Thread: Player Discussion: Brad Richards
View Single Post
04-13-2013, 06:59 AM
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
NYR Sting's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,506
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by ColonialsHockey10 View Post
Are you kidding me? Your argument against Gomez was that he produced "two of the most inefficient seasons for a top line center". Yet, the guy you're defending did even worse. That's why I brought it up.
Efficiency isn't about points. It's about how those points are achieved, and everything that happens when points aren't being scored.

You're just coming off as biased. And yes, let's nitpick, it's not true. Allow me to bump this is two weeks when it's a reality then. You dug yourself a hole with that comment. Go into attitude, go into intelligence, go into who's from a cooler place in north america, but for gods sake, what's the point of bringing up Scott Gomez's production as a Ranger in a Brad ****ing Richards thread.

Negligible or not, he outscored Brad.

Yes, I think Gomez was a hell of a lot better as a Ranger then Richards is/was. He outscored him during the regular season, and his PPG in the playoffs was better. On a team that was significantly more poorly constructed then the one we have now.

Were either of them good signings? No, I would never argue that. But for people to dismiss them as comparable is sad quite frankly.
Sad is attempting to use points alone for two players with nearly the same production as a basis of evaluation.

Yet we're currently 25th in goals this season, 3 ahead of 30th. You said yourself 4 points is "hardly enough to make up for everything else". What about 3 goals? Our offense is just as pathetic. The difference? Gomez still ****ing produced.
No, actually the difference is last year, the team was 11th in goals, by far the highest it has been since the lockout, and higher than it was the year before. Again, Richards was the only major roster change. Gomez's Rangers were the worst offensive squads since the lockout.

No one is denying that Richards has played terribly this season. But this is a weird season, and I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that he'll bounce back next year. He always has in the past.

Yeah, let's criticize the guy for shooting on a team supported by the likes of a washed up Markus Naslund, Nikolai Zherdev and Chris Drury. What is even the point of this argument? My enjoyment of the team has nothing to do with individual performances.
The point of the argument is that this is exactly what makes Scott Gomez a detrimental player to have on your team. Yes, on any day I would rather have Markus Naslund, Zherdev, or Drury shooting the puck over Gomez, because Gomez is a terrible shooter. His entire game is passing! Why would you ever want him to shoot the puck, much less be one of the most frequent shooters in the league? He had one of the lowest shooting percentages in the league, and this was just a pattern that had been going on for 4 years, even before he was on the Rangers. This is what makes Gomez an inefficient player. He's selfish and he's stupid. He is a turnover machine and he wastes offensive zone opportunities in record amounts. I would rather not have his 60 or 70 points and instead have all of the chances for puck possession and offensive zone time.

Richards turned it on the last couple of months of the season, and played pretty well during the playoffs, especially when you consider that Gaborik was playing hurt and almost entirely ineffective during the postseason.

Probably the worst argument of the bunch. Lundqvist winning the Vezina, McDonagh, Girardi and MDZ playing like Norris caliber defensemen, and guys like Kreider, Hagelin and Mitchell stepping in and playing the system to a T is what made the difference. Richards was crap last season as well, but we were winning so it was hardly a problem to some. That's what makes this place a psychologists wet dream from time to time. Selective memory.
LOL. Lundqvist is a Vezina candidate almost every year, and the notion that any of McD Girardi or MDZ were Norris caliber is laughable. The highest scorer among them, MDZ, was 24th in the league in points among defenseman. Just because McDonagh and Girardi played a lot of minutes doesn't mean they were Norris caliber. They were very good, and I would say that in addition to Richards, McDonagh was probably the biggest difference from the year before, but Norris? No, sorry. MDZ's point totals, by the way, had a lot to do with Richards. But what is even more laughable is suggesting that Mitchell or Kreider had more to do with the team's success than Richards. That is pure gold.

Is this a diversion tactic or something? We can vent about Glen Sather in another thread. He has his fair share of problems. But this thread is a player discussion on Brad Richards, and he's been a steaming pile of **** for his entire tenure as a Ranger. There's no ifs, ands, or buts about that, and you even said it yourself. First you say Sather didn't have a choice, then you come back saying I should be blaming our GM. Tip-toeing around the topic of subject, because there's no defending Richards in an argument.
How am I tip-toeing around anything? Sather DIDN'T have a choice . . . because as usual, he backed himself into a corner, in large part thanks to senseless moves like Gomez.

Quotes like the above make it seem like you're not even sure what you're arguing about, no offense.

I respect your opinion, but I think anyone who can even remotely support Richards is out to lunch. It's disgraceful what he's done as a Ranger.
Then we're even, because I think Gomez is the biggest piece of **** to ever put on a Ranger jersey in my lifetime, and the single dumbest non-goon player I've ever watched in the NHL. Anyone that is going to compare his two years favorably to Richards' 11-12 season is insane in my book.

NYR Sting is offline