: News Article:
Hockey News: The State of Hockey in NY
View Single Post
11-28-2010, 11:33 PM
Heart and Soul
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Originally Posted by
Before they missed the playoffs last year they were one of like 5 or less teams to have made the playoffs every year post-lockout. It is an accomplishment.
One team wins the Cup per year.
If it were so easy, then every team would win it. Like, Washington for example.
Washington, the team that has a better prospect pool than we do, 2 forwards better than any of our forwards, and a much higher chance of winning a Stanley Cup in the future than this team does. Good example.
Making the playoffs every year is not an accomplishment.
The Rangers haven't sacrificed going as far as they can each year, and they've drafted well each year at their position, every year post-lockout.
"Great, led to what and where"... They're a young team being led by their drafted and homegrown players. Period.
And they're contending for a playoff spot, with two rookies, and two second year players.
Prospect/farm system haters whine about the prospects and young players being garbage, yet the entire team is full of them with more to arrive in the next couple of years as well. And they're playing well, just as well as the rest of the league.
The Rangers young players are not garbage. They're wery good players. Together they make a team, that will be VERY good in a couple of years.
So what? What does any of this actually mean and why should it be impressive that one of the teams with all of the advantages is doing something completely unremarkable. And no one ever says that this team's young players are garbage. People just have a realistic view of what they see in front of them, which I don't think you do.
You're mistaking "franchise player" for "generational player".
Dubinsky, Staal, Lundqvist are 100% franchise players. They are guys who have a high probability of playing their entire careers or the vast majority of their careers with the Rangers, and being some of the better players in the league in that time. A "franchise player" doesn't need to be a generational player. Ryan Kesler is a franchise player, is he generational? Dustin Brown is a franchise player, is he generational? Zack Parise is a franchise player, is he generational?
You're mistaking very good player for franchise player. Brandon Dubinsky is not Zach Parise. Hell, neither is Dustin Brown. Dustin Brown is not the Kings' franchise player. That would be Anze Kopitar and Drew Doughty, who unlike Marc Staal, is a franchise defenseman. Lundqvist is a franchise player who is already in his prime, is a goaltender in a league where goaltending is no longer as important as it once was, and 6 years into his career has yet to be helped by being provided with a legit good team.
How many teams have a Crosby, Ovechkin, Stamkos? Three teams.
As if the Rangers have skaters not named Gaborik that are even on the level beneath these guys. They don't, not even close. There are a decent amount of great skaters in this league that are significantly better than anyone the Rangers dress except for Gaborik, and his value isn't as high when he doesn't have someone feeding him the puck.
The Islanders had a #1 overall pick, as well as multiple top 5 picks. Where are they in the standings?
The Oilers had a #1 overall pick, as well as numerous top 5 picks. Where are they in the standings?
These are terrible examples that prove nothing and have no business being compared to the Rangers. I'm not even sure what point you're trying to make. The Islanders have amassed a quality group of prospects, are playing this entire season without their best player and have suffered a number of other injuries, as well. They are also a team in danger of RELOCATION, have nowhere near the resources this team does, and have problems attracting free agents.
The Oilers had the number one pick THIS season. What do you expect from them?Also, check your facts. They've had NO other top 5 picks. They had the #6 pick in 07 and picked Gagner. They're also recognized as one of the worst-managed teams in the league for the past few years now. We're doing better than them? Huzzah! Unlike the Oilers, the Rangers don't generally have their best player demand to be traded because his wife doesn't want to live in the city anymore, but then again, unlike the Oilers, the Rangers don't have to worry about being unable to attract free agents, either.
You know why the Rangers have been drafting well? Because they've been drafting guys that have physical attributes and mental make up that translate well to the pro game. Not just guys who rack up points against teenagers in Juniors.
The Rangers have been drafting well because they decided to start doing things that their competent peers had been doing for years. What the Rangers haven't done is drafted players around whom you build a team that has Stanley Cup aspirations.
As for the mental make up...they just spent their highest draft pick in years on a player whose entire success will depend on his ability to vastly improve his mental make up, which at this point, is questionable at best. The team's top forward prospect is a player that has never had to rely on his mental attributes to succeed. The team's second best forward prospect? Another guy with physical gifts that, not surprisingly, is struggling mightily.
All in all, our prospect pool is very nice and much nicer than it's been...ever, perhaps. But IMO, none of these players are as good as you think they are. And how can they be, when most of the league's top players are drafted in positions that the Rangers are unwilling to draft from?
We have an elite 7+ mil game changing goal scorer in Gaborik. Though he may be enigmatic. And we also have an elite goaltender in Lundqvist.
And, lo and behold, we're still a slightly above average team at best that will be forced to look toward free agency or trade to fill the most important position on the team. Failure to do so, despite what you would like to believe based on your comments below, will result in again being stuck with a team that is just not good enough to be a contender.
Would getting Richards make us better? Maybe, depending on who we give up, both if via trade or via free agency. But its also not financially feasible/responsible.
I love Richards as a hockey player. But while we have Drury, Rozsival, Avery, Boogaard, Gilroy, Frolov, eating up a lot of the cap, and we need to give raises to Dubinsky, Callahan, Anisimov, we can't afford another 7+ mil cap hit right now.
Richards becomes a UFA one summer too early, unfortunately.
And if we did get him, some/all of Drury, Rozsival, Frolov, Avery, Gilroy, Boogaard, Christensen need to be gone and off the books. And more of the prospects that some rag on, need to be on the roster.
Having some cap discomfort for one season and getting Richards is far more preferable than not getting Richards, because without him, this team is not going to be able to go to the next level.
View Public Profile
NYR Sting's albums
Find More Posts by NYR Sting