cover for some dumb, failed pinch from the other. It's getting tiresome. They are awful at breakout passes and they aren't blocking shots anymore, but they sure as hell are still blocking our goalie's vision lane so he can't even see the puck. Something has to change, because this isn't working.

Ryan McDonaugh: 6. McD has had great games and awful games. His breakout passes leads to a dangerous scoring chance, you just don't know at which net. He can step up his game, but he has not been dominant. His offensive contribution has been missing. Defensively, mostly solid with a couple of stinkers.

Dan Girardi: 6. Girardi has been one of the worst breakout passers in the league. Absolutely brutal. Defensively, when he hasn't the puck in our zone, he has mostly done his job. But for a supposed top 2 D-man, you don't get a pass in my book with a bottom 20 breakout pass. He's a +1 in total. Dan has another gear and he knows it.

Marc Staal: 8. Staal has been our best defenseman according to me. He has been very solid defensively and has pinched offensively at the right occassions. Of course he was the one who had to be injured.

Michael Del Zotto: 5. Michael still is a double edged sword. For every smart play he does, he will make a dumbskull one that makes you cringe. He might cough up the puck at the blueline, make idiotic cross ice passes through three opponents and cost us a goal. He seems to never, ever be able to stop with his bad habits once and then. His offensive game is effective when he's on, killing ourselves when it's off. His defensive game is still inconsistent. I think the sword has been pointed against ourselves alot more this half-season than against our opponents. I have no clue why he's out on the PP.

Anton Strålman: 7. Anton has been real solid and is leading our defense in goals. He is playing like a top 4 D-man. He's the only D-man I want to see on the PP so far this season, the rest of them can take a hike.

Stu Bickel: 2. Useless. He can fight. There ends his resumé. I don't know what Torts sees in him.

Gilroy and Eminger hasn't played that much, neither has Hamrlik. I actually thought Eminger looked like our #6, but according to Torts, apparently not.

Forwards
Again, an utter disappointment with a few exceptions. Our stars are looking like grinders and our grinders are looking like bad grinders. This can't go on either, something has to change. Gaborik's PP goal against the Isles was the first PP goal combined between Richards and Gaborik. Ridiculous.

Rick Nash: 9. He was snakebitten but just kept going like the machine he is. To be a PPG player on a Rangers team speaks loads of how good he has played. He's pure danger with the puck and is together with Lundqvist the biggest contributors to this team even being in a playoff spot.

Brad Richards: 3. I don't think I've ever seen Brad Richards this awful. He has contributed the most to our PP by not being on it. He has no poise, he can't win pucks, he can't connect them to teammates, I don't know what he does out there. He collects some invisible assists to pad the stat sheet, that's all. Hopefully the goal last night can somewhat get him going again.

Marian Gaborik: 6. Marian is what he is. Invisible when he isn't scoring, invisible when he's scoring. His speed seems to have lost a step, his shot has lost a step and he isn't getting the chances. His goals are more the product of his teammates setting him up, than Marian contributing himself. If he's to contribute in a playoff series, roll a dice to see if he's on a streak or not. But, he still scores his goals and a goal is a goal. It's not like we have any options here, we can just pray.

Ryan Callahan: 7. You know what you get from Ryan. Hard work ethics. Offensively, he can screen the goalie, he will get an easy rebound once and then, but you will never ever be able to count on Ryan to create anything remotely offensively at all. An effective player in his areas, a hard working player that lacks the puck skill that would turn him into an elite forward.

Carl Hagelin: 8. This guy has been our second best forward and funnily enough, this 8 puts him right there in terms of grades. His speed is always there, so things will always happen on the ice when Carl is on it. The goal last night that Richards scored was a product of Carl's speed to chase down the ice. Excellent complimentary player. His shot isn't that good, his passing isn't exactly excellent, but his speed makes up for it. If he can improve his shot, he will be a dangerous player, a Gartner kind of guy.

Derek Stepan: 7. This is where it gets difficult. I just don't know where this guy is. He's like a wild card. He has had an excellent streak, with Nash though. If he isn't playing with Nash, I don't what you can expect in the long run. He might be a second line center, but he's not in the upper echelon of second line centers, that's for sure. His passing game is solid, it's just not happening often enough. Some of you have argued he's playing the best hockey of his career. I don't know how much that has to do with putting pucks into open nets on passes received by Nash. He did manage to hit the open net though, which is alot more than you could expect from most players on this team.

Bryan Boyle: 3. He's gone this season. He has gotten a fair share of ice time and has an assist and a team worst -7 to show for it. Maybe he stays as a 4th line center if we can live with the 4th line not contributing offensively, ever. On a cup aspiring team you can't live with that, so it's all about what the aspirations for this team is.

Taylor Pyatt: 7. He scored three quick goals and has scored one on the next 20 games or so. Still, with this team's standard for bottom six players, he has stood out. Heck, with Brad Richards standards, that's good. But on a good team? This isn't a good team, so we don't need to speculate.

J.T. Miller: 5. "He can be a dummy sometimes". I think that is a quote that can be put on most players on this squad this season. He's doing his best and isn't neither standing out nor making a fool out of himself. Just where you would expect a rookie to be.

Darrol Powe: 6. He is what he is. He can skate, he can hit, he can play the PK on a team that has had a shaky PK. You don't notice him out there, with the good and the bad. A warrior that will get a point when pigs fly. Again, what are the aspirations for this team? On an average team, Power has been just fine. His +/- is 0, so you cant' complain much about his play, he has done exactly what expected, just not with one single point. He kills ice time, so our top players can do the same when he gets to the bench.

Jeff Halpern: 6. He wins his faceoffs and dumps the puck. That's Jeff Halpern. He eats ice time while the top guys rest. End of story. Likeable guy, but again, we have a plethora of bottom 6 guys who will never ever contribute offensively, how long can this team keep playing like this?

Team parts overall
Offense: 3. 24th in the league, we have gone from 2,71 GF/ G to 2,48 GF/ G. How the hell are you supposed to win anything with a pathetic offense? I don't know. Our PP is Benny Hill Theme.

Defense: 7. Yet again we're worse off. From a 2,22 GA/ G to a 2,39 GA/ G. Our shot blocking is a former shelf, the strategy seems to be to make Hank's life miserable. Not even our PK is like you would expect, we're losing track of positions and track all over. It's quite disappointing.

Coaching staff
John Tortorella: 4 (and that's generous). Last season, he got out more from the team than the players on the back. This season, he's getting out less from the team than the names on the back. Last season, we were a team you hated playing against, we made our opponents earn their wins. This season, we're a cakewalk, an average team. Our record doesn't lie. We lost our warriors in trades and free agency, so we're a grinding team without grinders. It's a mess. Pathetic offense, pathetic PP, bad defense, bad transition game, bad breakout, bad, bad, bad. We have Lundqvist and Nash, that's why John still has a coaching job in New York.

Mike Sullivan: 3. PP coach. Yeeaah... The reason he doesn't ge a lower grade is because it doesn't seem to matter which players are out there, which coach is here, or anything. The New York Rangers will have one of the worst Flower Plays in the league. End of story. When will they start playing the Benny Hill Theme in MSG when we get a PP, so the crowd gets at least some entertainment out of it?

edit: Made some slight corrections to Girardi, Strålman and Stepan. My bashing of Del Zotto was probably over the top, I toned it down a notch.

Sheesh. Way......way Too glass half empty.

This team has had roughly half the line up turned over. The kids are all looking promising. Nash is an absolute monster. Stepan is playing his best ever hockey. Cally is playing like a guy that will have his sweater in the rafters some day.

The negativity here is just amazing sometimes. I mean is it clinical or something? Then I guess I could understand it.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:06 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.