I wouldn't give him the nod over Eminger or Bickel.
Agreed. I do believe Eminger or Bickel will be better suited for most games.
Honestly between dressing the three of Bickel, Eminger, and Gilroy (Girl-roy as some you call him ) it would come down to the team we are playing. But that's just me.
Haven't watched him since he left, but unless he's improved by leaps and bounds, I wouldn't give him the nod over Eminger or Bickel.
can't speak much on last year but i remember him playing his best hockey of his career in the playoff loss to washington his last games here. if he plays like that then he'd be more than fine as the #6 guy.
Haven't watched him since he left, but unless he's improved by leaps and bounds, I wouldn't give him the nod over Eminger or Bickel.
Agreed. Dont mind him here as depth, but the fictional narrative taking hold around here that hes a solid NHL player is a stretch.
Admittedly, I havent watched him much since he left either, but during the Ottawa series I remember thinking it was the same old Gilroy. Great wheels, less ability to jump in offensively than he should possess, poor defensive positioning and awareness, and - perhaps worst of all - weak physically.
There are few bigger myths than the one about Tom Poti bring an offensive defenseman.
Still the last Ranger defenseman to score 45 points. Scored at a 35 point pace in his pre-Washington career. If that's not an offensive defenseman, there are very few out there.
Once in ten years? It's been something like 25 years since Leetch was drafted.
And we forget that Sather never throught that Leetch was as good as he actually was. When Sather first took over the Rangers, what did he do? He promptly signed Vladimir Malakhov to a 4 year contract (something like $14 million total) because he had superstar potential. Poti was just another in a long line of offense oriented defensemen that Sather has been bringing in since he became GM. Most of them have not worked out nearly as well as they were hyped by management. Unfortunately, most of them didn't have nearly enough talent (realized or unrealized) to do the things they were traded for/signed to do.
Malakhov had nothing to do with Leetch. Malakhov replaced Schneider. And considering he was 32 and never did much with his career I doubt anyone thought there was any "potential" left.
Do not understand the "never thought that Leetch was as good as he actually was" comment at all.
Malakhov had nothing to do with Leetch. Malakhov replaced Schneider. And considering he was 32 and never did much with his career I doubt anyone thought there was any "potential" left.
Do not understand the "never thought that Leetch was as good as he actually was" comment at all.
Leetch had an outstanding 2000-2001 season, the last great one of his career. He was on the downside after that.
I dont really understand the "never though leetch was good as he actually was" comment either, but its quite clear his decline started shortly after Sather took the job. Im sure he realized how great Leetch was, but he had to think about how great he was going to be.
Cue consistently terrible decisions for several years afterward
I'd take Bickel over Gilroy on nights when it's going to get chippier. The fact of the matter is we don't have good depth at RD and this prevents having to turn to McIlrath, who isn't ready, should we suffer an injury at RD. Also gives us flexibility should any defenseman get hurt, since we're most likely only going to be started two right-handed defenseman a night.
That being said, I'm not ready to presume he's signing with the big club when the lockout ends.
The Rangers went into last season with very good defensive depth. They still had to claim Woywitka, sign Stralman and bring Bickel up for most of the season. Defensive depth is underrated around here.
) it would come down to the team we are playing. But that's just me.
