Boyle put up 26 points last season. Im still not sure why you're so skeptical that he cant put up 30 with a clearer role and, most importantly, better linemates.
Brad Richards would struggle to put up points playing strictly even strength minutes with Prust and Feds.
Because he has posted 30+ points just one time
And depending on who he playes with until Gaborik gets back, it's going to be very debatable that his line mates are better.
Pyatt is equal to (at best) Fedotenko. I personally think Feds is more reliable. But that is debatable
Who else plays wing on that line until Gaborik is back?
Will that player be better than Prust?
Hagelin has a top 6 role until Gaborik gets back.
Asham? I'd take Prust.
Rupp? I'd take Prust.
Halpern? I'd take Prust
Granted, once the roster is completely healthy, Hagelin or Kreider's presence on that line changes things, but to start the season, I would say we are no better on that line which is a problem in the sense that THEY COULD NOT GENERATE CONSISTENT OFFENCE.
You can't blame Prust and Feds for Brian's down season. Not when Boyle had a career year playing with Prust and Feds the year before. It doesn't make sense.
If Hagelin/Boyle/Pyatt ends up as our 3rd line, I think they'll end up spending a lot of time in the offensive zone. Perhaps not scoring all the time, but wearing down the other team with some long shifts. Boyle and Pyatt are huge guys who are quite good at controlling the puck down low, and Hagelin is so good at retrieving pucks, I think he's got a little Labrador in him.
See, for me, I would like to see a set number of goals per line.
1st line = 90 goals
2nd line = 65 goals
3rd line = 35 goals
4th line = 15 goals
That is 205 goals total. Now, if the 1st line eventually is Nash-Richards-Gaborik and they score, collectively 105 goals, the other totals will most likely be lowered.
Pyatt, Boyle and Hagelin should shoot for around 12-13 goals each along with very strong defensive play.
I would prefer 45 goals from that line, but at this point that is splitting hairs.
What I don't want is a 3rd line that will create limited offence putting undue pressure on the top 2 lines to deliver every night.
I want a 3rd line that is a threat to score. Whether they do or don't score is not the point. I want teams to look at the Rangers and say, you really have to be mindful if that team. They are three lines deep and can hurt you reardless of who is out there.
More often than not when you have a 3rd line that can create and generate consistent offensive pressure, it's the guys like Nash and Richards and Stepan that benefit from mis-matches and taking advantage of tired opposition.
Virtually nobody here agrees with you. Rangers management certainly doesnt agree with you.
Normally that might get someone to re-evaluate their position on a player. Not you, I bet.
Actually in part Ranger management does agree. They sunk alot of money into Boyle after his flukey 21 goal season. So, management felt offensive production was a good reason to pay a player like him. You think he gets the contract he got with all the wonderful defensive skills you all are saying he has if he scored 8 goals that year?
Unfortunately, those numbers will likely not be approached again and he is overpaid for a guy with 4th line skills.
According to NHL.com Brian was 13th on the entire Rangers team last year in terms of TOI. 5 d-men were ahead of him. Were you trying to skew and show the stats so that they would support your argument?
And now you are skewing them as you quoted TOI (which includes his PK time) and not ESTOI. Absolutely no integrity.
I'm not sure that anyone is arguing that pre-2010 Brian Boyle is a third line center, so I'm not sure how his stats before that point are relevant.
Post 2010 he averages 14.5 assists a season. 4th line. And don't get me wrong, I like him; slotted properly we would be better off. I also like MDZ, but if he's on our first pairing getting 23 - 26 minutes a night we need an upgrade.
You're talking about a kid who is about to get his first full taste of the NHL. Nash is definitely going to be above him. So the other top 6 spot is going to either Hagelin or Kreider.
Kreider played on the top-6 (at times) in the playoffs, but also keep in mind he was a LOT fresher than everyone else on the ice. Hagelin showed chemistry with Richards and Gaborik, and can perfectly play a needed role on that line while allowing higher talent to be dispersed elsewhere.
There is no way Kreider is going above Nash on the second line, and there is no way Kreider is going to play on the second line over Callahan.
It's foolish to expect Kreider to come out of the gate and immediately receive top-6 minutes from John Tortorella, especially considering that his defense was spotty in the post season.
Kevin Allen wrote a column on his predictions for the season
9. The NHL schedule will be at least 60 games: Certainly, there is potential for a lockout, and losing games is a real possibility (see the NBA). But unlike in 2004, there is no sense that either side is anticipating a lost season. In the summer of 2004, we were already predicting that. Donald Fehr might be new to the NHL Players' Association, but this isn't his first rodeo. The NHL's first proposal was harsh, but we can guess that Fehr expected that. Everybody knows the finished new deal won't look anything like that proposal (see NBA and NFL). If there is a lockout, it will be a short one because both sides are too scared to blow up another season.
The worry: Negotiations fall apart, and both sides resort to a war of words.