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

Another Jagr thread. Sundin+Jagr is Brooks #1 plan

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-30-2008, 08:41 PM
  #126
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAGLine View Post
Now see, giving big money to Jagr/Sundin doesn't scare me at all, because at most, it will be for 2 years. Signing Campbell scares me more because that will be 6-7 years. I just don't think we can maintain that many big, longterm contracts at the same time. At some point our young guys are going to be UFAs and they are going to command more money than we are paying them right now.

Jagr/Sundin may not make us a favorite to win the cup, but it should keep us competitive and in the playoffs for the next two years. In that time, the young guys on this team will mature and others will be ready to step into the lineup from Hartford (Sangs, Chere, Anisimov, Byers, Korp, etc.).

I think we can afford Orpik though. He will require a longterm contract, but he will cost a lot less than Campbell. We need both a PP QB and a hard hitting Dman, but I don't think we can responsibly satisfy both needs with this FA crop. The cost to do so will hamstring us for years. We have 2 offensive Dmen in the system and Sangs should be ready within a year or two, so it makes sense to go after Orpik and leave Campbell to some other team IMO.
The problem for me stems from the fact that we won't really be able to add pieces. If both guys require significant coinage to sign, than you can forget about adding anyone at the deadline or any kind of fixes should a hole arise. Additionally, the idea of our destiny being tied to two players who grow increasingly older doesn't really appeal to me much either.

But at the end of the day, what exactly would be the point of the move? It doesn't really make us a cup contender and who exactly are we buying time for with a move like Sundin? Dubinsky is now stuck as a third line center for at least one year, possibly two under the scenario you're willing to entertain. And how exactly are we going work Anisimov into the lineup should he continue to develop? Heck we'd already have Drury playing out of position to the tune of $5-million dollars a season.

Sundin doesn't buy anytime for guys like Byers or Korpikoski and he doesn't play Cherepanov's position. In fact the two players it most directly impacts (Dubinsky, Anisimov) play a position that we really don't need to buy time for. Afterall, wasn't that what we said Gomez and Drury was supposed to do last summer?

The move just reeks of EA Sports NHL series. It's a fantasy move with little positive impact on our end results this season and little benefit to what we're trying to accomplish in the future.

Edge is offline  
Old
06-30-2008, 08:51 PM
  #127
Shadowtron
Registered User
 
Shadowtron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,531
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
The problem for me stems from the fact that we won't really be able to add pieces. If both guys require significant coinage to sign, than you can forget about adding anyone at the deadline or any kind of fixes should a hole arise. Additionally, the idea of our destiny being tied to two players who grow increasingly older doesn't really appeal to me much either.

But at the end of the day, what exactly would be the point of the move? It doesn't really make us a cup contender and who exactly are we buying time for with a move like Sundin? Dubinsky is now stuck as a third line center for at least one year, possibly two under the scenario you're willing to entertain. And how exactly are we going work Anisimov into the lineup should he continue to develop? Heck we'd already have Drury playing out of position to the tune of $5-million dollars a season.

Sundin doesn't buy anytime for guys like Byers or Korpikoski and he doesn't play Cherepanov's position. In fact the two players it most directly impacts (Dubinsky, Anisimov) play a position that we really don't need to buy time for. Afterall, wasn't that what we said Gomez and Drury was supposed to do last summer?

The move just reeks of EA Sports NHL series. It's a fantasy move with little positive impact on our end results this season and little benefit to what we're trying to accomplish in the future.
Absolutely beautiful, Edge. Bravo!

Shadowtron is offline  
Old
06-30-2008, 08:57 PM
  #128
I Am Chariot
One shift at a time
 
I Am Chariot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 14,525
vCash: 500
So Brooks was right last year about Gomez and Drury and everyone said he was nuts.

Sundin and Jagr together is a nifty idea. If the capologist can make the numbers work.... why the hell not?


Sather had to bite the bullet letting Nylander. Maybe this is the chance to fix the whole thing

Better Top line, better Power Play

__________________
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man
I Am Chariot is offline  
Old
06-30-2008, 08:59 PM
  #129
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
Edge...

Sather's just dreaming of Sundin with Jagr. And it is an interesting dream because he's been a better centerman than Drury and Gomez and remains one today. Further, his style of play is something that would fit Jagr quite well and the two together would, for at least one season, be pretty amazing. But, Sather forgot the team he put together and the holes he left, which is on the left wing, the right wing and on defense. It's not at center. And while Drury seems to be a guy who's easily moved to wing, I'm not a huge fan of moving guys to other positions. Further, I was hoping for a guy with decent size to play the wing (although in any event, that guy may not be available). Especially guys who average 20 minutes per game. But Sather doesn't really care. He was like, hey, let's get Kovalev and play him on the left side - he's a winger - forget that all his success was on a right side (and for a reason). Or hey, Holik doesn't need to go against top lines solely - he should be a offensive force. And there are numerous others, obviously.

Fletch is offline  
Old
06-30-2008, 09:02 PM
  #130
JR#9*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,733
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
The problem for me stems from the fact that we won't really be able to add pieces. If both guys require significant coinage to sign, than you can forget about adding anyone at the deadline or any kind of fixes should a hole arise. Additionally, the idea of our destiny being tied to two players who grow increasingly older doesn't really appeal to me much either.

But at the end of the day, what exactly would be the point of the move? It doesn't really make us a cup contender and who exactly are we buying time for with a move like Sundin? Dubinsky is now stuck as a third line center for at least one year, possibly two under the scenario you're willing to entertain. And how exactly are we going work Anisimov into the lineup should he continue to develop? Heck we'd already have Drury playing out of position to the tune of $5-million dollars a season.

Sundin doesn't buy anytime for guys like Byers or Korpikoski and he doesn't play Cherepanov's position. In fact the two players it most directly impacts (Dubinsky, Anisimov) play a position that we really don't need to buy time for. Afterall, wasn't that what we said Gomez and Drury was supposed to do last summer?

The move just reeks of EA Sports NHL series. It's a fantasy move with little positive impact on our end results this season and little benefit to what we're trying to accomplish in the future.
I'm OK with either way it will go tomorrow as I think it will be an all or none situation and I'd rather come away with none then get into a bad position longterm.

That being said, having a shot at bringing in Sundin on a 2 yr max deal to center Jagr would be a very hard thing to pass up, especially in a wide open eastern conference.

I understand those that don;t want to sign both but to me one doesn't make sense w/o the other and if we do get them I could care less about the ability to get somebody at the deadline cap wise because we'd likely be sellers anyway if we don't sign the 2 so either we I don't see us as buyers come March.

Tomorrow obviously sets the course of action for the next 2 yrs at least so it will be very interesting either way.


Last edited by JR#9*: 06-30-2008 at 09:34 PM.
JR#9* is offline  
Old
06-30-2008, 09:06 PM
  #131
HatTrick Swayze
Tomato Potato
 
HatTrick Swayze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,564
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
The problem for me stems from the fact that we won't really be able to add pieces. If both guys require significant coinage to sign, than you can forget about adding anyone at the deadline or any kind of fixes should a hole arise. Additionally, the idea of our destiny being tied to two players who grow increasingly older doesn't really appeal to me much either.

But at the end of the day, what exactly would be the point of the move? It doesn't really make us a cup contender and who exactly are we buying time for with a move like Sundin? Dubinsky is now stuck as a third line center for at least one year, possibly two under the scenario you're willing to entertain. And how exactly are we going work Anisimov into the lineup should he continue to develop? Heck we'd already have Drury playing out of position to the tune of $5-million dollars a season.

Sundin doesn't buy anytime for guys like Byers or Korpikoski and he doesn't play Cherepanov's position. In fact the two players it most directly impacts (Dubinsky, Anisimov) play a position that we really don't need to buy time for. Afterall, wasn't that what we said Gomez and Drury was supposed to do last summer?

The move just reeks of EA Sports NHL series. It's a fantasy move with little positive impact on our end results this season and little benefit to what we're trying to accomplish in the future.
Exactly what I have been thinking this whole time without being able to put it into words. Bravo.

__________________
"Here we can see the agression of american people. They love fighting and guns. when they wont win they try to kill us all." -HalfOfFame
HatTrick Swayze is offline  
Old
06-30-2008, 09:09 PM
  #132
Forechecker
Registered User
 
Forechecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Country: Netherlands
Posts: 4,322
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Forechecker
Zip says hold on.

Quote:
We're told Jagr's people and the Rangers are still talking; one executive (and also a fellow journalist) told me that contrary to TSN's assessment, performance bonuses are allowed. That lack of a CBA provision is not pertinent.

Forechecker is offline  
Old
06-30-2008, 09:13 PM
  #133
eco's bones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elmira NY
Country: United States
Posts: 12,674
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
The problem for me stems from the fact that we won't really be able to add pieces. If both guys require significant coinage to sign, than you can forget about adding anyone at the deadline or any kind of fixes should a hole arise. Additionally, the idea of our destiny being tied to two players who grow increasingly older doesn't really appeal to me much either.

But at the end of the day, what exactly would be the point of the move? It doesn't really make us a cup contender and who exactly are we buying time for with a move like Sundin? Dubinsky is now stuck as a third line center for at least one year, possibly two under the scenario you're willing to entertain. And how exactly are we going work Anisimov into the lineup should he continue to develop? Heck we'd already have Drury playing out of position to the tune of $5-million dollars a season.

Sundin doesn't buy anytime for guys like Byers or Korpikoski and he doesn't play Cherepanov's position. In fact the two players it most directly impacts (Dubinsky, Anisimov) play a position that we really don't need to buy time for. Afterall, wasn't that what we said Gomez and Drury was supposed to do last summer?

The move just reeks of EA Sports NHL series. It's a fantasy move with little positive impact on our end results this season and little benefit to what we're trying to accomplish in the future.
The argument for me Edge is what do they (as in Jagr and/or Sundin) want and for how long and what do they have left in the tank?--which in the end is up to management to decide. Personally I'm not all that jazzed about bringing Sundin in. To me even signing Jagr the Rangers are less a cup contender next year than some thought they might be this year. My argument for bringing Jagr back isn't even so much for making next years playoffs or even being respectable in the standings--it comes down to this 1) we'll have plenty of cap space for at least one of them--and might as well use it because if nothing else re-signing Jagr probably 2) pushes along Dubinsky's development and not spending the money when there is lots of space is like wasting it. I might feel different if I thought we could add several worthwhile pieces instead but this is such a mediocre group of free agents IMO that that seems a waste of time and effort. People talking about Ryder who sat up in stands during his teams playoffs or a washed up Satan or giving the likes of Campbell or Hossa 8+ million.

eco's bones is offline  
Old
06-30-2008, 09:15 PM
  #134
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 23,733
vCash: 910
Awards:
Forechecker-

Interesting indeed.

__________________

It's just pain.
nyr2k2 is offline  
Old
06-30-2008, 09:17 PM
  #135
Burlington Bomb 26
Louie Louie Oh oh
 
Burlington Bomb 26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Green Mountain State
Country: United States
Posts: 16,615
vCash: 500
Quote:
We're told Jagr's people and the Rangers are still talking; one executive (and also a fellow journalist) told me that contrary to TSN's assessment, performance bonuses are allowed. That lack of a CBA provision is not pertinent.
, im a very happy, im gonna go pack a lip now

Burlington Bomb 26 is offline  
Old
06-30-2008, 09:19 PM
  #136
nyr2k2
Can't Beat Him
 
nyr2k2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Country: United States
Posts: 23,733
vCash: 910
Awards:
From Blueshirt Bulletin:

"What this means is that the Rangers can offer the bonuses as planned, but will not be able to exceed this year's cap (bonuses included whether they are hit or not) until the PA takes formal action on their right to terminate, which can happen at any time up until 120 days prior to September 15, 2009 (mid-May). But once that happens (and the PA is likely to extend the CBA, which has turned out to be player-friendly, not terminate it), the bonuses will again become deferrable, and the Rangers may then exceed the cap by up to 7.5% of the $56.7 Upper Limit, which is $4.25 million. It's a matter of timing."

http://ordinaryleastsquare.typepad.c...shirtbulletin/

nyr2k2 is offline  
Old
06-30-2008, 09:30 PM
  #137
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 16,570
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nyr2k2 View Post
From Blueshirt Bulletin:

"What this means is that the Rangers can offer the bonuses as planned, but will not be able to exceed this year's cap (bonuses included whether they are hit or not) until the PA takes formal action on their right to terminate, which can happen at any time up until 120 days prior to September 15, 2009 (mid-May). But once that happens (and the PA is likely to extend the CBA, which has turned out to be player-friendly, not terminate it), the bonuses will again become deferrable, and the Rangers may then exceed the cap by up to 7.5% of the $56.7 Upper Limit, which is $4.25 million. It's a matter of timing."

http://ordinaryleastsquare.typepad.c...shirtbulletin/
Certainly a disappointment.

Trxjw is offline  
Old
06-30-2008, 10:41 PM
  #138
Kodiak
Registered User
 
Kodiak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Ranger fan in Philly
Posts: 2,185
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Kodiak Send a message via AIM to Kodiak Send a message via Yahoo to Kodiak
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
The problem for me stems from the fact that we won't really be able to add pieces. If both guys require significant coinage to sign, than you can forget about adding anyone at the deadline or any kind of fixes should a hole arise. Additionally, the idea of our destiny being tied to two players who grow increasingly older doesn't really appeal to me much either.

But at the end of the day, what exactly would be the point of the move? It doesn't really make us a cup contender and who exactly are we buying time for with a move like Sundin? Dubinsky is now stuck as a third line center for at least one year, possibly two under the scenario you're willing to entertain. And how exactly are we going work Anisimov into the lineup should he continue to develop? Heck we'd already have Drury playing out of position to the tune of $5-million dollars a season.

Sundin doesn't buy anytime for guys like Byers or Korpikoski and he doesn't play Cherepanov's position. In fact the two players it most directly impacts (Dubinsky, Anisimov) play a position that we really don't need to buy time for. Afterall, wasn't that what we said Gomez and Drury was supposed to do last summer?

The move just reeks of EA Sports NHL series. It's a fantasy move with little positive impact on our end results this season and little benefit to what we're trying to accomplish in the future.
I think you are being way too hung up on positions, Edge. Drury and Gomez both started their NHL careers as wingers and were later shifted back to center. Anisimov can do the same if he needs to. And Drury's lack of vision would be much less apparent on the wing.

What would this accomplish? Several things. First, it would at a top-level forward to a team that needed ten quality scoring chances for every goal it scored.

Second, it puts Dubinsky in his rightful place on the third line. I don't know why you would think this is detrimental to Dubinsky, Edge. I loved what I saw from the kid, but he's not ready to face that kind of pressure night in and night out without someone of Jagr's calibre taking the heat off of him. Let him develop his all-around game on the third line where he won't have the pressure to rack up points constantly.

Third, it gives the Rangers some cap flexibility down the road. In a few years, we will need significant cap space for guys like Staal, Cherepanov, Dubinsky, Anisimov, etc. Jagr and Sundin can take short-term deals to eat up space now and still leave us in good shape for the future. If we give out long-term deals to players like Hossa and Campbell, then we're going to run into trouble down the road.

Honestly, Edge, I don't think this is the greatest idea. I think it's the best option that we're presented with right now. We don't have the young players to stand pat, so we need to add a quality scoring forward. Signing Hossa is too expensive long-term, and the remaining crop of UFAs is pretty lackluster. The trade market is pretty dry after Jokinen, Cammaleri, and Tanguay were traded. So faced with these options, what course of action would you suggest for the Rangers this off-season?

Kodiak is offline  
Old
06-30-2008, 10:50 PM
  #139
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Tromelin
Posts: 9,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kodiak View Post
I think you are being way too hung up on positions, Edge. Drury and Gomez both started their NHL careers as wingers and were later shifted back to center. Anisimov can do the same if he needs to. And Drury's lack of vision would be much less apparent on the wing.

What would this accomplish? Several things. First, it would at a top-level forward to a team that needed ten quality scoring chances for every goal it scored.

Second, it puts Dubinsky in his rightful place on the third line. I don't know why you would think this is detrimental to Dubinsky, Edge. I loved what I saw from the kid, but he's not ready to face that kind of pressure night in and night out without someone of Jagr's calibre taking the heat off of him. Let him develop his all-around game on the third line where he won't have the pressure to rack up points constantly.

Third, it gives the Rangers some cap flexibility down the road. In a few years, we will need significant cap space for guys like Staal, Cherepanov, Dubinsky, Anisimov, etc. Jagr and Sundin can take short-term deals to eat up space now and still leave us in good shape for the future. If we give out long-term deals to players like Hossa and Campbell, then we're going to run into trouble down the road.

Honestly, Edge, I don't think this is the greatest idea. I think it's the best option that we're presented with right now. We don't have the young players to stand pat, so we need to add a quality scoring forward. Signing Hossa is too expensive long-term, and the remaining crop of UFAs is pretty lackluster. The trade market is pretty dry after Jokinen, Cammaleri, and Tanguay were traded. So faced with these options, what course of action would you suggest for the Rangers this off-season?
This isn't a knock against Edge or anybody really but I've posed that question to a number of posters over the past month and the answer is either an outragious scenario (with numerous players taking less money) or the answer is "I don't know." My fear is if we posed this question to the Ragners braintrust we would have the same answer..

I don't think the Rangers need Sundin when they can bring back the guys they need to bring back and upgrade the defense. I do think your right about Ansimov playing winger and I'll even go one step further...

If Brooks fantasyland scenario comes true I think Dubinsky is the guy who is shifted to winger not Drury...

Eitherway in less than 24 hours a lot of questions about what the Rangers are going to be next season are going to be answered. It's kinda sit back and watch time now....

Son of Steinbrenner is offline  
Old
06-30-2008, 10:56 PM
  #140
Burlington Bomb 26
Louie Louie Oh oh
 
Burlington Bomb 26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Green Mountain State
Country: United States
Posts: 16,615
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Steinbrenner View Post
This isn't a knock against Edge or anybody really but I've posed that question to a number of posters over the past month and the answer is either an outragious scenario (with numerous players taking less money) or the answer is "I don't know." My fear is if we posed this question to the Ragners braintrust we would have the same answer..

I don't think the Rangers need Sundin when they can bring back the guys they need to bring back and upgrade the defense. I do think your right about Ansimov playing winger and I'll even go one step further...

If Brooks fantasyland scenario comes true I think Dubinsky is the guy who is shifted to winger not Drury...

Eitherway in less than 24 hours a lot of questions about what the Rangers are going to be next season are going to be answered. It's kinda sit back and watch time now....
I've got butterflys right now

Burlington Bomb 26 is offline  
Old
06-30-2008, 11:08 PM
  #141
Kodiak
Registered User
 
Kodiak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Ranger fan in Philly
Posts: 2,185
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Kodiak Send a message via AIM to Kodiak Send a message via Yahoo to Kodiak
Quote:
Originally Posted by Son of Steinbrenner View Post
This isn't a knock against Edge or anybody really but I've posed that question to a number of posters over the past month and the answer is either an outragious scenario (with numerous players taking less money) or the answer is "I don't know." My fear is if we posed this question to the Ragners braintrust we would have the same answer..
I'd agree with you there, SoS. We just aren't in a good situation right now and there's no clear course to take.

Quote:
I don't think the Rangers need Sundin when they can bring back the guys they need to bring back and upgrade the defense.
I'm assuming that you mean re-signing Jagr and Avery. But even if we do that, we still need someone to fill Shanny's role as Gomez's trigger man. Our options from within are guys like Prucha, Dawes, and Callahan. I think we'd be happy if any of those players scored 20 goals next year, but I doubt they could pot the 30 goals I'd want from that role. Our options on the FA market are guys like Rolston and Ryder, but they don't inspire much confidence in me. I think Drury would work well in that role, but without another center, we'd be filling one hole by tearing open another.

Quote:
I do think your right about Ansimov playing winger and I'll even go one step further...

If Brooks fantasyland scenario comes true I think Dubinsky is the guy who is shifted to winger not Drury...

Eitherway in less than 24 hours a lot of questions about what the Rangers are going to be next season are going to be answered. It's kinda sit back and watch time now....
I think we may be stewing a bit longer. Jagr and Sundin are probably not going to sign anywhere tomorrow. The only other way we'd know they are out of the picture is if we tie up a lot of cash in someone like Hossa or Campbell.

Kodiak is offline  
Old
06-30-2008, 11:18 PM
  #142
Burlington Bomb 26
Louie Louie Oh oh
 
Burlington Bomb 26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Green Mountain State
Country: United States
Posts: 16,615
vCash: 500
The Rangers have about 19.5 million dollars in cap room right now. Backman will get sent down which will make it 21.3 million dollars in cap. If they sign Avery to a 3.25 per year contract, sign Jagr to a 6 mil per year contract, then sign Sundin to a 6 mil per year, then they sign Rozsival to a 3.5 per year contract, then Sign Commodore/Streit to a 3 mil per year contract, we will have 50k left over.

Burlington Bomb 26 is offline  
Old
06-30-2008, 11:27 PM
  #143
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 16,570
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BubblegumGang184434 View Post
The Rangers have about 19.5 million dollars in cap room right now. Backman will get sent down which will make it 21.3 million dollars in cap. If they sign Avery to a 3.25 per year contract, sign Jagr to a 6 mil per year contract, then sign Sundin to a 6 mil per year, then they sign Rozsival to a 3.5 per year contract, then Sign Commodore/Streit to a 3 mil per year contract, we will have 50k left over.
50k certainly is a hefty raise for Dawes.

Not to mention you've waived Backman which leaves us with 3 signed d-men, but only brought in 2. Is Potter making the jump to the NHL? Who is the 7th d-man then?

Trxjw is offline  
Old
06-30-2008, 11:29 PM
  #144
Burlington Bomb 26
Louie Louie Oh oh
 
Burlington Bomb 26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Green Mountain State
Country: United States
Posts: 16,615
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trxjw View Post
50k certainly is a hefty raise for Dawes.

Not to mention you've waived Backman which leaves us with 3 signed d-men, but only brought in 2. Is Potter making the jump to the NHL? Who is the 7th d-man then?
i should've put im a lazy bastardd, i was just doing quick math and all of the things i've said probably wont happen

Burlington Bomb 26 is offline  
Old
06-30-2008, 11:32 PM
  #145
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 16,570
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BubblegumGang184434 View Post
i should've put im a lazy bastardd, i was just doing quick math and all of the things i've said probably wont happen
No worries mate. Boredom turns me into a nit-picky SOB, nothing personal.

Trxjw is offline  
Old
06-30-2008, 11:37 PM
  #146
CM Lundqvist
Best In The World
 
CM Lundqvist's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 8,754
vCash: 500
Ok, so what this boils down to is this being one of the worst off-seasons in terms of UFA availability since 2002, and having 3 plans of action that the Rangers have been supposedly persuing, and us fans being divided between the 3 of them.

1. Sundin + Jagr for a cup run: Provided it can actually happen somehow, how do we improve our back-end, which was really what killed us against the Penguins. We get top-heavy up front, and hope that we can sign these two to incentive laden contracts with low base salaries. We still need a stay-at-home bruiser and a pp qb on the backline, so I don't see this working. I don't necessarily see us as being the top team in the east, if Hossa resigns with Pittsburgh, and not only that, can this team beat the teams in the west? I would say Detroit has to be an odds on favorite to repeat, especially if they resign Stuart.

2. Hossa + Defense: Hossa + Streit/Campbell + Orpik/Commodore. If the Rangers want to keep competing for a while, this might be the way to go. Let the old guard leave and let a new guard take over, something that will eventually have to happen. This way, we could drop Dubinsky down to 2nd line minutes, and still let him develop, not putting too much pressure on him in the processs.

3. Don't Sign Any Big Names: They could get a guy like Huselius, and then maybe a defender or two, and hope that it's enough to make the playoffs, while keeping a ton of cap space. You could win games, and then if you suck, tank and hope for Tavares/Hedman. Who here is going to honestly sit through a period like that and not ***** and complain? After a 7 year period of futility, and then being spoiled these past 3 years, I can't see people willingly sitting through it. If you ask me, that team has the potential to lose more games than win. I don't see enough offensive firepower, as I don't trust Huselius at all, and I'm not sure if Gomez could carry an offense.

Another seperate issue... People talk about Anisimov's development. Do you guys realize that as long as Dubi, Gomer, and Drury are here, Anisimov is going to be screwed out of a spot unless he outperforms them all? While his play picked up in Hartford after being put on the top line, let's not assume that he's going to make the team out of camp. Let's also not assume that he's going to pan out and knock those guys out of spots. We all hope he does, but assuming the best is not preparing for the worst.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trxjw View Post
Yeah, but Sundin and Jagr is still the better play than Hossa.
I'm not so sure about that. I normally agree with nearly everything you post, but I think we'd both rather have the cap space to be able to go after Kovalchuk in 2010, and with the way Don Waddell runs that team, Kovalchuk will be gone. You'd rather have a 30+ year old Hossa or a 26 year old Kovalchuk? Kovalchuk it is for me.

Quote:
Neither Sundin, nor Jagr scored 80+ points last year. What makes you so sure that they'll do it next year?
Something tells me that Jagr's lack of production this season was due to not only his lack of chemistry with his centers, but him sulking over Nylander being gone, who played the same kind of game. Jagr didn't just hint at him wanting the Rangers to sign Mats to get him back, he wanted it. Jagr told Sather he wanted his friends here, and got his friends, and look at what happened... 123 points in 06 and 96 points in 07. Something tells me that if he got a center like Sundin that compliments his kind of game that his numbers would go up back to something more respectable.

Quote:
Originally Posted by motime42 View Post
I think Brooks deserves a bit more credit than you give him. This sounds exactly like a move Sather would make. Also, I think he had the Drury and Gomez plan last year and every one dismissed it.
Yeah, I hate to admit it, but he did.

He called it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trxjw View Post
I've also never heard anyone say Sundin's first choice is the Rangers.
The Rangers were the first team to have the exclusive rights to negotiate with Sundin, from what was said in that article, it also said that Sundin's camp had contacted the Rangers and seemed interested.

Remember, this was before Jagr's press conference. So things could have easily changed, especially with Jagr "hinting" that he wants Sundin as his center if he returns to NY.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyBasedNYC View Post
I'm surprised no one is *****ing that any one of Shanahan, Straka, or Jagr could have been traded at the deadline last season, because there's a good chance the Rangers might lose all three with nothing in return.
Not too concerned, we were on the borderline of the playoffs at that point, and they were going to go for it, just as we've done in nearly every year past, with the exception of 04.

Shanahan doesn't concern me at all, considering his play has deteriorated. I love the guy, will always be one of my favorites, but his time has passed. The concussion was the straw that broke the camel's back for him.

While I like Straka, his game just isn't there anymore, and if you ask me, he seems to depend a little too much upon Jagr. If he can't score enough to offset the fact that he's not good enough defensively or physical enough to make an impact otherwise, then his time is up, and that seems to be the case.

They just weren't going to trade Jagr, as much as some of us wanted it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
30 million wrapped up in the first 2 lines for a year, as opposed to signing Hossa and having that be the case for the next 4+ years.
I would rather have cap hell for 2 years than potential cap hell for 6. Hossa pretty much would restrict our signings.

Quote:
The money should go to the top 6 forwards anyway. Over the past 3 seasons, Renney has proven that he can get the most out of an average defense corp at best (with Lundqvist's help of course).
And that's why we won't win a cup with this team the way it is. We're trying to get too much out of an average defense corp.

Quote:
I want no part of Campbell, especially considering what he will receive on the open market. He is a talented winger playing defense.
My 1st choice was Liles, now he's gone. Stuart and Streit are next for me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
I just see a lot of money going into a plan that I really don't think puts us in the same ballpark as the top teams/cup contenders.
Well said.

If we can't improve the defense, what's the point of making a run for the cup? Our defense couldn't stop Pittsburgh's vaunted top-6. Unless there's some other way that Sather knows that he can improve every facet of the team that needs to be improved while doing this, I can't see this working.

CM Lundqvist is offline  
Old
06-30-2008, 11:50 PM
  #147
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Tromelin
Posts: 9,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kodiak View Post
I'd agree with you there, SoS. We just aren't in a good situation right now and there's no clear course to take.
I think that's pretty scary though when you think about it.. (in the grand scheme of things it actually isn't..i'm sure we all have a lot more fears in life than what the Rangers are going to do next season but that's besides the point)

In retrospect Sather should've done something at the deadline or at the draft (Cammalleri comes to mind) to give himself a little leverage on the free agent market. Would the Rangers have had less money to spend? Yes, but when you think about it the Rangers had more depth on the forward lines on Aug 1 2005 (the first day of post lockout free agency) than they do on July 1 2008. That team was picked for 30th in the league and none of us really expected the season we had that year. I can obviously see the differences in the teams (Weekes expected #1 Vs 3 time Vezina finalist in goal in Lundqvist) but this team could take a huge step backwards next year. This reminds me a little bit like when Messier was poised to leave...(I'm all over the timeline!) We ended up with Lafontaine (after the pipe dream run at Sakic to pacify the outraged fans/media) and the rest is history...I don't think losing Jagr/Avery/Rozsival will lead to 8 years of no playoffs but bad management decisions are contagious in sports...



Quote:
I'm assuming that you mean re-signing Jagr and Avery. But even if we do that, we still need someone to fill Shanny's role as Gomez's trigger man. Our options from within are guys like Prucha, Dawes, and Callahan. I think we'd be happy if any of those players scored 20 goals next year, but I doubt they could pot the 30 goals I'd want from that role. Our options on the FA market are guys like Rolston and Ryder, but they don't inspire much confidence in me. I think Drury would work well in that role, but without another center, we'd be filling one hole by tearing open another.
I do mean Jagr and Avery leaving. I agree with you I'd also be shocked if Prucha, Dawes, or Callahan got 20 goals next year (actually i wouldn't be shocked if Dawes score 20 or 25 next year maybe a little surprised but i think he has it in him.) I agree with you about Rolston and Ryder, the best "fit" guys I can see are Vrbata (who's stock seems to be rising) and Stillman (who i think fits the Rangers system's a winner...and has good hands) but they don't exactly inspire much confidence either. Maybe the Rangers are headed to the RFA market (which is something I wouldn't mind) to fill the gaps.

It's funny we call guys stopgap players a lot...I do....I read it all over this whole site but the truth is the league has turned into a stopgap league now. With lowered free agency and a salary cap the GREAT players are signed long term (for the most part) and the rest of the league is on 1 or 2 year contracts and play free agent musical chairs every year.
Quote:
I think we may be stewing a bit longer. Jagr and Sundin are probably not going to sign anywhere tomorrow. The only other way we'd know they are out of the picture is if we tie up a lot of cash in someone like Hossa or Campbell.
I agree I think this year July 1st might be a few big names signing and the Rangers sitting out waiting. I think the dominoes fall for the Rangers tomorrow if/when Avery signs with another team. I really believe once that happens the team is making some sort of move...It's just a hunch..

Son of Steinbrenner is offline  
Old
07-01-2008, 12:02 AM
  #148
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 16,570
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldshot View Post


I'm not so sure about that. I normally agree with nearly everything you post, but I think we'd both rather have the cap space to be able to go after Kovalchuk in 2010, and with the way Don Waddell runs that team, Kovalchuk will be gone. You'd rather have a 30+ year old Hossa or a 26 year old Kovalchuk? Kovalchuk it is for me.
I know what you're saying here, I see a lot of people around here saying it. However, I just have an issue with people 1) Assuming that Kovalchuk won't be locked up by some other team before he hits the market, and 2) Assuming that we'll even have the cap space to sign him. Sure, you're losing say, 12 million from Sundin and Jagr leaving, but a lot of that gets chewed up in resigning Dubi, Staal, etc. Not to mention if they are in fact allowed to rollover bonuses to the next season, Jagr and Sundin have a cap hit even after they're gone.

Hossa vs Kovalchuk? Obviously the logical choice is Kovalchuk, but I'd still have to pick Hossa. Kovalchuk is a fantastic offensive threat, but I like Hossa's overall two-way game better. 35-40 goals + defensive ability at 8.5 million outweighs 50 goals at 10+ million. At least for me it does, I don't expect everyone to agree with me on that of course.

I just don't see a need for us to be in the hunt for UFA's down the line when salaries are only going up, and we aren't even sure what will be out there. Signing Hossa now solidifies a pairing of Hossa - Gomez for the next 6 years without worrying about fluctuation in their salaries. Couple that with a second line scoring threat involving Cherepanov and Anisimov and a 3rd line that is capable of scoring in their own right, and you've become a serious contender in this league.

Quote:
Something tells me that Jagr's lack of production this season was due to not only his lack of chemistry with his centers, but him sulking over Nylander being gone, who played the same kind of game. Jagr didn't just hint at him wanting the Rangers to sign Mats to get him back, he wanted it. Jagr told Sather he wanted his friends here, and got his friends, and look at what happened... 123 points in 06 and 96 points in 07. Something tells me that if he got a center like Sundin that compliments his kind of game that his numbers would go up back to something more respectable.
I'll be honest here. At first, I was salivating over the idea of a Sundin - Jagr line. It does make sense on a lot of levels. However, I absolutely hate the idea of having guys counting against our salary cap when they aren't even on our roster anymore.

I also don't see the point of eating into two more years of Gomez and Drury's contracts by signing Jagr and players for Jagr when we've got almost 15 million in cap space invested in both of them and we have no players to compliment them.

There is a tremendous double-standard amongst Ranger fans on here that I just can't wrap my mind around. Why is it always Drury or Gomez's fault that they put up 'poor' numbers, but there are a laundry list of reasons for why Jagr's decline in production is acceptable? Oh it was because Jagr didn't have a quality center, or he wasn't trying, or he doesn't fit the system. However finding quality wingers for our two quality centers seems to be a non-issue for a lot of people? It's not Jagr's fault he couldn't mesh with Gomez or Drury, it's Gomez and Drury's fault? I just don't get it.

Trxjw is offline  
Old
07-01-2008, 12:23 AM
  #149
Block More Shots
Registered User
 
Block More Shots's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 1,355
vCash: 500
If Sundin and Jagr are both given one-year deals, sign me up. Other than that, I have my reservations.

Though after reading an article stating that MTL is willing to give Sundin 16 million over 2 years ($8 mil per), Sundin may very well be out of our price range.

Block More Shots is offline  
Old
07-01-2008, 12:41 AM
  #150
I Am Chariot
One shift at a time
 
I Am Chariot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 14,525
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trxjw View Post


Why is it always Drury or Gomez's fault that they put up 'poor' numbers, but there are a laundry list of reasons for why Jagr's decline in production is acceptable?
Because he's Jaromir Jagr and we've all seen him take over a game and completely DOMINATE the ice.

Jagr is an Elite amongst the Elite. Players like him are so rare. We could debate how much he has left in the tank, but if the team decides Jagr is still the man than give him the linemates that let him go bananas on the other team.

Its not just fun to watch, root for. Jagr in the zone still has domineering potential and can win hockey games.

Rangers already have a very good D

Rangers already have some depth down the middle and some great prospects

Rangers already have a great goaltender

If Jagr is the RW on the top line, getting top line minutes PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF ALL THAT IS HOLY GET HIM THE RIGHT LINEMATES TO GET THE JOB DONE

Letting Nylander go was the right BUSINESS call. It was not the right call for the #1 line.

If Jagr returns Sather needs to fix that issue. We may even end up with an upgrade. Albeit a whole season later.

I Am Chariot is offline  
Closed Thread

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 01:10 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.