HFBoards

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

All Encompassing Tortorella..ella..ella..eh..eh...and Glen Cigar Thread Part III

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-15-2013, 01:10 PM
  #301
Bardof425*
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,028
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post
Whole body of work the season before? This can be looked at in a couple of ways. In the last 3 seasons, he hasn't looked like he did in his first season here. His speed isn't as apparent. His shot has lost velocity. Last year, he found other ways to consistently score goals. The year before that, he looked exactly like he looked for us this year.

I'll tell you this: I watch Rangers games now and I don't miss Gaborik at all. And this is coming from a guy who was one of his biggest fans and was constantly defending him last year. Whether or not he was great for us in seasons past, if he's not missed on the ice, than he wasn't that valuable to us this season.
I'm a big Gabby supporter who feels like Torts ran him out of here. And I will admit that the team seems better positioned to make some noise in the playoffs than before the trade. The addition of Brassard alone gives us some offensive depth down the middle which was desparately needed. And since Gabby wasn't scoring and didn't appear poised to start scoring any time soon the deal makes a lot of sense. Get Staal healthy and Dorsett in the lineup and let's go to war.

Bardof425* is offline  
Old
04-15-2013, 01:37 PM
  #302
OverTheCap
Registered User
 
OverTheCap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 9,612
vCash: 500
Part of the problem with Dolan is that he is clueless when it comes to running a sports organization. He hired Sather and Isiah Thomas because they are big names. Then Dolan gives them free reign because he knows so little about the sport.

I really don't think Dolan knows how to evaluate whether management is doing a good or bad job. He seems a little more knowledgeable about basketball and is more involved with the Knicks. Sometimes it's better off when an owner is less involved (I wouldn't want an owner like Wang meddling in the team's affairs constantly), but there is literally no accountability. Sather is allowed to do whatever he wants without consequence.

OverTheCap is offline  
Old
04-15-2013, 02:02 PM
  #303
Kel Varnsen
Below: Nash's Heart
 
Kel Varnsen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,100
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ailurophile View Post
I'm not even convinced he cares about winning at all. Dolan has the model down pat. All Ranger fans need is the hope that at the beginning of every year the team will remain "competitive" and have a chance to make the playoffs. Listen to the sentiment around here all year. "Once you are in the playoffs anything can happen!" Yeah, anything, especially a first or second round exit. No matter how bad this team plays or has played the majority of this fan base believes with great conviction that once they're in the playoffs, it's a whole new ball game. Unfortunately a new ball game with the same ol' team. Why does Sather buy every year at the deadline? The reaction to the Gaborik trade should sum it up nicely. People are convinced that was the shot in the arm this team needed to turn things around and get back to playing "the right way." However the only thing that remains consistent is that yet again Henrik ****ing Lundqvist, the best goalie in the world right now is carrying this team on his back. Yet the outcome will be the same and the cycle will continue. The Kings winning last year was the best thing to happen to the Rangers managment. Now they have even more reason to keep this team mediocre year after year all while raising ticket prices. Rangers fans will keep believing all you need to do is make the playoffs, and continue standing behind poor asset managment as long as there is some hope they can win the Cup.
If Dolan only cared about making money from the Rangers why would he continue to approve of big free agent contracts, spending to the cap, contract buyouts, and outright burying contracts in the minors? You can criticize Dolan for a lot of things, but saying he only cares about the bottom line in terms of how the team spends money is not one of them.

Kel Varnsen is offline  
Old
04-15-2013, 02:11 PM
  #304
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 14,738
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kel Varnsen View Post
If Dolan only cared about making money from the Rangers why would he continue to approve of big free agent contracts, spending to the cap, contract buyouts, and outright burying contracts in the minors? You can criticize Dolan for a lot of things, but saying he only cares about the bottom line in terms of how the team spends money is not one of them.
You're right. He doesnt look like he particularly cares about winning or the bottom line. Good for him.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline  
Old
04-15-2013, 02:13 PM
  #305
JohnC
#FreeSteve
 
JohnC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 4,508
vCash: 500
It's official, Kel is a part of Rangers management

JohnC is offline  
Old
04-15-2013, 02:18 PM
  #306
5 4 Fighting
Big member
 
5 4 Fighting's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Bk all day
Country: United States
Posts: 4,223
vCash: 400
Yeah, Kel is definitely Tortorella's nephew.

5 4 Fighting is online now  
Old
04-15-2013, 02:57 PM
  #307
Jersey Girl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,900
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
You're right. He doesnt look like he particularly cares about winning or the bottom line. Good for him.
Sometimes you wonder if Dolan's favorite hockey team (for the little he actually cares about hockey) lost in OT Saturday night...

Jersey Girl is offline  
Old
04-15-2013, 03:13 PM
  #308
Kershaw
 
Kershaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country:
Posts: 25,519
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richter Scale View Post
First you say you want to keep Gabby, then you ***** about the fact that the Rangers are a much less deep team than they were last year. Make up your mind. You can't have both. If you keep Gabby, Nash, Richards, and Hank's contracts (combined they would eat up almost half the cap space next year)... you have to sacrifice something; and for most of the season this year it has been depth and grit.

The other problem here is that when you're talking about a "downgrade" - and imply it is primarily because of the Gabby trade - you leave out Clowe. The two trades can not be looked at in a vacuum. They both influenced each other and both were likely considered and formulated in the context of the other happening. In light of that, would you really say that this is a downgrade?

Nash-Gaborik
Clowe-Dubinsky
Brassard-Anisimov
Dorsett-_____
Moore-Erixon
Powe-Rupp

Those are the major pieces moved in trades over the past year. Granted, this doesn't look at the other considerations involved in the trades (draft picks, gaining significant cap space, ability to re-sign RFAs, etc); but you're talking immediate impact, so let's see... The only combination in there that comes even close to a downgrade is Brassard-Anisimov - and there isn't even a major roster piece to match with Dorsett. The trades made don't really look too shabby in that light.

That said, you include FA's as well (I agree with you here, virtually none of the FA replacements come even close to filling the holes they were meant to fill). So here are the 1-to-1 roster changes from last year:

Nash-Gaborik
Clowe-Dubinsky
Brassard-Anisimov
Dorsett-Prust
Pyatt-Fedotenko
Powe-Mitchell
Asham-Rupp
Moore-Erixon

That doesn't look nearly as bad as reading your post would lead one to believe. Its all subjective of course, but in my mind that is 3-4 minor downgrades and 3-4 pretty significant upgrades -- which would make it somewhere between a wash and a better team (depending upon which you think are upgrades).
With the exception of Nash-Gaborik, Asham-Rupp and Moore-Erixon(debatable), all of those are clear downgrades. But the difference is, the Rangers pissed away a 1rst rounder, a high 3rd rounder and potentially 2 2nd rounders. Team is treading water.

Kershaw is offline  
Old
04-15-2013, 04:50 PM
  #309
schabadoo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,179
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kershaw View Post
With the exception of Nash-Gaborik, Asham-Rupp and Moore-Erixon(debatable), all of those are clear downgrades. But the difference is, the Rangers pissed away a 1rst rounder, a high 3rd rounder and potentially 2 2nd rounders. Team is treading water.
Clowe-Dubinsky

schabadoo is offline  
Old
04-15-2013, 05:09 PM
  #310
Ail
k.
 
Ail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Mysidia
Country: United States
Posts: 15,934
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kel Varnsen View Post
If Dolan only cared about making money from the Rangers why would he continue to approve of big free agent contracts, spending to the cap, contract buyouts, and outright burying contracts in the minors? You can criticize Dolan for a lot of things, but saying he only cares about the bottom line in terms of how the team spends money is not one of them.
That's how he keeps the team in perpetual mediocrity aka avoiding an actual rebuild. You cannot be a competitive team year in and out without either:

A.) Spending big money and luring in top talent through FA and trades.

B.) Going through a PROPER rebuild and maintaining it through strong drafting.

The former requires him to pay what probably amounts to a rather small fraction of what he makes back in yearly revenue from the season and playoffs because of the loyal fan base, the latter requires him to possibly lose money for a few years because of a lack of playoffs, and fair-weather fans will stop going to games. Even then because it is NY, he still stands to profit during option B. Look at Toronto. He just wouldn't make as much.

For someone who cares mostly about money, it's a pretty easy choice. Also, for the record I never said he only cared about the bottom line and spending money, only that he cares about making it. Sometimes you have to spend it to make it back several times over.

__________________

Last edited by Ail: 04-15-2013 at 05:15 PM.
Ail is offline  
Old
04-15-2013, 05:14 PM
  #311
SA16
Two by two...
 
SA16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 1,928
vCash: 500
Dolan is a good owner.

SA16 is offline  
Old
04-15-2013, 06:21 PM
  #312
Kershaw
 
Kershaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country:
Posts: 25,519
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ailurophile View Post
All Ranger fans need is the hope that at the beginning of every year the team will remain "competitive" and have a chance to make the playoffs. Listen to the sentiment around here all year. "Once you are in the playoffs anything can happen!"
Most accurate post about the state of the franchise. Well done.

Not saying the fanbase is delusional, but this thought in general is delusional.

This is what Flames fans thought from 2007-12. 'Get in the 8th spot and anything can happen'. Look at where they are now.

The reality is, the franchise/management thinks it's much better than they really are. They think they're actually cup contenders when in reality, they are just a punching bag in the first round for superior, more well constructed opponents.


Kershaw is offline  
Old
04-15-2013, 06:36 PM
  #313
schabadoo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,179
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kershaw View Post
Most accurate post about the state of the franchise. Well done.

Not saying the fanbase is delusional, but this thought in general is delusional.

This is what Flames fans thought from 2007-12. 'Get in the 8th spot and anything can happen'. Look at where they are now.

The reality is, the franchise/management thinks it's much better than they really are. They think they're actually cup contenders when in reality, they are just a punching bag in the first round for superior, more well constructed opponents.

The team had a lot of turnover and no training camp. They're playing an abbreviated season. They made the ECF last year.

BTW, an 8 seed beat a 7 seed in the Finals last year. The last shortened season a lower seed won the SC.

Just make the playoffs.

schabadoo is offline  
Old
04-15-2013, 06:39 PM
  #314
JeffMangum
Ra shi da
 
JeffMangum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Listening to music
Country: United States
Posts: 55,151
vCash: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by SA16 View Post
Dolan is a good owner.
If Dolan was a good owner, Sather would have been fired 9 years ago.

__________________

#TannerGlass2014
SEEN YOUR VIDEO!
#SheWentToHarvard
JeffMangum is offline  
Old
04-15-2013, 06:50 PM
  #315
Kershaw
 
Kershaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country:
Posts: 25,519
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by schabadoo View Post
The team had a lot of turnover and no training camp. They're playing an abbreviated season. They made the ECF last year.

BTW, an 8 seed beat a 7 seed in the Finals last year. The last shortened season a lower seed won the SC.

Just make the playoffs.
How far do you personally think this team will go this season?

Kershaw is offline  
Old
04-15-2013, 06:55 PM
  #316
JohnC
#FreeSteve
 
JohnC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 4,508
vCash: 500
Bleacher Report did a poll, "How far do the Rangers make it in the Playoffs?"

I voted booted first round (realistically). The results? Majority of around 140 people were they win the cup don't know what it's at now but glad there are people with faith

Edit:


Last edited by JohnC: 04-15-2013 at 08:02 PM.
JohnC is offline  
Old
04-15-2013, 06:55 PM
  #317
haveandare
Registered User
 
haveandare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 5,748
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYR1967 View Post
Let's look at those first line minutes this year, because I think its clear to all of us that something changed from last year to this year. For the first 30 games of the season he was:

A) Playing out of position

on a line with:

B) A center who despite having a reputation as a world class playmaker was playing like absolute dog****

and

C) A right wing who, talented as he may be, ALMOST NEVER PASSES THE PUCK

Gaborik is a floater with a wicked shot - may as well call a spade a spade - he's not a Rick Nash type of player who is going to single handedly change a game - he needs his line mates to feed him in order to be successful. So, playing out of position, with those line mates for the majority of his tenure with the Rangers this season, how could he possibly be as productive as he was in seasons past?

Despite that, he was given **** by Torts and benched well before Richards - despite the fact that as bad as he was playing, he was still playing WAY better than Richards, and was not set up to be successful this season (given his strengths and weaknesses).

Oh, and then he was demoted to the third line, as if that was supposed to make him magically stop playing the same way he has been playing since he got drafted and become Ryan Callahan with a better shot.
In my opinion, what changed from last year to this year was that Gaborik stopped playing like he wanted to win. Playing his off wing could be part of it I suppose, but I don't see why that would stop him from using the speed he's depended on his entire career, or why that would take the mustard off his shot, or cause him to look absolutely lost so often.

I don't see how his linemates can possibly be an issue. He's had worse linemates in the past - far worse. He started on a line with Richards and Nash. Granted, Richards wasn't/isn't playing well, but playing Gaborik's game on the other side of Nash should have been relatively easy. Nash attracts attention, Gaborik uses his speed and sense of where the holes in the defense are to sneak in, snap a quick shot and score. Saying that Nash almost never passes the puck is head scratcher for me. He passes quite often, and toward the beginning of the season he was over-passing IMO.

Gabby was benched/demoted before Richards because the team had a tremendous hole at 3C with Richards while the RW was stacked with Nash and Callahan, and for a while Hagelin was on fire playing with Nash - ironically, playing the exact game that Gaborik should have been playing despite having a far less impressive skillset. Also, he was never asked to be a grinder. He was asked to score goals and he didn't.

Quote:
This is my point about Torts not being a creative problem solver. He seems to be unwilling to change tactics at all regardless of what players happen to be on the ice at any given moment. Opposing players are 4 across the blue line? Dump (or stretch pass tip in) and grind along the boards! Oh, that's not working? Do it more! Yay! We finally have puck possession in the O zone! What do you mean you 're out of gas?

Collapse into the D zone and give the opposing D free reign of 1/3 of their O zone! Oh, that's not working? We've been trapped in our own zone for the last 2 minutes? Collapse more, block shots, and let Hank bail you out! You took a penalty because you're out of gas? You're benched!

I can't imagine why we were gassed against the Devils in the ECF's last year...
Torts' tactics have been discussed to death. I still don't think it's as direct as him telling the players to dump, for example, no matter what and them doing it over and over and over. That doesn't seem realistic at all. Dumping it in is a plan B when the play isn't there, or maybe a go-to plan if you have a line that is really built for it, like Hagelin, Stepan and Callahan were. The team looked like garbage until very recently. I don't doubt for a second that they were dumping regularly because the opposing team was outplaying them and disrupting the plays they wanted to make.

On D, you can complain all you want, the team has success in their zone by the numbers. You play to win, not to please internet critics.

Quote:
Take Kreider as another example. Last year in the playoffs, he had some abysmal games and a couple of really good games under the directive of (at least as far as I have read) "Just go out and play". So, what happened this year? Kreider has been terrible all year when with the big club. Did his play really regress that much? Or was he terrified of "just playing", making a mistake and riding pine all night?

So, instead of having a kid (who admittedly will make a ton of rookie mistakes) with a wicked shot and fast wheels on the PP, we have Brian Boyle (I have nothing against the guy and think he's very effective when utilized properly - but I don't think he should be on the PP - a big body in front of the net is only effective if said body can't be moved i.e. Zdeno Chara).
I don't think it's an issue of regression with Kreider. He came in to the NHL immediately after winning a championship, on a team that was very tightly knit, extremely confident and on a roll, and he did pretty well. If he's scared of playing because of a coach that so many other young players have come into their own under, that's a huge problem for Kreider. I don't think that's the issue though. He's a rookie, and what he's going through isn't unusual for rookies. People put absurd expectations on him, and when he fell short they blamed the same person that ends up being the scapegoat for any player that fans don't want to get on.

Quote:
Why is Girardi getting PP minutes over Stralman, McDonagh and Moore?

Why is Boyle getting minutes he can't possibly deliver on given his skill set?
I could be wrong, but I'm fairly certain that both Girardi and Boyle were on the PPs that looked incredible right when the new players came in. People have been complaining, rightfully, about the PP all year. A group comes in and has success, the coach keeps that group together, and now people are complaining that this or that player doesn't meet their ideal PP player standards. You can't have everything all the time. I'd rather have a working PP - I don't care who's on it if it works.


Quote:
Because Totorella is RIGID. He has no creative solutions. There is no "Gaborik is a specialist. He does one thing well. Scores goals. That's it. How can I use that to the team's advantage?" Everything is "This is my decision. If it's not working, it's because you're not doing it right/with enough jam/heart/etc."
To say Torts didn't realize how to utilize Gabby is silly to me. How did Gaborik score 40 twice? Luck? Or the classic cop-out for a real reason, "he did it in spite of Torts?" The past few years it sure looked like Torts knew that Gabby was a goal scorer and put him in a place to succeed. If you honestly watched Gabby this season and thought that he was showing the proper amount of hustle, we have very different standards for how hard players should go. If you don't want to play like you give a damn, you better put up the points to justify being an exception to the team rule. If you're not holding yourself to the standards the rest of the team is and you're not putting up points, you're useless, like Gabby was for the end of his time here.


Quote:
Edit: As for Zucc not being a Torts guy, I wholeheartedly disagree. A guy who is 5'6" and plays like he's 6'5", face mushing Phaneuf? He is the definition of a Torts guy. Stepan as well. Nash gets a pass because of his talent, which leaves only Brassard... Call me delusional, but this trade, to me, reeks of Torts. I think that we, as fans, see the centerpiece of this trade (if there can be a centerpiece) as Moore. I think that for Torts, the centerpiece was Dorsett - Mr. Brandon Prust 2.0 and I'm willing to bet that if Columbus didn't want to include him, this trade never happens.
Putting your hand in a bigger guy's face, while awesome, is not the same as being a grinder or playing a strictly grinding game. Zucc plays a creative game. He skates the puck in and looks for smart passes. That is not the "Torts game" that people rag on so often, the dump, chase, grind sort of strategy. Stepan and Nash are the same - they play creative hockey, they don't dump, chase, grind and that's fine because they put up points and make chances all the time. Players can break the mold if the results are worth it.

Torts isn't the GM. I don't know how many times this needs to be said. He doesn't decide who goes or stays. He probably has a say in it like any coach does, but he doesn't deserve the blame for deals Sather makes.

Quote:
And realistically, what did this trade (and the Clowe trade) do for us? It made us deeper certainly. But all it really did was ensure that we make the playoffs. So what? That helps Dolan's pockets, saves Tortorella and Sather's jobs and that's about it. We are not going deep into the playoffs with this team. IMHO, you don't trade a player like Gaborik unless 1) You are blowing up the team and getting futures or 2) trading him for players that will give you that extra "oomph" for a deep playoff run (i.e. Gartner for Andersson). The Gaborik trade, the Clowe trade (and it could be argued, the Nash trade) did neither of those things, and if it weren't for Hank, at this point, the Rangers would pretty much be the Panthers without a first round pick.
This team might go deep into the playoffs. That's the beauty of hockey. Once you make the dance, anything can happen. They're 5-1-1 since the trade. While they played some sloppy hockey at times, you don't lose games for playing sloppy, you lose by scoring less goals than the other team and they haven't done that very often recently.

Also, if you have 4 guys on huge deals like Richards, Nash, Gabby and Hank, and you need to make a trade in order to make the playoffs, something is wrong. Someone, or a group of people, are underperforming. Out of those 4, who makes sense to trade? Not Hank, the fact that NYR has him is a miracle. Not Nash, he's been the entire offense most of the year. As much as Richards sucks, his contract is extremely unappealing, maybe untradeable, and the team is already short at center. Gabby is obviously the odd man out. He was making a lot, almost a UFA, he was underperforming and he was worth something in a trade.

"If it weren't for Hank..." means nothign to me. If it weren't for their best player, a lot of teams would look like crap. Luckily, those alternate realities are meaningless.

In summation, I don't love Torts as a coach. I think it's possible that the team peaked with him last year, but I think it's probably too early to make that call at this point. I wish he'd bring in a PP specialist. I wish he'd ride out certain lines longer before breaking them up. I wish he'd tell the guys to stop dumping on the PP every single time they enter the zone etc. There are problems with him for sure, like with any coach. However, I don't think that he's to blame for Gaborik's decline one bit. Gabby wasn't putting in the proper effort and wasn't putting up points, combine that with being near UFA, having a huge contract and being able to fetch a decent return and you have a trade. I have no problem with that.

haveandare is offline  
Old
04-15-2013, 07:23 PM
  #318
Ryan McDonut
McD for Captain
 
Ryan McDonut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 3,626
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haveandare View Post
I could be wrong, but I'm fairly certain that both Girardi and Boyle were on the PPs that looked incredible right when the new players came in. People have been complaining, rightfully, about the PP all year. A group comes in and has success, the coach keeps that group together, and now people are complaining that this or that player doesn't meet their ideal PP player standards. You can't have everything all the time. I'd rather have a working PP - I don't care who's on it if it works.
ok this is just silly. you're justifying those two being in the PP by saying they had 3 good games when brass and clowe came in? girardi provides absolutely nothing whatsoever to the powerplay and its mind-boggling why he still sees any pp time

Ryan McDonut is offline  
Old
04-15-2013, 07:34 PM
  #319
haveandare
Registered User
 
haveandare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 5,748
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan McDonut View Post
ok this is just silly. you're justifying those two being in the PP by saying they had 3 good games when brass and clowe came in? girardi provides absolutely nothing whatsoever to the powerplay and its mind-boggling why he still sees any pp time
I'm justifying them being on the PP by saying that the PP, which was garbage almost all year, had success with them on it. They haven't been so great recently, maybe they should get taken off, but it was fairly obvious to me why they were out there for a while after that success. Again, I don't care who's out there so long as the PP works.

haveandare is offline  
Old
04-15-2013, 07:47 PM
  #320
JohnC
#FreeSteve
 
JohnC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 4,508
vCash: 500
Girardi has been pretty bad on the PP all year. I don't think Boyle played it once until after the deadline

JohnC is offline  
Old
04-15-2013, 08:17 PM
  #321
dethomas07
Registered User
 
dethomas07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: New York, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,204
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OverTheCap View Post
Part of the problem with Dolan is that he is clueless when it comes to running a sports organization. He hired Sather and Isiah Thomas because they are big names. Then Dolan gives them free reign because he knows so little about the sport.

I really don't think Dolan knows how to evaluate whether management is doing a good or bad job. He seems a little more knowledgeable about basketball and is more involved with the Knicks. Sometimes it's better off when an owner is less involved (I wouldn't want an owner like Wang meddling in the team's affairs constantly), but there is literally no accountability. Sather is allowed to do whatever he wants without consequence.
you think its any different with any other team.. teams hire GMs with pedigrees to make business decisions for the team.. nothing to do with owners!! Most owners dont even have a clue WTF is going on, and when they are hands on they **** the bed!! al davis few yrs ago, w. johnson, schynder (red skins) jerry jones.. i mean it can go on and on.. what about the owners that dont spend money and just manage a small budget and are content with loosing... tampa bay rays, oakland, islanders.. its works all ways in sports..

biggest issue is players have a hard time performing in NY.. its like we get all the best players but they cant put it together or eventually die off.. it doesnt make sense.. and to think its coaching is an issue all teams struggle.. blackhawks are 0-18 in there last PP.. det might miss the playoffs for the first time in nearly 30yrs and need to get younger, theyre old as dirt.. min signed all those big contracts and look where they are in the playoffs, barely making it as well.. St. louis was the fav this year along with us and struggled.. every team has issues and problems that need addressing, we;re no different nor special.. we're competing and with the trades we made, made us better..

dethomas07 is offline  
Old
04-15-2013, 09:56 PM
  #322
Ail
k.
 
Ail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Mysidia
Country: United States
Posts: 15,934
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haveandare View Post
I'm justifying them being on the PP by saying that the PP, which was garbage almost all year, had success with them on it. They haven't been so great recently, maybe they should get taken off, but it was fairly obvious to me why they were out there for a while after that success. Again, I don't care who's out there so long as the PP works.
The key part of your supporting claim is "when the new players came in."

That's all you need to say. Since then the PP has regressed again and the brief stint with success it had, had nothing to do with Boyle or Girardi individually.

Neither of them belong on a PP that is above average in the NHL. I don't even know why people are trying to argue otherwise. The idea to me that people could defend Boyle on the PP is really absurd. Girardi maybe, simply because none of the NYR D are stellar on the PP, but there are at least 8 other forwards better suited for the PP than Boyle. Both Callahan and Clowe are better options in front of the net than Boyle, and I wouldn't even bother attempting him anywhere else on the PP.

Ail is offline  
Old
04-15-2013, 09:59 PM
  #323
JohnC
#FreeSteve
 
JohnC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 4,508
vCash: 500
Boyle screening the goalie would be good if we could get decent point shots off. He's not gonna be scoring any rebounds that might be near the goalie tho.

That's what makes Cally so good in front of the net. Want a 'garbage goal'? Ryan Callahan will get you that garbage goal

JohnC is offline  
Old
04-15-2013, 10:07 PM
  #324
Ail
k.
 
Ail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Mysidia
Country: United States
Posts: 15,934
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dethomas07 View Post
biggest issue is players have a hard time performing in NY.. its like we get all the best players but they cant put it together or eventually die off.. it doesnt make sense.. and to think its coaching is an issue all teams struggle.. blackhawks are 0-18 in there last PP.. det might miss the playoffs for the first time in nearly 30yrs and need to get younger, theyre old as dirt.. min signed all those big contracts and look where they are in the playoffs, barely making it as well.. St. louis was the fav this year along with us and struggled.. every team has issues and problems that need addressing, we;re no different nor special.. we're competing and with the trades we made, made us better..
Chicago could hit 80 pts in a 48 game season. Who cares about their PP?
Detroit has been competitive for years and will not stay out of it for long.
Minnesota making the playoffs is a step forward for them.
St. Louis is comparable.

Being hard to play in NY is the lamest excuse I've ever heard for the failure of this franchise. Yes, playing in NY has its' demands, but to blame the success of the entire franchise on that? Laughable.

Ail is offline  
Old
04-16-2013, 12:00 AM
  #325
haveandare
Registered User
 
haveandare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 5,748
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ailurophile View Post
The key part of your supporting claim is "when the new players came in."

That's all you need to say. Since then the PP has regressed again and the brief stint with success it had, had nothing to do with Boyle or Girardi individually.

Neither of them belong on a PP that is above average in the NHL. I don't even know why people are trying to argue otherwise. The idea to me that people could defend Boyle on the PP is really absurd. Girardi maybe, simply because none of the NYR D are stellar on the PP, but there are at least 8 other forwards better suited for the PP than Boyle. Both Callahan and Clowe are better options in front of the net than Boyle, and I wouldn't even bother attempting him anywhere else on the PP.
Take all names and associations with players out of it. The PP is awful all year. Suddenly, new players come in, get mixed with certain old guys, and the PP clicks. Do you keep those 5 guys together for a little bit and see if they can consistently perform or do you break them up?

Girardi and Boyle aren't working on the PP now. They should be cycled out for other guys. They were parts of an effective group on the PP before, though. Having them out there for a while made sense.

haveandare is offline  
Closed Thread

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 04:41 AM.

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.