View Single Post
09-30-2003, 04:24 AM
True Blue
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,806
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by JCProdigy
I just got to ask, where did this Malakhov/Mironov stigma come from?? Because he's Russian and he's everything that those two players could've/should've been? He's a totally different person from either of them so he should get no stigma. He's succeeded wherever he's played so far in his career and I haven't heard a bad word from any of his past teammates nor his past coaches about his attitude or game.
It has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that he's Russian. And it's just a little early to say that he's everything that the M&M boys should have been, isn't it? I mean, so far Tyutin has not proved a blessed thing. All he really had is an impressive half a game.
How different he is remains to be determined. There were rumors last year that his attitude in camp was not the best. That while players like Lundmark seemed to be actively trying to get better, Tyutin looked a little content with himself. And let's recall that his camp last year was a little unimpressive. There were also something in the wind right after the Rangers drafted him that said that he has tendencies to take games off and only play when he wants to. His play was termed as inconsistent. The fact that up to the last half of the Boston game, Tyutin's camp was once again thoroughly unimpressive did not help his case.
That's where the stigma comes from for me. He SEEMS like he has all the tools to be a VERY GOOD #2 d-man in the league. He has size, speed, a strong shot, and is not unwilling to take the body. He LOOKS like at the top end, he could be everything that the Ambiguously Defenseless Russian Duo SHOULD have been. Wether or not he lives up to those expectation or becomes just another player whose potential is largely unfullfilled (a la the Russian twins) is up to him.

True Blue is offline