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

Would jagr be a perfect fit under Tortorella's system?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-25-2009, 05:24 PM
  #26
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,437
vCash: 500
no offense to Dubi, but you're giving him too much credit. Also remember that Avery was on the other side and doing very well. Again, Jagr played when Jagr wanted to play and often times he dominated, and even on most nights he remained an even against the top lines in the league. The one big difference in his points was the PP. His PP time was cut, kind of significantly, and Dubi, quite honestly, was not cut out to be the centerman with Jagr on the PP - not dynamic enough and didn't move around enough, not to mention that the PP all around just wasn't very good. I also wouldn't be surprised if he never fully recovered from the shoulder injury he suffered against Jersey in the playoffs, but that's something that would only strengthen the argument of him not being resigned by the Rangers.

Fletch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2009, 05:25 PM
  #27
Fataldogg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,904
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sting36e View Post
Jagr is 37 years old. He is no longer a dominant player. As good as he might have been in the playoffs last year, he himself admitted that he was conserving himself during the season. I don't need a guy on the team that for the entire regular season isn't playing at 100 percent. The Rangers/Jagr saga needs to end. Time to move on.
You mean like Gomez, Drury, Redden, Roszival, Zherdev, all giving it 100%?

Personally, I think thats a cop out excuse. Sure, Jagr probably didn't play his hardest over the season but he proved that when he can he is still miles better than just about anyone in the NHL. He put on a showcase for Malkin and Crosby in the 2nd round. Jagr is an excellent player and well conditioned, if he was able to come back, happily, into an offensive system first I have no doubt that if he came to the NHL next season he would put up 90 points. He didn't try his hardest, played in a system he hated, and still put up 71 points. And I don't care about the "he didn't try, I don't want that player on my team" because all of our biggest "stars" if thats what you can call them, today, haven't been giving it close to 100%. Especially Drury with his lax attitude on the ice and in front of the mic.

Fataldogg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2009, 05:34 PM
  #28
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,437
vCash: 500
I'd take Jagr's 71 points and half-arsed effort last season over Gomez's 70 points and great effort last season, for sure. I'd also take his half-arsed effort over any of the efforts this season. While he didn't "dominate" other teams, which typically consisted of other teams' top lines, didn't dominate either. He was able to keep it pretty even throughout the season, for the most part. And the focus was still on him and he managed those 70 points while playing a lot with a kid who wasn't known for putting up points and Sean Avery, who, to the best of my knowledge, hasn't had a 20 goal season in his career (sorry, I don't prorate - if I did Sjostrom would've been a 30 goal scorer at the 23 game mark last season). The amount of ice afforded Dubi and Avery was huge which meant that Jagr, despite being easier to neutralize, was effective. Also, when you give a winger second and third liner linemates, his game will tend to trend down a bit - there's only so far one can raise the bar.

Fletch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2009, 10:58 PM
  #29
pavvento
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 263
vCash: 500
I think it's also important to note that Jagr didn't give 100% because he knew he couldn't sustain it, as opposed to other players who don't give 100% for unknown excuses.

It doesn't make it any better that he can't give 100% 100% of the time, but at least there was a reasoning, and a pretty dam good reasoning if you ask me.

pavvento is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2009, 11:11 PM
  #30
ruckus*
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 3,554
vCash: 500
Jagr fits in well period. The biggest mistake Glen made was letting him go. That forced him to trade Tyutin for Zherdeve who couldn't hold Jagr's jock and replace Tyutin with Redden. This team instantly got worst when he refused to give Jagr a dollar more than that POS Gomez.

ruckus* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-25-2009, 11:23 PM
  #31
bcrt2000
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 3,495
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
Jagr played when Jagr wanted to play
This is one of the worst sports cliches ever.

bcrt2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-26-2009, 01:06 AM
  #32
NHLsnipers
Registered User
 
NHLsnipers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 1,036
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sting36e View Post
I disagree. He was clearly better with Dubinsky, but dominating? I don't think so. At no point during the season did I ever see a Jagr that I thought could carry the team, until the playoffs.
This is what noone understood about Jagr's game. How can someone put up 54 goals and 70+ assists one season and then lose it all in the next two seasons.

Jagr was thought to have lose his dominance in Washington and after the lockout, teams did not focus on him and BAMM 54 goals later.

Then the next two seasons teams planned their entire game plan around Jagr and double teamed and took him out of the game as much as possible.

Now it was up to the other players to step up while Jagr was being covered for the Rangers to be successful. This is where the Rangers failed, they did not have anyone else to step up, so it was easy to take away any Ranger offensive presence.

What do the intelligent fans say? Rather than finding another offensive guy to take the focus away from Jagr, fans ***** and demand he leaves.

Look at the successful teams. Do you think the Red Wings would be as good if they only had Zetterburg and Datzyuk wasnt there? Lecavalier without St. Louis? Sakic without Forsberg?

There are many teams in history that were successful because of one of two offensive juggernauts. But in order for the team to be successful, you need two of them and that is where the Rangers failed with Jagr.

Look at the Jagr Pittsburgh teams. They were nasty with Lemieux and Jagr in the late 90's and early 00's but did not have the goaltending.

Well the Rangers had the goaltending and rather than finding a way to trade for a Kovalchuk or Lecavalier or whoever last season and keep Jagr, we signed Roszival, Redden, etc. while letting Jagr go.

Just stupid. Jagr should have finished his career here and taken a legitimate run at the cup. Now were stuck with crap and a bunch of defensive prospects.

NHLsnipers 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 05:11 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.