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

Question for the doomsayers

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-09-2008, 02:19 PM
  #26
MadHookUp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 363
vCash: 500
Quote:
- How will Zherdev handle New York City pressure? He seems to be very shy guy, he played second line in Columbus, now he is gonna play 1st line RW in New York...thats a huge step.
How do we know that he isnt the type of player that does better under pressure?

Quote:
- How will Naslund produce? If Jagr was on decline, Naslund is even more. Personally i consider Markus worst Rangers signing this offseason(2 ******* years?!)
Everyone is complaining that we dont have enough top 6 forwards. Other than Cherepanov, what reason do we have to believe that the Rangers will have a surplus 2 years from now where the Naslund signing is foolish?


Quote:
- Can Redden handle playing in New York and position of No1 d-man? Ottawa fans are reporting that after his mom died 2 years ago he was never been the same...can he produce?Can he be PP QB?
Ottawa has WAY more pressure than NY. The media in NY isnt aware the Rangers even exist. I somehow doubt that Redden's mother die is going to cause him to suck the rest of his career. He may have been upset when it first happened. As for the 2nd year afterwards, no one looked good.

Quote:
- imo most important - team drastically changed, what about chemistry in locker room?Lot of new faces, lot of new personalities...will they mesh together?
Who says we had that last season? Maybe it was bad last year? Its entirely possible that Jagr was pissy all season because he lost Nylander. Maybe Drury and Gomez were pissed with Jagr for being the cause of jumbled lines, and not giving 100%? We know for a fact that Mara and Malik weren't happy at times. We still dont know what affect Avery had. So for all we know, locker room was hell last season and everyone is excited about the changes? We will never know, but Renney and Sather do.

Quote:
Rangers have top3 goaltender in league, very good defense(on paper), and very solid bottom6. If you did not like defensive system from last year, u better don't watch this year
Zherdev! You know he will be fun to watch. Naslund specifically said that he was coming to the Rangers because of the new/fast system that Renney plans on implementing this season. The guy averaged 35 goals the past 7 seasons. Who is to say he cant hit 35 coming to a team with an offensive system that suits him?

MadHookUp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2008, 02:26 PM
  #27
BrianLeetch2
Registered User
 
BrianLeetch2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Toms River NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 701
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BrianLeetch2 Send a message via MSN to BrianLeetch2
Mad I do love you optimism we need more of this and less negative

BrianLeetch2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2008, 02:35 PM
  #28
rangerfan2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 59
vCash: 500
I've been lurking here for months and I must say, it's a great place to get my Rangers fix. I finally decided that I had to chime in here.

Look, being an armchair GM is what gets most of us through the offseason, and come February, we'll all be loving or hating some or all of these moves, regardless of what we might think now.

Sure, I'd have likes Jagr playing with Sundin and Campbell on the blueline and Rozi at half the price and Avery back for another year or two, but putting these pieces together isn't easy. The July 1st madness is a fluid process and you make the best decision at the time. An earlier poster said he wanted Redden at 4 yrs/ $5 million. I think we all would have voted for that. But the market was set and Slats had to play ball, or not. One decision affects the next, not just for your team, but for others as well, and teams offer contracts based on the player value to them, and the perceived value to other teams. But we really have no idea what the details were on most of the moves, and non-moves, that caused each of them to happen, or not happen.

I know a little bit about this stuff 'cause I used to work in the sports world, though not in the hockey world. These players are people, they have families, they have problems, and their lives change from year to year. All of these guys have talent. The ones that excel are either exceptionally gifted or are mentally tough with their heads screwed on right. The exceptionally talented ones with their heads screwed on too tight fail miserably. Look at Josh Hamilton. He could win the baseball MVP this year after being the 1st overall pick in the draft forever ago and suffering through all kinds of problems for many years.

Calling Zherdev an enigma annoys me. Have you been to Columbus? I have been there many time. Nice town actually, but not for a kid from Russia. He'll be more at home in NYC. Or maybe not. Only time will tell.

Prucha, he's shown he can score, and he has also shown to be soft on his skates. Maybe he comes to camp 10 pounds stronger? Or not.

Rissmiller and Voros--do you really think Slats would spend that valuable cap space on two guys not going to play?

The logjam of forwards will take care of itself, perhaps not until the end of the preseason. Don't rush it.

Naslund was a great player for a bunch of years. His success depends on the role he is asked to play. Much of his impact, along with that of Drury, could be something we will never see. He's a leader in the locker room and with such a young squad, we need leaders.

Which leads me to chemistry. Winning breeds it, but it starts with the coach. One thing about Renney--the players have all loved him (and the assistants as well). They play hard for him. They are prepared. And they compete.

After 7 years of mostly unwatchable hockey, followed by a year without it, I can honestly say I have loved the past 3 seasons, and I am proud that my 8 year old son now calls himself a Ranger fan. And i am looking forward to a more aggressive style. Jagr was great here, but 90 seconds of cycling in the corner without a shot is something I will not miss in the least!

rangerfan2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2008, 02:35 PM
  #29
MadHookUp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 363
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianLeetch2 View Post
Mad I do love you optimism we need more of this and less negative
Yeah, I just dont get why everyone looks at all the question marks as Negatives?

Instead of saying, "Naslund is washed up and old!" You could be saying, "Maybe he will bounce back like Selanne did!" And what is funny is that there is more evidence to think he will have a good season than bad...

1.) He isnt ancient. 35 is not that old in todays NHL. Many players play well at that age.
2.) He was always bounced around the past 2 years. When playing with the Sedins, he did very well. When stuck with Morrison he didnt put many points up. So the skill is there, just needs people to play with.
3.) He didnt like Vancouver's system.
4.) He has worked with Renney before, and is excited with the system that he plans to run.

With many of the choices Renney and Sather have made with this off season, there are more reasons to be optimistic, but that doesnt seem to stop many people on this forum from only pointing out the negatives.

MadHookUp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2008, 02:46 PM
  #30
McRanger
Registered User
 
McRanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,735
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrianLeetch2 View Post
Mad I do love you optimism we need more of this and less negative
I don't know if we need more optimism so much as less pessimism under the guise of realism.

McRanger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2008, 02:52 PM
  #31
TheZherdev
Registered User
 
TheZherdev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,351
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynRangersFan View Post
There are a number of folks who have been posting recently decrying the Rangers' offseason (Radek27, Bleed Ranger Blue, Blackburn2727, etc.). Personally, I am very pleased with the moves so far (and expect one more to clear up the forward glut), but you obviously wanted to see Slats do (or perhaps not do?) something else. So I have a question:

If you don't like the direction the team has taken... exactly what lineup DID you want to see? (Please refrain from goofball responses like trading Hollweg for Gaborik.)
What the hell? Why did i get thrown into this? Because I questioned Dubinskys ability to perform as well without Jagr by his side? I cant really think of anything else. I never said the rangers were going to suck this season. I havent really questioned any of the other moves except maybe disagreeing with Redden's contract terms. And I also mentioned that people would need to be patient as chemistry may take a while to build.

In all reality I absolutely loved the Zherdev trade. I understood the reasoning of letting Jagr go and getting Naslund to make the team play more as a team. In fact I've agreed with almost every move so far. I think Prucha can regain form if put in the right role. In all reality ive agreed with most of what has happened.

I really dont see what made you think i was a "doomsayer" BrooklynRangersFan.

TheZherdev is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2008, 02:54 PM
  #32
HockeyBasedNYC
Registered User
 
HockeyBasedNYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Here
Country: United States
Posts: 12,942
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rangerfan2 View Post
I've been lurking here for months and I must say, it's a great place to get my Rangers fix. I finally decided that I had to chime in here.

Look, being an armchair GM is what gets most of us through the offseason, and come February, we'll all be loving or hating some or all of these moves, regardless of what we might think now.

Sure, I'd have likes Jagr playing with Sundin and Campbell on the blueline and Rozi at half the price and Avery back for another year or two, but putting these pieces together isn't easy. The July 1st madness is a fluid process and you make the best decision at the time. An earlier poster said he wanted Redden at 4 yrs/ $5 million. I think we all would have voted for that. But the market was set and Slats had to play ball, or not. One decision affects the next, not just for your team, but for others as well, and teams offer contracts based on the player value to them, and the perceived value to other teams. But we really have no idea what the details were on most of the moves, and non-moves, that caused each of them to happen, or not happen.

I know a little bit about this stuff 'cause I used to work in the sports world, though not in the hockey world. These players are people, they have families, they have problems, and their lives change from year to year. All of these guys have talent. The ones that excel are either exceptionally gifted or are mentally tough with their heads screwed on right. The exceptionally talented ones with their heads screwed on too tight fail miserably. Look at Josh Hamilton. He could win the baseball MVP this year after being the 1st overall pick in the draft forever ago and suffering through all kinds of problems for many years.

Calling Zherdev an enigma annoys me. Have you been to Columbus? I have been there many time. Nice town actually, but not for a kid from Russia. He'll be more at home in NYC. Or maybe not. Only time will tell.

Prucha, he's shown he can score, and he has also shown to be soft on his skates. Maybe he comes to camp 10 pounds stronger? Or not.

Rissmiller and Voros--do you really think Slats would spend that valuable cap space on two guys not going to play?

The logjam of forwards will take care of itself, perhaps not until the end of the preseason. Don't rush it.

Naslund was a great player for a bunch of years. His success depends on the role he is asked to play. Much of his impact, along with that of Drury, could be something we will never see. He's a leader in the locker room and with such a young squad, we need leaders.

Which leads me to chemistry. Winning breeds it, but it starts with the coach. One thing about Renney--the players have all loved him (and the assistants as well). They play hard for him. They are prepared. And they compete.

After 7 years of mostly unwatchable hockey, followed by a year without it, I can honestly say I have loved the past 3 seasons, and I am proud that my 8 year old son now calls himself a Ranger fan. And i am looking forward to a more aggressive style. Jagr was great here, but 90 seconds of cycling in the corner without a shot is something I will not miss in the least!
Welcome to the board, and a good realistic post.

HockeyBasedNYC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2008, 02:58 PM
  #33
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,457
vCash: 500
MadHookUp...

personally, I like to take the other side of the argument just to spur conversation. How exciting of a forum would it be if we all said "Gee Wally, I love that signing too and am really pumped for the beginning of the season". That gets boring. And while you ask why everyone looks at question marks as negative (and it's not everyone - seems to be more positive than negative in this forum), I answer that there are always two sides to every story. When you have question marks, they are just that until they are answered. I don't think it's unreasonable for a poster to say this team isn't going to make the playoffs. I don't think it's unreasonable for them to come in and say that the team will struggle early to find an identity and it's possible that certain guys don't perform. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that they will have trouble finding chemistry since most successful teams don't experience so much turnover and will struggle to score because the team has a bunch of followers up front and no leaders, citing Drury typically being behind quality guys and Gomez playing with quality guys.

Maybe some consider that being negative. Others may feel that they're being realistic and others are being optimistic about so many questions.

Fletch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2008, 03:03 PM
  #34
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,473
vCash: 500
I'm glad I decided to start this thread, because I'm really enjoying the well-thought-out answers that it has garnered. Having said that, the answers are all discussing the future of the team as currently constituted and whether it will evolve as we all hope - I think that's a meaningful discussion and the posts on the subject are very interesting.

However, it's NOT an answer to my original question. Doomsayers: what did you want done instead?

Reading between the lines, the answers for the most part SEEM to be, keep Jagr, keep Avery, don't sign Naslund, don't sign Redden and 50/50 on whether or not you sign Rozsie, 50/50 on whether or not you let Straka go. So doing some quick math... that's basically the same team as last season - with Tyutin and Backman traded for Zherdev and Fritsche.

Guys, we had that team (understanding that the trade would make the offense better while leaving a hole in the defense). It relied too much on a declining Jagr. It made poor use of last year's free agent signings. It had a crap powerplay. It was too old. It was too slow. As I've argued in multiple other threads, I believe that there was a fundamental schism in the construction that held it back (and for this reason I believe the team will actually develop chemistry much FASTER this year) - but whether or not you agree with me on that specific point, the bottom line was... it didn't win.

So again, what did you want done differently? Am I missing something?

BrooklynRangersFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2008, 03:07 PM
  #35
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 16,540
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynRangersFan View Post
I'm glad I decided to start this thread, because I'm really enjoying the well-thought-out answers that it has garnered. Having said that, the answers are all discussing the future of the team as currently constituted and whether it will evolve as we all hope - I think that's a meaningful discussion and the posts on the subject are very interesting.

However, it's NOT an answer to my original question. Doomsayers: what did you want done instead?

Reading between the lines, the answers for the most part SEEM to be, keep Jagr, keep Avery, don't sign Naslund, don't sign Redden and 50/50 on whether or not you sign Rozsie, 50/50 on whether or not you let Straka go. So doing some quick math... that's basically the same team as last season - with Tyutin and Backman traded for Zherdev and Fritsche.

Guys, we had that team (understanding that the trade would make the offense better while leaving a hole in the defense). It relied too much on a declining Jagr. It made poor use of last year's free agent signings. It had a crap powerplay. It was too old. It was too slow. As I've argued in multiple other threads, I believe that there was a fundamental schism in the construction that held it back (and for this reason I believe the team will actually develop chemistry much FASTER this year) - but whether or not you agree with me on that specific point, the bottom line was... it didn't win.

So again, what did you want done differently? Am I missing something?
Honestly, I think if we had resigned Jagr instead of Naslund we wouldn't be hearing a peep out of most people.

Personally, I'm very happy with the changes that were made.

Trxjw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2008, 03:10 PM
  #36
bogans
Registered User
 
bogans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philly
Country: United States
Posts: 635
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
Naslund WAS a star. Drury was NEVER a star. Gomez is ALMOST a star. Redden was ALMOST a star and may still ALMOST be a star, hopefully. Lundqvist is the only current STAR, with the departure of Jagr.

Of the rest, I expect Staal to become a star. Dubi might become a star but I doubt it. Dawes is an even bigger longshot. This is not a lineup littered with potential superstars or great players. They are either not here yet or we are years away from competing for the prize.

With luck they might win a Cup but with luck one could say the same thing for almost every team in the league. This is currently a very non-physical team without great offensive firepower. Only if the youth greatly accelerates their skills does this team not face an immediate bleak future, in my opinion.
Star was used in my post as a classification, while superstar was another. A guy who has consistently been an all-star in this league is a star in my opinion. Naslund, Redden and Gomer are all stars. Drury is a star because of the intangibles that he brings to the table rather than his point production. All are stars in this league.

Superstar is another level. Jagr used to be our superstar. Each team needs one, and the team is built around that one guy's skillset usually. The team was built around Jagr for the last three years. Lundqvist is now our superstar, this is a transition year, but if he plays up to that level, this team is built to be a contender this year or next.

When your team is built for a superstar goaltender you need guys who can score, but those first line scoring wingers become less important, because the game becomes a totally different game. As I said in my previous post, look at the Devils, they have never had a superstar scoring winger. Nobody they ever had, other than defenseman could be classified as a superstar and turns out to be much worse when they leave their team. They had star level forwards, just like our team has right now. It is built for success around their superstar player, Henrik Lundqvist

bogans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2008, 03:13 PM
  #37
bogans
Registered User
 
bogans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philly
Country: United States
Posts: 635
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynRangersFan View Post
However, it's NOT an answer to my original question. Doomsayers: what did you want done instead?
The reason for that is because none of the biggest doomsayers are here, most of us are the most positive people about the changes. I think the changes are great, I for one am very excited that we are rebuilding around Henke and I think the rebuild actually maanged to happen in one year, I beleive we are a playoff team already.

bogans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2008, 03:13 PM
  #38
HockeyBasedNYC
Registered User
 
HockeyBasedNYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Here
Country: United States
Posts: 12,942
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynRangersFan View Post
I'm glad I decided to start this thread, because I'm really enjoying the well-thought-out answers that it has garnered. Having said that, the answers are all discussing the future of the team as currently constituted and whether it will evolve as we all hope - I think that's a meaningful discussion and the posts on the subject are very interesting.

However, it's NOT an answer to my original question. Doomsayers: what did you want done instead?

Reading between the lines, the answers for the most part SEEM to be, keep Jagr, keep Avery, don't sign Naslund, don't sign Redden and 50/50 on whether or not you sign Rozsie, 50/50 on whether or not you let Straka go. So doing some quick math... that's basically the same team as last season - with Tyutin and Backman traded for Zherdev and Fritsche.

Guys, we had that team (understanding that the trade would make the offense better while leaving a hole in the defense). It relied too much on a declining Jagr. It made poor use of last year's free agent signings. It had a crap powerplay. It was too old. It was too slow. As I've argued in multiple other threads, I believe that there was a fundamental schism in the construction that held it back (and for this reason I believe the team will actually develop chemistry much FASTER this year) - but whether or not you agree with me on that specific point, the bottom line was... it didn't win.

So again, what did you want done differently? Am I missing something?
I agree, and I understand why you want them to answer it, but I dont think theres one straight answer. I think most of them wanted to keep Jagr and Avery, but sometimes things dont turn out the way you want... If Sather re-signed Avery for the contract he got in Dallas, I guarantee 50% of the people who WANTED him back would complain about it. Its just the nature of the beast in here.

Going back to what you said at the beginning of your post - I am just happy that we are all discussiong the "future", "youth" and the newly proposed "speed" game Renney will imploy, rather than discussing how Jagr and Sundin will mesh - or how Jagr wil lbe complimented in a system still being pulled in two directions.

HockeyBasedNYC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2008, 03:16 PM
  #39
In The Flesh
Registered User
 
In The Flesh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 9,732
vCash: 500
My feelings about Sather you can see in my sig. He cannot go an offseason and not go ape **** on the FA market, its impossible for him too. Just sayin.

In The Flesh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2008, 03:18 PM
  #40
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,473
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by theMessiah1194 View Post
My feelings about Sather you can see in my sig. He cannot go an offseason and not go ape **** on the FA market, its impossible for him too. Just sayin.
Okaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay... what would [your GM of choice] have done instead?

BrooklynRangersFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2008, 03:21 PM
  #41
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,473
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyBasedNYC View Post
I agree, and I understand why you want them to answer it, but I dont think theres one straight answer. I think most of them wanted to keep Jagr and Avery, but sometimes things dont turn out the way you want... If Sather re-signed Avery for the contract he got in Dallas, I guarantee 50% of the people who WANTED him back would complain about it. Its just the nature of the beast in here.

Going back to what you said at the beginning of your post - I am just happy that we are all discussiong the "future", "youth" and the newly proposed "speed" game Renney will imploy, rather than discussing how Jagr and Sundin will mesh - or how Jagr wil lbe complimented in a system still being pulled in two directions.
Totally understood, HBNYC, and I'm enjoying the discussion, no doubt. But I remain frustrated by the doomsayers, who are conspicuously absent as Bogans points out. As I say all the time at work - it's a cliche, but a good one - don't bring me problems, bring me solutions.

BrooklynRangersFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2008, 03:23 PM
  #42
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,457
vCash: 500
Brf...

I'm not necessarily a doomsayer as I've played both sides (so call me on the fence) but it's tough to answer what one wanted done without knowing what was available. I think some thought the Rangers should keep Jagr and Avery while replacing Shanny and Straka. Could've still traded for Zherdev and perhaps the top line would've been Avery-Dubi-Jagr and Dawes-Gomez-Zherdev with Drury centering the third line like he did last season. Redden may not have been afforded, but perhaps they still sign Rozsival and somehow get Oprik to come by spending a little bit more to get him. So defensively the team may get better than last season with the offense improving slightly for the addition of Zherdev over Shanny and the maturation of other forwards. Perhaps that's one scenario, and I think it's one people feel more comfortable predicting because there's less wholesale changes.

And of course there are those who wanted this guy and that guy without thinking of what could actually be done about the cap. I think the naysayers really think there are more questions than ever because there's a lot of new faces and more often than not excessive turnover is not a good thing. It's exciting for many who wanted to move on for the Jagr era. It's exciting because we can dream up of far more line combos than ever since there are so many new faces. But when you stack a lot of "what ifs" onto a team it's tough for many to paint a decent picture at the onset.

Again, look at me as someone on the fence who believes there are more moves and who is waiting to see the finished product since I think it's impossible to dream up lines right now (but it's still a fun exercise).

Fletch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2008, 03:26 PM
  #43
In The Flesh
Registered User
 
In The Flesh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 9,732
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynRangersFan View Post
Okaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay... what would [your GM of choice] have done instead?
I don't feel like really going into it as I already have in a bunch of threads. Basically, I would have liked to see realitivly the same team come back next season. Add a little help on D (Orpik) and maybe a winger, maybe pull the Tytuin trade. This was a good team, with a few tweaks (not an overhaul) we'd be better. Play out a 2nd season, see what we could do, build a team methodically, learn something from that GM across the river with 3 cups. Theres worse GMs, but Sather isn't a good one.

In The Flesh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2008, 03:27 PM
  #44
MadHookUp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 363
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
personally, I like to take the other side of the argument just to spur conversation. How exciting of a forum would it be if we all said "Gee Wally, I love that signing too and am really pumped for the beginning of the season". That gets boring. And while you ask why everyone looks at question marks as negative (and it's not everyone - seems to be more positive than negative in this forum), I answer that there are always two sides to every story. When you have question marks, they are just that until they are answered. I don't think it's unreasonable for a poster to say this team isn't going to make the playoffs. I don't think it's unreasonable for them to come in and say that the team will struggle early to find an identity and it's possible that certain guys don't perform. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that they will have trouble finding chemistry since most successful teams don't experience so much turnover and will struggle to score because the team has a bunch of followers up front and no leaders, citing Drury typically being behind quality guys and Gomez playing with quality guys.

Maybe some consider that being negative. Others may feel that they're being realistic and others are being optimistic about so many questions.
You are 100% correct. I think what really bothers me are the people that say, "OMG THAT WAS SO STUPID!"

There definitely are a number of concerns for next season, and you brought most of them up. My real frustration is with the people that just flat out say that something Renney or Sather did was stupid.

MadHookUp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2008, 03:32 PM
  #45
RMcDonagh
New York Rangers Cup
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 6,264
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by theMessiah1194 View Post
I don't feel like really going into it as I already have in a bunch of threads. Basically, I would have liked to see realitivly the same team come back next season. Add a little help on D (Orpik) and maybe a winger, maybe pull the Tytuin trade. This was a good team, with a few tweaks (not an overhaul) we'd be better. Play out a 2nd season, see what we could do, build a team methodically, learn something from that GM across the river with 3 cups. Theres worse GMs, but Sather isn't a good one.
Play out a 2nd season with whom exactly?

At a point you have to ask yourself "how long can this aging team do their work?"

With your main offensive guns in Jagr, Straka, Shanahan, your relying on a damn lot. This was great to go this way. We have a young, fast, exciting team. It's not necessarily a rebuild by any means but it's getting out of the Jagr era of a single player being the go-to guy. Straka couldn't hit the net, and barely ever shot for it. Jagr just coughed up the puck all the damn time, and Shanahan couldn't battle for any puck or do anything at the end of last season, what makes you think it'll be a good idea to bring back the 3 aged veterans?

I just don't get it.

RMcDonagh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2008, 03:40 PM
  #46
The Thomas J.*
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Staten Island, NY
Posts: 18,847
vCash: 500
My biggest gripe is the Redden signing, the non signing of Orpik.

I would have liked Jagr to stay, buy i'm not devestated he left. I hope letting Jagr walk doesn't bite us in the end.

I feel that Naslund is Shanahan 2.0 & that would make us better, I like the trade for Zederev, although I can see both these guys going though long slumps.

Alot of pressure will be put on Cally, Prucha & Dawes to preform, Pressure that they really never felt because Jagr took all the pressure on himself.

Like I said in earlier posts, When we signed Gomez & Drury I was thrilled, I felt we were the team to beat in the East. These moves in 08' just don't stir the same excitment in me as they did a year ago.

I think we will be competive, but at the same time I can see us struggling like we did the past two seasons & being a 6 to 8 seed, maybe evern missing the PO's all together.

The Thomas J.* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2008, 03:44 PM
  #47
MadHookUp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 363
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Thomas J. View Post
My biggest gripe is the Redden signing, the non signing of Orpik.
Cant fault them on that. Orpik turned down more money from the Rangers to go back to Pittsburgh.

MadHookUp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2008, 03:45 PM
  #48
HockeyBasedNYC
Registered User
 
HockeyBasedNYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Here
Country: United States
Posts: 12,942
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
I'm not necessarily a doomsayer as I've played both sides (so call me on the fence)
Fletch, you are the sobering voice of God in here.

You always see both sides of the story very clearly, seldom taking an argumentative position.

I always enjoy your posts, and again I agree.

There still is some work to be done, unless they decide to wait it out and be patient - see how this team develops and how the youth will react in their first non-Jagr campaign before they look to grab another piece to the puzzle. They could very well do just that, if not just to see if Prucha's stock rises again because its not very high right now.


Last edited by HockeyBasedNYC: 07-09-2008 at 03:51 PM.
HockeyBasedNYC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2008, 03:47 PM
  #49
Casmatt
Registered User
 
Casmatt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by theMessiah1194 View Post
My feelings about Sather you can see in my sig. He cannot go an offseason and not go ape **** on the FA market, its impossible for him too. Just sayin.
What about 2 years ago? He signed Aaron Ward and Matt Cullen, then traded for Adam Hall. He could've gone out and spent 7+ on Chara, but he didn't.

Anyway, on to this offseason. I don't necessarily love the signings this offseason. I would've liked to have Jagr back, but I realize this team wants to move in a different direction and I'm okay with that. I like the Zherdev deal, although I will miss Tyutin. I am a little concerned about the toughness of the team, but I think we'll do alright with that. Orpik would've been a nice addition and we did make an effort to sign him, he seems like he just wants to stay in Pittsburgh.

Casmatt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-09-2008, 03:48 PM
  #50
frankthefrowner
Registered User
 
frankthefrowner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,663
vCash: 500
Someone earlier in this thread said we lack physicality. I have to disagree completely...

Yea maybe on the top 2 lines we lack physicality but uhhh what team has a bunch of meat heads looking to pound peoples faces in on the top 2 lines? As far as the 3rd and 4th lines, we have Voros, Orr, Hollweg(for now), and perhaps if he makes the team Dane Byers.

On Defense we have to 2 guys in the likes of Girardi and Mara who are physical. Yes Mara despite being known for his offensive play can lay a hit as he showed alot during the playoffs.

While Dawes, Prucha and Drury arent very large, they all play like they are. Dawes and Prucha both play like freight trains and Dru blocks shots all god damn day.

Oh yea I almost forgot, BRANDON *** DUBINSKY would qualify as physical No??!!

frankthefrowner 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 07:40 PM.

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.