all players that will improve the bottom six/toughness/aggressiveness factor...
At this stage in his career, Ott is really slowing down. I don't want him near this team. He would be a smaller version of the Drury debacle. A player who style of play is finally taking a toll on his body.
__________________
I feel like this is such an appropriate quote for these boards...
"Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level, and then beat you with experience"-Mark Twain
I'm a little leery of Doan. If he isn't willing to sign a 1 year deal, I think I'd lose quite a bit of interest. He's a good fit up front, but I'm not willing to get into a 35+ debacle if he comes in and puts up 35 points in the first year of his deal.
I agree - if the team is going to go stopgap shopping (and I think they should, given the current landscape) then its pertinent not to move off one year contract demands.
If they could add 2 of Whitney, Doan, Jagr, or Mueller on 1 year deals, I'd be content.
I agree - if the team is going to go stopgap shopping (and I think they should, given the current landscape) then its pertinent not to move off one year contract demands.
If they could add 2 of Whitney, Doan, Jagr, or Mueller on 1 year deals, I'd be content.
The only one I see there getting a one year deal to a new team is Mueller. Jagr maybe if its alot of fishnagles.
all players that will improve the bottom six/toughness/aggressiveness factor...
I know many will disagree with me on this, but I feel the Rangers bottom-6 should add toughness. I think it should be a team effort when it comes to toughness and fighting, not just (2) guys doing all of the heavy lifting. It is part of the reason I hope they bring in a d-man who can drop the gloves if need be.
Yeah, I sometimes think he would be a good addition just for his aggressive play. I mean, look at the way Neil changed the series for Tootoo. That would be, hopefully, the type of player Tootoo can be.
I think I would prefer Burish to Konopka.
I'd rather resign Mitchell and only bring in one other 4th liner to replace Prust.
Here's the problem I have with Burish. The Rangers led the league in fighting majors last year and it was rarely because they felt the need to fight with their opponents. There were an awful lot of cases with teams targeting the Rangers and Prust was a guy very willing to answer the bell. I didn't just give the team pride in Prust being on their side, it enhanced the team's pride in itself. We need to replace that. Burish does not fight.
I'd rather resign Mitchell and only bring in one other 4th liner to replace Prust.
Here's the problem I have with Burish. The Rangers led the league in fighting majors last year and it was rarely because they felt the need to fight with their opponents. There were an awful lot of cases with teams targeting the Rangers and Prust was a guy very willing to answer the bell. I didn't just give the team pride in Prust being on their side, it enhanced the team's pride in itself. We need to replace that. Burish does not fight.
I agree they need a player to replace Prust. I would sign Burish as the 4th line C on top of that signing. Burish does fight if need be.
I like Moen and Tootoo as far as lower line wingers.
In 69 games, Burish had zero majors last season. The year before, he had 3. Compared to 20 and 18 for Prust. I'm not saying we need another guy who's going to fight 20 times a year. Just a guy who is actually going to do it often enough to have the same kind of effect as Prust did.
Besides, we don't need a 4th line center. If Boyle is playing on the 3rd line, we're going to have the same problems we had last year.
At this stage in his career, Ott is really slowing down. I don't want him near this team. He would be a smaller version of the Drury debacle. A player who style of play is finally taking a toll on his body.
you may be right, i haven't watched enough of him to know honestly. I know he's great on FOs but maybe he's past it in other areas?
He's only 29...
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR Boyler87
I know many will disagree with me on this, but I feel the Rangers bottom-6 should add toughness. I think it should be a team effort when it comes to toughness and fighting, not just (2) guys doing all of the heavy lifting. It is part of the reason I hope they bring in a d-man who can drop the gloves if need be.
Well, i wouldn't be one that disagrees. I strongly advocate it, given the style and system we play.
Moen is most definitely a 3rd liner. He creates chances and is good at what he does. Boyle is a borderline 3rd liner and if the Rangers had more than 3 players who could score a goal not as much attention would be paid to the soldiers on the 3rd and 4th lines.
Moen is most definitely a 3rd liner. He creates chances and is good at what he does. Boyle is a borderline 3rd liner and if the Rangers had more than 3 players who could score a goal not as much attention would be paid to the soldiers on the 3rd and 4th lines.
you sure Moen wont be overpaid? He doesnt score a ton. I rather sign a C and move Boyle to the wing on the 4th line.
If they keep Dubi and Anisimov they are just fine for the 3rd line to go with Hagelin
Sather will come up with someone to play top 6 LW whether it be Doan or Whitney from Phoenix or a bold trade. I am starting to vote for a UFA signing then see what the season brings
Question for you guys. I know that teams were able to start talking to Schultz on Monday, and he can't be signed until July 1st. Is that true for all UFAs? Or is this a special condition?
This is a special condition. I don't have specific details but this doesn't happen often. Sometimes teams will allow their soon-to-be free agents to negotiate with other teams if they don't want them. The Islanders let us do that to Biron a couple years ago.
Besides, we don't need a 4th line center. If Boyle is playing on the 3rd line, we're going to have the same problems we had last year.
Bingo. We need to force players down in the lineup, not sign more players for what is already a bevy of natural 3rd/4th liners. Losing Prust is a small concern, and Im sure they'll sign someone else to fit that type of role.
But I find it comical that so many posts get dedicated to the bottom 6 forwards. From a personal standpoint, it is - quite literally - the last thing Im worried about with this team.
Moen is most definitely a 3rd liner. He creates chances and is good at what he does. Boyle is a borderline 3rd liner and if the Rangers had more than 3 players who could score a goal not as much attention would be paid to the soldiers on the 3rd and 4th lines.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRangers88
Moen has played on the third line a lot and is more offensive minded than Boyle, so I think he would do fine there depending on his line mates.
The guy has scored 10 goals and 20 points once in his career. You need your 3rd liners between 30 and 40 points. Travis Moen is not a 3rd line player.
I agree - if the team is going to go stopgap shopping (and I think they should, given the current landscape) then its pertinent not to move off one year contract demands.
If they could add 2 of Whitney, Doan, Jagr, or Mueller on 1 year deals, I'd be content.
I'm still looking to stay young. I like Mueller and Ladtendresse. I think this team has at least one more season of growing pains in it before we're finally ready to add the missing piece. Not a great year for free agency. Lots of older players who will be looking for retirement deals. Roll the dice on Mueller and see what the trade market is like later in the summer. Maybe Howson will blink on Nash, or a kid will win a spot in camp somewhere and free up a roster player for that team as trade bait.
Would their not be a % roll back in cap hits to account for that and grandfather in existing contract? Teams that would be over the cap cannot just trade away players if enough teams that are far enough under the cap can't add that sizable salary atm.
The players don't want to take another rollback in salaries. They have gave up 24% of their salaries in 2005. Gorton made reference to being smart this summer when the cap number for the new CBA is not known. He made those comments last week. Its hard to build a team when the rules are going to change by the time you play again.
If Prust does not return, I wouldn't mind Konopka at a short term deal. I know Prust is a W and Konopka is a C but I think our 3rd and 4th liners have some versatility where they could play multiple forward positions. Konopka would help on faceoffs.
I'm still looking to stay young. I like Mueller and Ladtendresse. I think this team has at least one more season of growing pains in it before we're finally ready to add the missing piece. Not a great year for free agency. Lots of older players who will be looking for retirement deals. Roll the dice on Mueller and see what the trade market is like later in the summer. Maybe Howson will blink on Nash, or a kid will win a spot in camp somewhere and free up a roster player for that team as trade bait.
Gaborik will be out until about December so they should attempt to plan the line-up without him in there. There will most likely be another injury by then anyways.
Bingo. We need to force players down in the lineup, not sign more players for what is already a bevy of natural 3rd/4th liners. Losing Prust is a small concern, and Im sure they'll sign someone else to fit that type of role.
But I find it comical that so many posts get dedicated to the bottom 6 forwards. From a personal standpoint, it is - quite literally - the last thing Im worried about with this team.
how many posts qualifies as excessive to you regarding the bottom six? who's worried? many have argued that we lost in the ECF because of the lack of skill in our bottom six! Ottawa's bottom six and 7th defenseman nearly knocked us out in round one!
We know what the top priorities are. The bottom six is still important, and we need to eliminate redundant drone players.
Any team that plays a defensive grinding system should have a top 3rd line and a VG 4th. we have neither right now.
The players don't want to take another rollback in salaries. They have gave up 24% of their salaries in 2005. Gorton made reference to being smart this summer when the cap number for the new CBA is not known. He made those comments last week. Its hard to build a team when the rules are going to change by the time you play again.
I don't see the need for a rollback if the Cap drops to $60m, which by the way is a 47% share of the revenue. According to CapGeek, only 3 teams would have to make moves to get under the Cap. Boston would get under if they can trade Thomas and with Savard on IR. If Chicago can trade one or both of Kane and Hjalmarsson and reduce their payroll by $3m, they're under. San Jose would be in the toughest spot. Unlike the other two, they don't have 12 forwards under contract. They'd be $1m over the Cap with 3 or 4 spots to fill.
how many posts qualifies as excessive to you regarding the bottom six? who's worried? many have argued that we lost in the ECF because of the lack of skill in our bottom six! Ottawa's bottom six and 7th defenseman nearly knocked us out in round one!
We know what the top priorities are. The bottom six is still important, and we need to eliminate redundant drone players.
Any team that plays a defensive grinding system should have a top 3rd line and a VG 4th. we have neither right now.
We have the 3rd and 4th line players to have a skilled enough bottom-6 to not have the problem we did in the ECF. The problem is that too many of those players were playing a line above where they should have been.
