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

Some Practice Notes from Zipay

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-16-2008, 10:01 AM
  #76
WhipNash27
Quattro!!
 
WhipNash27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westchester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 15,589
vCash: 500
Most players in the NHL are exceptional skaters or they wouldn't be there. Most also take power skating lessons and the like so they all have very good form. There are few players that you can call ugly skaters and they usually don't play in the top two or three lines.

WhipNash27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2008, 10:11 AM
  #77
GarretJoseph*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 7,604
vCash: 500
cat fight.

GarretJoseph* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2008, 10:17 AM
  #78
Jeds2StepOpus
Registered User
 
Jeds2StepOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 893
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Davisian View Post
I think its great how you're being belligerent and insistent that your crude analysis, born out of time spent in the hard knocks school of "rec leagues" and an over intepretation of a Brian Leetch answer to a question, is somehow the ultimate authority on the effects of ice condition.


Why don't you settle down and absorb alternate opinions before mashing your keyboard with those strong, manly, rec league hands?



SBOB's point is solid, and your point that bad ice can affect different types of skaters in different ways was also good. They're not mutually exclusive, so don't be so defensive.

There's a lot of ultimate authorities of this site. I'm just one of many

Jeds2StepOpus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2008, 10:38 AM
  #79
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 16,603
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radek27 View Post

Lastly, that line is soft, small, and really not that fast. So what exactly are they going to excell in?
Small I'll give to you, but you're completely off your rocker if you don't acknowledge that Gomez and Drury are very, very fast skaters. They aren't soft either.

Trxjw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2008, 12:05 PM
  #80
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
Drury is not a very fast skater and Gomez is soft. When overplayed, Drury might as well be soft because he's not involved (saw this last November).

On the ice subject...interesting topic. An argument can be made that a team relying on speed compared to other teams would be similarly affected since the other team would be even slower and may have a more difficult time bringing the puck up ice. Conversely, it seemed as though Edmonton thrived on their home ice, but aren't teams supposed to have an advantage on home ice? So an argument can be made on both sides, however, I don't think I've said too often that team A lost a game due to bad ice.

Fletch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2008, 12:31 PM
  #81
MikeyLikesHockey
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 603
vCash: 500
haha...

Crazy stuff.

Drury will play left as the power fwd/finisher to the rush that Gomer brings on, Zherdev will play second line with Naslund and Dubi.

Voros will be given a shot at right wing with Gomer, since he played the top two lines on his former team.

At least they are starting to look at complimentary play styles. Maybe they even move Zherdev up to line one and Prucha to line 2.

But the big thing is having Drury play the left wing with Gomer. I believe it will provide positive gain for both players.

MikeyLikesHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2008, 12:35 PM
  #82
KreiMeARiver*
Have Confidence
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UES
Posts: 6,621
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
I'm not arguing that bad ice is just as easy to skate on as good ice.

I'm saying that if you skate better than a team on good ice, you will still skate better than that same team on bad ice. Because both teams are playing on the same ice surface — good or bad.

Hence the term "proportional."
lol I thought it was pretty clear, also.

Drury and Gomez on the first line, though? Its interesting, but do you think it will realistically come to fruition come game 1?

KreiMeARiver* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2008, 12:45 PM
  #83
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 30,011
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by hightide85 View Post
Drury and Gomez on the first line, though? Its interesting, but do you think it will realistically come to fruition come game 1?
I don't know if you're talking specifically, but I'm going to answer.

I think that Drury is clearly one of the top three wingers on the team. I liked what I saw when Gomez and Drury played together on the PP last season.

I think it all comes down to camp. There certainly seem to be more options and chances that someone steps up and claims a third line center position than someone will a top 6 forward spot.

__________________
SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2008, 12:46 PM
  #84
Loto68
Registered User
 
Loto68's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 859
vCash: 500
I don't get most of you people, Cally has failed to produce significant offense even based on his playing time thus far in the NHL, where as Pru is a proven goal scorer, why the hell would Cally be kept if Pru isn't when he have several Cally clones in the system, except some of them are much better in front of the net and fighting.

Loto68 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2008, 12:48 PM
  #85
I Am Chariot
One shift at a time
 
I Am Chariot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 14,526
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loto68 View Post
I don't get most of you people, Cally has failed to produce significant offense even based on his playing time thus far in the NHL, where as Pru is a proven goal scorer, why the hell would Cally be kept if Pru isn't when he have several Cally clones in the system, except some of them are much better in front of the net and fighting.
Because Prucha eats up cap space Sather needs to add player XXX

Player XXX > Prucha

Than you pray Cally can net 20-25 goals at his current cap hit

__________________
Yeah, well, you know, that's just, like, your opinion, man
I Am Chariot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2008, 01:02 PM
  #86
Larry Melnyk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Gloomsville, USA
Posts: 4,376
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loto68 View Post
I don't get most of you people, Cally has failed to produce significant offense even based on his playing time thus far in the NHL, where as Pru is a proven goal scorer, why the hell would Cally be kept if Pru isn't when he have several Cally clones in the system, except some of them are much better in front of the net and fighting.
True, cally hasn't been a producer at thr NHL level and why I had some problems with him up until the the last third of the season..But no forward on the Rangers worked harder, hit more, got involved both offensivbley and defensively, and created energy/turnovers as Cally did from that point on...Hopefully more goals will come on a set line.Maybe not, we'll see..but there is defientely a place for him on the team...we'll see..Prucha, OTOH, down right sucked..brought absoutley ZERO to the table...No offense, no defense, no hitting, just flopping all over the ice...To me, Prucha's offense is a distant memory and he needs to prove himslef all over again before he even gets a 4th line spot...

Larry Melnyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2008, 01:07 PM
  #87
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 30,011
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loto68 View Post
I don't get most of you people, Cally has failed to produce significant offense even based on his playing time thus far in the NHL, where as Pru is a proven goal scorer, why the hell would Cally be kept if Pru isn't when he have several Cally clones in the system, except some of them are much better in front of the net and fighting.
The guy who "has failed to produce significant offense" had pretty similar numbers to the "proven goal scorer."

SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2008, 01:36 PM
  #88
KreiMeARiver*
Have Confidence
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UES
Posts: 6,621
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
I don't know if you're talking specifically, but I'm going to answer.

I think that Drury is clearly one of the top three wingers on the team. I liked what I saw when Gomez and Drury played together on the PP last season.

I think it all comes down to camp. There certainly seem to be more options and chances that someone steps up and claims a third line center position than someone will a top 6 forward spot.
good points...and the more I think about it, the more I think it could work. I'd really like to see Anisimov claim a C spot...to make the Drury move to W viable.

KreiMeARiver* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2008, 01:59 PM
  #89
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
mikey...

I doubt we see Voros as a top liner. He may've gotten some time on a top line in Minnesota. To what extent I couldn't say because I didn't follow Minnesota. But in the end he had 14 points in 55 games - not top line numbers, even though it was his 'rookie' season, albeit at the age of 26. He averaged a bit more than 9 minutes per game (about 1:30 of PP time), one minute more than Hollweg. I'm not seeing top six numbers here. True I don't have the benefit of watching the guy and having great firsthand knowledge, but going on how many minutes he was getting, his production, etc., he seems to be more of a third liner, at best. Of course if the Rangers decide that the fourth line is best for him, they shouldn't expect similar production, but I think he'd be an improvement over Hollweg there at a minimum.

Fletch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2008, 02:05 PM
  #90
HockeyBasedNYC
Registered User
 
HockeyBasedNYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Here
Country: United States
Posts: 12,954
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
I doubt we see Voros as a top liner. He may've gotten some time on a top line in Minnesota. To what extent I couldn't say because I didn't follow Minnesota. But in the end he had 14 points in 55 games - not top line numbers, even though it was his 'rookie' season, albeit at the age of 26. He averaged a bit more than 9 minutes per game (about 1:30 of PP time), one minute more than Hollweg. I'm not seeing top six numbers here. True I don't have the benefit of watching the guy and having great firsthand knowledge, but going on how many minutes he was getting, his production, etc., he seems to be more of a third liner, at best. Of course if the Rangers decide that the fourth line is best for him, they shouldn't expect similar production, but I think he'd be an improvement over Hollweg there at a minimum.
I think what they were doing in Minnesota was sending Voros to the net to clear space for Demitra and Gaborik. I think your statements are correct though. On this team the only top billing Voros will get is probably via the second PP unit, when they have him stand in front taking the punishment ala Graves style.

Who knows what Renney has up his sleeve though.

HockeyBasedNYC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2008, 02:12 PM
  #91
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
Voros had one PP assist - I'm not sure how well that strategy really worked, but again, I didn't see many Wild games so I can only go what I'm seeing on paper.

Fletch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2008, 02:19 PM
  #92
NYRSinceBirth
Registered User
 
NYRSinceBirth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 2,843
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeds2StepOpus View Post
You call that "logic"?

Oh, you mean bad logic...or half-assed backwards logic, right?

Strap, on a pair of skates and find yourself a nice smooth, solid ice surface to skate on.

Then go find yourself a ratty, soft, slushy or brittle ice to skate on.

Report back on how well you skated on the good ice and how much fun you had on the bad ice. I'm giddy to read the results.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeds2StepOpus View Post
It doesn't apply. There are many variables.

A team built for speed could be effected to such an extent that their speed advantage is eliminated. Yet the opposing team that has not as much speed, but skates in powerful strides will be barely effected. I've seen it happen many times.
Do you see your own contradiction? Also, you don't need powerful strides to be fast?

I think I know what your talking about, but your way off base in your explanation. The whole speed thing is proportionate to ice at each rink. Both teams are on the same ice, so both teams will be positively/negatively affected similarly. The faster team will be faster, although overall slower. The slower team will still be slower, and overall slower.


Choppy ice, or ****** ice, helps the slower team because it limits momentum and flow that the faster team needs to beat them. It's similar in the NFL when there's a mud bowl. The mud makes the faster players come down to earth (In terms of speed), but also makes passes harder and makes ball carrying and dekes much harder if not impossible. It just strips the better team of what makes it better. When there is bad ice, crisp clean passes are difficult at best, and stick handling is affect also. Almost in a sense stripping the better team of what makes them better. The problem is, it works BOTH ways. Remember, they're on the same playing surface.

What bad ice does is allow more breaks and opportunities through out the game, and making it, let me say, artificially even. If the Red Wings played the Kings on glass like ice, the argument could be made Detroit would win in a 7 game series. Now, put the same series on the outdoor ice that Buffalo/Pitt experienced this season, and LA might make something of it. Not from Detroit getting slower, or Detroit losing skill, but rather leveling the playing field through unpredictable conditions and hindering Detroit's game slightly more than LA.

NYRSinceBirth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2008, 02:33 PM
  #93
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
wouldn't both teams be equally slowed down so the faster team could still rely on speed since it is still proportionately faster than the other team, albeit not as fast as on better ice? It's not a perfect science and perhaps there is some disadvantage to one or the other, but I still see the better team winning the game four times out of seven. Heck, fast teams used to play on the crappy Garden ice and still blow by the slower Rangers in the late-90s.

Fletch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2008, 03:30 PM
  #94
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 Jeds2StepOpus View Post
Oh really. Interesting.

Well, I know from my experience that bad ice can and does create a lot of problems in skating and playing the game. I only played recreational hockey ice hockey in recreational leagues. But considering that I've been skating since since I was six years old, I have plenty of experience with different ice qualities.

Anyone who has played the game knows bad ice makes the game a bit more difficult.


I've had the pleasure of meeting Brian Leetch several times in my life and I once asked him about this subject matter


In a one-on-one Q & A with Brian Leetch back in 1990/91 I asked Leetch a three part question about ice surface conditions/quality of ice.

The question was posed like this....

" Brian, from my perspective in the audience and even when veiwing on television the the Garden ice looks really bad.

Is the Garden ice as bad to play on, as it looks?

If so, how does the bad ice effect the players ability to play their game and the game in general?

Is there something that could be done to improve the ice quality?


Leetch's response was that ...... Yes, the Garden ice is often in bad condition and that it does have an effect on the players ability to skate and pass the puck.

He talked about how the puck is effected in passing and when receiving a pass. He also talked about the dangers of bad ice and how a skate blade can get caught in a rut and cause serious injury.

In fact, he actaully said that it was an excellent question and one he'd never had a fan ask him.

I'll take Brain Leetch's word and my experience in skating over yours, any day of the week.


Furthermore, how you can figure a team is " proportionally faster " on bad ice, is beyond me.

Bad surfaces effect the game play of just about every sport. Football, Baseball, Golf, Tennis....you name it.

Why you would figure it to be different and that Hockey is immune from the effects of a bad surface; is quite funny.
Bad ice = Bad excuse. it may be bad but its not where you can barley skate in. If anyone who has played Travel hockey orobably knows this rink, when i was younger i played at Mount Vernon's "Bubble" and it is possibly the worst ice surface ive ever skated on, but to say that you'd be extremely worse is just laughable.

Burlington Bomb 26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2008, 03:54 PM
  #95
Jeds2StepOpus
Registered User
 
Jeds2StepOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 893
vCash: 500
And you're all missing the original point, to begun with.

And being, it seems rather stupid to build a team around a balls to the wall Speed and Attack concept, when you're home ice routinely sucks so bad; that it's considered one of the worst ice surfaces in the NHL.

That was my point from the beginning.

As for the ice quality.

The point being this, if you build a team with a lot of smallish, passive speedy guys; you have no balance through out your lineup. So when there are nights were the ice is bad, your team doesn't have much else going for it. And there will be plenty of nights of bad ice. Not just at the Garden, but in several arenas around the league.

Who knows, maybe the rumor is true and the Rangers brass do have a plan of action for better ice.

We'll see.

Jeds2StepOpus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2008, 03:55 PM
  #96
Jeds2StepOpus
Registered User
 
Jeds2StepOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 893
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRSinceBirth View Post
Do you see your own contradiction? Also, you don't need powerful strides to be fast?
Clearly I was refering to a more power game, than a speed game.

Jeds2StepOpus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2008, 03:57 PM
  #97
Jeds2StepOpus
Registered User
 
Jeds2StepOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 893
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GongShowHockeyNYR View Post
Bad ice = Bad excuse. it may be bad but its not where you can barley skate in. If anyone who has played Travel hockey orobably knows this rink, when i was younger i played at Mount Vernon's "Bubble" and it is possibly the worst ice surface ive ever skated on, but to say that you'd be extremely worse is just laughable.
Excuses? Who's making excuses?

This started out with me expressing my thoughts on the possibility of having aq one dimensional team of small speedsters. And it evolved from there. There was no excuses being made. I don't even know what the hell you're talking about.

As for being extremely worse, you can laugh all you want. Extremes would be a very rare occurance. But if you're a team that thrives on speed, quick and accurate passing and finesse puck handling/control; you will be handcuffed and your strengths greatly diminished on a bad surface. And if your team doesn't have the balance through out the lineup to go with the flow and adjust; you're screwed.

Jeds2StepOpus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-16-2008, 03:58 PM
  #98
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 Jeds2StepOpus View Post
And you're all missing the original point, to begun with.

And being, it seems rather stupid to build a team around a balls to the wall Speed and Attack concept, when you're home ice routinely sucks so bad; that it's considered one of the worst ice surfaces in the NHL.

That was my point from the beginning.

As for the ice quality.

The point being this, if you build a team with a lot of smallish, passive speedy guys; you have no balance through out your lineup. So when there are nights were the ice is bad, your team doesn't have much else going for it. And there will be plenty of nights of bad ice. Not just at the Garden, but in several areans around the league.

Who knows, maybe the rumor is true and the Rangers brass do have a plan of action for better ice.

We'll see.
Oh Vey! its not there playing on a pond. have you even ever been on MSG ice before? your making it out wayyyyyy worse than it really is.

Burlington Bomb 26 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 05:36 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.