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

Is Managements Perspective "We Are Rebuilding"?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-08-2010, 03:34 PM
  #76
DontStepanMe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Queens, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 5,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Alright, Ill play along. If you want to trade Lundqvist and his 6.8 million dollar cap hit and get a #1 center in return, thats a nice thought...but who? Is a team going to take on the hit and give up a young stud with a small cap hit? No. You'd be entering Brad Richards+ territory with this line of thinking. Does subtracting Lundqvist and adding Brad Richards make this team better? At best its a lateral move, and it I'd be inclined to say it'd hurt the team.
Well that's the problem... I don't think that we could make a trade for a young #1 center for Lundqvist. I dont think the other team would actually want to make that trade personally. Especially one that doesn't make alot yet. It would probably make the other team worse off.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
I cant even imagine how good Lundqvist could be if he had a capable team in front of him. Hes the foundation from which we should be building.
Honestly he wouldn't be any better. He would be the same goalie as he is now. Just his stats would be much better as he would be facing less shots, and hopefully much easier shots. And he also has a bad penchant for letting in bad goals lately which I don't think a good team around him can even fix. he would still be the same goalie as he is now though... he would just appear better due to the team around him.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Also, I know Marc-Andre Fleury isnt considered a star goalie, but he is a former #1 overall, so be careful where youre going with this already very small sample size of post-lockout cup winners.
Very true. He did have a great season and PO run last year, and is a #1 pick. He has got the skills but seems inconsistent. I would not be surprised to see him become a top 5 goalie in the next 2-3 years though... but at the moment he is not one yet. And the season he won the cup, he wasn't one yet. So even if he does become one, it makes no difference as this has happened when he wasn't one yet.

DontStepanMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-08-2010, 03:38 PM
  #77
Vito Andolini
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 923
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rags225 View Post
there is your answer. he can be replaced quite easily on a good team without a huge dropoff in their play. But take out Toews from that team and insert Lundqvist and I would put money on it that that team would actually be WORSE off. Therefore he is not this invaluable piece that cannot be moved under any circumstances.

These days it is harder to replace a Toews, E Staal, Perry, Getzlaf, Stamkos, Gaborik... etc than it is a Lundqvist. And that is because the high end talent level is spread so damn thin through the 30 teams, and there are alot more solid goalies being pumped up into this league.
Since when are WE a good team?

Taking Lundqvist away from us is just as (if not more) devastating as taking Toews away from Chicago.

Take Toews away from Chicago and they'll of course have problems, but their offensive depth on the bottom 2 lines is strong. Take Lundqvist away from us, and who's going to stop the point blank cross crease passes that this defense allows on a nightly basis?

Vito Andolini is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-08-2010, 03:51 PM
  #78
DontStepanMe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Queens, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 5,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vito Andolini View Post
Since when are WE a good team?

Taking Lundqvist away from us is just as (if not more) devastating as taking Toews away from Chicago.

Take Toews away from Chicago and they'll of course have problems, but their offensive depth on the bottom 2 lines is strong. Take Lundqvist away from us, and who's going to stop the point blank cross crease passes that this defense allows on a nightly basis?
I never said we are a good team. My whole point is that you don't need an elite goaltender to win. A solid team is more important than an elite goalie. And that in the New NHL a top notch center is probably more important than an elite goalie.

Oh... and say we trade Lundy for Toews straight up... then yes we probably would be worse off b/c we have absolutely nobody capable of being even an average NHL starter. But if we had Bernier + Toews (i think together their salary is near Lundys) we would be much better off than we are now. hell even if we had Niemi + Toews I think we would be better off than with just Lundy. We might let up a few more goals, but I think our overall offense would go up significantly to where it would overcome it.

DontStepanMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-08-2010, 04:04 PM
  #79
BrandNewDream
Registered User
 
BrandNewDream's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Bayonne, NJ
Country: Poland
Posts: 1,278
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inferno272 View Post
this year, youd be, in essence, trading Jokinen and Redden for Kovalchuk+raises to Girardi and Staal.

Next year you could trade Rozsival for McDonagh, and raises to Cally, Dubi, and whoever else is needed.

The Rangers have proven they can bring in elite players even when in cap hell...see the Gomez trade for proof.
Ok, so we end up with two great wingers, and two guys that have proven capable even without top centers. But as has been debated in other threads, strength down the middle is HUGE. Not necessarily have an A-1 elite center, but overall. And that's where our problems lie.

Nevermind elite goalies, if you look at every Cup winner for the past decade, they have all been strong in the middle.

Kovalchuk scoring 50+ in Atlanta did wonders for their winning percentage.

BrandNewDream is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-08-2010, 04:14 PM
  #80
Vito Andolini
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 923
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rags225 View Post
Oh... and say we trade Lundy for Toews straight up... then yes we probably would be worse off b/c we have absolutely nobody capable of being even an average NHL starter. But if we had Bernier + Toews (i think together their salary is near Lundys) we would be much better off than we are now. hell even if we had Niemi + Toews I think we would be better off than with just Lundy. We might let up a few more goals, but I think our overall offense would go up significantly to where it would overcome it.
Are you arguing the benefits of trading players on max salary for players on their 1st or 2nd contract? Because you conveniently bring up Bernier & Niemi, but they are both on their 1st contracts. As they perform and get the opportunity to negotiate new deals, their salaries will surely rise as well....so Lundqvists salary for Toews and Niemi's salary is not a fair comparison, in my opinion.

Vito Andolini is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-08-2010, 04:22 PM
  #81
DontStepanMe
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Queens, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 5,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vito Andolini View Post
Are you arguing the benefits of trading players on max salary for players on their 1st or 2nd contract? Because you conveniently bring up Bernier & Niemi, but they are both on their 1st contracts. As they perform and get the opportunity to negotiate new deals, their salaries will surely rise as well....so Lundqvists salary for Toews and Niemi's salary is not a fair comparison, in my opinion.
I bring up Bernier b/c he is on the trading block and there is a likelihood that he will be traded this offseason. Same goes for Schneider. Niemi just b/c he is chicago's goalie.

But yes you are correct that their salaries will go up, but their skills should go up as well with a little more experience right? And Toews and Niemi's salary is fair, b/c well Niemi will be playing at that Salary for 1 or 2 more years i think. Then yes he will get a raise. But for the timebeing we would be better off. When he gets his raise then it could/will change the equation and a good salary would have to be found. Same goes w/ Bernier, same goes for every single player in the NHL.

it actually seems that once teams get high priced goalies that their overall team play can go down... thats because of the cap... some of the best teams in the league this year have low paid goalies... i seriously believe that paying a goalie to much can be detrimental to you team (although paying anybody too much can be detrimental)... but paying a goalie too much can be worse b/c once he hits 25 or so he will not get that much better, but the team around him will make him better or worse thats why these low paid goalies in their ELC's and in some cases 2nd contracts can still have amazing talent surrounding them... but once they start getting contracts over $5mil the law of diminishing returns really starts to bog down their overall value b/c they need to get rid of some other talent to keep the goalie. And like I said, there is so much good young goaltending coming up lately that it seems to be getting easier to find good goalie, but not a real good forward or dman.


Last edited by DontStepanMe: 04-08-2010 at 04:48 PM.
DontStepanMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-08-2010, 04:57 PM
  #82
Inferno
HFB Partner
 
Inferno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 20,258
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrandNewDream View Post
Ok, so we end up with two great wingers, and two guys that have proven capable even without top centers. But as has been debated in other threads, strength down the middle is HUGE. Not necessarily have an A-1 elite center, but overall. And that's where our problems lie.

Nevermind elite goalies, if you look at every Cup winner for the past decade, they have all been strong in the middle.

Kovalchuk scoring 50+ in Atlanta did wonders for their winning percentage.
Explain to me how a centers offensive totals are more important than a wingers offensive totals? I simply do not understand that.


If you have a line that scores say 90 goals combined, what difference does it make if its 50-20-20 instead of 20-50-20? I have yet to hear an explanation to that. Everyone here keeps extolling the importance of strength down the middle, strength down the middle, strength down the middle....but not a single person can explain to me WHY. The last few stanley cup winners have GREAT players playing GREAT hockey. THAT is what they have in common. Only reason it is up the middle is because generally speaking, when kids start playing hockey, coaches tend to put the best players at center because they can control both ends of the ice against their inferior counterparts. The fact that you have a winger scoring your goals instead of a center has absolutely no bearing on the game whatsoever. Someone explain to Jaromir Jagr that he wasn't worth as much as a comparable center, offensively, just because he played Right Wing.

I would argue that in Tort's system, a defensive center coupled with offensive wingers are FAR more valuable than an offensive center with defensive wingers. The amount of rotation needed, and the amount of back checking that is needed probably hurts the centers offensive ability. Torts wants his D coming in all the time (when he is running his actual system...right now hes playing more of a defensive version of his system), the D coming in means you need rotation back, a defensive center can rotate to either position easily.

This is why he constantly praises Anisimovs play, he is a smart defensive center, and has offensive game to boot.

Also, regarding Kovalchuk in Atlanta, those teams had horrendous defense, and OK goaltending..thats what happens when you don't spend to the cap max. The Rangers have a superb stable of defenseman who will be in their primes within the next few years. That doesnt concern me one iota, we also have Henrik Lundvist back there, the PERFECT goalie to play a run and gun system with....if you had the players to do it.

Inferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-08-2010, 05:13 PM
  #83
Kel Varnsen
Below: Nash's Heart
 
Kel Varnsen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,137
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inferno272 View Post
Explain to me how a centers offensive totals are more important than a wingers offensive totals? I simply do not understand that.


If you have a line that scores say 90 goals combined, what difference does it make if its 50-20-20 instead of 20-50-20? I have yet to hear an explanation to that. Everyone here keeps extolling the importance of strength down the middle, strength down the middle, strength down the middle....but not a single person can explain to me WHY. The last few stanley cup winners have GREAT players playing GREAT hockey. THAT is what they have in common. Only reason it is up the middle is because generally speaking, when kids start playing hockey, coaches tend to put the best players at center because they can control both ends of the ice against their inferior counterparts. The fact that you have a winger scoring your goals instead of a center has absolutely no bearing on the game whatsoever. Someone explain to Jaromir Jagr that he wasn't worth as much as a comparable center, offensively, just because he played Right Wing.
Hope that puts the issue to rest.

Kel Varnsen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-08-2010, 05:20 PM
  #84
BrandNewDream
Registered User
 
BrandNewDream's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Bayonne, NJ
Country: Poland
Posts: 1,278
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inferno272 View Post
Explain to me how a centers offensive totals are more important than a wingers offensive totals? I simply do not understand that.


If you have a line that scores say 90 goals combined, what difference does it make if its 50-20-20 instead of 20-50-20? I have yet to hear an explanation to that. Everyone here keeps extolling the importance of strength down the middle, strength down the middle, strength down the middle....but not a single person can explain to me WHY. The last few stanley cup winners have GREAT players playing GREAT hockey. THAT is what they have in common. Only reason it is up the middle is because generally speaking, when kids start playing hockey, coaches tend to put the best players at center because they can control both ends of the ice against their inferior counterparts. The fact that you have a winger scoring your goals instead of a center has absolutely no bearing on the game whatsoever. Someone explain to Jaromir Jagr that he wasn't worth as much as a comparable center, offensively, just because he played Right Wing.

I would argue that in Tort's system, a defensive center coupled with offensive wingers are FAR more valuable than an offensive center with defensive wingers. The amount of rotation needed, and the amount of back checking that is needed probably hurts the centers offensive ability. Torts wants his D coming in all the time (when he is running his actual system...right now hes playing more of a defensive version of his system), the D coming in means you need rotation back, a defensive center can rotate to either position easily.

This is why he constantly praises Anisimovs play, he is a smart defensive center, and has offensive game to boot.

Also, regarding Kovalchuk in Atlanta, those teams had horrendous defense, and OK goaltending..thats what happens when you don't spend to the cap max. The Rangers have a superb stable of defenseman who will be in their primes within the next few years. That doesnt concern me one iota, we also have Henrik Lundvist back there, the PERFECT goalie to play a run and gun system with....if you had the players to do it.
You're correct on your point about where the points come from. Doesn't matter. But what does is having a top center, because if you're going to have wingers who constantly think offense, they need to be able to play BOTH sides of the puck well, which top centers can do. The idea that Kovy scoring was less important than the center scoring was never my point.

Your point about Torts' system is well taken, but there's a reason Chris Drury can't play with Gaborik. He's not creative enough offensively, not fast enough, etc. Hence Christensen playing there. He's done great work. But if we did sign Kovy, are him and Gabby going to find that chemistry together? It's rare that you find a winger combo that works, regardless of the center. The center has the puck much more than any other offensive player (in most cases). Would it make sense to stack the top line?

Taking that into consideration, come playoff time, I'd trade the 10-15 points that Kovy might score for someone who can play effectively against the other team's top line, as well as contribute offensively in a meaningful way. In addition, I think it's important to have a center who can jump into different spots and onto different lines (although this team is flexible, with guys like Dubi and Drury).

BrandNewDream is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-08-2010, 05:21 PM
  #85
BrandNewDream
Registered User
 
BrandNewDream's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Bayonne, NJ
Country: Poland
Posts: 1,278
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by genericnyrusername View Post
Hope that puts the issue to rest.
It doesn't.

BrandNewDream is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-08-2010, 05:30 PM
  #86
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 28,987
vCash: 500
Having a center who is good at both ends of the ice and scores around 50-60 points while playing with a 90 point winger is the same as a defensively responsible center who scores 90 points playing with a 50-60 point winger.

NYR Viper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-09-2010, 12:10 AM
  #87
Inferno
HFB Partner
 
Inferno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 20,258
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyviper87 View Post
Having a center who is good at both ends of the ice and scores around 50-60 points while playing with a 90 point winger is the same as a defensively responsible center who scores 90 points playing with a 50-60 point winger.
agreed.

Inferno 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 11:07 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.