The "offensive woes" aren't that serious. NYR is 13th in the league in Goals/Game.
13th for the year, but that ranking has been dropping since the beginning of the season. We've scored 32 goals in the last 15 games, 1 of those an empty netter. In 6 of those games, we scored 1 goal or less. Only in 1 of the 15 did we score more than 3 goals.
No matter where it comes from, we need more scoring. 2 goals a game isn't going to cut it.
13th for the year, but that ranking has been dropping since the beginning of the season. We've scored 32 goals in the last 15 games, 1 of those an empty netter. In 6 of those games, we scored 1 goal or less. Only in 1 of the 15 did we score more than 3 goals.
No matter where it comes from, we need more scoring. 2 goals a game isn't going to cut it.
I agree that the ranking has been dropping but in those 15 games they've scored 3 goals in 9 of them. 3 goals is enough to win alot of games. If they were averaging 3 goals a game they would be 8th in the NHL. The problem is the 1 or none games. 3 shutouts and 2 one goal games out of the 15 is too much.
I hate when people say this. Marty St. Louis as short as he is, is probably 3 inches taller than MZA. He also isnt knocked off the puck as easily as MZA is.
MSL is listed as 5'8" 176 lbs on TBL.com. MZA is listed as 5'7" 179 lbs. on NYR.com. Not a big difference.
Not saying that MZA has even an ounce of the skill that MSL has, but let's not make stuff up.
MSL is listed as 5'8" 176 lbs on TBL.com. MZA is listed as 5'7" 179 lbs. on NYR.com. Not a big difference.
Not saying that MZA has even an ounce of the skill that MSL has, but let's not make stuff up.
I was looking at yahoo which had MSL listed at 5'9 and I thought MZA was 5'6. Either way the only thing they have in common is they are both shorter than most of the NHL and thats where the comparisons stop.
When has Zuccarello proven to be a offensive force? It's not like the Rangers have Malkin in Hartford and simply are refusing to call him up.
For that matter, when was the last team the Rangers didn't reach down to Hartford if there was a guy there the powers that be felt could help this team?
cant people just accept that Zuc is most likely done as a Ranger?
The funniest part is that the Norwegian fans have accepted a long time ago that he´s done as a Ranger, and just hope that he is given another fair chance in another team. And if he strikes out there too, welcome him home to Europe again
Actually it seems like there are more american fans that are pissed that he is still in Hartford, even though the Rangers are playing good hockey and putting up more points than in decades....
When has Zuccarello proven to be a offensive force? It's not like the Rangers have Malkin in Hartford and simply are refusing to call him up.
For that matter, when was the last team the Rangers didn't reach down to Hartford if there was a guy there the powers that be felt could help this team?
How is this a fair argument?
Malkin is one of a very few elite talents in the league. You're basically making the argument that unless someone is an elite player, then why bother calling them up.
Zuccarello, in his short stint with this team, had proven that he can put points on the board. That's not something to just write off.
I'm a big fan of this team & what they've done thus far, but we can't ignore our problems. The lack of goal scoring needs to be addressed. The pathetic powerplay needs to be addressed. If we have a piece in the minors that could come up and chip in, I want to see it.
Malkin is one of a very few elite talents in the league. You're basically making the argument that unless someone is an elite player, then why bother calling them up.
That was not my point at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vito Andolini
Zuccarello, in his short stint with this team, had proven that he can put points on the board. That's not something to just write off.
I'm a big fan of this team & what they've done thus far, but we can't ignore our problems. The lack of goal scoring needs to be addressed. The pathetic powerplay needs to be addressed. If we have a piece in the minors that could come up and chip in, I want to see it.
Obviously, the powers that be don't see him as a solution. When have they been shy about reaching down to Hartford for a guy who they feel can contribute?
If a player isn't going to score consistently on this team, then he has to have some other tool that will help the team. EC is gone and Wolski is a healthy scratch... both players are of little use to the team when they aren't generating offense.
If MZA had another facet to his game, whether it be defense, speed, size, etc., he probably would have been called up already. Obviously he won't be on the scoresheet every game and he had stretches last season where he wasn't contributing. The question remains, what can he do to help the team when he's not producing, and should he be playing over the likes of Rupp/Mitchell/whomever, players that can be effective even if they aren't scoring.
We've seen Zuccarello contribute offensively at this level. We've seen that he has skills that can translate to address team weaknesses. He shouldn't need to be an "offensive force" to take someone like Mitchell's spot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway
Obviously, the powers that be don't see him as a solution. When have they been shy about reaching down to Hartford for a guy who they feel can contribute?
It's kind of an impossible question to answer. If they felt someone could contribute, then they'd bring that someone in.
The question is, why don't they feel he can contribute to this team? Earlier in the season, I understood. Lately, I'm starting to wonder.
I have never been a Zuke supporter to get him back in the lineup, but at this point in time I think he should get a shot. Our offense is atrocious right now, and its downright embarrassing. We have too many grinders on our team right now, which is eliminating any secondary scoring that we need. Yea yea that's "Torts" style of hockey, which is fine, but substituting out one player like Mitchell does not do us any harm.
Who knows if Zuccs would provide a spark, but the guy has only been given like 3 games with the team to prove himself. Give him one more opportunity to spark our offense, if nothing happens then atleast we know it was not going to work out.
The question is, why don't they feel he can contribute to this team? Earlier in the season, I understood. Lately, I'm starting to wonder.
The answer remains the same. He is too small to compete on boards and in corners, which is the way everyone on this team plays. And he is not solid defensively. Which is also the way that this team plays.
In watching some of teh game that the Rangers have been playing lately, never once did I wonder how the game would have been if only he had been on the ice.
substituting out one player like Mitchell does not do us any harm.
No, but playing MDZ on the bottom 2 lines is not going to allow him to do much of anything. And again, there is a reason why the St. Louis's of the world are few and far between. MDZ's size IS an issue.
We've seen Zuccarello contribute offensively at this level. We've seen that he has skills that can translate to address team weaknesses. He shouldn't need to be an "offensive force" to take someone like Mitchell's spot.
My point is I fail to see the answer to the woeful power play being calling up a largely unproven player who is hardly lighting up the AHL.
[QUOTE=True Blue;43849503]No, but playing MDZ on the bottom 2 lines is not going to allow him to do much of anything. And again, there is a reason why the St. Louis's of the world are few and far between. MDZ's size IS an issue.[/QUOTE
Take a look at Torts' lines for tonights game...do you see a bottom six and top six? No, you really don't. Im not comparing him to Marty at all, Zuke has a skill level that not many other players in our lineup provide (from an offensive standpoint). Get him into the lineup for a few games, if it doesn't work out then hes gone, no harm done.
The answer remains the same. He is too small to compete on boards and in corners, which is the way everyone on this team plays. And he is not solid defensively. Which is also the way that this team plays.
The way that this team is playing has produced 24 goals in 12 games. We've managed to do OK in terms of record during this time, but I'm not confident in a teams ability to win on 2 goals a night.
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
In watching some of teh game that the Rangers have been playing lately, never once did I wonder how the game would have been if only he had been on the ice.
I guess you don't think he'd help on the powerplay then.
1 for 32 over the past 12 games. New blood wouldn't hurt.
If size is such as issue - why did the Rangers go out of their way to sign him to a contract in the first place?
He was a +3 last season. So I don't want to hear this blanket excuse that he is a defensive liability. Guess what? Last season: Mr. Wonderful Brandon Dubinsky was a -3. Cally? Love him, but he was a -7. And don't give me that +/- stat doesn't mean anything argument. If that was the case it wouldn't be brought up on the board over and over and over. It does have some meaning.
This whole "Wow, this thread again? We've already determined that MZA is done as a Ranger..." thing still doesn't answer some burning questions - like WHY is he done as a Ranger. I don't think there have been adequate answers to that question.
I am by no means a MZA fanboy. But when your offense is stale (to use a term that Torts likes) you stir the pot a little. Moving Prust to a top-6 isn't a good way to stir the pot.
Last edited by UlfNilsson: 02-09-2012 at 12:34 PM.
When was he scouted? The Olympics. Who was he playing against in that tourney? A load of top NHL talent (not other smurfs), and the best talent from other top leagues in the world. You don't get awarded as MVP of Modo for no reason, either.
Why was he signed? They saw him play against top players and obviously thought he handled himself well.
When was he scouted? The Olympics. Who was he playing against in that tourney? A load of top NHL talent (not other smurfs), and the best talent from other top leagues in the world. You don't get awarded as MVP of Modo for no reason, either.
There are plenty of top European players who fail to stick in the NHL (Jiri Dopita, Jarkko Immonen, Marcel Hossa, etc)
Why was he signed? They saw him play against top players and obviously thought he handled himself well.[/QUOTE]
Then they were wrong. Like I said before, it was a low risk, high potential move.
If size is such as issue - why did the Rangers go out of their way to sign him to a contract in the first place?
He was a +3 last season. So I don't want to hear this blanket excuse that he is a defensive liability. Guess what? Last season: Mr. Wonderful Brandon Dubinsky was a -3. Cally? Love him, but he was a -7. And don't give me that +/- stat doesn't mean anything argument. If that was the case it wouldn't be brought up on the board over and over and over. It does have some meaning.
This whole "Wow, this thread again? We've already determined that MZA is done as a Ranger..." thing still doesn't answer some burning questions - like WHY is he done as a Ranger. I don't think there have been adequate answers to that question.
I am by no means a MZA fanboy. But when your offense is stale (to use a term that Torts likes) you stir the pot a little. Moving Prust to a top-6 isn't a good way to stir the pot.
Your +/- argument is flawed because MZA played sheltered minutes against lower lines, while guys like Cally and Dubi were often matched up against top offensive lines. He doesn't help the puck possession game at all and he's lost in the defensive zone. He isn't fast enough or strong enough, and he doesn't have enough skill to offset those deficiencies.
