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

Rangers' Rebuild Lowers Expectations

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-04-2005, 10:57 PM
  #1
Kovy274Hart
Registered User
 
Kovy274Hart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Shaolin
Country: United States
Posts: 1,498
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Kovy274Hart
Rangers' Rebuild Lowers Expectations

http://www.nysportsday.com/news/comb...128467892.html

Kovy274Hart is offline  
Old
10-05-2005, 09:27 AM
  #2
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,116
vCash: 500
Not that I want to start another war, but articles like this utterly irk me. Or, to be more presice, it's the wording.

"For years, Ranger fans have wanted to see the team rebuild. With mostly overpaid vets underperforming the past seven seasons to miss the playoffs, there was an outcry for change.

At the '04 trade deadline, GM Glen Sather finally awoke, giving the public what they wanted. "


Given the fans what they wanted? Change is far different that a rebuild that the title of the article alludes to. I'm sorry but when your top 3 lines look like this

Rucinsky-Nylander-Jagr
Straka-Rucchin-Hossa
Niemo-Lundmark-Ward

and 4 out of your top 6 defensemen are comprised of Kasperitis, Poti, Malik & Rozsival,
That does NOT constitute a rebuild. Yes, it is a change. But it is far from a rebuilding team. A rebuilding team is a young (note: not just younger) team that has yutes playing various important roles. All of our young important roles are being played in Hartford. The above is not a young team, but a veteran-laden team. This team is not to be judged by simply playing hard and effort, but by the amount of wins that they put on the board. This is not a team that has the luxury of being judged by what a rebuilding team is to be judged by.

"Tom Renney has a tough assignment ahead. Get maximum results from his vets and hope for some younger players to come through

Come through what? How much can they come through on the 4th line?

Sorry for the rant, but certain things just irk me.

True Blue is offline  
Old
10-05-2005, 11:11 AM
  #3
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
This team...

is actually better than past teams Sather has been involved as a Ranger. A bit more firepower up front with Nylander, Straka and Jagr, and the same crap on the blueline, save Leetch. Goaltending looks a bit more solid than in the past, but that's only if Lundqvist can provide quality starts. So, my expectations haven't been lowered. Sather's shooting for the playoffs and should be judged as such. Funny tidbit in the post today...his teams haven't had a winning record since 91-92...un-freaking-believable.

Fletch is offline  
Old
10-05-2005, 11:13 AM
  #4
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch
So, my expectations haven't been lowered. Sather's shooting for the playoffs and should be judged as such. Funny tidbit in the post today...his teams haven't had a winning record since 91-92...un-freaking-believable.
Agreed on expectations. And the unbelievable part. Unreal to think just how long it has been since we had a team to be proud of.

True Blue is offline  
Old
10-05-2005, 11:14 AM
  #5
tinyzombies
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Calif via Montreal
Posts: 11,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
Not that I want to start another war, but articles like this utterly irk me. Or, to be more presice, it's the wording.

"For years, Ranger fans have wanted to see the team rebuild. With mostly overpaid vets underperforming the past seven seasons to miss the playoffs, there was an outcry for change.

At the '04 trade deadline, GM Glen Sather finally awoke, giving the public what they wanted. "


Given the fans what they wanted? Change is far different that a rebuild that the title of the article alludes to. I'm sorry but when your top 3 lines look like this

Rucinsky-Nylander-Jagr
Straka-Rucchin-Hossa
Niemo-Lundmark-Ward

and 4 out of your top 6 defensemen are comprised of Kasperitis, Poti, Malik & Rozsival,
That does NOT constitute a rebuild. Yes, it is a change. But it is far from a rebuilding team. A rebuilding team is a young (note: not just younger) team that has yutes playing various important roles. All of our young important roles are being played in Hartford. The above is not a young team, but a veteran-laden team. This team is not to be judged by simply playing hard and effort, but by the amount of wins that they put on the board. This is not a team that has the luxury of being judged by what a rebuilding team is to be judged by.

"Tom Renney has a tough assignment ahead. Get maximum results from his vets and hope for some younger players to come through

Come through what? How much can they come through on the 4th line?

Sorry for the rant, but certain things just irk me.
Yeah, but rebuilding doesn't mean you throw the rookies to the wolves. That's how you can ruin a kid. They still have to earn the spot.

Some of Sather's moves have been questionable (like, why didn't he get something in return for Holik when he had the chance?). But he did fairly well to chop the budget from $80 quadrillion to a large group of prospects. Not that that excuses any of his past performance.

tinyzombies is offline  
Old
10-05-2005, 11:20 AM
  #6
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by raketheleaves
Yeah, but rebuilding doesn't mean you throw the rookies to the wolves. That's how you can ruin a kid. They still have to earn the spot.
Off course they have to earn their spots. But why are we afraid to throw our 23-24 year old prospects to the big, bad wolves of the NHL? They are of the age to play. And speakng of earning spots, I can think of various players in Hartford (we still need to see where Prucha lands after Neimo comes off the IR) that have shown more in preseason than the ones that will be starting tonight.

True Blue is offline  
Old
10-05-2005, 12:23 PM
  #7
DarthSather99
Registered User
 
DarthSather99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,262
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
Not that I want to start another war, but articles like this utterly irk me. Or, to be more presice, it's the wording.

"For years, Ranger fans have wanted to see the team rebuild. With mostly overpaid vets underperforming the past seven seasons to miss the playoffs, there was an outcry for change.

At the '04 trade deadline, GM Glen Sather finally awoke, giving the public what they wanted. "


Given the fans what they wanted? Change is far different that a rebuild that the title of the article alludes to. I'm sorry but when your top 3 lines look like this

Rucinsky-Nylander-Jagr
Straka-Rucchin-Hossa
Niemo-Lundmark-Ward

and 4 out of your top 6 defensemen are comprised of Kasperitis, Poti, Malik & Rozsival,
That does NOT constitute a rebuild. Yes, it is a change. But it is far from a rebuilding team. A rebuilding team is a young (note: not just younger) team that has yutes playing various important roles. All of our young important roles are being played in Hartford. The above is not a young team, but a veteran-laden team. This team is not to be judged by simply playing hard and effort, but by the amount of wins that they put on the board. This is not a team that has the luxury of being judged by what a rebuilding team is to be judged by.

"Tom Renney has a tough assignment ahead. Get maximum results from his vets and hope for some younger players to come through

Come through what? How much can they come through on the 4th line?

Sorry for the rant, but certain things just irk me.
This is how I would explain it to you.

They don't have the prospects "yet" to play on the top lines in the NHL. The veterans signed are on short term deals and are not BIG name players with BIG salary that will demand that you play them on the top two lines. They can slide back if a prospect breaks though and dominates to the point where he is capable of playing against the best in the NHL. These veterans will not improve the Rangers enough to where they'd make us a much better team and give us a much worse draft pick. The veterans they have are all hard workers, the key ingredient management is trying to instill in the younger players. You can't just throw 19-21 year old players into the NHL because you say you are rebuilding. Developing those players is part of rebuilding and that means spending time in the minors and adjusting to the pro game at a slower pace.

On another front, you don't think a player like Ruczinsky, Jagr, Straka, Nylander and Rucchin will make great trade bait at the trade dealine, giving us more draft picks and prospects. They are the type of players that playoff teams look for

Once the Rangers have players that show they can handle the play of the top two lines they will make space available for them. In future years I expect the rangers to get higher picks, giving them more talented players that will make the transition to the NHL faster. Our current crop of prospects were drafted during the "quest for the playoffs" era and will need longer development. In 2-3 years you'll see drafted players playing on the top 2 lines.

Remember just because you are rebuilding doesn't mean you only give roster spots to players 18-24 regardless of how they showed they belong or not. Simply, the Rangers do not have the prospects that are capapble of going against the best of the NHL. They are better served being tutored in the AHL, it is more forgiving of errors that young players make and lets them play more aggressive instead of passive(being afraid of making a mistake).

I have been calling for a rebuild for years and have been watching every move the rangers make. I believe they are doing this "rebuild" correctly. Simply, look at Hartford's roster. It is stacked with good players in the 20-24 age range. Not too long ago it was filled with 25-28 year old career AHLers.

DarthSather99 is offline  
Old
10-05-2005, 12:42 PM
  #8
eco's bones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elmira NY
Country: United States
Posts: 12,780
vCash: 500
That is a reasonable assessment of the situation Darth. One thing though if we're in contention (say 9th or 10th) for a playoff spot does Slats still trade those vets for prospects or does he trade some prospects for more vets? And that answer we won't know unless and until it happens. But I'd guess that more vets would come in and in that case who he trades and how it all works out is how we'll assess the season.

eco's bones is offline  
Old
10-05-2005, 12:43 PM
  #9
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 30,027
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by eco's bones
That is a reasonable assessment of the situation Darth. One thing though if we're in contention (say 9th or 10th) for a playoff spot does Slats still trade those vets for prospects or does he trade some prospects for more vets? And that answer we won't know unless and until it happens. But I'd guess that more vets would come in and in that case who he trades and how it all works out is how we'll assess the season.

Hanging around 9 or 10 is the worst thing that can happen to this team.

SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline  
Old
10-05-2005, 12:51 PM
  #10
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
If this team...

is going to hang around #9 or #10, it would've been better-served not signing either Rucinksy or Straka and have Prucha playing a top six forward. And perhaps having Rucchin or Nylander wasn't necessary especially if the presumption is he needs little seasoning in Hartford, and when that is over, they're still here and hopefully Betts is playing well. On defense, if the objective was short contract, the team should've offered one to Leetch, not Malik, and perhaps Kondratiev would've been better-served in Rozsival's spot, assuming Strudwick's also in the lineup. Just some thoughts. I understand where this team is with its 'prospects'. I don't disagree, although after seeing Prucha (who I like better than Hossa - but only saw Hossa in one game, admittedly) and Immonen, thought they're NHL-ready, and at least one other defenseman aside from Tyutin to be ready too. Who knows though. It's early and we don't have enough information. I just still think the real goal is playoffs, and if kids make it, great (and they'd have to excel to make it) and if not, then a year in HFD won't kill them (although it could push others down the line, and possibly to Charlotte).

Fletch is offline  
Old
10-05-2005, 12:54 PM
  #11
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway
Hanging around 9 or 10 is the worst thing that can happen to this team.
If that is the case, then there will be no deadline deals. Don't get me wrong, off course I will root for the Rangers to win (you cannot just root for you team to get their doors blown off). I hope to see hard work and accountability, two things that have been unheard of throughout Sather's entire era here.
I hope for a hard fought game. However, if the stars align and this team is within sniffing distance of the 8th spot, then the vets are going nowhere.

True Blue is offline  
Old
10-05-2005, 01:01 PM
  #12
DarthSather99
Registered User
 
DarthSather99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,262
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eco's bones
That is a reasonable assessment of the situation Darth. One thing though if we're in contention (say 9th or 10th) for a playoff spot does Slats still trade those vets for prospects or does he trade some prospects for more vets? And that answer we won't know unless and until it happens. But I'd guess that more vets would come in and in that case who he trades and how it all works out is how we'll assess the season.

From what Rangers management has been saying, they are building a core of youngersters in order to build a team that can win a Stanley Cup. Playoffs would be nice but they are not going to throw away prospects for a short team gain. We can not reasonably win the Stanley Cup this year. I believe we'd stand pat and see what happens rather than trade prospects away.

DarthSather99 is offline  
Old
10-05-2005, 01:06 PM
  #13
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
Darth..

it sounds that way...come March whenever, if the Rangers had been flirting with the #8 spot, including being a few points off, and the right winger and/or defenseman come available (and at that point, Sather will know a lot more about the prospects, i.e., are there too many defensemen, etc.) - I think it would be tough for Sather to not pull the plug. Jagr's not hanging around and being close to not having a shot. His buddies and countrymen aren't surrounding him because this team has no shot this year. We'll see if that bridge is even crossed. Tonight will show how ready this team is. As bad as they are, they somehow competed with the Devils, and Isles (save the first period of game 1) - and the Boston game in New York. That's 4 2/3 of 6 games. But that was preseason, a time when Lundmark once scored 6 goals.

Fletch is offline  
Old
10-05-2005, 01:29 PM
  #14
eco's bones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elmira NY
Country: United States
Posts: 12,780
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway
Hanging around 9 or 10 is the worst thing that can happen to this team.
And I think you might be right.

eco's bones is offline  
Old
10-05-2005, 01:40 PM
  #15
eco's bones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elmira NY
Country: United States
Posts: 12,780
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarthSather99
From what Rangers management has been saying, they are building a core of youngersters in order to build a team that can win a Stanley Cup. Playoffs would be nice but they are not going to throw away prospects for a short team gain. We can not reasonably win the Stanley Cup this year. I believe we'd stand pat and see what happens rather than trade prospects away.
Well that's why I said depends on who. Because we do have a plethora of legitmate prospects (yes mostly 3rd and 4th liners and 4-7 D) at all kinds of stages in their development. Depending again on who --losing some of them is not necessarily bad although then you wouldn't be going into the 06 with the extra picks from trading vets and maybe not making the kind of move up we saw when they drafted Stall and Korpikoski in the last 2 drafts. I think the correct judgement for the team to make and this is just my opinion would be not to make any such trades for vets unless we are already sitting in a playoff position and then use very careful judgement on who they are and what we give up for them. I don't see that scenario as happening though. I think the 9th-10th spot scenario is much more likely.

eco's bones is offline  
Closed Thread

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 01:17 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.