HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   New York Rangers (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=24)
-   -   Younger Team? (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=247126)

polako 04-28-2006 04:40 PM

Younger Team?
 
http://www.newsday.com/sports/hockey...ckey-headlines

at the end of the article, he seems to intimate that the rebuilding process will go on next year, much like management has been insisting all season. i, for one, am happy that the unexpected success of this season (hopefully) will not lead to an abandonment of the "plan." I would be very pleased if 3 rookies make it into next year's lineup. It doesn't really even matter who, although my early preference would be Immonen, Pock, and Staal. Possibly Dawes or Helminen.

NYR469 04-28-2006 05:15 PM

our team was NOT that young this year, that is a huge misperception so getting 'younger' isn't really that tough. tyutin, prucha, lundqvist and to a lesser extent hollweg are the only guys under 25 to get significant playing time.

In The Flesh 04-28-2006 05:28 PM

I really don't think the team is going to change all that much, except for the addtions of Immonen, Pock, and Staal. And then maybe a UFA, preferably a D man. I don't want us to go crazy with the FA's, the best way to success is to build within, and thats what we did this year. This season was an evalution season, to see where the team is at, and it was really successfull. I think you just keep building from what you have. As for Dawes and Helminen being up next season, I don't know. Are they NHL ready?

DutchShamrock 04-28-2006 05:37 PM

Well, like we've been saying all year on the boards, I hope management doesn't resign too many of our UFAs. I'll take a potential "missed playoffs year" if we can start getting some of our young guys into the NHL next year. I'd love it if they walk away from Rucinsky, Rucchin, Sykora, Poti and Rosival and take whatever meassures to get Ozolinsh out of the organization (via trade or buy-out). Make a run at one or two UFAs, so long as they are no older than 30 or 31 and are legitimate improvements. No more band aids. We have to get guys that deserve a shot into the lineup. Immonen, Dawes, Dubinsky, Helmenien, Staal, Rachunek and Pock need the opportunity to earn and keep a spot.

I guess guys can piss and moan about missing the playoffs again and how walking away from all of these UFAs will doom us, but look at what this lineup ultimately accomplished. Look at their ages. How far will these guys really take us? How about when Lundqvist is in his prime? Where will these guys be then? Why bother committing more years and dollars to guys that aren't solutions. And in all honesty the only way this team is making it to the playoffs, whether it be with these UFAs or with the young guys, is if they are committed to working hard every night and sticking to the system.

You look at the Devils and you see that they know what the real prize is. They didn't have a fantastic first half, but they know what it takes and how to dig deep. You can tell that they want it more than the Rangers and are willing to work harder for it. Until we can get a group that is willing to match their work ethic this is all we have to look forward to, a cup of coffee in the second season.

Block More Shots 04-28-2006 07:04 PM

With the way Sykora has been playing lately (end of the season and playoffs), I really don't know if he's worth the money. I could see paying him around 2 million but any more than that might not be worth it.

Watch...he'll sign with the Devils next season and have a big year. I don't know, I just have a feeling.

BDubinskyNYR17* 04-28-2006 09:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYR469
our team was NOT that young this year, that is a huge misperception so getting 'younger' isn't really that tough. tyutin, prucha, lundqvist and to a lesser extent hollweg are the only guys under 25 to get significant playing time.

Betts just turned 25 and Moore is I think 25.

NYR469 04-28-2006 09:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JOrtmeyer41
Betts just turned 25 and Moore is I think 25.

betts just turned 26, born 2/16/80...moore will be 26 in august so he is 25 now but i said 'under 25'

Edge 04-28-2006 10:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYR469
our team was NOT that young this year, that is a huge misperception so getting 'younger' isn't really that tough. tyutin, prucha, lundqvist and to a lesser extent hollweg are the only guys under 25 to get significant playing time.


Yeah but of those, One was the top goalie, one a top 4 defenseman, one a top 6 forward who scored 30 goals, and Moore, Betts and Hollweg all developed into significant roles with the club.

That's not bad for the first year of a rebuild especially when you consider that guys like Kondratiev, Pock, Liffiton and Immonen were given looks as well.

Next year there will be even more, a lot of the players that will be key parts of the rebuild weren't ready or were still very young this season. Next year you've got Staal, Baranka, Immonen, Helminen and Dawes who are going to get longer looks in camp.

That's not bad at all.

Edge 04-28-2006 10:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NYR469
betts just turned 26, born 2/16/80...moore will be 26 in august so he is 25 now but i said 'under 25'

Don't you think that's a little slanted than?

I mean you have two players who are still under the limit for rookies who are cut out of the classification to strengthen a point.

dedalus 04-29-2006 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polako
at the end of the article, he seems to intimate that the rebuilding process will go on next year

I question how much it went on this year.

The Rangers played a lot of kids, sure. So did the Flyers and they're most definitely not rebuilding. (In fact with the DUC line as their second line, they played quite a few more kids in top positions than the Rangers did.)

The Rangers did nothing to help acquire for the future. They merely did what the Flyers did, and if we cannot say the Flyers were rebuilding, why should we be saying the Rangters were? Because they didn't trade away TOO much youth?

That's the only real disappointment for me this season. The team didn't do enough rebuilding and instead adoted a wait-and-see mode.

polako 04-29-2006 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dedalus
I question how much it went on this year.

The Rangers played a lot of kids, sure. So did the Flyers and they're most definitely not rebuilding. (In fact with the DUC line as their second line, they played quite a few more kids in top positions than the Rangers did.)

The Rangers did nothing to help acquire for the future. They merely did what the Flyers did, and if we cannot say the Flyers were rebuilding, why should we be saying the Rangters were? Because they didn't trade away TOO much youth?

That's the only real disappointment for me this season. The team didn't do enough rebuilding and instead adoted a wait-and-see mode.

i really can't disagree with what you are saying, it's pretty accurate i believe. The only thing I can offer is to say that our "top" prospects were not far enough into their development to make the NHL this season, like Carter, Richards & Umberger were. Hopefully guys like Dawes, Staal, Dubinsky, and Korpikoski will progress to that level sometime during next year's season.

Lundqvist, Tyutin, and Prucha is a pretty good start though.

Khelvan 04-29-2006 11:37 AM

I certainly hope Pock is gone as a part of a draft day package. I don't understand the Pock love here; for all the talk about Ozo's bad defensive play, and he certainly has done poorly, Pock is worse in his own end. He's a real project, and with some of the young defensemen on the team, and especially in the system, there is no need to try and work on a project on defense.

dedalus 04-29-2006 11:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by polako
Hopefully guys like Dawes, Staal, Dubinsky, and Korpikoski will progress to that level sometime during next year's season.

Lundqvist, Tyutin, and Prucha is a pretty good start though.

Yeah without a doubt we hope that this crop of youngsters are going to be really good NHLers, but even if they're expected to be, that doesn't require the team to stop adding to that stable by collecting other picks and prospects. You don't expect the Flyers to do that because their stated purpose is to win the Cup, but if the Rangers are rebuilding, why do they have ONLY as many kids in their lineup as the Flyers, and why aren't they looking to acquire more since they (unlike the Flyers) definitely WEREN'T going for the Cup?

The team has been succesful in what's it's done with the current crop of young NHLers, but it has failed so far (a draft day trade or two could change this) in adding to its potential crop of future NHLers.

Its a PP Goal 04-29-2006 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dedalus
I question how much it went on this year.

The Rangers played a lot of kids, sure. So did the Flyers and they're most definitely not rebuilding. (In fact with the DUC line as their second line, they played quite a few more kids in top positions than the Rangers did.)

The Rangers did nothing to help acquire for the future. They merely did what the Flyers did, and if we cannot say the Flyers were rebuilding, why should we be saying the Rangters were? Because they didn't trade away TOO much youth?

That's the only real disappointment for me this season. The team didn't do enough rebuilding and instead adoted a wait-and-see mode.

It may not have been a Florida Marlins start from scratch with all rookies type of rebuild but it was most definitely a rebuild. I think the Rangers played as many youngsters as possible this year. They could've sacrificed the future at the trade deadline but sat tight with what they had and stuck to their word.

They can only play so many rookies, depending on what type of talent they have and who's ready. Other than Prucha which youngster is ready or able to take a top line role? The blueline?

dedalus 04-29-2006 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Truth
It may not have been a Florida Marlins start from scratch with all rookies type of rebuild but it was most definitely a rebuild. I think the Rangers played as many youngsters as possible this year.

It's not only about playing rookies this year. It's also about acquiring assets for future years. There's no reason at all (except the playoffs drive - a Flyers goal) to spend a 3rd rounder on Ozolinsh. There's no reason at all (except the playoffs - a Flyers goal) to keep Rucchin, Rucinsky, and/or a couple other players at the trade deadline.

This team's management decided that making the playoffs was their priority over acquiring young potential Rangers. That is not the usual decision of rebuilding teams. Management's justification (and its defenders) has been that they are "getting the kids valuable playoff experience," but teams that are looking to get their youth some playoff experience are those just beginning their climb out of a rebuilding.

There are those who would argue differently, but IMO one year INTO this rebuild is a bit to soon to begin using the strategies used by those closing their rebuilding.

Its a PP Goal 04-29-2006 12:23 PM

I don't disagree with the Rangers philosophy. We should have more rookies coming in next year if they earn a spot in training camp. Off the bat, Staal sounds like someone who can step in and play a significant role sometimes next year. They don't necessarily have to sacrifice everything they have for the future, even though they were prepared to when this season started. As long as the flow of youngsters keep coming into the team, as opposed to the past when they were packaged in trades for vets, I'm happy.

dedalus 04-29-2006 12:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Truth
As long as the flow of youngsters keep coming into the team, as opposed to the past when they were packaged in trades for vets, I'm happy.

Oh sure, if the flow is good and continues to come, we're ALL happy, BUT if the team is taking the picks that comes to it and putting kids in the lineup when it feels they're mature enough to do so, how is that "rebuilding" different from what the Flyers are doing - which is NOT rebuilding?

I question how we can call this a rebuild if they're merely doing what every other non-rebuilding team is doing.

Its a PP Goal 04-29-2006 12:40 PM

This really just seems like semantics to me. We have a totally different team this year, a lot of youngsters are stepping up and we have more youngsters coming to the team next year. To me, the Rangers are rebuilding though its not at the pace that some want. Could they trade Jagr, Rucinsky, Straka? Sure but they didn't and the flow of youngsters is still coming in, not out.

I think the difference is, the Flyers are more willing to make moves for vets than we are. They made a trade for Nedved this year while didn't make any sacrifices this year. Ozo's trade ended up a wash for Neimo.

NYR469 04-29-2006 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Edge
Yeah but of those, One was the top goalie, one a top 4 defenseman, one a top 6 forward who scored 30 goals, and Moore, Betts and Hollweg all developed into significant roles with the club.

That's not bad for the first year of a rebuild especially when you consider that guys like Kondratiev, Pock, Liffiton and Immonen were given looks as well.

Next year there will be even more, a lot of the players that will be key parts of the rebuild weren't ready or were still very young this season. Next year you've got Staal, Baranka, Immonen, Helminen and Dawes who are going to get longer looks in camp.

That's not bad at all.

point is simply that we weren't like the pens with a bunch of 19-20 year olds. even our 'kids' were older. so the idea of getting 'younger' next year is something that can easily happen

DutchShamrock 04-29-2006 04:05 PM

Rebuilding isn't just about getting young guys in the lineup. It is all for naught if you don't create the proper environment for the organization. I think it's very important to create a winning atmosphere and to also have veteran leadership and experience around the young guys to help them develop. You can't have 20 rookies running around every night. They won't learn as much and their development will be hampered by such an environment. If a guy isn't ready for the NHL you do him no good by putting him in that position. I like the fact that the Rangers are being smart and patient with the rebuild. I believe that next year will be more of a rebuild.

Sure we could have traded Rucchin and Rucinsky at the deadline. But what would we have gotten for them? A 3rd round pick? A 4th rounder? Is that more valuable than a good postseason run and their leadership at this time of year? Of course in hindsight it looks like a poor decision but at the time it is a reasonable course of action.

I'm sure that if we were somewhat in this series but still losing people would wonder if it was worth trading away a veteran presence and leadership going into the playoffs. When the dust settles, this year will be viewed as very successful and well played by management.

Inferno 04-29-2006 05:25 PM

i truly believe the rangers had every intention of trading away their vets at the deadline BEFORE THE SEASON STARTED.

but you would have to be absolutely off your friggin rocker if you think a team is going to dismantle a team headed to the playoffs.

they stayed the course by not trading away youth for a quick fix today...but no gm who wants to keep his job is going to dismantle a first place (at the time) team.

NYR469 04-29-2006 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by inferno272
i truly believe the rangers had every intention of trading away their vets at the deadline BEFORE THE SEASON STARTED.

but you would have to be absolutely off your friggin rocker if you think a team is going to dismantle a team headed to the playoffs.

they stayed the course by not trading away youth for a quick fix today...but no gm who wants to keep his job is going to dismantle a first place (at the time) team.

i agree 10000%. i think the game plan going into the year was to have another fire sale and deal all the soon to be free agents for more prospects and picks, then let more kids get experience down the stretch. but with the team in 1st we couldn't do this...luckily they just stood pat and didn't go the opposite direction and traded kids to help the playoffs.

dedalus 04-29-2006 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by inferno272
they stayed the course by not trading away youth for a quick fix today...but no gm who wants to keep his job is going to dismantle a first place (at the time) team.

You can trade two veterans without it being considered a "dismantle."

Besides, rebuilding teams (and management STILL calls this team that) should not be afraid to dismantle.

Inferno 04-29-2006 06:02 PM

no...you cant.

dude, a first place team is NEVER going to trade away players for picks, especially not players that are of any consequence. i mean, you cant trade away 2 top 6 forwards while youre in first place, and not bring back anyone to fill their places.

what kind of a message does that give to your team? well, we know youre in first place, but since you obviously arent gonna do squat this post season, we figure we'll trade away two top 6 forwards for some kids, and you guys gotta deal.

youll have a team that will absolutely quit on you, and a pretty upset fan base.

eco's bones 04-29-2006 06:04 PM

Like it or not this year more young players made an impact on our lineup than any time since the mid 70's. That's something considering that we've got some really good looking prospects that should be coming in the next season or two. Is it a rebuild or not? It depends on what the word means to the individual using it.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:48 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.