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

Should Gilroy get a QO?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-20-2011, 10:57 PM
  #101
Vitto79
Registered User
 
Vitto79's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sarnia
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,176
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike14 View Post
??? Assuming that NHL.com correctly lists the handness of each player, only 6 teams in the NHL have 3 R and 3 L D in their top 6 (and the Flames top 3 minute getters are all L anyway).

Flyers and Lightning go with 6 L (although if you go to 7 players Brewer makes it 6 and 1)

7 teams have a 5 L to 1 R split

As for Gilroy, no to a QO but if he wants to come back for under $1m I think he'd be fine as a #6/7
Does not shock me. Not sure why some think it has to be a lefty righty. Its not common for a righty to be on the left side but there are tons of righties that play the right side

did DZ and Vtank play together at all in CT?

Vitto79 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-20-2011, 11:01 PM
  #102
Rangers4Life74
Registered User
 
Rangers4Life74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 799
vCash: 500
5 years-30 million

get it done Sather








2 years @1.3 per is what i would do

Rangers4Life74 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-23-2011, 02:28 PM
  #103
94now
Registered User
 
94now's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Snow Belt, USA
Country: United Nations
Posts: 6,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vitto79 View Post
Does not shock me. Not sure why some think it has to be a lefty righty. Its not common for a righty to be on the left side but there are tons of righties that play the right side

did DZ and Vtank play together at all in CT?
Leftie play on left, rightie play on right side. That is pairing LH with RH.
Whatever other teams do with Ds matchup doesn't matter. Rangers do match RH with LH. They will act accordingly, IMO, when it comes to Gilroy, not just based on average NHL pay to 3rd pairman. Rangers value RH Ds because they match positions.

94now is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-23-2011, 03:12 PM
  #104
xxxZENxxx
Registered User
 
xxxZENxxx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 439
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rangers4Life74 View Post
5 years-30 million

get it done Sather








2 years @1.3 per is what i would do
I just don't understand why he even would get that much. I don't necessarily doubt that it will happen, but it just doesn't make sense. You pay a guy on his production as a player. He should get 750K max.

xxxZENxxx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-23-2011, 03:32 PM
  #105
94now
Registered User
 
94now's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Snow Belt, USA
Country: United Nations
Posts: 6,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by xxxZENxxx View Post
You pay a guy on his production as a player.
Wrong. Production is just one of many aspects. Production of defenseman is meaningless sometimes.

Rangers cannot offer him whatever one thinks appropriate. They can either qualify him at 2.1 million or not. If you think not, say no, we should let him walk, to become UFA. Read the thread topic. No one asked what IYO he is worth.
Just keep in mind, he could become Brian Rafalski somewhere else. Then what?


Last edited by 94now: 05-23-2011 at 03:41 PM.
94now is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-23-2011, 03:40 PM
  #106
Inferno
HFB Partner
 
Inferno's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Country: United States
Posts: 20,961
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 94now View Post
Leftie play on left, rightie play on right side. That is pairing LH with RH.
Whatever other teams do with Ds matchup doesn't matter. Rangers do match RH with LH. They will act accordingly, IMO, when it comes to Gilroy, not just based on average NHL pay to 3rd pairman. Rangers value RH Ds because they match positions.
rangers have played players on their offside before. as a defenseman its just flat out easier to play on the right side if you are right handed, but on the PP the defenseman usually switch sides so its easier to do 1 timers. defensively though, playing your strong side is usually advisable, but not a necessity.

Inferno is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-23-2011, 04:15 PM
  #107
94now
Registered User
 
94now's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Snow Belt, USA
Country: United Nations
Posts: 6,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inferno272 View Post
rangers have played players on their offside before. as a defenseman its just flat out easier to play on the right side if you are right handed, but on the PP the defenseman usually switch sides so its easier to do 1 timers. defensively though, playing your strong side is usually advisable, but not a necessity.
Good summary. The point was Gilroy being RH shot has a value for Rangers who happen by no accident to have 50/50 split and play all thier Ds on strong side. It is not the necessity, yet it is what Rangers do and will continue, I belive, up until Sullivan is around.

94now is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-23-2011, 06:12 PM
  #108
wolfgaze
Interesting Cat
 
wolfgaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,364
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 94now View Post
Good summary. The point was Gilroy being RH shot has a value for Rangers who happen by no accident to have 50/50 split and play all thier Ds on strong side. It is not the necessity, yet it is what Rangers do and will continue, I belive, up until Sullivan is around.
That was purely by circumstance.... Rangers played Eminger on the left side for 3 months up until the point that Rozsival was traded in early January. I think he did fine in that role.

wolfgaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-23-2011, 10:05 PM
  #109
94now
Registered User
 
94now's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Snow Belt, USA
Country: United Nations
Posts: 6,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfgaze View Post
That was purely by circumstance.... Rangers played Eminger on the left side for 3 months up until the point that Rozsival was traded in early January. I think he did fine in that role.
Eminger would play both sides, although, if I recall correctly, people wanted him off the team here during that 3 month period. Play and play well are different outcomes.

Look, NHL is different than pee-wee team I used to coach, they apparently have defensemen able to play off side with no problem. Yet it must be something new, if I just missed it. As such it may be good to go to basics, i.e. play strong side. That is what Rangers do. It is not incidental.

94now is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2011, 12:39 AM
  #110
Boom Boom Geoffrion*
CarciLOL
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NYC
Country: Greece
Posts: 7,552
vCash: 500
I don't think some of you guys realize what a bad defensemen is. I'm not a stat-freak, but +5 over the last 2 seasons (127 games) isn't as awful as some of you guys make him out to be. You over exaggerate things just a tad bit, mainly because of his lack of physical play. I've seen bigger, stronger bodies play weaker in dirty areas of the ice.

He's only going to improve. He knows the team, knows the coaching staff, knows the system, and is still being groomed as an NHL dmen. There are no holes in his effort. He didn't get to spend a year in the A. You can't compare playing up in beantown and being a professional hockey player. There is a learning curve, and that can take a few years. We already invested 2 years coaching him. Let's see what he can do with it.

His real value will come offensively. Marc Staal scored 5 goals his first two season's in the league. With about, 50 more games played. It wasn't until his third full season he actually started producing something offensively, by nearly doubling his prior years point total.

Sure, a couple hundred K over a veteran replacement is a bit of a risk, but I feel it's well worth the reward. It's not foolish to think Gilroy's best days are ahead of him. I'd give him the same exact contract he signed, 2 years 3.2M...

Boom Boom Geoffrion* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2011, 12:46 AM
  #111
JeffMangum
Man Girardi
 
JeffMangum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Listening to music
Country: United States
Posts: 59,791
vCash: 50
Wade Redden was a + as a third pairing defenseman, too. You're not going to tell me he's a good defenseman, are you?

Gilroy had a good two weeks mid-season. Other than that, he was the team's worst player in the majority of the games he played. He's weak, soft, and can't make up for it with his offensive game. I always hear about his "talent", but he has 26 points in 127 games. It doesn't make up for the constant defensive gaffes and turnovers.

__________________
Soon.
JeffMangum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2011, 01:00 AM
  #112
Boom Boom Geoffrion*
CarciLOL
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NYC
Country: Greece
Posts: 7,552
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Mastrosimone View Post
Wade Redden was a + as a third pairing defenseman, too. You're not going to tell me he's a good defenseman, are you?
He sure as hell wasn't a bad dmen, steven. Redden's defensive play was copacetic. He wasn't demoted to Hartford because he was a liability defensively.

Del Zotto, is a classic example of a defensive liability. Constantly putting himself completely out of position. Gilroy's a hell of a lot steadier on the back end to be considered a liability.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven Mastrosimone View Post
Gilroy had a good two weeks mid-season. Other than that, he was the team's worst player in the majority of the games he played. He's weak, soft, and can't make up for it with his offensive game. I always hear about his "talent", but he has 26 points in 127 games. It doesn't make up for the constant defensive gaffes and turnovers.
And two good weeks mid-season? There were some open Gilroy-Haters who snuck in a few praises during the end of the season, as well as his play in the playoffs. You must have too busy posting instead of watching the actual games, Steven.

You're bias and it's quite evident. I'm not suggesting he's anything exceptional. Just, serviceable, *with upside. And if you think 120'ish games is enough time for a dmen to come into his own, then I think it is safe to say your opinion on anything Gilroy-related should just be kept to yourself.


Last edited by nyr2k2: 05-24-2011 at 10:02 AM.
Boom Boom Geoffrion* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2011, 01:08 AM
  #113
BlueshirtBlitz
Rich Nash
 
BlueshirtBlitz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New York
Posts: 19,521
vCash: 500
The only person biased here is you, apparently, if you can't admit that Gilroy was prone to ridiculous defensive gaffes.

I don't see this upside you talk about. At all. He was at best slightly better than Del Zotto, and just as bad most of the time. He DID have a span of a few games where he flashed his upside- then the rest of us except you ignored that because he went back to being the same old incompetent defense-man.

I also think his play in the playoffs is being vastly overrated because he managed to score a goal.

BlueshirtBlitz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2011, 01:09 AM
  #114
JeffMangum
Man Girardi
 
JeffMangum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Listening to music
Country: United States
Posts: 59,791
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boom Boom Geoffrion View Post
He sure as hell wasn't a bad dmen, steven. Redden's defensive play was copacetic. He wasn't demoted to Hartford because he was a liability defensively.

Del Zotto, is a classic example of a defensive liability. Constantly putting himself completely out of position. Gilroy's a hell of a lot steadier on the back end to be considered a liability.
He certainly wasn't good, either. And, honestly, he didn't have a spot in this Ranger lineup, 6.5m cap hit or not. He's a 6-7 defenseman at best.

Really? "Hell of a lot better"? I remember Del Zotto outplaying Gilroy in February, but he was getting reamed because his deficiencies are much more noticeable than Gilroy's.

Quote:
Another classic quote that yet again highlights your pubescent eye for the game. And two good weeks mid-season? There were some open Gilroy-Haters who snuck in a few praises during the end of the season, as well as his play in the playoffs. You must have too busy posting instead of watching the actual games, Steven.
He had an okay playoffs, but I'm not going to sing his praises on a couple of good reads. He had his awful moments then, too. Just watch him try and defend Laich on Chimera's 1st goal of the series. It was awful.

Also, you can question my opinion, but please, don't question whether I watch the games or not. I watch a lot of games more than once so I can really pay attention to detail, as I'm too nervous to do such during a live broadcast.

Quote:
Your bias and it's quite evident. I'm not suggesting he's anything exceptional. Just, serviceable, *with upside. And if you think 120'ish games is enough time for a dmen to come into his own, then I think it is safe to say your opinion on anything Gilroy-related should just be kept to yourself.
I'm not biased, I just think Gilroy is a bad hockey player. That doesn't make me biased. At best, he's a #5 dman, and his best rarely shows. Most of the time, he's a borderline NHLer. That's not worth 1.5m. That's more than most 6/7 dmen make.

And tell me once where I said that I thought 126 games was enough time for him to come into his own? I said 26 points in that timeframe isn't enough to make up for his defensive gaffes.

EDIT: Speaking of bias, you seem to be the only one here who sees any positive upside with Gilroy.

JeffMangum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2011, 01:21 AM
  #115
t3hg00se
Registered User
 
t3hg00se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,398
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to t3hg00se
If Gilroy is back next season, our off-season was not a success.

t3hg00se is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2011, 01:31 AM
  #116
Boom Boom Geoffrion*
CarciLOL
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NYC
Country: Greece
Posts: 7,552
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueshirtBlitz View Post
The only person biased here is you, apparently, if you can't admit that Gilroy was prone to ridiculous defensive gaffes.
How efficient is the average third-pairing NHL dmen when it comes down to defensive-gaffes? And I never suggested Gilroy isn't prone to mistakes. As far as I'm concerned, every player is. Especially 2nd year, 3rd pairing dmen.

What I argued though, was the rate at which he suffers these defensive setbacks. I argued the word 'constant', since that defines someone a lot more unstable on the blue-line than Gilroy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueshirtBlitz View Post
I don't see this upside you talk about. At all. He was at best slightly better than Del Zotto, and just as bad most of the time. He DID have a span of a few games where he flashed his upside- then the rest of us except you ignored that because he went back to being the same old incompetent defense-man.
So you don't see any upside. At all. But he DID have a flash it over a span of a few games.

You're not making any sense.

At all.

There's a reason why MDZ was a -20 last season. And a -5 this season. And there's a reason why Gilroy's a +5 in his career, while MDZ is a -25. One has absolutely no clue how to defend, while the other does.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueshirtBlitz View Post
I also think his play in the playoffs is being vastly overrated because he managed to score a goal.
He's the only one who managed to score a goal that game, but that doesn't matter. What matters to me is how he competed in all three zones of the ice, and if you still refuse to pay tribute to his solid playoff performance, then you're just another one of those guys on this forum.


Last edited by Boom Boom Geoffrion*: 05-24-2011 at 02:09 AM.
Boom Boom Geoffrion* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2011, 02:52 AM
  #117
mike14
Registered User
 
mike14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Melbourne
Country: Australia
Posts: 4,670
vCash: 500
My biggest concern with bringing Gilroy back (assuming he takes a lower offer) is that he needs a reasonably solid defensive defenceman to be his partner and that means that you can't play MDZ on the bottom pairing. The only way to do it would be to split up McD and Sauer and let either Gilroy or MDZ play top 4 minutes. Not the best situation IMO

mike14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2011, 09:39 AM
  #118
Fitzy
All Is Well
 
Fitzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 20,009
vCash: 500
Goodness.

Matty Gilroy would be in the AHL on just about any other team in the league. Its unfortunate that the experiment with him has lasted this long, and certainly a QO at a ludicrous 2.1 should not be considered.

I'd bring Eminger for the same price 10x out of 10 over Gilroy.

__________________
"I have something better than proof: I have anecdotal evidence."
Fitzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2011, 09:47 AM
  #119
Blue Line Monster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 249
vCash: 500
Just let Gilroy go. Torts doesn't trust him at all.

He had the 2nd lowest even strength time on ice per game out of all defenseman that played 50 or more games.

He had the 4th easiest quality of competition faced out of all defenseman with 50 or more games.

He was 2nd out of all defenseman in offensive zone faceoff start %. Meaning he's very rarely on the ice for a defensive zone faceoff.

Basically, he's one of the most sheltered regular dmen in the NHL. And he provides nothing else at all..Dump him.

Blue Line Monster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2011, 10:06 AM
  #120
allstar3970
Registered User
 
allstar3970's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,227
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Line Monster View Post
Just let Gilroy go. Torts doesn't trust him at all.

He had the 2nd lowest even strength time on ice per game out of all defenseman that played 50 or more games.

He had the 4th easiest quality of competition faced out of all defenseman with 50 or more games.

He was 2nd out of all defenseman in offensive zone faceoff start %. Meaning he's very rarely on the ice for a defensive zone faceoff.

Basically, he's one of the most sheltered regular dmen in the NHL. And he provides nothing else at all..Dump him.
These are rankings for the entire NHL? Wow, I knew he was sheltered but didn't even know it was that bad. But some will keep saying "He's a plus player!!"

allstar3970 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2011, 10:16 AM
  #121
94now
Registered User
 
94now's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Snow Belt, USA
Country: United Nations
Posts: 6,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike14 View Post
My biggest concern with bringing Gilroy back (assuming he takes a lower offer) is that he needs a reasonably solid defensive defenceman to be his partner and that means that you can't play MDZ on the bottom pairing. The only way to do it would be to split up McD and Sauer and let either Gilroy or MDZ play top 4 minutes. Not the best situation IMO
Sauer and McD must be separated anyway. Both are stay-at-home Ds.

MDZ-Sauer
McD-Gilroy/ Eminger/ UFA

If Staal remains the same in terms of offense Staal-Girardi should be questioned. You can sign as many Richards you want, but without PMDs offence will remain stagnant. Gilroy is PMD in making until proven otherwise.

94now is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2011, 10:18 AM
  #122
Blue Line Monster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 249
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by allstar3970 View Post
These are rankings for the entire NHL? Wow, I knew he was sheltered but didn't even know it was that bad. But some will keep saying "He's a plus player!!"
Yeah, this is out of all defenseman in the NHL to play 50 or more games. it was around 180 players, and he's one of the worst(or most sheltered) in every category I checked.

Why keep a player like that around? He doesn't add anything else, and just drives up other defenseman's ice time. It seems like Torts doesn't even feel he's serviceable.

Blue Line Monster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2011, 10:21 AM
  #123
94now
Registered User
 
94now's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Snow Belt, USA
Country: United Nations
Posts: 6,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Line Monster View Post
Just let Gilroy go. Torts doesn't trust him at all.

He had the 2nd lowest even strength time on ice per game out of all defenseman that played 50 or more games.

He had the 4th easiest quality of competition faced out of all defenseman with 50 or more games.

He was 2nd out of all defenseman in offensive zone faceoff start %. Meaning he's very rarely on the ice for a defensive zone faceoff.

Basically, he's one of the most sheltered regular dmen in the NHL. And he provides nothing else at all..Dump him.
That only prove Gilroy is not good as a ntasy pick. Dump him from your fantasy team.

94now is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2011, 10:26 AM
  #124
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 13,474
vCash: 500
I'm all for bringing him back, but not at $2.1m. Doing so, in regards to the Cap, would be irresponsible.

Don't get me wrong. I liked what I saw from him towards the end of the year and into the playoffs and am more than curious to see what he brings this year. I just don't think he's earned a $2.1m contract.

Tawnos is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2011, 10:30 AM
  #125
Blue Line Monster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 249
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 94now View Post
That only prove Gilroy is not good as a ntasy pick. Dump him from your fantasy team.
It doesn't prove that he's sheltered and Torts doesn't trust him in most situations, that he gets the 2nd lowest ice time of all regular defenseman in the NHL? Or that he's 2nd in percentage of shifts started in the offensive zone? Or is the latter because he's such a good offensive dman.

Blue Line Monster 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 10:04 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.