View Single Post
05-17-2013, 02:07 PM
Registered User
SnowblindNYR's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 17,274
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Richter Scale View Post
I wasn't suggesting the Rangers get rid of Hank. Just pointing to how that big salary impacts what the rest of the roster looks like, and so - at least in part - whether this team has a good offense or not. It isn't the only factor - but it contributes to it.

Pittsburgh, one of the better teams in the league, has a pretty awful defense, and a big hole in goal. In a cap world, you're not going to have every aspect of the team be stellar. Something is going to have to suffer; whether it is depth, offense, defense, goaltending, not having the top tier scoring talent, etc.

That said, right there with you on Richie. Not necessarily on board to buy him out this summer. But if his ****** play continues next season, by all means.
Honestly, in theory, we have a team now that when healthy is without real weaknesses in THEORY. With Staal healthy we have a very solid D-crew. Maybe the best in the league. Of course in practice, someone always seems to have a subpar stretch. MDZ and Girardi can be inconsistent. Hagelin is not a great top 6 player, but is a great complimentary player that doesn't look out of place in the top 6, so not a real hole. Stepan and Callahan are definitely top 6 players. Of course in practice, Callahan has been a playoff under-performer his entire career. In theory, Brassard, Zucc, and Nash are top 6 players. In practice of course Nash has been MIA. Clowe if he were healthy would be a great 3rd liner. Richards, is young enough to not be the complete garbage he is now and SHOULD be a great 3rd line center. Dorsett is a pretty solid 3rd liner. The 4th line is decent too, Asham as a very good 4th liner for example, so is Boyle.

Reason I say in theory is that I feel like we've assembled a team that while lacking in superstar talent outside of goal (even then Nash and McDonagh will be Olympians most likely on the 2 best teams in the olympics), doesn't have many weaknesses. The problem is a few guys are injured and a bunch of guys are under-performing. Then again, that's probably true of EVERY team. You think Chicago doesn't have under-performing or injured players? Sather did a good job with this roster. Though my biggest worry is that those under-performers seem to be that EVERY playoff.

SnowblindNYR is offline   Reply With Quote