HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Notices

Artem Anisimov

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-01-2012, 05:26 PM
  #126
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,193
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NvincentYvalentineR View Post
I don't get the point of this post. Your saying Anisimov and Thomas are worth more more then all those other combo's? So what? Thomas isn't going anywhere despite your un real dislike for the kid and obsession with trading him.
Thomas is EXPENDABLE. It has nothing to do with hate. He's not anywhere near our beat prospect. He has value. You have to give to get. Its plain and simple.

Anisimov isn't bring back elite level talent. These are examples of players that would be equal value.

SupersonicMonkey* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 05:39 PM
  #127
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
 
NYR Sting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfgaze View Post
I just want a season where AA & Dubinsky don't endure these long scoring droughts. Seems to effect them every season....
You can't bunch them together like that, it won't provide for objective analysis. If Anisimov was playing in the role he's ideal for, a scoring drought really wouldn't be much of an issue. Anisimov and Dubinsky are supposed to fill different roles for this team. One of the reasons the team can't do with Artie what is best for him is because of Dubinsky's disappointing play.

Dubinsky was supposed to be part of the solution to the team's LW problems. Anisimov was never that. All these other problems have been created because of how poorly Dubinsky has played this season.

Heading into this season, this team was still without a top line LW, but anticipated having a second line LW. What we've found is that the team has neither. I adore Carl Hagelin, but I'd much rather see him on the third line, with Anisimov, as 2/3s of a speedy, responsible shutdown line.

XXXX-Richards/Stepan-Gaborik
XXXX-Richards/Stepan-Callahan
Hagelin-Anisimov-Fedotenko
Rupp-Boyle-Prust

I think these players, and this lineup, is where the team needs to go. You can debate Fedotenko as the 3rd line RW, and I'd love to see Boyle replaced by a more useful 4th line center, but those are nitpicks. Anisimov is part of the solution, if he's used the right way. It's Dubinsky that needs to go. He's being paid like a second line winger, he's not playing like one. Consistency is a cornerstone of success. Dubinsky is a model of inconsistency. How long does he get to prove otherwise? This isn't his first rodeo.

One of those open LW slots will hopefully be Kreider's. Down the line, perhaps one will be Fasth's. But that one top line LW hole is going to be a problem for a while. I still hope the solution involves the movement of Dubinsky, as part of a package. We'll see.

NYR Sting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 05:48 PM
  #128
Fitzy
All Is Well
 
Fitzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 19,889
vCash: 50
Exactly. Our center is deep. Even if AA isn't producing much offensively he and Boyle can focus more on the defensive part of the game, when we have two guys like Richards and Stepan manning the top lines.

Dubinsky, on the other hand was our one sure thing as far as offense at LW this year. Wolski has become a new Enver Lisin, and Fedotenko and Rupp fill similar roles as Anisimov and Boyle; good defensive bottom 6 hockey. Neither should be relied upon on the top 2 lines.

Dubinsky has been playing like a 3rd line grinder in a season where he had every chance to improve. He has seen himself heavily outproduced by an undersized speedy gunner rookie straight out of college.

__________________
"I have something better than proof: I have anecdotal evidence."
Fitzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 06:04 PM
  #129
smoneil
Registered User
 
smoneil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 2,291
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Sting View Post
You can't bunch them together like that, it won't provide for objective analysis. If Anisimov was playing in the role he's ideal for, a scoring drought really wouldn't be much of an issue. Anisimov and Dubinsky are supposed to fill different roles for this team. One of the reasons the team can't do with Artie what is best for him is because of Dubinsky's disappointing play.

Dubinsky was supposed to be part of the solution to the team's LW problems. Anisimov was never that. All these other problems have been created because of how poorly Dubinsky has played this season.

Heading into this season, this team was still without a top line LW, but anticipated having a second line LW. What we've found is that the team has neither. I adore Carl Hagelin, but I'd much rather see him on the third line, with Anisimov, as 2/3s of a speedy, responsible shutdown line.

XXXX-Richards/Stepan-Gaborik
XXXX-Richards/Stepan-Callahan
Hagelin-Anisimov-Fedotenko
Rupp-Boyle-Prust

I think these players, and this lineup, is where the team needs to go. You can debate Fedotenko as the 3rd line RW, and I'd love to see Boyle replaced by a more useful 4th line center, but those are nitpicks. Anisimov is part of the solution, if he's used the right way. It's Dubinsky that needs to go. He's being paid like a second line winger, he's not playing like one. Consistency is a cornerstone of success. Dubinsky is a model of inconsistency. How long does he get to prove otherwise? This isn't his first rodeo.

One of those open LW slots will hopefully be Kreider's. Down the line, perhaps one will be Fasth's. But that one top line LW hole is going to be a problem for a while. I still hope the solution involves the movement of Dubinsky, as part of a package. We'll see.
All due respect, but this entire post is a complete load of crap. Anisimov was expected to be our 2nd line center coming into this season. The ONLY difference between his disappointing season and Dubinsky's is that the other players on the team who play AA's position rose to the challenge. Your bias against Dubinsky is starting to get almost comical.

smoneil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 06:18 PM
  #130
Noonan25
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Country:
Posts: 1,334
vCash: 500
Now do you think Dubinsky poor play like u say is solely on goals? Because he does everything else and never plays lazy

Noonan25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 06:34 PM
  #131
wolfgaze
Interesting Cat
 
wolfgaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,050
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Sting View Post
You can't bunch them together like that, it won't provide for objective analysis. If Anisimov was playing in the role he's ideal for, a scoring drought really wouldn't be much of an issue. Anisimov and Dubinsky are supposed to fill different roles for this team. One of the reasons the team can't do with Artie what is best for him is because of Dubinsky's disappointing play.

Dubinsky was supposed to be part of the solution to the team's LW problems. Anisimov was never that. All these other problems have been created because of how poorly Dubinsky has played this season.
.
Sting, the consistency issues for both players go beyond this season. They do not produce consistently offensively throughout the course of a 82 game season. If someone could plot their production on a line chart throughout the course of an 82 game season, you would see significant drop-offs for both players. I think Dubinsky has had a handful of near 20 game goal-less droughts already. Anisimov has endured long streaks of not putting up points as well, that go beyond this season.

My issue isn't unrealistic expectations for either of these players either. (not implying you suggested that, but just throwing that statement out there for purposes of expressing my thoughts on thsi subject matter) If they are going to average production in the 45-60 point range, I'd like to see more even distribution of their production throughout the court of the season. Not instances of them producing at closer to PPG rates for a 6 week stretch, followed by a 6 week stretch of little to no production. These players have been too unpredictable/inconsistent on the offensive side of things.

Yes, some of that can be attributed to factors like playing time and utilization by the coach in different positions and on different lines. But the larger majority of the blame or responsibility lies with the players, and not with the coaching staff or external circumstances.

I'll also note that Stepan has similar issues of hot and cold stretches. We need these players to be more predictable contributors, and not put great stretches of hockey together followed by poor stretches and vice versa.


Last edited by wolfgaze: 02-01-2012 at 06:42 PM.
wolfgaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 06:39 PM
  #132
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
 
NYR Sting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoneil View Post
All due respect, but this entire post is a complete load of crap.
That's interesting, since less than a month ago, you agreed with virtually everything I said in this load of crap, other than the assertion that Dubinsky is the bigger issue with the forwards.

Quote:
Anisimov was expected to be our 2nd line center coming into this season.
No, he wasn't. No one expected Anisimov to be the team's 2nd line center. How on Earth was Anisimov expected to be the 2nd line center on a team with Richards and Stepan?

Quote:
The ONLY difference between his disappointing season and Dubinsky's is that the other players on the team who play AA's position rose to the challenge.
I'm not even sure what that means. Which teammates? What position? Wasn't Anisimov the player who "rose to the challenge" as a result of Dubinsky's poor play, since Anisimov was moved to play Dubinsky's position? The difference between Anisimov's season and Dubinsky's is that you can't label Anisimov's season a disappointment, considering offense has never been the focal point of his game. Considering he was moved out of his comfort zone and had his role flipped on its head. The fact that he's a stronger defensive player than Dubinsky also means it's harder to get upset with him, especially when he's still meeting the standards of the strongest part of his game.

Quote:
Your bias against Dubinsky is starting to get almost comical.
I have no bias against Dubinsky, and I never have. I've spent his entire Rangers career trying to convince myself to like him because I enjoy the way he spices up the action. My only bias is against inconsistent players who routinely display flawed hockey sense, which Dubinsky is doing frequently for the second season in three years. Since you chose to label my post a "complete load of crap" for seemingly no reason other than my criticism of Dubinsky, I'd argue that if anyone here has a bias regarding Dubinsky, it would be you. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you one of the guys that has been trying to convince us that Dubinsky is a superior player to Callahan for years now? Talk about bias. Talk about comical.

NYR Sting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 07:06 PM
  #133
Leetch66
Registered User
 
Leetch66's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: PEI Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,143
vCash: 500
The time has arrived to crap or get off the pot The trade deadline is coming and management should start seeing who wants to be a Ranger who does not . Richards-Prust-AA-Dubi should all be sat for a couple of games and see if we cannot motivate them to play a bit better .

It should motivate them all except Richards...hard to motivate anybody making that kind of money[good luck on that...playoffs might motivate him] . If AA cannot get it going we should move him ASAP to TBLightning ...get Downie and MA Bergeron to shoot the puck on our PP and that is an instant upgade for our PP and Downie makes us a harder team to play against when we play some more physical teams like the Pens-Bruins-Flyers in the playoffs .

Dubie still does a lot of stuff right and he just needs to cut to the center and shoot more and keep going straight to the net for rebounds and arrive there in ill humor . Get it done Slats...move AA fpr those 2 pieces and then if Richards does not pick it up...call Montreal and send him packing for Pacioretti . This current team has some nice stuff happening but it can still do as well without Richards if we had somebody that could produce a PPG . Maybe JD would take him for Oshie ?

Leetch66 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 07:10 PM
  #134
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,098
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Sting View Post
You can't bunch them together like that, it won't provide for objective analysis. If Anisimov was playing in the role he's ideal for, a scoring drought really wouldn't be much of an issue. Anisimov and Dubinsky are supposed to fill different roles for this team. One of the reasons the team can't do with Artie what is best for him is because of Dubinsky's disappointing play.

Dubinsky was supposed to be part of the solution to the team's LW problems. Anisimov was never that. All these other problems have been created because of how poorly Dubinsky has played this season.

Heading into this season, this team was still without a top line LW, but anticipated having a second line LW. What we've found is that the team has neither. I adore Carl Hagelin, but I'd much rather see him on the third line, with Anisimov, as 2/3s of a speedy, responsible shutdown line.

XXXX-Richards/Stepan-Gaborik
XXXX-Richards/Stepan-Callahan
Hagelin-Anisimov-Fedotenko
Rupp-Boyle-Prust

I think these players, and this lineup, is where the team needs to go. You can debate Fedotenko as the 3rd line RW, and I'd love to see Boyle replaced by a more useful 4th line center, but those are nitpicks. Anisimov is part of the solution, if he's used the right way. It's Dubinsky that needs to go. He's being paid like a second line winger, he's not playing like one. Consistency is a cornerstone of success. Dubinsky is a model of inconsistency. How long does he get to prove otherwise? This isn't his first rodeo.

One of those open LW slots will hopefully be Kreider's. Down the line, perhaps one will be Fasth's. But that one top line LW hole is going to be a problem for a while. I still hope the solution involves the movement of Dubinsky, as part of a package. We'll see.
Great post, Sting.

BrooklynRangersFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 07:36 PM
  #135
smoneil
Registered User
 
smoneil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 2,291
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Sting View Post
That's interesting, since less than a month ago, you agreed with virtually everything I said in this load of crap, other than the assertion that Dubinsky is the bigger issue with the forwards.
That assertion was the entire point of the post that was a load of crap. I also completely agreed with a post you wrote earlier in this very thread. I base my opinions on the content of the posts, not the name of the person who posted it. That's a weakness now? You tried to blame Dubinsky for Anisimov's poor play. That was the point of the post I quoted. That post was a load of crap.

Quote:
No, he wasn't. No one expected Anisimov to be the team's 2nd line center. How on Earth was Anisimov expected to be the 2nd line center on a team with Richards and Stepan?
You're just making **** up, now. At the start of the season, the VAST majority of this board was penciling Stepan in at 3rd line C. The Pack line was this team's best line last year, and everyone was expecting that to be our 2nd line. If you think that Anisimov was expected to be the 3rd line C, then you must have also thought that Callahan and Dubinsky were expected to be the 3rd line wingers.

Quote:
I'm not even sure what that means. Which teammates? What position? Wasn't Anisimov the player who "rose to the challenge" as a result of Dubinsky's poor play, since Anisimov was moved to play Dubinsky's position? The difference between Anisimov's season and Dubinsky's is that you can't label Anisimov's season a disappointment, considering offense has never been the focal point of his game. Considering he was moved out of his comfort zone and had his role flipped on its head. The fact that he's a stronger defensive player than Dubinsky also means it's harder to get upset with him, especially when he's still meeting the standards of the strongest part of his game.
Again, you see what you want to see. Dubinsky and Anisimov have both surged and slumped this season, often at the same time. Anisimov was moved to the LW to shake things up. It worked for a while, so he stayed there for a month or so. The only reason you view that as Anisimov being forced to cover for Dubinsky is that you WANT to see it that way. Dubinsky was moved to center for about a month. Was that move done to cover for Anisimov's incompetence? Of course not. It was just Torts trying to get his lines to work.

Finally, you can keep on repeating your claim that AA is better defensively than Dubinsky until you're blue in the face. It won't make it true. PKing, key situations, own zone situations--Torts has made it more than obvious that he views Dubinsky as the better defensive player of the two (not to take anything away from AA, who I do think is an exceptional defensive player).

Quote:
I have no bias against Dubinsky, and I never have. I've spent his entire Rangers career trying to convince myself to like him because I enjoy the way he spices up the action. My only bias is against inconsistent players who routinely display flawed hockey sense, which Dubinsky is doing frequently for the second season in three years. Since you chose to label my post a "complete load of crap" for seemingly no reason other than my criticism of Dubinsky, I'd argue that if anyone here has a bias regarding Dubinsky, it would be you. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't you one of the guys that has been trying to convince us that Dubinsky is a superior player to Callahan for years now? Talk about bias. Talk about comical.
With the exception of Henrik and the defense, EVERY PLAYER ON THIS TEAM is "inconsistent." With Dubinsky, you bleat on about it incessantly. For the players you like, you make excuse after excuse. Yes, you have a bias. Yes, it is comical.

Yes, I am the poster who believes that Dubinsky is a superior player to Callahan (marginally). The thread you refer to was another fine example of your bias. I used YOUR OWN ARGUMENT (you routinely use stat-based arguments to bash Dubinsky) to defend that view, and you started posting in a pretentious "I feel sorry for you" tone. Yes, you are comical. And for the record, I don't have a bias. My favorite Rangers have almost always been D-men. Dubinsky is one of my favorite forwards (along with Callahan and Stepan), but he's far from my favorite Ranger. Put another way--I would be depressed to see Staal or Del Zotto traded, regardless of the return. If Dubinsky were to be traded for somebody like Ryan? I'd be thrilled. I went on a tear in December not because I'm some kind of Dubinsky fanboy, but because people on here were suggesting that he be moved in a lateral move or for a lesser player.

smoneil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 09:24 PM
  #136
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
 
NYR Sting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoneil View Post
You tried to blame Dubinsky for Anisimov's poor play. That was the point of the post I quoted. That post was a load of crap.
No, I didn't. I blamed Dubinsky's play offensively for the reason that other players on the team are forced to play out of role. That's a pretty big difference.

Quote:
You're just making **** up, now. At the start of the season, the VAST majority of this board was penciling Stepan in at 3rd line C. The Pack line was this team's best line last year, and everyone was expecting that to be our 2nd line. If you think that Anisimov was expected to be the 3rd line C, then you must have also thought that Callahan and Dubinsky were expected to be the 3rd line wingers.
Being the best line on a terrible team with no offense to speak of doesn't mean much to me, so I didn't have any particular interest in seeing the Pack Line reunited. Why would I, when I've believed always that Anisimov was an ideal third line center? In fact, despite my comical bias against Dubinsky, as you put it, I spent the entire summer posting about how I thought Dubinsky should be the first line LW with Richards and Gaborik. This was when I (foolishly) assumed that after his play last year, Dubinsky had finally dislodged his head from his own posterior for good.

Quote:
Again, you see what you want to see. Dubinsky and Anisimov have both surged and slumped this season, often at the same time. Anisimov was moved to the LW to shake things up. It worked for a while, so he stayed there for a month or so. The only reason you view that as Anisimov being forced to cover for Dubinsky is that you WANT to see it that way. Dubinsky was moved to center for about a month. Was that move done to cover for Anisimov's incompetence? Of course not. It was just Torts trying to get his lines to work.
Anisimov was moved to LW as a result of two things: the injury to Wolski, and the poor play of Dubinsky. When Anisimov was moved from center to LW, it only made sense that Dubinsky, playing like **** on the LW, would be moved to C. Is that what I want to see, or is that what happened? And I didn't like moving Dubinsky to C, by the way, just as I didn't like Anisimov being moved to LW. I understood it, I understood why the coach made the move, and the biggest reason was the poor play of Dubinsky.

Quote:
Finally, you can keep on repeating your claim that AA is better defensively than Dubinsky until you're blue in the face. It won't make it true. PKing, key situations, own zone situations--Torts has made it more than obvious that he views Dubinsky as the better defensive player of the two (not to take anything away from AA, who I do think is an exceptional defensive player).
Well, that's the way you want to see it. The way I see it, Dubinsky plays more than Anisimov because Anisimov simply doesn't have the same endurance. And when you consider that Anisimov has spent much of the season playing with the team's top offensive line, it's hard to expect a player with stamina issues getting so much even strength time to play in critical late game situations. Plus, I NEVER said that Dubinsky was a poor defender, and since he's not doing anything offensively and Anisimov is being used in such a role, then it doesn't really hurt the team (whose strength is defensive play and goaltending) to have a small downgrade defensively on the ice if it allows Tortorella to get Artie on the ice more at even strength with Stepan and Gaborik.

Quote:
With the exception of Henrik and the defense, EVERY PLAYER ON THIS TEAM is "inconsistent." With Dubinsky, you bleat on about it incessantly. For the players you like, you make excuse after excuse. Yes, you have a bias. Yes, it is comical.
Who are "the players I like," and why do I "like" them? What you call excuses, I call legitimate points that should logically be taken into consideration before reaching any conclusions. It seems to me like they're only excuses when they aren't in support of the players that you like. The players I like are the players who I feel are the best players, particularly for their role (or what I feel their role should be). Why would I possibly "like" Callahan more than Dubinsky for any reason other than their performance on the ice? No, you've cracked the case. Cally's smile and his rapidly receding hairline...that's it.

The players I like the most are the players who fit my philosophy on winning in this sport. At this point in his career, Brandon Dubinsky doesn't fit it, particularly because consistency is a big part of that philosophy. And I don't think every player on this team is inconsistent, or at least to the level that Dubinsky is. If you do...I guess that's the way you want to see it. Actually, though, you're right... I don't think Dubinsky is inconsistent. At this point, he's been nothing but consistent. He's consistently been useless offensively (you know, the most important part of HIS role, and what he is making 4.2 million per season for) for virtually the entire season. No one on this team fails to fulfill the requirements of their role as often as Dubinsky does. Anisimov isn't really meeting the standards of his role, either, but he's playing in the wrong role.

Quote:
Yes, I am the poster who believes that Dubinsky is a superior player to Callahan (marginally).
Which, in addition to flying in the face of everything that success in this sport revolves around, is basically admitting that you are heavily biased toward Dubinsky. The bias itself isn't so disconcerting, but what it says about your philosophy on the game is.

Quote:
The thread you refer to was another fine example of your bias. I used YOUR OWN ARGUMENT (you routinely use stat-based arguments to bash Dubinsky) to defend that view, and you started posting in a pretentious "I feel sorry for you" tone. Yes, you are comical.
Actually, I wasn't referring to any thread in particular, but I do remember saying that. It was genuine and sincere. If you took it as pretentious, well...I guess that's the way you want to see it. Just because you made a stat-based argument, doesn't mean that the argument was convincing or successful. My comment was prompted by the fact that, AFAIC, it wasn't. As for me being comical, all I have to respond with is the following:

Quote:
Originally Posted by smoneil View Post
Yes, I am the poster who believes that Dubinsky is a superior player to Callahan (marginally).

NYR Sting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 09:37 PM
  #137
JeffMangum
A Love Supreme
 
JeffMangum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Listening to music
Country: United States
Posts: 54,850
vCash: 300
There is nothing that can justify the opinion of Dubinsky being better than Callahan.

That's just ludicrous.

__________________

#TannerGlass2014
SEEN YOUR VIDEO!
#SheWentToHarvard
JeffMangum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 09:46 PM
  #138
mattyd99
Registered User
 
mattyd99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Warwick, NY
Posts: 560
vCash: 500
Played real good tonight I thought. One of, if not the best forwards tonight. Hopefully this helps him break out of the slump.

mattyd99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 09:49 PM
  #139
JeffMangum
A Love Supreme
 
JeffMangum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Listening to music
Country: United States
Posts: 54,850
vCash: 300
Agreed with Matty. Was going to mention it earlier.

I liked the Anisimov-Richards-Callahan line.

JeffMangum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 10:07 PM
  #140
PromNite
Armed Android
 
PromNite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Tampa, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 6,282
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to PromNite
Dubi a better player than Callahan? Unless that's some sort of multi-layered joke where you're gonna be like "JUST KIDDING!" then all I can say is wow.

__________________


Adam Tensta's from the 163
PromNite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 10:08 PM
  #141
wolfgaze
Interesting Cat
 
wolfgaze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 12,050
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zenith View Post
Agreed with Matty. Was going to mention it earlier.

I liked the Anisimov-Richards-Callahan line.
Which line was that? I saw about 6 different combinations tonight.

wolfgaze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 10:27 PM
  #142
smoneil
Registered User
 
smoneil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 2,291
vCash: 500
The back and forth quotations can block up a thread, so I'll just try to be direct--I think you (and many others) don't like Dubinsky because he held out a couple of years ago. That's it. I don't see how anyone can like Callahan and hate Dubinsky. They're the same player in so many ways. The only thing separating them is the holdout. It's when people first started the threads to trade him. Dubinsky is no more or less inconsistent than other players on the team (Richards, has had the same number of 5+ game pointless streaks, and he makes far more than Dubinsky). Dubinsky's goalscoring is very inconsistent, but if you are judging his play based on an assumption that scoring goals is the key part of his game, then I don't know which player you've been watching for the last 5 years (Dubi has ALWAYS been more of a playmaker).

Yes, I do think that you make excuses for players that you like. When you want to rip a player, stats are the be all and end all (you judge Dubinsky not by his play, but by his stat line, and only one category of that stat line at that). When you want to make excuses for a player, the stats don't matter (Anisimov doesn't have endurance now? Please ). We all have players that we like and dislike for various reasons (who knows, maybe you ARE all about smiles and receding hairlines ). I tend to value skill in defensemen (Leetch is my all time favorite Ranger. DZ is my current favorite) and heart in forwards (particularly defensive forwards--loved Nemchinov back in the day, Cally and Dubi now, Prucha in the post-lockout years).

You claim to value certain things, but you praise one guy as if he were infallible (if Dubinsky had made that turnover against the Devils, you'd still be posting on it a month from now--Cally, all is forgiven), and rip a guy who is pretty much the same player in many ways. THAT to me, shows your bias.


Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Sting View Post
Which, in addition to flying in the face of everything that success in this sport revolves around, is basically admitting that you are heavily biased toward Dubinsky. The bias itself isn't so disconcerting, but what it says about your philosophy on the game is.

Actually, I wasn't referring to any thread in particular, but I do remember saying that. It was genuine and sincere. If you took it as pretentious, well...I guess that's the way you want to see it. Just because you made a stat-based argument, doesn't mean that the argument was convincing or successful. My comment was prompted by the fact that, AFAIC, it wasn't. As for me being comical, all I have to respond with is the following:

My point in the last thread had NOTHING to do with ripping Callahan. I made it absolutely clear from post # 1 that I thought that he and Dubinsky were very close in terms of value/importance/skill what have you. My goal in that thread was to take the same approach that you use to rip Dubinsky, and apply it to Callahan. When you do so, Dubinsky comes out on top every single season AND postseason except for the current, in progress one (and Cally is up by a dozen or so points, with more games played, far more minutes played, with far superior linemates and significantly more PP time). Again, it's a case of you thinking stats are crucial when evaluating one player, and completely useless in evaluating another. It's a hypocritical argument. You can't say in one post that stats are useless and one has to judge Callahan by his intangibles, and then say in another post that Dubinsky's intangibles are irrelevant because he only has 5 goals. Yes, you are comical.

As to my "philosophy of the game"--it's basically that I don't (okay--rarely) hate any of the players on the roster for non-hockey reasons. Avery is a useful player--ergo, I defended him against the people who were clearly judging him by his antics/reputation. Del Zotto was experiencing growing pains last year--ergo, I defended him against the hordes of people on here who wanted to ship him out for peanuts. I did the same with Girardi (when half the board wanted to trade him over the Gaborik fight). I've done the same with Gaborik, Staal and (in this thread) Anisimov. My track record is pretty consistent, and it doesn't revolve around one player (which shoots your theory that I've got a Dubinsky bias right out the window). My "philosophy of the game" as it applies to my posting habits is that I consistently seek to have the SAME standards applied to ALL the players on the roster. I'm not a fan of knee-jerk moves. Wanting to move Dubinsky because of half a down season is idiotic.

For the record--the one time I really lobbied on behalf of a player and the player DIDN'T bounce back was the one time I lobbied on behalf of my then-favorite player (Prucha).

smoneil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 10:39 PM
  #143
smoneil
Registered User
 
smoneil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Rochester
Country: United States
Posts: 2,291
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zenith View Post
There is nothing that can justify the opinion of Dubinsky being better than Callahan.

That's just ludicrous.
Steve--All due respect, but aren't you the guy who wanted to trade Dubinsky + to the Kings for Justin Williams (a far inferior player) and Alec Martinez (a left-sided D who would struggle to play 3rd pair on this team)?

To Zenith and Promnite (hoping to head this off, as it always devolves into people thinking I'm claiming something that I'm not, or that I hate Callahan or something)--My opinion, based on watching this team for 20+ years and these two players for 5+ years, is that Callahan and Dubinsky are VERY similar players. I think they have similar skill defensively. I think both players can be momentum changers. I think they both approach the game in the same way (the right way). Callahan is (and always has been) the better goal-scorer of the two, and Dubinsky is (and always has been) the better playmaker. Both players lead--both verbally and through example--though Callahan gets the edge there (again, though, not by a huge margin).

Both players are among my favorite Rangers, and they are my two favorite Ranger forwards--I am NOT hating on Callahan at all. That said, Dubinsky--even though he's a full year younger and has been bounced back and forth between center and LW--has out-produced Callahan in every year. He's also raised his game in the playoffs in a way the Callahan never has (yet--to be fair, Callahan hasn't seen playoff action since he's become one of the team's better players). When the two are viewed objectively, I think Dubinsky is the (marginally) more valuable player. I realize that it's basically a crime on this board to think that, but I also worry that we're putting Callahan on a pedestal that can't be sustained (we do love to build players up to unrealistic expectations and then tear them down--See MDZ 2009 vs 2010, Gaborik 2009 vs 2010, Dubinsky/Anisimov 2010 vs 2011, and on and on).

smoneil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-01-2012, 11:37 PM
  #144
ChrisKreider20
Oh Hai Guise
 
ChrisKreider20's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,311
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoneil View Post
Steve--All due respect, but aren't you the guy who wanted to trade Dubinsky + to the Kings for Justin Williams (a far inferior player) and Alec Martinez (a left-sided D who would struggle to play 3rd pair on this team)?

To Zenith and Promnite (hoping to head this off, as it always devolves into people thinking I'm claiming something that I'm not, or that I hate Callahan or something)--My opinion, based on watching this team for 20+ years and these two players for 5+ years, is that Callahan and Dubinsky are VERY similar players. I think they have similar skill defensively. I think both players can be momentum changers. I think they both approach the game in the same way (the right way). Callahan is (and always has been) the better goal-scorer of the two, and Dubinsky is (and always has been) the better playmaker. Both players lead--both verbally and through example--though Callahan gets the edge there (again, though, not by a huge margin).

Both players are among my favorite Rangers, and they are my two favorite Ranger forwards--I am NOT hating on Callahan at all. That said, Dubinsky--even though he's a full year younger and has been bounced back and forth between center and LW--has out-produced Callahan in every year. He's also raised his game in the playoffs in a way the Callahan never has (yet--to be fair, Callahan hasn't seen playoff action since he's become one of the team's better players). When the two are viewed objectively, I think Dubinsky is the (marginally) more valuable player. I realize that it's basically a crime on this board to think that, but I also worry that we're putting Callahan on a pedestal that can't be sustained (we do love to build players up to unrealistic expectations and then tear them down--See MDZ 2009 vs 2010, Gaborik 2009 vs 2010, Dubinsky/Anisimov 2010 vs 2011, and on and on).
Callahan is far more consistent night in a night out, and better defensively.
Dubinsky is more talented and I have always thought had higher potential offensively.

I think Dubinsky could put up better numbers than Callahan if he were finally to get consistency to his game, which he sorely lacks...

ChrisKreider20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2012, 12:04 AM
  #145
NYR Sting
Heart and Soul
 
NYR Sting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoneil View Post
The back and forth quotations can block up a thread, so I'll just try to be direct--I think you (and many others) don't like Dubinsky because he held out a couple of years ago. That's it. I don't see how anyone can like Callahan and hate Dubinsky. They're the same player in so many ways...Dubinsky's goalscoring is very inconsistent, but if you are judging his play based on an assumption that scoring goals is the key part of his game, then I don't know which player you've been watching for the last 5 years (Dubi has ALWAYS been more of a playmaker).
The holdout has absolutely zero to do with my opinion of Dubinksy. I couldn't possibly care less. And I couldn't disagree more, particularly with that last bit about being a playmaker. No wonder you don't see the problem; you think just like he does. Dubinsky's inability to accept what he is and what he isn't is the biggest reason he's such an inconsistent player. I don't see how anyone can think Dubinsky is better than Callahan, unless they can't see the difference because they don't know what to look for. Nothing personal; that's just my honest opinion.

Quote:
Yes, I do think that you make excuses for players that you like. When you want to rip a player, stats are the be all and end all (you judge Dubinsky not by his play, but by his stat line, and only one category of that stat line at that). When you want to make excuses for a player, the stats don't matter (Anisimov doesn't have endurance now? Please ). We all have players that we like and dislike for various reasons.
Again, with the players I "like" bit. The players I like are the those that play the game in a fashion that is most conducive toward winning. Would I want this guy on my team if I was the coach? If the answer is yes, then I like him. If the answer is no, then I don't. Anisimov has had endurance issues since his rookie year. He gets tired. He's not the greatest skater. That's nothing new. That's another one of those nuances that you seem to miss when you watch the games, and it's those missed nuances that can lead to warped conclusions.

Quote:
My goal in that thread was to take the same approach that you use to rip Dubinsky, and apply it to Callahan. When you do so, Dubinsky comes out on top every single season AND postseason except for the current, in progress one (and Cally is up by a dozen or so points, with more games played, far more minutes played, with far superior linemates and significantly more PP time). Again, it's a case of you thinking stats are crucial when evaluating one player, and completely useless in evaluating another. It's a hypocritical argument. You can't say in one post that stats are useless and one has to judge Callahan by his intangibles, and then say in another post that Dubinsky's intangibles are irrelevant because he only has 5 goals.
The problem is that you didn't use the same approach I did, so whatever conclusions you reached as a result are suspect. You have mischaracterized my opinion on Dubinsky, as well as the argument I used in that thread, so many times that even I'm not sure what it is anymore. I don't choose to judge Dubinsky on stats or play; I do so based on both, as I would any and all players. Also, I hate the word intangible, and would not have used it in the manner you are suggesting. Generally speaking, the word intangible is what people who don't know what they're talking about use to describe nuances of the game that they aren't informed enough about to put into words.

Quote:
As to my "philosophy of the game"--it's basically that I don't (okay--rarely) hate any of the players on the roster for non-hockey reasons...
This isn't what I meant by philosophy. I was referring, as I did above, to a strategic philosophy. A coaching philosophy. The belief that Dubinsky is a better player than Callahan signals that yours is founded on some pretty wild and unorthodox opinions about this sport.

Quote:
When the two are viewed objectively, I think Dubinsky is the (marginally) more valuable player.
Therein lies the problem. To be objective, one must consider things from every perspective and within all contexts. I believe you intend to do that, but you are unable to because you lack the background to do so. That's why you try to compare Callahan and Dubinsky solely on the basis of offensive production, when the biggest differences between the two are in their play away from the puck. I implore you, seek out someone who you think is credible when it comes to this sport. Ask anyone intimately involved with this sport who watches Rangers hockey, "Callahan or Dubinsky?" You won't like the answer you get. In practically every aspect of the game, Callahan is a much better player than Dubinsky. And when it comes to defensive play, excluding success in the faceoff circle, Anisimov is a stronger defensive player than Dubinsky, as well.

NYR Sting is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2012, 04:46 AM
  #146
Sticky Fingers
Registered User
 
Sticky Fingers's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,506
vCash: 500
Both Anisomov and Dubinsky are under performing this year and playeing below expectations. Anisimov haven't had a point for 17 games and Dubi has like 5 goals all season, both with a lot of ice time. Defend their games all you want, but Dubi didn'g get +4 million/year to finish checks, he got payed to that AND put it in the net on a consistent basis. And AA is a good defensive center, but we did expect more from him, and fairly so.

And for the Dubinsky vs Callahan debate: To me it seems like Callahan is more physically fit than Dubinsky and therefore better to keep on going game after game with their exhausting playing style, just my opinion, might be totally wrong. But for sure is that Callahan is less streaky.

Sticky Fingers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2012, 09:04 AM
  #147
JimmyStart*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoneil View Post
Steve--All due respect, but aren't you the guy who wanted to trade Dubinsky + to the Kings for Justin Williams (a far inferior player) and Alec Martinez (a left-sided D who would struggle to play 3rd pair on this team)?

To Zenith and Promnite (hoping to head this off, as it always devolves into people thinking I'm claiming something that I'm not, or that I hate Callahan or something)--My opinion, based on watching this team for 20+ years and these two players for 5+ years, is that Callahan and Dubinsky are VERY similar players. I think they have similar skill defensively. I think both players can be momentum changers. I think they both approach the game in the same way (the right way). Callahan is (and always has been) the better goal-scorer of the two, and Dubinsky is (and always has been) the better playmaker. Both players lead--both verbally and through example--though Callahan gets the edge there (again, though, not by a huge margin).

Both players are among my favorite Rangers, and they are my two favorite Ranger forwards--I am NOT hating on Callahan at all. That said, Dubinsky--even though he's a full year younger and has been bounced back and forth between center and LW--has out-produced Callahan in every year. He's also raised his game in the playoffs in a way the Callahan never has (yet--to be fair, Callahan hasn't seen playoff action since he's become one of the team's better players). When the two are viewed objectively, I think Dubinsky is the (marginally) more valuable player. I realize that it's basically a crime on this board to think that, but I also worry that we're putting Callahan on a pedestal that can't be sustained (we do love to build players up to unrealistic expectations and then tear them down--See MDZ 2009 vs 2010, Gaborik 2009 vs 2010, Dubinsky/Anisimov 2010 vs 2011, and on and on).
It's clear many of your points are either being misunderstood here by a few people or purposely being misrepresented.

JimmyStart* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2012, 11:19 AM
  #148
SwedishBullet62
Never go full torts.
 
SwedishBullet62's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,723
vCash: 500
dubinsky better than callahan, doesnt the thread title read Artem Anisimov? does anyone know how to stay on topic around here without turning everything into a pissing match about something completely different than what the thread was intended for

SwedishBullet62 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2012, 11:24 AM
  #149
McRanger
Registered User
 
McRanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,703
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfgaze View Post
Which line was that? I saw about 6 different combinations tonight.
Just 6? For a while I thought Renney and his line generator was back.

McRanger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-02-2012, 11:27 AM
  #150
we want cup
We do not Sow
 
we want cup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: New York City
Country: United States
Posts: 10,636
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by McRanger View Post
Just 6? For a while I thought Renney and his line generator was back.
Healthy scratch: Petr Prucha

__________________

RANGERS =
we want cup is online now   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 09:51 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.