Thread: Speculation: Dubinsky on the block (Garrioch)
View Single Post
Old
02-14-2010, 04:34 PM
  #108
smoneil
Registered User
 
smoneil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 2,291
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trxjw View Post
I never said any of those players were as good as Dubinsky. All I said was that players often look like they can become more than what they're truly capable of. Dubi may have increased his point total (by 1 freakin point), but he's still hounded by inconsistency, and until that changes, he'll never break through as a player.
It's rhetoric. You try to downplay a player by comparing him to three previous players who disappointed in some way. The problem is, it's not a good comparison. Dubinsky accomplished more in his first season than any of those players have in ANY season (save Prucha). As to your "1 freakin point," that's significant, since people were going on about how Dubinsky only got points by playing with Jagr. Improving, even if only by "1 freakin point" without Jagr on his wing is significant. Being on pace to improve significantly, while adding two minutes of PK time is even more significant. You just choose not to see it.

Quote:
Either we know what he is; A decent 2nd liner or good 3rd liner that is horribly inconsistent, or we're holding out hope for him to become more. Honestly, if he tops out as a 40 point borderline top-six player, will you be content with that?
Yes, I will be. I do think he will get better (not 1st line better, but great 2nd line better), and his trends make that look likely. Even if he does max out as a 40-45 point average second line player, I would be content with that.


Quote:
How do you know when this team will be ready to compete? What 'expensive' player are you referring to?
Assuming Sather doesn't do something stupid like trading the youth, both Drury and Roszival come off the cap in 2012. During those two years, Stepan, Werek, Sanguinetti, Grachev, Del Zotto, Kreider and co get to improve. Not all of them will make it, but most of those that do should be ready to make the jump (and some will have done so already). That gives the team a great young core and a ******** of room under the cap to address a hole or two in free agency (I'd guess a true number 1 center). If patience prevails, 2012 should be the start of a lot of fun years as a Rangers fan.

Horton was the "expensive" player I was referring to. He makes 4million now. His deal runs out and allows him to hit free agency right when we get cap flexibility. Even if his numbers stay where they are right now, he won't be re-signing for 4million per year. He will likely enter free agency as a player that will earn much more than he's worth. So we either lose him or sign him, and if we sign him, we have another cap issue on our hands.

Dubinsky's salary cap hit can be controlled for far longer than Horton's. Since this team is unlikely to compete seriously for another couple of seasons yet, moving out a lesser player on a better long term contract situation for a better player whose contract will be an issue is short-sighted thinking. So I ask again- Which do you prefer- quick mediocrity or long-term competitiveness?

Quote:
Horton is a better player than Dubinsky. That's really not debatable. I'm not sure how adding a better player to the lineup translates into more mediocrity.
Because this isn't a video game. The long-term cap implications of any move need to be considered if you want to build a serious cup contender. It's not as simple as Player A is better than Player B, so let's trade for them. Cap considerations, team chemistry, and a good mix of skill sets is key to building a team. Dubinsky, with his lower long-term cap hit, his chemistry with the core of this team's youth and his physical play, is more important to this TEAM than Horton with his higher point totals, lackadaisical attitude and cap disaster waiting to happen contract situation.

smoneil is offline   Reply With Quote