HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

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

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-06-2013, 11:11 AM
  #251
OverTheCap
Registered User
 
OverTheCap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 9,623
vCash: 500
No matter who the coach is, it's going to be awfully hard to be a top offensive team in the league without a first line center or a legitimate offensive defenseman - two problem areas that have plagued this team for years.

Richards has failed to meet expectations as a top line center and Del Zotto is still too inconsistent to be considered a scoring threat from the blueline. Until the Rangers upgrade at those positions, it is going to be a struggle for the Rangers to become an elite offensive team.

OverTheCap is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 11:12 AM
  #252
Bob Richards
Mr. Mojo Risin'
 
Bob Richards's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 45,923
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ailurophile View Post
Can't hurt at this point. The only goals scored less than zero is negative goals and I am fairly certain that cannot happen. I am not an expert however.
Johnny Malkin vs. Buffalo circa 2012 will prove you wrong.

__________________
"New day, new hope. Richards Buyout 2014". -Ail
Bob Richards is online now  
Old
05-06-2013, 11:13 AM
  #253
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 14,811
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OverTheCap View Post
No matter who the coach is, it's going to be awfully hard to be a top offensive team in the league without a first line center or a legitimate offensive defenseman - two problem areas that have plagued this team for years.

Richards has failed to meet expectations as a top line center and Del Zotto is still too inconsistent to be considered a scoring threat from the blueline. Until the Rangers upgrade at those positions, it is going to be a struggle for the Rangers to become an elite offensive team.
Game. Set. Match. I think you have it here in a nutshell.

Although Sather will likely try the "Magic Coach" theory first.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 11:13 AM
  #254
Leetch2McDonagh27
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Ha, way to play right into the hands of the argument regarding speaking in absolutes.

Got news for you. Tortorella isnt going anywhere until the seasons over at the very earliest. I dont see the need to get caught up in this whine-fest about the coach during the playoffs.

You'll likely be feeling a lot better this time tomorrow if the Rangers deliver a tidy 4-1 win tonight. Thats the problem with knee-jerk reactions, which NYC fanbases usually excel in.
lol.....that's the problem. That Torts is here for no only this Playoffs.....but he will start next season as well as the Head Coach of the Rangers

And sure I'd feel better if they get a 4-1 win. But I will still be calling for Torts head afterwards.....you can be sure of that.

My belief is that our team will never meet the expectations we have with Torts as our coach. His style, stubbornness, and his arrogance will be the death of this team. You can count on that.....

Leetch2McDonagh27 is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 11:15 AM
  #255
Leetch2McDonagh27
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 215
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ola View Post
Torts is a bum and should go home and beat those dogs instead of torturing us with this humiliating crap.
it is funny....but a statement like this couldn't be further from the truth at this point in time

Leetch2McDonagh27 is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 11:19 AM
  #256
Cake or Death
.
 
Cake or Death's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 2,081
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Thats a "very good" lineup to you? Especially at forward?

This year, only Stepan and Nash could be considered "very good" in my eyes. And my definition of very good are players that fill roles successfully to a Stanley Cup caliber. Callahan is always good, but I dont think hes been overly impressive this season. Hagelin is all speed and little anything else. Zuccarello looks like a wizard against the dregs of the NHL, and is a non-factor against top-half teams. Richards? Do we even need to get into him, and the season hes having?

The bottom 6 has been a comically tragic revolving door all season. Guys like Brassard and Dorsett, members of the NHL's doormat for years, are supposed to save it? Clowe? Too bad hes not the old broken down version we've acquired, or I might be able to give a "very good" award to him.

Pyatt? Boyle? Asham? Powe? Lets put our hands together for them. These are the guys, often 33% of the forward roster, that literally serve little to no purpose on any given night. You're trying to say that 4th liners are, by definition, not very good? Maybe they wont go coast to coast and score a beautiful goal, but there are tons of 4th liners that know, accept, and execute their roles -- usually to provide hitting and energy. We've got none of that.

I've readily admitted there are systemic problems with this team. Namely their grotesque transition game in the neutral zone. But to push this false illusion that this roster is a cup contending team, and a coaching change is all thats standing in their way, is an absurd notion.
You don’t look strictly at individual players to see if a TEAM is very good. This is a very good team. It is a top 5-7 roster in the league, without doubt. When you quote someone and you say, “this false illusion that this roster is a cup contending team, and a coaching change is all thats standing in their way, is an absurd notion,” you’re totally misrepresenting what he said. He said we should not be struggling to beat the Caps. And we flat out shouldn’t. We should take them in 5, 6 games at most. I’ll get more into this in responding to the next person.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
It's not a great team on based purely on offense:
  • Nash is the only legit top line player.
  • Stepan needs to repeat this year's production and play before I put him in that category.
  • Hagelin is not a top line player on a Cup contender.
  • I love Callahan, but he's not a top 3 player either.
  • Richards is on the downside of his career.
  • Zuccarello is still an unknown entity who still has not played a full NHL season's worth of games.
  • Brassard has shown flashes which is nice. But it also means he's inconsistent.
  • I don't feel like I have a good grasp on what Dorsett is, but to pencil him in on the third line is presumptuous.
  • Clowe has seen his production go down each of the last three seasons.
  • The fourth line is devoid of offense.

So, no it's not a great team based on offense.
Apply this same player by player scrutiny to all 30 teams. Then add in defensive scoring, and the best goalie in the world. Again, you have to look at an entire team, not just individual parts. Moreover, I think people overestimate what constitutes an average NHL team. If people think this is a weak squad, other teams are, in general, weaker player by player than I think some people realize. That, or people have very warped views of what first, second, and third liners offensively look like in the NHL.

When you start looking at a first line winger, what's the criteria offensively? 80 points? 70 points? 13 teams in the league last season didn't have a player who reached 70 points. Offensive output, line by line, is probably a lot lower than people realize.

The NYR are a top 5, absolute worst case top 10 roster in the NHL. If anyone thinks otherwise, please start watching every team, please check stats on all 30 teams, please look at what a second line forward really scores, and then you will see this is absolutely a very solid team.

Are the Rangers a Cup caliber team? Hard to say. Pitt is a Cup caliber team on paper, and they’re struggling with the Islanders and lost to Philly last season. So who freakin knows. But the Rangers are not a bubble team, are not a team that should be losing a series to Washington, or down 2-0, are not a team that should have an inept PP year after year, and are better than some people give them credit for when compared to the rest of the league’s rosters.

Cake or Death is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 11:24 AM
  #257
Richter Scale
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 899
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ailurophile View Post
The only goals scored less than zero is negative goals and I am fairly certain that cannot happen. I am not an expert however.
Its called being a defensive liability and giving up a goal because of a defensive lapse. Remember last season's series against the Caps in which Kreider made a perfect blind pass to Ovechkin, gift wrapping him a goal? There is your negative goal.

In Kreider's defense, he hasn't been nearly as brutal defensively this season. But he also hasn't been nearly as potent offensively. I'm pretty neutral on whether Kreider plays or not... If he brings the same offensive game he did in last year's playoffs, then yea, he's an improvement over pretty much anyone on the 4th line. Problem is he isn't bringing that game. I don't understand the people throwing hissy fits about him not playing. Playoffs are not the time to let a young kid develop or work through inconsistencies in his game. You ice the roster you think gives you the best chance to win.

Richter Scale is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 11:31 AM
  #258
Ail
k.
 
Ail's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Mysidia
Country: United States
Posts: 16,311
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richter Scale View Post
Its called being a defensive liability and giving up a goal because of a defensive lapse. Remember last season's series against the Caps in which Kreider made a perfect blind pass to Ovechkin, gift wrapping him a goal? There is your negative goal.

In Kreider's defense, he hasn't been nearly as brutal defensively this season. But he also hasn't been nearly as potent offensively. I'm pretty neutral on whether Kreider plays or not... If he brings the same offensive game he did in last year's playoffs, then yea, he's an improvement over pretty much anyone on the 4th line. Problem is he isn't bringing that game. I don't understand the people throwing hissy fits about him not playing. Playoffs are not the time to let a young kid develop or work through inconsistencies in his game. You ice the roster you think gives you the best chance to win.
Callahan and Richards have been gift-wrapping blind passes to other teams all season. No one is defining their careers by that. I assure you negative goals would be representing the Rangers goal tally as -1 on the scoreboard and it was obviously not a serious comment. Thank you for twisting it in to a reason why Kreider should ride the pine though.

__________________
Ail is online now  
Old
05-06-2013, 11:35 AM
  #259
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 16,472
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OverTheCap View Post
No matter who the coach is, it's going to be awfully hard to be a top offensive team in the league without a first line center or a legitimate offensive defenseman - two problem areas that have plagued this team for years.

Richards has failed to meet expectations as a top line center and Del Zotto is still too inconsistent to be considered a scoring threat from the blueline. Until the Rangers upgrade at those positions, it is going to be a struggle for the Rangers to become an elite offensive team.
You don't have to be a "top offensive team" but you certainly can't be a one trick pony, and that's exactly what this team has been for a few years now -- perhaps only with the exception being last year. They get so focused on defense that the offense suffers because of it.

I don't think Del Zotto is too inconsistent to be the PP QB we need. The problem is that we don't let him actually QB the PP. We let Richards run the show, and as a result, Del Zotto spends most of his time deferring to Richards. Some of the best PPQB's aren't necessarily a threat to score, but they're simply a perceived threat. They have the talent to draw players out of position, and then make the pass to the open man. Del Zotto can do that, but you can't have two guys on the same unit playing the same role. Two QB's doesn't work.

I don't think it's any coincidence that the highest ranked PP we've had since Jagr left was Del Zotto's rookie season.


Last edited by Trxjw: 05-06-2013 at 11:47 AM.
Trxjw is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 11:40 AM
  #260
Richter Scale
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 899
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ailurophile View Post
Callahan and Richards have been gift-wrapping blind passes to other teams all season. No one is defining their careers by that.
Kreider doesn't have an NHL career to be defined or judged. He has ~40 games played. But I'm pretty sure I said I was neutral on whether he plays or not... Just wondering "aloud" about why I don't get the extreme views toward either perspective.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ailurophile View Post
I assure you negative goals would be representing the Rangers goal tally as -1 on the scoreboard and it was obviously not a serious comment.
Humor is lost on me. Does not compute.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ailurophile View Post
Thank you for twisting it in to a reason why Kreider should ride the pine though.
No problem!

Richter Scale is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 11:43 AM
  #261
Bob Richards
Mr. Mojo Risin'
 
Bob Richards's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 45,923
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cake or Death View Post
Apply this same player by player scrutiny to all 30 teams. Then add in defensive scoring, and the best goalie in the world. Again, you have to look at an entire team, not just individual parts. Moreover, I think people overestimate what constitutes an average NHL team. If people think this is a weak squad, other teams are, in general, weaker player by player than I think some people realize. That, or people have very warped views of what first, second, and third liners offensively look like in the NHL.

When you start looking at a first line winger, what's the criteria offensively? 80 points? 70 points? 13 teams in the league last season didn't have a player who reached 70 points. Offensive output, line by line, is probably a lot lower than people realize.

The NYR are a top 5, absolute worst case top 10 roster in the NHL. If anyone thinks otherwise, please start watching every team, please check stats on all 30 teams, please look at what a second line forward really scores, and then you will see this is absolutely a very solid team.

Are the Rangers a Cup caliber team? Hard to say. Pitt is a Cup caliber team on paper, and they’re struggling with the Islanders and lost to Philly last season. So who freakin knows. But the Rangers are not a bubble team, are not a team that should be losing a series to Washington, or down 2-0, are not a team that should have an inept PP year after year, and are better than some people give them credit for when compared to the rest of the league’s rosters.
I refuse to believe this roster is a Top 5 roster in the NHL. On paper we should be decent but that doesn't appear to be the case. Richards is terrible which nukes the center depth and our bottom 6 has to be one of the worst league wide.

I crunched the numbers and totaled the stats of everyone who played a bottom 6 role this year including guys like Kreider and Miller.

259 combined games.
28 goals.
28 assists.
56 points.

That is absolutely dreadful. Defensively and Goal-tending wise we should probably be Top 3 in the league but McDonagh has been up and down all year, Del Zotto has had his brains in his ass for the past month, Girardi by all accounts had a pretty terrible season, Stralman is consistent but a 5th D-man, Staal is injured, the jury is out on Moore and Emmy/Gilroy/Bickel were Emmy/Gilroy/Bickel.

Bob Richards is online now  
Old
05-06-2013, 11:45 AM
  #262
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 11,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trxjw View Post
You have to be a "top offensive team" but you certainly can't be a one trick pony, and that's exactly what this team has been for a few years now -- perhaps only with the exception being last year. They get so focused on defense that the offense suffers because of it.

I don't think Del Zotto is too inconsistent to be the PP QB we need. The problem is that we don't let him actually QB the PP. We let Richards run the show, and as a result, Del Zotto spends most of his time deferring to Richards. Some of the best PPQB's aren't necessarily a threat to score, but they're simply a perceived threat. They have the talent to draw players out of position, and then make the pass to the open man. Del Zotto can do that, but you can't have two guys on the same unit playing the same role. Two QB's doesn't work.

I don't think it's any coincidence that the highest ranked PP we've had since Jagr left was Del Zotto's rookie season.
I really think that if we insist on having a forward as a puck distributor on the point, it needs to be Stepan. Del Zotto really needs to be on our top PP unit, but he isn't because Richards plays the point. Richards is left handed. Del Zotto is left handed. You need one of your point men to be right handed as a shot threat. Stepan is right handed. Relegate Richards to the second unit or have him distribute the puck from the half wall.

This has been an ongoing issue with the team's powerplay. The units don't actually make sense. They haven't for years. These would be units that make sense:

Callahan-Richards-Nash
Stepan-Del Zotto

Clowe-Brassard-Zuccarello
Girardi-Moore

Instead, we're going to keep getting

Callahan-Stepan-Nash
Girardi-Richards

Clowe-Brassard-Zuccarello
Random D

Tawnos is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 11:46 AM
  #263
3rd Guy High
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 745
vCash: 500
My responses are bolded.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
I never said that he doesn't hit and provide energy. I said he provides no offense.

It wasn't you that said that, it was the other quote I posted. 4th liners are not expected to score many goals. Just to provide energy and hit. Any offense is a plus. Look around the league. Asham also is the only one that resembles any form of offense on our 4th line, like it or not.

Not sure I would tout the Nash-Richards-Gaborik line because it was overall pretty ineffective.

I wasn't touting the line, I was just using it as an example of a 1st line that has all "first line caliber" players.

Looking at the roster from a purely offense standpoint, it's not all that impressive.

Well shucks, who gives a crap about defense then when all we need is offense! Let's just get 12 Mike Ribieros. It's also not impressive because we are not getting the best out of all of them, which is exactly my point.

They also have a guy who is going to get consideration for the Hart who has turned an otherwise average wing into a three time 30 goal scorer.

Does that explain why their 2nd and 3rd lines can chip in goals too?

They also have a guy who is basically a point-per-game center.

Again, one guy is not a reason to make an entire team play under a certain system. He's not the guy getting their D involved in their transition game either. Thats the coach.

You are what you're record says you are.

I agree, but this team has the potential to be so much more than an 8th place team.

I don't know what Zuccarello is I've seen some excellent flashes (in this system). I have also seen some time when he looks overmatched. The fact is, he's an unknown that I'm not ready to say the times he's unproductive to be because of the system. It could do something with the fact he's a small. And I can't say what he could/should be because he still hasn't played a full season's worth of games in his career.

Most of the flashes have been when he manages to get open ice (mostly against ****** teams). If we played a system that was conductive to creating more open ice, it is a no brainer that he would be better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OverTheCap View Post
No matter who the coach is, it's going to be awfully hard to be a top offensive team in the league without a first line center or a legitimate offensive defenseman - two problem areas that have plagued this team for years.

Richards has failed to meet expectations as a top line center and Del Zotto is still too inconsistent to be considered a scoring threat from the blueline. Until the Rangers upgrade at those positions, it is going to be a struggle for the Rangers to become an elite offensive team.
No one ever said we needed to be an elite offensive team. We just need to have a GF/G average higher than the abysmal .50 it is right now, in the playoffs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trxjw View Post
You don't have to be a "top offensive team" but you certainly can't be a one trick pony, and that's exactly what this team has been for a few years now -- perhaps only with the exception being last year. They get so focused on defense that the offense suffers because of it.

I don't think Del Zotto is too inconsistent to be the PP QB we need. The problem is that we don't let him actually QB the PP. We let Richards run the show, and as a result, Del Zotto spends most of his time deferring to Richards. Some of the best PPQB's aren't necessarily a threat to score, but they're simply a perceived threat. They have the talent to draw players out of position, and then make the pass to the open man. Del Zotto can do that, but you can't have two guys on the same unit playing the same role. Two QB's doesn't work.

I don't think it's any coincidence that the highest ranked PP we've had since Jagr left was Del Zotto's rookie season.
I'm assuming you meant to say you "don't" have to be an elite offensive team. If, so, I completely agree with this statement. There are no one dimensional teams that go far in today's NHL. That's exactly what we are right now.

3rd Guy High is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 11:46 AM
  #264
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 16,219
vCash: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by OverTheCap View Post
No matter who the coach is, it's going to be awfully hard to be a top offensive team in the league without a first line center or a legitimate offensive defenseman - two problem areas that have plagued this team for years.

Richards has failed to meet expectations as a top line center and Del Zotto is still too inconsistent to be considered a scoring threat from the blueline. Until the Rangers upgrade at those positions, it is going to be a struggle for the Rangers to become an elite offensive team.
Here's the thing though, I don't think that anyone is asking for a top offensive team.

I think that we as a fan base, want a team that can generate offensive opportunities consistently.

We want a coach that can come in here work with the players that the team has and devise a system that maximizes the talent we do have. Not devise a system that forces them to the outside and behind the goal. I'd prefer a team that has the testicular fortitude to work the puck IN FRONT OF THE NET. Not behind it.

And while Richards has falied to meet his expectations, Stepan has exceeded his. Net affect is a wash.

Del Zotto could be better on the PP no question.

The PP as a whole (systemic as well as individual players) have all contributed to MDZ's struggles on the PP as much as he has contributed to a struggling PP.

Tort's system is flawed. The team is better than the results have indicated and as a result we play the game with no confidence.

pld459666 is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 11:53 AM
  #265
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 14,811
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Richards View Post
I refuse to believe this roster is a Top 5 roster in the NHL. On paper we should be decent but that doesn't appear to be the case. Richards is terrible which nukes the center depth and our bottom 6 has to be one of the worst league wide.

I crunched the numbers and totaled the stats of everyone who played a bottom 6 role this year including guys like Kreider and Miller.

259 combined games.
28 goals.
28 assists.
56 points.

That is absolutely dreadful. Defensively and Goal-tending wise we should probably be Top 3 in the league but McDonagh has been up and down all year, Del Zotto has had his brains in his ass for the past month, Girardi by all accounts had a pretty terrible season, Stralman is consistent but a 5th D-man, Staal is injured, the jury is out on Moore and Emmy/Gilroy/Bickel were Emmy/Gilroy/Bickel.
Agreed. Top 5 roster? Huh? Some folks need to pay a little more attention around the NHL, I think.

Washington is a good example. They have been one of the best teams in the NHL for about 6 weeks now. Their top offensive catalysts in Ovechkin, Backstrom, and Green blow away what the Rangers have to offer.

Yet, the mighty Rangers, held back by their evil coach, should blow away these guys in 5 or 6? Get your heads out of the sand.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 11:54 AM
  #266
Trxjw
Retired.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 16,472
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post
I really think that if we insist on having a forward as a puck distributor on the point, it needs to be Stepan. Del Zotto really needs to be on our top PP unit, but he isn't because Richards plays the point. Richards is left handed. Del Zotto is left handed. You need one of your point men to be right handed as a shot threat. Stepan is right handed. Relegate Richards to the second unit or have him distribute the puck from the half wall.

This has been an ongoing issue with the team's powerplay. The units don't actually make sense. They haven't for years. These would be units that make sense:

Callahan-Richards-Nash
Stepan-Del Zotto

Clowe-Brassard-Zuccarello
Girardi-Moore

Instead, we're going to keep getting

Callahan-Stepan-Nash
Girardi-Richards

Clowe-Brassard-Zuccarello
Random D
I'd prefer not to have a forward on the point at all. I think between Moore, Stralman and McDonagh, we could easily put one of them on the point with Del Zotto as a shooter. The shooter doesn't necessarily have to be a righty either. It's nice to have that off-wing shot, but it's not a necessity.

Trxjw is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 11:57 AM
  #267
Off Sides
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 948
vCash: 446
Offense off the rush does not always allow the defense to set up in advantageous positions before the shot comes.

Offense from behind the net allows for the defense to set up.

Skating and passing through the neutral zone may be dangerous but without it, you get what the Rangers are, a team who has no idea how to generate offense. If a team does not know how to generate offense with puck possession, the power play will suffer because the team is not practiced at having possession of the puck, which is paramount to a successful power play.

Off Sides is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 12:02 PM
  #268
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 11,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trxjw View Post
I'd prefer not to have a forward on the point at all. I think between Moore, Stralman and McDonagh, we could easily put one of them on the point with Del Zotto as a shooter. The shooter doesn't necessarily have to be a righty either. It's nice to have that off-wing shot, but it's not a necessity.
It depends. I'd like to not have a forward on the point either, but I was mostly talking about our team's insistence that we do. As far as the handedness issue, if you're playing two point men, I disagree. You someone to be able to shoot on each side, because a lefty playing on the left isn't going to have many choices of good shooting angles. Also, both point men need to be shooters. Only having one shooter lets the opposing PK key on him.

If you insist on not having the handedness issue resolved on the points, you need to move to an umbrella. And there isn't anything wrong with an umbrella. If that's the style your pieces dictate you use, that's fine. Del Zotto needs to be at the top.

Tawnos is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 12:12 PM
  #269
schabadoo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,179
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by li97 View Post
Every team has injuries. If we can't deal with one or two injuries were not going anywhere anyway. It's not like we're missing Lundqvist.

If anyone's still up, I suggest you watch the San Jose Sharks play. Watch how they use their d in their transition play. If their forwards get the puck and see something they don't like or don't see a clear lane/entry they send it back to their D to reset and try again. It's such a joy to watch.
You listed a lineup and claimed they're not performing.

The lineup you listed has never played together. One of the players on it has played exactly one game as a Ranger.

schabadoo is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 12:14 PM
  #270
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,847
vCash: 500
Who should be the coach? Young guy. First HC job in NHL. Another experienced guy. The Caps were terrible for the first 2 months of the season. Oates is a first time coach. He would have been run of town if he was the Rangers HC. Moved Alex to the RW. Gaborik balked at switching sides. Oates wouldn't play D on their opposite sides. MacLean in Ottawa is another first timer.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 12:16 PM
  #271
frankthefrowner
Registered User
 
frankthefrowner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,661
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
Who should be the coach? Young guy. First HC job in NHL. Another experienced guy. The Caps were terrible for the first 2 months of the season. Oates is a first time coach. He would have been run of town if he was the Rangers HC. Moved Alex to the RW. Gaborik balked at switching sides. Oates wouldn't play D on their opposite sides. MacLean in Ottawa is another first timer.
Ive heard Scott Gordons name being thrown around... dont like Isles Retreads but its not as though he could have done anything to make that team good.

frankthefrowner is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 12:18 PM
  #272
BroadwayBlues
oxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxo
 
BroadwayBlues's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: New York City
Country: United States
Posts: 7,880
vCash: 500
Heard Ron Duguay on the radio. Pretty much said Tortorella is an issue with the younger players.

BroadwayBlues is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 12:20 PM
  #273
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 29,820
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by BroadwayBlues View Post
Heard Ron Duguay on the radio. Pretty much said Tortorella is an issue with the younger players.
What does that mean?

__________________
SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 12:21 PM
  #274
frankthefrowner
Registered User
 
frankthefrowner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,661
vCash: 500
I dont get how he is an issue with younger players.. Carl Hagelin, Derek Stepan, Ryan McD havent had an issue getting ice. Del Zotto got a fair chance after he came back up from the minors. So to me that is Horse ****.

frankthefrowner is offline  
Old
05-06-2013, 12:22 PM
  #275
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 16,219
vCash: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
Who should be the coach? Young guy. First HC job in NHL. Another experienced guy. The Caps were terrible for the first 2 months of the season. Oates is a first time coach. He would have been run of town if he was the Rangers HC. Moved Alex to the RW. Gaborik balked at switching sides. Oates wouldn't play D on their opposite sides. MacLean in Ottawa is another first timer.
I would go with a 1st time HC. Doesn't have to be veyr young.

Someone that understands offence and how to generate it.

I joke about it all the time, but I can't see the down-side of giving a guy like Joey Mullen a shot here as Head Coach.

The PP alone would benefit and if everything else stayed the same, we would be better off.

We have dodged the Offence/Defence balance that teams need in order to really compete for a cup. We have what I think is a very solid, well balanced team in the sense that we have a solid top 9 at forward and a solid top 4 on D, but the focus of the system has now followed in that balance.

We need someone that can come in here and develope an offensive system while not sacrificing to much defensively.

pld459666 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 08:30 PM.

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.