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

Bobby Sanguinetti

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-24-2010, 03:16 PM
  #76
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 offdacrossbar View Post
very good post. well said. players dont all develop at the same rate.

at one time, we were considered to have a "stocked" d prospect pool. all of a sudden, not so much. just goes to show how things can change quickly.

i like your premise that we need more offensive d men like sangs. i happen to concur.

unless there was something negative that the organization became aware of that were arent aware of, i still say keeping bobby was better than dunping him for a 2nd rounder.
As a general rule, if a player isn't taking it up a notch by his second AHL season, he's probably not going to be the player you hoped he'd be. There always exceptions, but it generally proves to be true. In the case of Sanguinetti, he was an offensive defenseman who didn't progress in the one area he really needed to. It's not like he was dominating the AHL.

It's a calculated risk. You either subscribe to the belief that Sanguinetti needs more time or you subscribe to the belief that he's peaked and that the value only goes down from here.

Bottom line is that Sanguinetti is going to have step up his effort and offensive contributions to become an NHL player. Because he doesn't have the defensive awareness or physical willingness to compensate in other areas.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 03:25 PM
  #77
offdacrossbar
with the 10th pick..
 
offdacrossbar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: da cuse
Country: Tuvalu
Posts: 8,388
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
As a general rule, if a player isn't taking it up a notch by his second AHL season, he's probably not going to be the player you hoped he'd be. There always exceptions, but it generally proves to be true. In the case of Sanguinetti, he was an offensive defenseman who didn't progress in the one area he really needed to. It's not like he was dominating the AHL.

It's a calculated risk. You either subscribe to the belief that Sanguinetti needs more time or you subscribe to the belief that he's peaked and that the value only goes down from here.

Bottom line is that Sanguinetti is going to have step up his effort and offensive contributions to become an NHL player. Because he doesn't have the defensive awareness or physical willingness to compensate in other areas.
fair enough edge.

it comes down to this. they didnt believe he would develop so they had to move him now or risk getting even less than a 2nd next year. if you believe this, then it makes sense.

so i ask you, are you of the opinion that the return for him was reasonable or would you have given him another camp and chance to make the club or return to hartford and make a bold statement?

offdacrossbar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 03:42 PM
  #78
Garfinkel1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: CT
Posts: 3,446
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by offdacrossbar View Post
fair enough edge.

it comes down to this. they didnt believe he would develop so they had to move him now or risk getting even less than a 2nd next year. if you believe this, then it makes sense.

so i ask you, are you of the opinion that the return for him was reasonable or would you have given him another camp and chance to make the club or return to hartford and make a bold statement?
Could it also be that Sangs asked for the trade behind closed doors? Knew he was getting passed up on the depth charts and every year and was sick of knowing he wouldn't get a chance to play in the NHL again for another season... and for many more on this team that is.

Garfinkel1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 03:48 PM
  #79
offdacrossbar
with the 10th pick..
 
offdacrossbar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: da cuse
Country: Tuvalu
Posts: 8,388
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garfinkel1 View Post
Could it also be that Sangs asked for the trade behind closed doors? Knew he was getting passed up on the depth charts and every year and was sick of knowing he wouldn't get a chance to play in the NHL again for another season... and for many more on this team that is.
yes.

i think thats a very real possibility.

if true, then they told him you are not in our plans.

i still wouldnt rule out the torts factor.

offdacrossbar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 03:54 PM
  #80
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,867
vCash: 500
Sanguinetti is working out with the Canes players. He discussed the trade

Quote:
"I don't know what goes on with the management and stuff," he said. "I just kind of stuck to my game. Obviously there are things you need to work on and develop. I think this summer I put on a little weight, and I'll try to carry it and be a little more physical.

"As far as what happened in New York, I'm just going to put that in the past and look forward to the future here."

Asked if he felt the Rangers gave up on him, Sanguinetti said, "They have their guys they want to go with and it kind of left me out, and there's where it ended, I guess."
Read more: http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/08/...#ixzz0xYP3a89z

Carolina has Corvo,Babchuk and McBain on the right side. They re-signed Carson who is another righty. Gleason and Pitkanen on the left side. One spot open on the left side. Harrison is the prime contender for that spot. Sanguinetti is a righty. Where is he playing on the right side?

That first statement regarding putting on weight and being a little more physical That's not his game. Now you know why the Rangers moved this player. Sanguinetti's skating and offensive ability should be the reasons for his success. If he was able to contribute offensively,his lack of physical prowess would not be a big deal.

When the Rangers sent Sanguinetti down after training camp last September,Dave Maloney and Joe Michelletti doubted Sanguinetti was going to be the player he was in the OHL. They didn't see that type of player from what they saw of him in pre-season.

RangerBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 04:18 PM
  #81
Jeds2StepOpus
Registered User
 
Jeds2StepOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 893
vCash: 500
Sanguinetti=Jessiman

With a little luck, that is.....

Jeds2StepOpus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 04:28 PM
  #82
offdacrossbar
with the 10th pick..
 
offdacrossbar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: da cuse
Country: Tuvalu
Posts: 8,388
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeds2StepOpus View Post
Sanguinetti=Jessiman

With a little luck, that is.....

huge specimin has played exactly zero nhl games.

sangs has already got him beat.

offdacrossbar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-24-2010, 05:13 PM
  #83
vipernsx
Flatus Expeller
 
vipernsx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 6,525
vCash: 500
Joe Corvo worked out well for you guys, BobbySan might too. He's got an offensive game, skate, pass, shoot.....in that order, but physical stuff, not so good and defense is even worse. He's struggled to learn to play defense in the AHL, but there's no doubt he's got offense at that level. Good luck.

vipernsx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 12:44 AM
  #84
007
Olympic nut
 
007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Mannahatta
Country: Lebanon
Posts: 3,476
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to 007 Send a message via MSN to 007
I'm a believer in Bobby Sangs, in that I think he'll be an NHL'er at some point. I look at what happened to Mike Mottau, who of course is a different sort of player, and I genuinely think that Sanguinetti's a better player than Mottau. It's all about effort with Sanguinetti, which isn't to say he's lazy, but he's someone who is going to have to work very hard to take advantage of his very real talent.

007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 05:12 AM
  #85
eco's bones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elmira NY
Country: United States
Posts: 12,674
vCash: 500
My read of last year was just the Rangers not having a good mix and not having an intelligent philosophy. They wanted everyone to be a puck moving two way guy. That was requirement No. 1. Some guys are more comfortable staying at home than others. Meanwhile the Rangers neglected the physical element almost completely thinking the constant pressure created by their uptempo strategies would keep other teams on their heels and they wouldn't need it. The Rangers had to readjust and Sanguinetti who might fit the uptempo strategy better than others just got tossed overboard.

eco's bones is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 09:57 AM
  #86
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 16,570
vCash: 500
I think some of the fault lies with Sanguinetti, but some of it falls with the organization as well. From the get go, we heard much about Sangs' poor play in his own end. I think the organization invested a lot of time and energy in trying to mold Sanguinetti into a two-way d-man, as opposed to an offensive minded one. He always had some issues upstairs, so I think it's fair to say a part of him felt as though he needed to impress the team with his defensive abilities in order to get noticed.

Part of me feels that if they had let him go the Mike Green route, he would have had more success. However, with the addition of Gilroy and McIlrath in addition to the existing stable of d-men, I guess the writing has been on the wall for a while.

I think it was too soon to give up on him, but I guess we'll see what happens in the future.

Trxjw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 10:59 AM
  #87
Jeds2StepOpus
Registered User
 
Jeds2StepOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 893
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by offdacrossbar View Post
huge specimin has played exactly zero nhl games.

sangs has already got him beat.

Yes, those five games where he stood around looking like a pedestal were very impressive. I never knew a human being could be so stationary and statuesque.

Let's see if Bobby could scrape up another two years the AHL, to match Hugh's five years.

Jeds2StepOpus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 11:35 AM
  #88
offdacrossbar
with the 10th pick..
 
offdacrossbar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: da cuse
Country: Tuvalu
Posts: 8,388
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeds2StepOpus View Post
Yes, those five games where he stood around looking like a pedestal were very impressive. I never knew a human being could be so stationary and statuesque.

Let's see if Bobby could scrape up another two years the AHL, to match Hugh's five years.
sometimes people post intelligent stuff i just disagree with.

then theres your stuff......

comparing jessiman and sangs

offdacrossbar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 11:41 AM
  #89
ChrisKreider20
Oh Hai Guise
 
ChrisKreider20's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,337
vCash: 500
i personally feel like he was given up on too quickly.
Every pack game I say, he looked like one of the most skilled players on the ice.
I think he has a shot to make top 4, plus he is right handed.
Also, when he was up with the big club, he never joined the rush, due to focusing on the defensive game first.
Honestly, Sangs is probably better than Gilroy, but thats something we'll find out for sure next year, especially if Sangs gets a chip on his shoulder.

ChrisKreider20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 12:06 PM
  #90
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 offdacrossbar View Post
fair enough edge.

it comes down to this. they didnt believe he would develop so they had to move him now or risk getting even less than a 2nd next year. if you believe this, then it makes sense.

so i ask you, are you of the opinion that the return for him was reasonable or would you have given him another camp and chance to make the club or return to hartford and make a bold statement?
Personally, I would have held onto him. Having said that, I don't think the trade unreasonable.

I think Sangs plays in the NHL, at some point. This team has done a pretty good job of drafting and developing prospects in the last 5 or 6 years and seperating the legit prospects from the suspects.

Sanguinetti at this point, is probably more of the latter. Time will tell what kind of player he becomes. But right now, there's probably too many holes in his game.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 02:15 PM
  #91
Jeds2StepOpus
Registered User
 
Jeds2StepOpus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 893
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by offdacrossbar View Post
sometimes people post intelligent stuff i just disagree with.

then theres your stuff......

comparing jessiman and sangs
Most intelligent people realize that a short five game stint in the NHL, where he was terrible and a very disappointing AHL career; hardly indicates he's had a better career than and is a better bet, than Hugh Jessiman.

Then there's....you.

Jeds2StepOpus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 02:35 PM
  #92
ThirdEye
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New York
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 11,666
vCash: 500
Not the biggest fan of Sanguinetti. If we're speaking of offense, I think Michael Del Zotto is miles ahead of him in that department, and will be even moreso in the future. Why am I comparing the two? Well, they were pretty much our only offensive d-man prospects.

Sanguinetti doesn't really have the "it" factor that makes him stand out. His offensive numbers in the AHL were pretty good, but I still think it will take a while for his game to translate to the NHL... if it ever does. The instincts just don't seem to be there. He will have to substitute that with a lot of NHL experience to be effective

It's really too bad about him being a Rangers fan and all, but there is really not much need for him here right now.

So yeah, I would say he has a good chance to be a #4 or #5 d-man one day. I'm not going to rule out the idea of him ever becoming more than that though. A lot of players make huge strides later in their career, but it's not really a common thing. And even then, it's hard to blame the management because at the time he was traded he was pretty low on the depth chart... and not for no reason

ThirdEye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 02:38 PM
  #93
Rabid Ranger
2 is better than one
 
Rabid Ranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Murica
Country: United States
Posts: 19,566
vCash: 500
My guess is Carolina will let Sanguinetti play "his game" and as a result he'll carve a niche out for himself. It's all about expectations. He'd never thrive under a Torts' led team, that's for sure.

Rabid Ranger is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 02:52 PM
  #94
haveandare
Registered User
 
haveandare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 6,363
vCash: 500
Sangs has some serious skill, he can skate and shoot with the best of them but he hasn't really put it all together yet. The question with him is whether or not the time has come and gone for him to assemble these skills and make a nice game out of them. I haven't seen enough of him to be able to say yes or no for sure, but a prospect who has raw skill is always better than one that doesn't.

Having said that, I don't lament his loss too much. MDZ has already done what I hoped Sangs might be able to do, which is put up good offensive numbers in the NHL and be a PP QB. Yes, it would have been nice to have another offensive d man, but like I said, Sangs is still largely a gamble, he's far from being an NHL ready offensive force. If McD turns out to be a successful, physical d man that can play well in the NHL I'll be really happy with the whole deal. In my opinion, we need that kind of player on our blue line a lot more than we need another, less reliable version of MDZ.

Bobby can still go either way. He's got a lot of skill. If Carolina figures out which way he'll grow most comfortably, maybe they can crack him. Perhaps he just needs some consistent NHL time - we pretty much gave him as much AHL time as can be useful for anyone. Its time to sink or swim for him. The odds are about even I'd say.

haveandare is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-25-2010, 02:56 PM
  #95
Evgeny Oliker
Registered User
 
Evgeny Oliker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,424
vCash: 500
...

Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
Sanguinetti is working out with the Canes players. He discussed the trade



Read more: http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/08/...#ixzz0xYP3a89z

Carolina has Corvo,Babchuk and McBain on the right side. They re-signed Carson who is another righty. Gleason and Pitkanen on the left side. One spot open on the left side. Harrison is the prime contender for that spot. Sanguinetti is a righty. Where is he playing on the right side?

That first statement regarding putting on weight and being a little more physical That's not his game. Now you know why the Rangers moved this player. Sanguinetti's skating and offensive ability should be the reasons for his success. If he was able to contribute offensively,his lack of physical prowess would not be a big deal.

When the Rangers sent Sanguinetti down after training camp last September,Dave Maloney and Joe Michelletti doubted Sanguinetti was going to be the player he was in the OHL. They didn't see that type of player from what they saw of him in pre-season.
Interesting read.

What I get from it is that he did not ask for a trade. This is also very telling:

"They have their guys they want to go with and it kind of left me out, and there's where it ended, I guess."

I think that in camp and pre-season MDZ and Gilroy clearly stood out a lot more than Sangs and so management felt they surpassed Sangs. That is a fair assumption. However, it does not mean that Sangs has no potential and is all of a sudden Hugh Jessiman.

While I agree that Sangs didn't do much in pre-season and in his 5 NHL games, that is a very short stint of games to go by. He has done well offensively in the AHL and again, some D take longer to adjust to the NHL. He seems very cautious in pre-season and in his 5 NHL games...but I did see glimpses of his potential. If Carolina tells him to just play his game and not worry about what happened in NY, he could become a solid top 4 guy. Corvo is a good example...a guy who the Kings kind of gave up on but he is a top 4 right now.

Evgeny Oliker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 10:29 AM
  #96
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 2forsbergaura1 View Post
Interesting read.

What I get from it is that he did not ask for a trade. This is also very telling:

"They have their guys they want to go with and it kind of left me out, and there's where it ended, I guess."

I think that in camp and pre-season MDZ and Gilroy clearly stood out a lot more than Sangs and so management felt they surpassed Sangs. That is a fair assumption. However, it does not mean that Sangs has no potential and is all of a sudden Hugh Jessiman.

While I agree that Sangs didn't do much in pre-season and in his 5 NHL games, that is a very short stint of games to go by. He has done well offensively in the AHL and again, some D take longer to adjust to the NHL. He seems very cautious in pre-season and in his 5 NHL games...but I did see glimpses of his potential. If Carolina tells him to just play his game and not worry about what happened in NY, he could become a solid top 4 guy. Corvo is a good example...a guy who the Kings kind of gave up on but he is a top 4 right now.
Sometimes it becomes a catch-22 for a team. Let's say Sanguinetti is a late bloomer - for him to show his stuff, he needs to play. But how does he play, if he can't beat out better players? Who do you move to take the risk? I don't really have a fool-proof answer.

Sanguinetti, at this point, is pretty much a one dimensional player. Unfortunately, thus far, his one dimension hasn't been good enough to make him stand out. It might be fair to say that even if he becomes an NHL player, he is not likely to reach that level with the Rangers.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 10:34 AM
  #97
Evgeny Oliker
Registered User
 
Evgeny Oliker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,424
vCash: 500
...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
Sometimes it becomes a catch-22 for a team. Let's say Sanguinetti is a late bloomer - for him to show his stuff, he needs to play. But how does he play, if he can't beat out better players? Who do you move to take the risk? I don't really have a fool-proof answer.

Sanguinetti, at this point, is pretty much a one dimensional player. Unfortunately, thus far, his one dimension hasn't been good enough to make him stand out. It might be fair to say that even if he becomes an NHL player, he is not likely to reach that level with the Rangers.
I agree with what you said.

My only issue is getting a 2nd in return. I would prefer that the Rangers went after a D prospect with some offensive upside...Carolina has a few of those who are lesser known but could have decent potential. Carolina wanted Sangs probably because he is close to NHL ready...so maybe they would be ok with giving up a D prospect that is not as NHL ready...which would be fine for Rangers who have a bunch of young D who are ready now.

Evgeny Oliker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 10:42 AM
  #98
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 2forsbergaura1 View Post
I agree with what you said.

My only issue is getting a 2nd in return. I would prefer that the Rangers went after a D prospect with some offensive upside...Carolina has a few of those who are lesser known but could have decent potential. Carolina wanted Sangs probably because he is close to NHL ready...so maybe they would be ok with giving up a D prospect that is not as NHL ready...which would be fine for Rangers who have a bunch of young D who are ready now.
I can't really agree or disagree. I probably would have held on to Sanguinetti, but I can't say the return is out of line either. If Sanguinetti continues to plateau, Carolina just threw away a pick. If he starts putting it together, the Rangers just gave up on a prospect.

We'll probably have a pretty good idea shortly.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 10:51 AM
  #99
mjolnir13
Registered User
 
mjolnir13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 85
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
Sometimes it becomes a catch-22 for a team. Let's say Sanguinetti is a late bloomer - for him to show his stuff, he needs to play. But how does he play, if he can't beat out better players? Who do you move to take the risk? I don't really have a fool-proof answer.
I wonder if it was a case of not beating out better players. I wondered a number of times why he wasn't out there instead of Redden and/or Roszival....could it have been worse?

mjolnir13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-26-2010, 11:00 AM
  #100
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 mjolnir13 View Post
I wonder if it was a case of not beating out better players. I wondered a number of times why he wasn't out there instead of Redden and/or Roszival....could it have been worse?
I don't know if I can blame them for that. This was a young defense anyway last season and playing three rookie defenseman and having five start the season 25 and under is a bit scary.

Sangs opportunity was to either beat out MDZ or Gilroy, two chances, and he didn't nail either.

As for Rozy and Redden, the big problems are there contracts. Rozy is overpriced, but a capable NHL defenseman. Redden is hanging by a threat, but if he were making $850,000, we probably wouldn't care.

Edge 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 05:05 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.