Trading Lundmark? (merged)
View Single Post
04-16-2004, 08:53 PM
Join Date: Mar 2002
Originally Posted by
It never ceases to amaze me how Ranger fans cut this guy slack. He isn't a power forward like Guerin or Stevens. Or a physial defenseman like Stevens was or like Chara is now.
Everybody knows you have to wait a long time with big power players as they often take a long time to develop. However, they can always hit and play physical which is good for the playoffs.
Lundmark is a non physical factor and never will be. He isn't any good on the PK unit. He isn't a great passer. He isn't great in the corners. He isn't even a great skater from what I've seen. The only thing I see him do is shoot it well which is worthless because his mind doesn't understand how to get open on the NHL level.
This guy was the 9th pick in the draft and hasn't shown any ability that he can score 15 goals by 24. Considering he stinks in almost every other aspect of the game that isn't good enough.
Your absolutely right. Ortmeyer was outstanding and Murray looked like Peter Forsberg compared to Lundmark. Since your using stats (in another thread) to cut up Lundmark. Ortmeyer played MORE games than Lundmark but had the same amount of goals, 4 less assists and a -10 compared to Lundmnarks -8. Oh yes, SO much better. Garth Murray played 20 games last year and had, UM 1 goal and a -5, OH YES, SO much better than Lundmark. Don't give me that Ortmeyer and Garth Murray showed more energy. They were checkers, of course you would notice them more.
I remember Lundmark being the best forward on the Rangers earlier this year in some games and then the next game he'd be on the fourth line playing 5 minutes a game. How can one motivate oneself to play hard when you play your heart out and then get punished for it, diminishing your ice time. Play aggressive and make a mistake and your coach benches you. Your team plays bad and the next game your coach benches YOU.
Another problem Lundmark had as well as every other Ranger is HORRIBLE coaching. No player knew their role, had a role or knew what position they'd be playing from night to night. I know every player had the same circumstances but young players need coaching more than veterans.How many different coaches did Lundmark have his last three years?
Most of the players that were traded at the deadline flourished with their new team. Why is that? The new teams play a system and each player gets assigned a specific role. Dumb F%ck Sather doesn't get that. Did ANY player have a good year on the Rangers the last few years? NO! So then how do you expect a player like Lundmark to flourish under a regime that Sather runs. Take a look at Malhotra, he just about outscored Kovelev (in goals MM 12, Kovelev 14)who is regarded as one of the elite offensive players in the NHL. The same Malhotra who couldn't buy ice time here in NY. He flourishes under a system that allots him a role and gives him ice time regardless of a mistake he may make for playing aggressively.
When a player like Lundmark looks lazy and doesn't score it's easy to point at him and say he stinks. When the rest of the team that has 10-15 year veterans, is playing equally as poorly, taking lazy penalties and showing no interest on any shift maybe there's something behind the scenes that isn't right. Someone like you doesn't notice this of course.
I sure would hate to have someone like you running a company of mine. Lundmark has talent and you can't see that. You watch TV and don't see him on your screen often so you say he stinks. You look at the box score and don't see his name so this confirms for you that he stinks. I don't care where he was drafted, the fact is that he does have speed, he does have a good shot, he can create scoring chances. I have seen him do it in the past. Scouts draft players that high in a draft because they do have those skills. Whether or not a organization lets that player develope that talent is the real question here.
Last edited by DarthSather99: 04-16-2004 at
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by DarthSather99