Thread: Brad Richards
View Single Post
Old
04-14-2013, 11:23 AM
  #927
shinchanyo
Registered User
 
shinchanyo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Here
Posts: 3,383
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Sting View Post
Efficiency isn't about points. It's about how those points are achieved, and everything that happens when points aren't being scored.



Sad is attempting to use points alone for two players with nearly the same production as a basis of evaluation.



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.



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.



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.



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.



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.
He explained why he doesn't think Richards was the major roster change that led to last season. Richards played a role but most of the season he was not producing at a high level and in fact had months of around 3-5 pts if I remember. I agree with him there that young guys stepping in was bigger, not Richards but it's just our opinion you have valid points and a valid stance too.

When he said Norris caliber defense I thought he was talking from a defensive perspective only. In that sense their play on the D side of things was truly awesome and Stralman was great too. Saying "norris caliber" the way he did seems more a figure of speech I think you are taking too literal.
Even guy like EMinger stepped in and played really really well D wise last year at points (Woywitka even had a few good games lol).

You might have wanted Naslund and Drury shooting more but they needed to shoot more on their own. They were old and as colonials said prob too washed up to do so. maybe this led Gomer Pile to pepper goalies chests more. There were small things like I thought Drury should have been used more on the PP but really ES and overall Drury just deteriorated on his own without Gomer's help.

Both of you have valid points but it makes this arguement stupid when you're both ignoring and nitpicking each others points in crucial areas and the only arguement I can see is "You're wrong and this is right". How could you list Mitchell and Kreider while simultaneously not mentioning Girardi's best season as a pro, Stralman being a true surprise, McD turning into a borderline all star and leaving out Hags name completely?

Gomer was a garbage heap and richards is a garbage heap but Gomer never came close to doing what Rich did his first season here. Gomer however got us an all time rangers defenseman in a trade whereas Richards will likely be bought out and if we're lucky contribute next year to an acceptable degree. Both deserve to be labeled in the same level of trash that seems befitting of all big time Sather FA signings.

I'll never forget how supremely excited I was to see we signed Gomer Pile and Drury only to see the terms and immediately think "Oh we've made a terrible mistake"


Last edited by shinchanyo: 04-14-2013 at 11:34 AM.
shinchanyo is offline