HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Zaborsky signed

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-02-2008, 03:10 PM
  #26
TomLaidlaw
Registered User
 
TomLaidlaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Transylvania
Country: Romania
Posts: 3,177
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RCallahan43 View Post
well then why did renney not play prucha over hollweg in the playoffs??? and prucha was not hurt at the time

Prucha may lack certain things but grit isn't one of them. The kid has the heart of a lion and has zero regard for his own well being when he is on the ice. He throws his body into anything that moves and is constantly taking bone crushing hits to make a play. He never backs down from the high contact areas either. Take a look at Prucha's first year highlight video and look how many ugly goals he scored from in front of the net with hardwork and "grit". I am in the minority around here because I think Prucha should be kept and given another opportunity now that Shanny is gone but even the most staunch prucha hater should be able to see that toughness and grit were never an issue with Prucha.

TomLaidlaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 03:18 PM
  #27
Vitto79
Registered User
 
Vitto79's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sarnia
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,437
vCash: 500
I disagree about Moore and Byers not getting to atleast 3rd line status.........I mean they won't be top stars but they can play.........Callahan is a perfect example of a 3rd line forward........if he goes to top 2 then YEA we are in deep doo doo........their is said it

I would love to see some of the young kids get a shot this year though.................As for Prucha, play him........I am fine with him getting Shanny's PP time and playing on the 3rd line with Drury and Callahan

I think Dawes should move up and play with Gomez and a FA like Rolston.................then keep Avery in the fold with Dubi and Keep Jagr

But who the heck knows what will happen

What I do know is this FA list sucks pretty bad

Vitto79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 04:04 PM
  #28
squishy
Registered User
 
squishy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,149
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PukkuMikku View Post
Tom Pyatt had a horrible rookie season in the AHL. And was sent DOWN to the ECHL Charlotte Checkers.
Yes, because he was completely overmatched against older, bigger, more mature professional competition. Just as Zaborsky was when he came to Hartford at the end of this season. Throwing prospects that aren't ready on to the first line because you perceive them to have the most upside isn't how you develop them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PukkuMikku View Post
And, take a look at the AHL roster right now, Zaborsky, Hillier, and Anisimov are by far and away the most talented forwards with the highest ceilings on that roster. Therefore, my assessment is NOT terrible. It is accurate.
No, because if we follow your logic, there's no point in bothering to develop a prospect who's not going to be a top 6 forward, which couldn't be farther from the truth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PukkuMikku View Post
The BEST players on the team play on the TOP lines.
Yes, the BEST players, not the ones perceived to have the most upside. This is why guys like Moore and Parenteau were on the first line over Anisimov in Hartford this season. They were better players this season.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PukkuMikku View Post
The players with the highest potential play the MOST minutes.
This suggests to me you've never followed the AHL. This may be what you think should happen, but it's certainly not what actually happens. The BEST players get the most ice time. P.A. Parenteau and Andrew Hutchinson likely don't figure in the Rangers long-term plans, but that didn't stop them from getting top-line minutes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PukkuMikku View Post
the AHL is meant for that, it is meant to develop talent for the NHL. not hold it back so that marginal players at best get to take their time.
The AHL is for developing players at the right pace. More ice time doesn't equal better development if the player in question can't handle the ice time (as became quickly apparent this season with Anisimov) or isn't yet up to facing the opposing teams best lines or handling the pressure being on the ice at the most crucial times.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PukkuMikku View Post
Excuse me if i don't get head over heals for guys like Byers and Moore who are dime a dozen players, and will never produce in the NHL. I could care less if Moore got to the NHL, so did Jamie Lundmark.
Every single person on this board vastly underrates Byers. But we'll have to wait until he gets to the NHL and proves it. I don't disagree with you on Moore, however.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PukkuMikku View Post
And besides, we have guys in the NHL right now who can fill the roles that Moore and Byers would be filling. Callahan, Dawes, Sjostrom (RFA) and yes even Orr are better NHL players then Moore and Byers ever will be.
You completely lost me at Orr...

Quote:
Originally Posted by PukkuMikku View Post
The difference between guys like Zaborsky, Hillier, Anisimov compared to Bourret, Byers, and Moore, is that the later rely on their size and/or strength to win battles and produce at a lower level. Where as the other three use their SKILL. Their SKILL will translate more then Byers' size, which, no offense, is not NHL caliber. 6 foot 190 lbs is not intimidating anyone in the NHL...sorry.
Implying Bourret relies on his size and strength suggests you've never seen him play. Bourret is 5'10" and while he can throw massive body checks, it's his skill that will or will not get him to the NHL. The guy's got hands and vision most players can only dream of. That's what made him a first round pick, not his ability to throw a body check. The issue with Bourret is all mental.

And Byers is 6'3" 195 according to the Rangers site, and easily over 200 if you've actually ever seen him in person. And if you'd seen him destroy everyone he fought in the second half of the season, you just might find him a little more intimidating.

squishy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 05:01 PM
  #29
Jay88*
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Queens,NY
Country: United States
Posts: 960
vCash: 500
G.Moore, looked so out of place in the NHL it was ridiculous. If h makes the team,like seomone said NYR is in trouble.

Jay88* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 05:04 PM
  #30
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 28,350
vCash: 500
yea, im going to agree with squishy......

bourret has the potential to be better than hiller and zaborsky....

byers has the potential to be a very good and valuable player to the NHL team as he has much needed size, grit and the ability to score garbage goals which is HUGE for te current rangers as they cant seem to do that

NYR Viper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 05:13 PM
  #31
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,193
vCash: 500
Pierre Parenteau and Andrew Hutchinson may not be back.

Also Jessiman may not be back.

And, I'll believe Byers, Moore, or Bourret will be good NHL players when i see it.

Any way it is sliced, Anisimov, Hillier, and Zaborsky are going to be the most talented forwards on the team, unless Sather signs someone else. Or trades for someone else.

Pyatt had 41 games in the AHL last year.

Zaborsky had 2.

Can't compare them, Pyatt had a bad year. Bourret had 2 bad years with Hartford.

There is no way they should be considered higher in the depth chart, simply because they have seniority on the team. they are not better players then Hillier, Zaborsky, and Anisimov.

Again, Moore, Byers, and Bourret should not play more minutes then Hillier, Zaborsky and Anisimov simply because they have more experience.

Hillier, Zaborsky, and Anisimov will not be damaged from playing. Their development will not be damaged.

If you can list players who both have more talent, and deserve to make up the top line, then go for it.

But i don't see how burying Hillier and Zaborsky on a lower line in Hartford is going to help their development. It would do the opposite.

And besides that, Anisimov will compete for an NHL spot, saying he can't be the top line center in Hartford is wrong.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 05:14 PM
  #32
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,193
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyviper87 View Post
yea, im going to agree with squishy......

bourret has the potential to be better than hiller and zaborsky....

byers has the potential to be a very good and valuable player to the NHL team as he has much needed size, grit and the ability to score garbage goals which is HUGE for te current rangers as they cant seem to do that
When Bourret plays like he has more upside, ill believe it. So far in three AHL seasons, he has shown squat.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 05:19 PM
  #33
eco's bones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elmira NY
Country: United States
Posts: 12,444
vCash: 500
Generally agree with Squishy's comments--but she is not the only one who thinks Byers has a good future. After an underwhelming junior career--he's had two very good seasons in Hartford. I think he and Korpikoski are the closest to making the Rangers of all Hartford's forwards.

On putting Zaborsky or Hillier automatically on the top line as one poster would have it--he or she need to get a clue. Hartford will have better options than that. They will have to prove themselves at the AHL level first. Neither one of them strikes me as a budding star or are even a slam dunk to become legit NHL players. They are starting all over again.

eco's bones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 05:32 PM
  #34
Brooklyn Ranger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn, of course
Posts: 7,763
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PukkuMikku View Post
When Bourret plays like he has more upside, ill believe it. So far in three AHL seasons, he has shown squat.
Bourret has only played two seasons in the AHL and he's not even 21 yet (his birth date is October 1986). Plus, he only played 54 games due to injuries this season. I'm a skeptic, but it's way too early to give up on this kid.

Brooklyn Ranger is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 05:33 PM
  #35
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 28,350
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PukkuMikku View Post
When Bourret plays like he has more upside, ill believe it. So far in three AHL seasons, he has shown squat.
i understand your stand here, although it isnt like on most nights whenhe is healthy he is a good player...its just that he hasnt stayed healthy because his head isnt in it inthe offseason....if he works out for one year he can put up over a ppg....mark my words....if he stays healthy next year he will make the team the following year as a 3rd or 2nd line player.....he is a ball of energy with great hands and great vision.....theres a reason he was drafted in the 1st round and there was a reason the rangers originally wanted to draft him if they couldnt get staal

NYR Viper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 05:42 PM
  #36
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,848
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by inferno272 View Post
how many signed players does that give us now?
29 players

Gomez,Drury,Prucha,Betts,Callahan,Hollweg,Orr,Dubi nsky,Byers,Korpikoski,Bourret,Pyatt,Anisimov,
Dupont,Barnes,Soryal,Hillier and Zaborsky

Staal,Tyutin,Girardi,Backman,Sauer,Sanguinetti,
Pock,Potter and Busto

Lundqvist and Wiikman

RangerBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 06:37 PM
  #37
squishy
Registered User
 
squishy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,149
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PukkuMikku View Post
Pierre Parenteau and Andrew Hutchinson may not be back.
That was my point. They're not in the long term plans, but yet pulled down some of the biggest minutes on the team... because they were the best players on the team.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PukkuMikku View Post
And, I'll believe Byers, Moore, or Bourret will be good NHL players when i see it.
I never claimed Moore would be.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PukkuMikku View Post
Any way it is sliced, Anisimov, Hillier, and Zaborsky are going to be the most talented forwards on the team, unless Sather signs someone else. Or trades for someone else.
Most talented doesn't equal most able to perform at the level required at this stage in their careers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PukkuMikku View Post
Pyatt had 41 games in the AHL last year.

Zaborsky had 2.
Zaborsky played only two games because he didn't out-play or out-practice AHL guys like Mike Ouellette and Jordan Owens. He didn't play more than that because the coaching staff recognized he wasn't ready to step in and play at the level required yet. And the coaching staff is in a far better position to judge that than you, me, a stat sheet, or a scouting report.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PukkuMikku View Post
Can't compare them, Pyatt had a bad year. Bourret had 2 bad years with Hartford.

There is no way they should be considered higher in the depth chart, simply because they have seniority on the team. they are not better players then Hillier, Zaborsky, and Anisimov.
No one in Hartford gets ice time because they have more seniority. Players get ice time when they perform better than others. And nowhere have I said Bourret or Pyatt are higher on the depth chart than Anisimov. But until Hiller and Zaborsky prove they can play at the next level, Pyatt and Bourret most certainly are for now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PukkuMikku View Post
Again, Moore, Byers, and Bourret should not play more minutes then Hillier, Zaborsky and Anisimov simply because they have more experience.
Perhaps you should re-read my post, because I never said they should. The best players get the most ice time. Who will be the best players next season won't be decided until they all get on the ice next September and start playing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PukkuMikku View Post
Hillier, Zaborsky, and Anisimov will not be damaged from playing. Their development will not be damaged.
Their development most certainly would be damaged if they were consistently put in a position to fail by being thrown out on the ice in situations they're not ready for, against competition that's consistently better than them. Confidence is huge part of success in hockey. If you constantly put a player out against competition that outplays them, you WILL damage their confidence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PukkuMikku View Post
If you can list players who both have more talent, and deserve to make up the top line, then go for it.
See, that's the difference between you and me. I'm not basing my evaluation on stats and scouting reports. Whoever plays best in camp and to start the season next year should get the top line spots. You don't hand a player that position because of their pedigree, draft position or past stats, you make them earn it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PukkuMikku View Post
But i don't see how burying Hillier and Zaborsky on a lower line in Hartford is going to help their development. It would do the opposite.
Where did I say I want Hiller and Zaborsky buried on lower lines? My whole argument is that the player who proves they are most capable of the role should get it. Moreover, the reason there are only 17 skaters allowed in the AHL is to prevent the existence of a 4th line of scrubs who don't belong there and only get 4 minutes of ice time a night. That's why players are developed in the AHL rather than the NHL. In Hartford, for the majority of the season, the even strength playing time is pretty distributed amongst the three lines, with power play time going to the players who show the most offensive talent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PukkuMikku View Post
And besides that, Anisimov will compete for an NHL spot, saying he can't be the top line center in Hartford is wrong.
Again, please re-read my post. NOWHERE did i say Anisimov can't be the top line center in Hartford next season. I said he couldn't at the start of last season. He started there, but it became obvious very early on that he couldn't handle the minutes (by the third period he'd have to skip shifts because he was gassed). Add to that the fact that he didn't understand the North American pro game yet, was getting outbattled physically in the face off circle and along the boards, and it resulted in him looking lost and overmatched. So his ice time was eased back and he was put out on the ice in a role where there was less pressure to score and he could focus on his all-around game, adjusting to the style of play, and improving his physical play. In other words, he was put in a position to succeed, rather than fail. And it worked perfectly. By the end of the season, he'd put on 10 pounds, was playing a more physical game, rocking the faceoff circle, contributing more consistently offensively and was able to handle the ice time, often getting double shifted with the spare forwards. It was a textbook example of how to develop a player, and he responded beautifully, and was easily the player who showed the most consistent, visible improvement over the course of the season.

squishy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 06:39 PM
  #38
FLYLine24*
 
FLYLine24*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 29,102
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay88 View Post
G.Moore, looked so out of place in the NHL it was ridiculous. If h makes the team,like seomone said NYR is in trouble.
So did Dawes when he first got called up...most players dont fit in perfectly right off the bat and contribute on the scoreboard.

FLYLine24* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 06:41 PM
  #39
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 23,093
vCash: 500
Awards:
This is exactly why I'm in love with Squish.

__________________

It's just pain.
nyr2k2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 06:56 PM
  #40
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,193
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eco's bones View Post
Generally agree with Squishy's comments--but she is not the only one who thinks Byers has a good future. After an underwhelming junior career--he's had two very good seasons in Hartford. I think he and Korpikoski are the closest to making the Rangers of all Hartford's forwards.

On putting Zaborsky or Hillier automatically on the top line as one poster would have it--he or she need to get a clue. Hartford will have better options than that. They will have to prove themselves at the AHL level first. Neither one of them strikes me as a budding star or are even a slam dunk to become legit NHL players. They are starting all over again.
Who?

Thats what i want to know.

People can say I'm wrong and lambaste me, however, no one has provided any better options.

Because there are none.

Byers, Moore, and Bourret are not it IMO.

In 122 AHL games, Bourret has 25 goals... when he lives up to his potential, i will believe it. But he has to produce at least a little.

At the same time why automatically put guys on the top line simply because of seniority? Bourret hasn't earned it. Not in the least.

And again, who is the better option for top line center? Dupont? Don't think so. Pyatt? Don't think so. Graham? No.

Anisimov should be top line center in Hartford.

Admittedly, Moore and Byers had good seasons in the AHL last year.

The point is that they still do not have a higher ceiling then that of Hillier and Zaborsky. They simply do not.

And if Moore and Byers are in fact on the top line in Hartford, then there are certainly no better options for 2nd line wingers at the moment.

But honestly, there is no reason to attempt grooming Byers and Moore as scoring wingers when that simply will not be their job in the NHL. They will be checking role players. However, Hillier and Zaborsky have the ability to be offensive wingers, and that is how they should be used in the AHL as well.

I mean... people understand that Jessiman may not be resigned and Parenteau may not be resigned.

Secondly, no one suggested that Hillier and Zaborsky are closer to making it to the NHL. The issue is that Moore and Byers are DO NOT have a higher ceiling then Hillier and Zaborsky, who have the potential to be offensive wingers in the NHL. Where as Moore and Byers are CHECKING LINE ROLE PLAYERS at best. Moore is 24 years old and looked absolutely lost in the NHL this year. Byers has a higher ceiling then Moore. But Byers is a 4th liner who can take over for Hollweg. This is my point.

I believe i mentioned several times in this discussion that Korpikoski will make it to the NHL next year.

Ultimately, Hillier and Zaborsky should be Anisimov's wingers.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 07:04 PM
  #41
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,193
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLYLine88 View Post
So did Dawes when he first got called up...most players dont fit in perfectly right off the bat and contribute on the scoreboard.
Dawes was younger when he was called up.

Moore is now 24 years old.

Also, Dawes out produced every year at every level.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 07:04 PM
  #42
hlundqvist30*
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7,520
vCash: 500
If the best way to develop a player is to automatically give him top minutes, then how come Dawes wasn't just stuck on the first line in the beginning of the year, and why wasn't Staal getting 22 minutes a night? The point is that players get the amount of icetime they can handle. That is why you see some rookies jump right onto the top lines and others are on the bottom for a while.

Along with what squishy is saying about players physically not ready to have the job, the mental aspect is here to. Let's be honest here, a guy like Zaborsky is a project, and is more likely to fail than succeed. If you just stick him on the first line after playing a whole 2 games in Hartford last year, then what are you making him work for? If you put him on the 3rd line, then he has to work his way to the top, thus making him a better player in the long run.

If you think that Jessiman and Huchinson and whatever all possibly leaving is suddenly going to open a bunch of spots then you're wrong. The Rangers clearly would sign a few other players to minor league deals...

hlundqvist30* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 07:10 PM
  #43
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,193
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by squishy View Post
That was my point. They're not in the long term plans, but yet pulled down some of the biggest minutes on the team... because they were the best players on the team.



I never claimed Moore would be.



Most talented doesn't equal most able to perform at the level required at this stage in their careers.



Zaborsky played only two games because he didn't out-play or out-practice AHL guys like Mike Ouellette and Jordan Owens. He didn't play more than that because the coaching staff recognized he wasn't ready to step in and play at the level required yet. And the coaching staff is in a far better position to judge that than you, me, a stat sheet, or a scouting report.



No one in Hartford gets ice time because they have more seniority. Players get ice time when they perform better than others. And nowhere have I said Bourret or Pyatt are higher on the depth chart than Anisimov. But until Hiller and Zaborsky prove they can play at the next level, Pyatt and Bourret most certainly are for now.



Perhaps you should re-read my post, because I never said they should. The best players get the most ice time. Who will be the best players next season won't be decided until they all get on the ice next September and start playing.



Their development most certainly would be damaged if they were consistently put in a position to fail by being thrown out on the ice in situations they're not ready for, against competition that's consistently better than them. Confidence is huge part of success in hockey. If you constantly put a player out against competition that outplays them, you WILL damage their confidence.



See, that's the difference between you and me. I'm not basing my evaluation on stats and scouting reports. Whoever plays best in camp and to start the season next year should get the top line spots. You don't hand a player that position because of their pedigree, draft position or past stats, you make them earn it.



Where did I say I want Hiller and Zaborsky buried on lower lines? My whole argument is that the player who proves they are most capable of the role should get it. Moreover, the reason there are only 17 skaters allowed in the AHL is to prevent the existence of a 4th line of scrubs who don't belong there and only get 4 minutes of ice time a night. That's why players are developed in the AHL rather than the NHL. In Hartford, for the majority of the season, the even strength playing time is pretty distributed amongst the three lines, with power play time going to the players who show the most offensive talent.



Again, please re-read my post. NOWHERE did i say Anisimov can't be the top line center in Hartford next season. I said he couldn't at the start of last season. He started there, but it became obvious very early on that he couldn't handle the minutes (by the third period he'd have to skip shifts because he was gassed). Add to that the fact that he didn't understand the North American pro game yet, was getting outbattled physically in the face off circle and along the boards, and it resulted in him looking lost and overmatched. So his ice time was eased back and he was put out on the ice in a role where there was less pressure to score and he could focus on his all-around game, adjusting to the style of play, and improving his physical play. In other words, he was put in a position to succeed, rather than fail. And it worked perfectly. By the end of the season, he'd put on 10 pounds, was playing a more physical game, rocking the faceoff circle, contributing more consistently offensively and was able to handle the ice time, often getting double shifted with the spare forwards. It was a textbook example of how to develop a player, and he responded beautifully, and was easily the player who showed the most consistent, visible improvement over the course of the season.
OK, squishy, we will see. I see what you are saying but...

I still believe that their skill set IS a reason to believe that they will be able to play on that line with Anisimov.

I still believe they are the better players, and will prove it.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 08:03 PM
  #44
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 28,350
vCash: 500
bourret-anisimov-jessiman
byers-moore-hillier

i think those are good lines as each can score and has size and someone who will stick up for their teammates....just my ideas but thats if byers doesnt make it and korpikoski does....plus parenteau could be back next year as well and he would be on the first line as well.....also, all three lines pretty much play evenly at 5v5 so it doesnt matter what line you are on, as long as you are improving

NYR Viper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 08:14 PM
  #45
AJ1982
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: New York
Posts: 1,812
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to AJ1982
I hope we have room for Kveton. If his rights are expired now must be because of his whopping 32 games in the Q last season, which really sucks.

AJ1982 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 09:11 PM
  #46
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,193
vCash: 500
I just find it odd that so many people got on me when i mention Zaborsky and Hillier getting big minutes this year.

Zaborsky - Anisimov - Hillier

Would be a good balanced line.

All are defensively sound, have decent size, and have good offensive ability.

However, i will rest my opinion for now on this matter. No need to have full blown arguments over it, when we don't know for sure who will even be in Hartford to determine any line combinations. And no point arguing with fellow Rangers fans either. Especially with Squishy, who has more knowledge of the AHL squad.

For all we know a couple of trades could happen and the whole dynamic could change.

I still feel that would be a real good line.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-02-2008, 11:27 PM
  #47
BDubinskyNYR17*
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New York
Posts: 10,761
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BDubinskyNYR17*
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyviper87 View Post
i understand your stand here, although it isnt like on most nights whenhe is healthy he is a good player...its just that he hasnt stayed healthy because his head isnt in it inthe offseason....if he works out for one year he can put up over a ppg....mark my words....if he stays healthy next year he will make the team the following year as a 3rd or 2nd line player.....he is a ball of energy with great hands and great vision.....theres a reason he was drafted in the 1st round and there was a reason the rangers originally wanted to draft him if they couldnt get staal
i thought bourdon was on the list if van took staal instead.

BDubinskyNYR17* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2008, 01:31 AM
  #48
eco's bones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elmira NY
Country: United States
Posts: 12,444
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PukkuMikku View Post
Who?

Thats what i want to know.

People can say I'm wrong and lambaste me, however, no one has provided any better options.

Because there are none.

Byers, Moore, and Bourret are not it IMO.

In 122 AHL games, Bourret has 25 goals... when he lives up to his potential, i will believe it. But he has to produce at least a little.

At the same time why automatically put guys on the top line simply because of seniority? Bourret hasn't earned it. Not in the least.

And again, who is the better option for top line center? Dupont? Don't think so. Pyatt? Don't think so. Graham? No.

Anisimov should be top line center in Hartford.

Admittedly, Moore and Byers had good seasons in the AHL last year.

The point is that they still do not have a higher ceiling then that of Hillier and Zaborsky. They simply do not.

And if Moore and Byers are in fact on the top line in Hartford, then there are certainly no better options for 2nd line wingers at the moment.

But honestly, there is no reason to attempt grooming Byers and Moore as scoring wingers when that simply will not be their job in the NHL. They will be checking role players. However, Hillier and Zaborsky have the ability to be offensive wingers, and that is how they should be used in the AHL as well.

I mean... people understand that Jessiman may not be resigned and Parenteau may not be resigned.

Secondly, no one suggested that Hillier and Zaborsky are closer to making it to the NHL. The issue is that Moore and Byers are DO NOT have a higher ceiling then Hillier and Zaborsky, who have the potential to be offensive wingers in the NHL. Where as Moore and Byers are CHECKING LINE ROLE PLAYERS at best. Moore is 24 years old and looked absolutely lost in the NHL this year. Byers has a higher ceiling then Moore. But Byers is a 4th liner who can take over for Hollweg. This is my point.

I believe i mentioned several times in this discussion that Korpikoski will make it to the NHL next year.

Ultimately, Hillier and Zaborsky should be Anisimov's wingers.
First off I'll agree with Fly that Moore has a shot and that first NHL impressions aren't a be all and an end all.

Onto Zaborsky--there was much speculation on whether he'd be offered a contract or even an AHL contract. More talented than others on the team is your opinion. I was not as impressed with Tomas's final OHL season as some others. Basically he did a point a game in his overaged season. A 20 year old competing against players younger than him--sometimes much younger than him. He should have had a good season if not even a better season. His size is a concern--if he even makes the Hartford team he is going to be facing bigger, faster d-men. For that matter bigger, faster forwards. How he will handle all that remains to be seen. Players jumping out of major junior even with much gaudier stats than Zaborsky's or Hillier's for that matter don't always handle it well. Callahan also played an overaged year--but Ryan seems more like the exception than the rule. Ryan had a somewhat better overage year--hitting 50 goals and Ryan has a far grittier game.

As for Hillier--much better size--more deserving of his contract. Even last season had periods of inconsistent or no offense. The Q is not known as the most defensive major junior league. Hillier put up good numbers--but they're hardly remarkable. Just because you play on the first line on your junior team does not mean you can be thrown on the first line of an AHL team in your first season. Have you ever heard of Daniel Goneau? A big, big junior star (much bigger than either Zaborsky or Hillier)--did not sign with the Bruins who originally drafted him--reentered the draft and was picked by us in the 2nd rd. Made the Rangers out of training camp. Put up some points in his first two-three weeks and then just disappeared--spent the next two--three seasons in the AHL trying and never really finding his game. For us he became a 3rd line AHL player--and he's been banging around the minors for years. You should look him up on the hockey database.

eco's bones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2008, 08:15 AM
  #49
bogans
Registered User
 
bogans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philly
Country: United States
Posts: 635
vCash: 500
I'm just saying, Hillier has a good pedigree and good size, but unless he is a defensive star, his numbers in the Q were not very impressive. The kid did not play on the first line for his junior team, the first line was Voracek's and they did not play together. He is talented and has some potential to be a pro player, so we gave him a contract, but in no way does this pedigree suggest he is ready for the AHL, especially not top line minutes IMO. He could be good, but who knows how his game will translate to the pro level hockey.

And, IMO, you are way, way off base on Zaborsky. He had some mediocre numbers in his overage year as the poster before stated. At 20 years old on a bad team in the OHL he should have been scoring 40 or 50 goals at least to really impress anybody. And even that may not mean all that much, but considering what he accomplished this past season it was very, very surprising he was given an NHL contract.

That said, I think you are overrating both of the guys coming from juniors by a very wide margin. IMO our class coming from n=juniors in the prior year was much more impressive (Dupont, Staal, Pyatt) and we can see how they panned out in the pros. I also think you are vastly underrating some current, young, talented players like Bourrett and Byers. And also, Moore was terrible in his first year in the AHL, then improved dramatically last season. If he can make strides in the offseason again, I would be interested to see how you and others change their tune regarding him and his NHL potential.

bogans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2008, 08:51 AM
  #50
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,508
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyviper87 View Post
i understand your stand here, although it isnt like on most nights whenhe is healthy he is a good player...its just that he hasnt stayed healthy because his head isnt in it inthe offseason....if he works out for one year he can put up over a ppg....l
He works/worked out in the offseason...it's just a question of whether he was doing the right things, and whether his head is in the game in general. I don't think fitness is really the problem with Bourrett.

He looks to me like a young guy trying to figure out what he has to do to be a pro athlete. He hasn't figured that out yet...maybe he never does. Being a pro would seem to be different than being a skilled kid who can dominate based on that skill alone, and if he really figures that out, he could be a very good player.

Levitate is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:00 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.