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

Time to swap Straka and Prucha on the top 2 lines...

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-30-2006, 02:55 PM
  #26
JR#9*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,733
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE View Post
I'm fairly confident that everyone realizes this is a "hockey TEAM."

As I said, there are other problems that seem to be costing us games right now: our defense and the power play's efficiency are the two most prominent.

If you try to fix something that isn't broken (that would be our overall goal production, in particular our 5 on 5 goal production), you could very well end up with three major problems as opposed to two.

There are other solutions to this problem that have not been exhausted yet, so why bother making a move in haste?

Don't panic.
Panic???

Panicing would be to force a trade for a 2nd line center and overpay in the process.

5 on 5 scoring hasn't been a problem/concern?

When 17 of the last 18 goals prior to last game are scored by 4 guys, 3 of them being on the same line and the other one doing almost all of his scoring when on the PP with the 1st unit personel I'd say it's a major concern.

And this is not some major move that you guys are making it out to be, forget about the fact that this can be changed on a shift by shift basis for christs sake.

Let's not forget that this is a coaching staff that has been willing to try and make Betts a 2nd line center for crying out loud so swaping 2 qulaity players who both play the same position isn't some crazy shakeup/panic move and the upside is possibly having 2 lines that are actually a legit scoring threat.

At the end of the day the answer will be acquiring somebody to fill the 2nd line spot but until the trade market opens up with a deal that would make sense for us then I think this is the very least is worth giving a shot.

JR#9* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2006, 02:58 PM
  #27
JR#9*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,733
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
a bit broken, as well as bottom two lines? The top line ain't, but one can argue that most of that is created from Jagr, and that Straka and Nylander, unlike last season, are burying their chances. Additionally, one can argue that the top line wouldn't suffer any chemistry issues with Prucha since he has had success there in the past and does mesh in well. And the second line, which hasn't scored in I don't know how long, could only do better.

I don't always agree with 'ain't broke, don't fix'. You still find ways to improve. If the top line stays the same and the second line gets an additional goal, it's improved. And as mentioned, assuming Jagr continues skating like it has been, I'd guess that the top line at worse stays constant. It's not a guarantee, but nothing is.
Thank you Fletch...the fact that everyone is throwing the "if it ain't broke" nonsense in regards to the 1st line is killing me and makes zero sense when trying to address the shortcomings of the entire team which has 3 other lines that need to contribute if we are to have any meaningful success this season.

JR#9* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2006, 03:25 PM
  #28
True Blue Bleed Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 4,132
vCash: 500
Well we got a bit of a shake up. Jason Ward will probably be out tomorow with an ankle injury so you're looking at:

Straka-Nylander-Jagr
Shanahan-Cullen-Hall
Hossa-Betts-Prucha
Callahan-Hollweg-Orr

True Blue Bleed Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2006, 03:39 PM
  #29
polako
Registered User
 
polako's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Country: Lebanon
Posts: 1,178
vCash: 500
JR,

I think what some of us are saying is that, by and large, the first line is responsible for the success of this team. Experimentation should first be applied to the bottom three lines before messing with the one truly productive one. Straka-Nylander-JJ has been a force ever since it was formed.

Like some other posters said, maybe a trade isn't the only option. Now that the top line is firing away, maybe this is the time to experiment with Immonen on the
2nd line...

polako is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2006, 03:56 PM
  #30
mike14
Registered User
 
mike14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Melbourne
Country: Australia
Posts: 4,303
vCash: 500
Rather than move Straka, I'd move Nylander. Lines I'd like to see tomorrow
Prucha - Straka - Jagr
Shanny - Nylander - Hall
Callahan - Cullen - Hossa
Hollweg - Betts - Orr

I know Straka isn't an ideal centre but he's servicable and he's got 2 wingers who know how to score. Moving Nylander down a line gives Shanny the playmaking centre he needs while Cullen finally finds himself in the right role

mike14 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2006, 06:27 PM
  #31
ChrisKreider20
Oh Hai Guise
 
ChrisKreider20's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,313
vCash: 500
Maybe sign Allison. He is slow as hell but maybe he'd work out okay with Shanahan and Prucha. Cullen is not cutting it. Frankly, I'm not sure about Allison, it just depends whether he is an upgrade on Cullen. When it comes down to it, I think the best possible pick up is Doug Weight.

ChrisKreider20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2006, 09:20 PM
  #32
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Tromelin
Posts: 9,481
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
is a bad idea. Cullen's a third line center/winger playing second line center. Nylander's a second line center playing top line. Switch Cullen and Nylander and you really put Cullen out of position. He's not a top line playmaker. Heck, he's not much of a playmaker at all. He generates scoring chances off his speed. He's a third liner. Not much Renney can do about that.
Nylander playing with Shanny isn't so bad...

Cullen can drive to the net (something Jagrs linemates don't really do) and his speed combined with Cullen would be a sight to see..

Fletch Rob Brown scored 40 goals playing with Mario...3rd line players can be 1st line players in the right situation..

Than again the Rangers record in November MIGHT just be fools gold for Sather, Maloney, Renney...I have feeling they don't think there is a problem or need at the second line center postion...

Son of Steinbrenner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2006, 09:35 PM
  #33
Fire Sather
Play Like a Pug
 
Fire Sather's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 19,657
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to Fire Sather
The team also needs to get back to rolling 4 lines. That will come (hopefully) when Ortmeyer hopefully gets his health back and can return to the 4th line, bumping out useless Orr.

Fire Sather is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2006, 12:08 AM
  #34
BigE
Registered User
 
BigE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: San Francisco, CA
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,476
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
a bit broken, as well as bottom two lines? The top line ain't, but one can argue that most of that is created from Jagr, and that Straka and Nylander, unlike last season, are burying their chances. Additionally, one can argue that the top line wouldn't suffer any chemistry issues with Prucha since he has had success there in the past and does mesh in well. And the second line, which hasn't scored in I don't know how long, could only do better.

I don't always agree with 'ain't broke, don't fix'. You still find ways to improve. If the top line stays the same and the second line gets an additional goal, it's improved. And as mentioned, assuming Jagr continues skating like it has been, I'd guess that the top line at worse stays constant. It's not a guarantee, but nothing is.
One could argue, one could argue, one could argue.

Lets look at what we do know:

We're scoring enough goals 5 on 5 to win hockey games.

We're not scoring enough on the power play to win hockey games.

We're not playing as defensively sound as we should be in order to win as many games as we like.

You can argue that this might happen or that might happen, but the three points I stated above are the current realities of this team.

Yes, we're getting 70% of our scoring from 4 players - but you're overlooking one very important detail: we're scoring!

Yes, maybe Straka would be god's gift to the Rangers second line, but what happens if it doesn't work out? And what happens if Prucha doesn't work out? I could "argue" just as easily that Straka will contribute much less playing on the second than he will on the first (as he did last year when he was 'demoted'). I could also argue that Petr Prucha won't fill Straka's shoes as adequately as we'd like.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JR#9 View Post
Panic???

Panicing would be to force a trade for a 2nd line center and overpay in the process.

5 on 5 scoring hasn't been a problem/concern?

When 17 of the last 18 goals prior to last game are scored by 4 guys, 3 of them being on the same line and the other one doing almost all of his scoring when on the PP with the 1st unit personel I'd say it's a major concern.

And this is not some major move that you guys are making it out to be, forget about the fact that this can be changed on a shift by shift basis for christs sake.

Let's not forget that this is a coaching staff that has been willing to try and make Betts a 2nd line center for crying out loud so swaping 2 qulaity players who both play the same position isn't some crazy shakeup/panic move and the upside is possibly having 2 lines that are actually a legit scoring threat.

At the end of the day the answer will be acquiring somebody to fill the 2nd line spot but until the trade market opens up with a deal that would make sense for us then I think this is the very least is worth giving a shot.
Panic: a sudden overwhelming fear, with or without cause, that produces hysterical or irrational behavior, and that often spreads quickly through a group of persons

A sudden overwhelming fear: I only need to cite the dozen or so "for crying out loud's" to support the idea that you're overwhelmed.

Irrational behaviour: Taking the NHL's best line and dismantling it when other options are available that could keep that number one line intact while possibly solving our dilemma.

Spreads quickly through a group of persons: A few other silly rabbits bouncing right along with you.

So tell me, if moving Straka down is worth a shot, why isn't Immonen? Why not exhaust a few other options within this organization before you start jumping for our top line, or a trade?

Quote:
Originally Posted by JR#9 View Post
Thank you Fletch...the fact that everyone is throwing the "if it ain't broke" nonsense in regards to the 1st line is killing me and makes zero sense when trying to address the shortcomings of the entire team which has 3 other lines that need to contribute if we are to have any meaningful success this season.
I've never said this wasn't a problem. It's a long-term problem, however, and not something that needs to be adjusted with such a grandeous move.

Sure it's not a "huge" move. Breaking up our only scoring line is never a huge move; and besides it can be corrected within the same game if things go wrong, right? I've got you pegged as the type of guy that comes right back on here afterwards only to cry about how his lineup wasn't given enough time. So cry me a river.

BigE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2006, 12:25 AM
  #35
MisterUnspoken
Vintage
 
MisterUnspoken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Orlando, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 10,074
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to MisterUnspoken
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE View Post
One could argue, one could argue, one could argue.

Lets look at what we do know:

We're scoring enough goals 5 on 5 to win hockey games.

We're not scoring enough on the power play to win hockey games.

We're not playing as defensively sound as we should be in order to win as many games as we like.

You can argue that this might happen or that might happen, but the three points I stated above are the current realities of this team.

Yes, we're getting 70% of our scoring from 4 players - but you're overlooking one very important detail: we're scoring!

Yes, maybe Straka would be god's gift to the Rangers second line, but what happens if it doesn't work out? And what happens if Prucha doesn't work out? I could "argue" just as easily that Straka will contribute much less playing on the second than he will on the first (as he did last year when he was 'demoted'). I could also argue that Petr Prucha won't fill Straka's shoes as adequately as we'd like.



Panic: a sudden overwhelming fear, with or without cause, that produces hysterical or irrational behavior, and that often spreads quickly through a group of persons

A sudden overwhelming fear: I only need to cite the dozen or so "for crying out loud's" to support the idea that you're overwhelmed.

Irrational behaviour: Taking the NHL's best line and dismantling it when other options are available that could keep that number one line intact while possibly solving our dilemma.

Spreads quickly through a group of persons: A few other silly rabbits bouncing right along with you.

So tell me, if moving Straka down is worth a shot, why isn't Immonen? Why not exhaust a few other options within this organization before you start jumping for our top line, or a trade?



I've never said this wasn't a problem. It's a long-term problem, however, and not something that needs to be adjusted with such a grandeous move.

Sure it's not a "huge" move. Breaking up our only scoring line is never a huge move; and besides it can be corrected within the same game if things go wrong, right? I've got you pegged as the type of guy that comes right back on here afterwards only to cry about how his lineup wasn't given enough time. So cry me a river.


You make very good points. I advocated trading for a second line center, but giving Immonen a chance certainly is an option we should try before attempting a trade. What's the worst that can happen? We wouldn't get scoring from the 2nd line (other than Shanny)?

MisterUnspoken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2006, 08:04 AM
  #36
JR#9*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,733
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE View Post
One could argue, one could argue, one could argue.

Lets look at what we do know:

We're scoring enough goals 5 on 5 to win hockey games.

We're not scoring enough on the power play to win hockey games.

We're not playing as defensively sound as we should be in order to win as many games as we like.

You can argue that this might happen or that might happen, but the three points I stated above are the current realities of this team.

Yes, we're getting 70% of our scoring from 4 players - but you're overlooking one very important detail: we're scoring!

Yes, maybe Straka would be god's gift to the Rangers second line, but what happens if it doesn't work out? And what happens if Prucha doesn't work out? I could "argue" just as easily that Straka will contribute much less playing on the second than he will on the first (as he did last year when he was 'demoted'). I could also argue that Petr Prucha won't fill Straka's shoes as adequately as we'd like.



Panic: a sudden overwhelming fear, with or without cause, that produces hysterical or irrational behavior, and that often spreads quickly through a group of persons

A sudden overwhelming fear: I only need to cite the dozen or so "for crying out loud's" to support the idea that you're overwhelmed.

Irrational behaviour: Taking the NHL's best line and dismantling it when other options are available that could keep that number one line intact while possibly solving our dilemma.

Spreads quickly through a group of persons: A few other silly rabbits bouncing right along with you.

So tell me, if moving Straka down is worth a shot, why isn't Immonen? Why not exhaust a few other options within this organization before you start jumping for our top line, or a trade?



I've never said this wasn't a problem. It's a long-term problem, however, and not something that needs to be adjusted with such a grandeous move.

Sure it's not a "huge" move. Breaking up our only scoring line is never a huge move; and besides it can be corrected within the same game if things go wrong, right? I've got you pegged as the type of guy that comes right back on here afterwards only to cry about how his lineup wasn't given enough time. So cry me a river.
So your answer after all of this is that Immonen is the key to solving the Rangers woes on the 2nd line.

Doing some lineshuffling is considered a grandeous move by a hockey genius like you I guess?

And yes, it can be changed on a shift to shift basis..not sure if you follow this game of hockey or not but that's how it goes on with teams trying to find the right balance and chemistry amoung it's lineup.

And moves like this can be done for short periods of times just to ride some hot hands or to jumpstart cold ones...you did say you follow the NHL, right?

But yeah, calling up a guy who did zero to distinguish himself in his make or break preseason where the spot was his to lose and who has been absolutely dreadful in Hartford prior to the last 5-6 games sure seems like a better option to me..I wonder why it hasn't happened yet.

And calling for the swapping of Prucha-Straka is overwhelmed???

I know it's assinine to think that Prucha would have any chemistry with Jagr...there is no reason to think that would be a possibility based upon last season when they shared ice together.and if it did click we'd have yet another weapon that has been dormant so far this season with his current linemates

You've been around enough to know my posting is never paniced or calling for drastic measures that don't make sense.


Last edited by Melrose_Jr.: 12-01-2006 at 09:16 AM. Reason: let's not start a flame war here....
JR#9* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2006, 08:17 AM
  #37
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,426
vCash: 500
So you're saying...

wait until Straka slows down a bit before making the change? No sense in trying to get Cullen and Prucha going and getting ES scoring (aside from one line) going? It's a team game (obviously) and you need all your horses working. The second line has scored about 5 goals in the last 10 games. I just don't think that's enough (espcially considering 4 of those goals are from Shanny). So in my opinion, the second line is not working. Further, in my opinion, I don't think there's any real help from within. Finally, as I mentioned, I still think that Jagr is the lynchpin on that line, and keeping him and Nylander and changing-out Straka, in my opinion, does not affect that line's production. Further, I think Straka would fit better on the second line since he carries the puck better than Prucha, and Jagr and Nylander do not need another puck carrier. So net net, I believe we'd see an increase in net goals for the Rangers at even strength (aside from the big 4 on this team, most of the other forwards are minus - that has to change).

And I agree, defense is a bigger problem for this team than offense. But I don't think there's an internal fix. I think the third and fourth lines aren't perfect, and there could be fixes, but we're not talking about those lines, or the defense in this thread. It was about moving Prucha up, and getting that kid his confidence back sooner, rather than later. The second line is broke, it needs to be fixed so this team doesn't solely rely on one man to bring them to the promised land again - we saw how that story ended last season - in a four game, embarassing sweep.

Fletch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2006, 08:21 AM
  #38
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,426
vCash: 500
BigE...

on Immonen - and you may know how much of a supporter I've been of him, but I just don't know if he's 'second' line material. On a third line with, say, Hall and a decent offensive winger, fine, but 15-17 minutes per night against better defensemen? I've been clamoring for Immonen to get a shot, but am not sure that's the shot he should be given (thinking replacing Betts as the third line center, moving him to the fourth line, and sitting Orr altogether).

unspoken - I somewhat agree about the trade (as I hoped a bit over the Summer that Savard would be signed), but I don't know who's out there, the cost, etc., and think there could be some internal maneuvering done before looking externally.

Fletch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2006, 09:19 AM
  #39
Melrose_Jr.
Registered User
 
Melrose_Jr.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Providence, RI
Country: United States
Posts: 10,692
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
on Immonen - and you may know how much of a supporter I've been of him, but I just don't know if he's 'second' line material.
That can be said of every center in the organization except for Nylander. If Renney's willing to try Betts or Straka there, it doesn't seem like a reach to me to try Immonen there.

Melrose_Jr. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2006, 09:43 AM
  #40
94now
Registered User
 
94now's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Snow Belt, USA
Country: United Nations
Posts: 6,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unseenpunk View Post
Maybe sign Allison. He is slow as hell but maybe he'd work out okay with Shanahan and Prucha. Cullen is not cutting it. Frankly, I'm not sure about Allison, it just depends whether he is an upgrade on Cullen. When it comes down to it, I think the best possible pick up is Doug Weight.
I think we missed Y. Perrault. He helped PHX well beyond expectations. Anyway, it is time to admit that letting Ruccin go was a mistake and attempts to fix it have to be made. I'm against signing anyone at this point. I would borrow Straka or Nylander to improve 2nd line as JR suggested, granted that Prucha can keep 1st with no big change in its effectiveness while improving his own.

94now is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2006, 09:59 AM
  #41
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,194
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 94now View Post
I think we missed Y. Perrault. He helped PHX well beyond expectations. Anyway, it is time to admit that letting Ruccin go was a mistake and attempts to fix it have to be made. I'm against signing anyone at this point. I would borrow Straka or Nylander to improve 2nd line as JR suggested, granted that Prucha can keep 1st with no big change in its effectiveness while improving his own.
Meh. Cullen > or = Rucchin production-wise over the course of the season.

BrooklynRangersFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2006, 10:31 AM
  #42
BigE
Registered User
 
BigE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: San Francisco, CA
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,476
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JR#9 View Post
So your answer after all of this is that Immonen is the key to solving the Rangers woes on the 2nd line.

Doing some lineshuffling is considered a grandeous move by a hockey genius like you I guess?

And yes, it can be changed on a shift to shift basis..not sure if you follow this game of hockey or not but that's how it goes on with teams trying to find the right balance and chemistry amoung it's lineup.

And moves like this can be done for short periods of times just to ride some hot hands or to jumpstart cold ones...you did say you follow the NHL, right?

But yeah, calling up a guy who did zero to distinguish himself in his make or break preseason where the spot was his to lose and who has been absolutely dreadful in Hartford prior to the last 5-6 games sure seems like a better option to me..I wonder why it hasn't happened yet.

And calling for the swapping of Prucha-Straka is overwhelmed???

I know it's assinine to think that Prucha would have any chemistry with Jagr...there is no reason to think that would be a possibility based upon last season when they shared ice together.and if it did click we'd have yet another weapon that has been dormant so far this season with his current linemates

You've been around enough to know my posting is never paniced or calling for drastic measures that don't make sense.
You're shadow boxing, and that's always the sign of a desparate debater.

I did not say Immonen was the solution to the entire problem, rather that he is an alternative that we have yet to exhaust, and an alternative that doesn't include breaking up the best line in the league.

You've completely ignored every point I've made. Instead you've chosen to discuss your hf pedigree and recycle the same argument you've been laying out for 10-12 posts now. We get it, you started the thread and you've been here since 2002 - great for you. We've read and acknowledged your point, but if you've got nothing else constructive to add, and if the mods have to edit your posts I suggest you bow out here and now.

Until you've got something further to add, I see no further reason to engage in any sort of discussion with you.

BigE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2006, 10:46 AM
  #43
BigE
Registered User
 
BigE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: San Francisco, CA
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,476
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
wait until Straka slows down a bit before making the change? No sense in trying to get Cullen and Prucha going and getting ES scoring (aside from one line) going? It's a team game (obviously) and you need all your horses working. The second line has scored about 5 goals in the last 10 games. I just don't think that's enough (espcially considering 4 of those goals are from Shanny). So in my opinion, the second line is not working. Further, in my opinion, I don't think there's any real help from within. Finally, as I mentioned, I still think that Jagr is the lynchpin on that line, and keeping him and Nylander and changing-out Straka, in my opinion, does not affect that line's production. Further, I think Straka would fit better on the second line since he carries the puck better than Prucha, and Jagr and Nylander do not need another puck carrier. So net net, I believe we'd see an increase in net goals for the Rangers at even strength (aside from the big 4 on this team, most of the other forwards are minus - that has to change).

And I agree, defense is a bigger problem for this team than offense. But I don't think there's an internal fix. I think the third and fourth lines aren't perfect, and there could be fixes, but we're not talking about those lines, or the defense in this thread. It was about moving Prucha up, and getting that kid his confidence back sooner, rather than later. The second line is broke, it needs to be fixed so this team doesn't solely rely on one man to bring them to the promised land again - we saw how that story ended last season - in a four game, embarassing sweep.
You make good points, and I see them. I see the need to look down the road, but I also see a team that is struggling right now, and for different reasons.

Why take any risk at all when we're not defensively sound enough, or efficient enough on our powerplay to win with zero 5 on 5 production? This is what I'm saying. You fix or do your best to fix the other ****, and then you can address a long-term problem. It hasn't become an issue yet, although evidence is starting to mount that it could become one.

Even if we can fix the powerplay to the point where it's contributing at 20-22% that's a goal or two a game in the new penalty-crazed NHL, and a big difference. Taking that contribution into account you can afford to tinker with lines and have the patience required to try things for more than 20 minutes before abandoning them because you "need goals now!"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
on Immonen - and you may know how much of a supporter I've been of him, but I just don't know if he's 'second' line material. On a third line with, say, Hall and a decent offensive winger, fine, but 15-17 minutes per night against better defensemen? I've been clamoring for Immonen to get a shot, but am not sure that's the shot he should be given (thinking replacing Betts as the third line center, moving him to the fourth line, and sitting Orr altogether).

unspoken - I somewhat agree about the trade (as I hoped a bit over the Summer that Savard would be signed), but I don't know who's out there, the cost, etc., and think there could be some internal maneuvering done before looking externally.
It's a tough call on Immonen and where he actually belongs, but you won't know unless you find out. And slotting Immonen in between Prucha and Shanahan takes nothing away from the top line. He showed speed and surprising grit last year, in addition to some good offensive zone sense. You bring the kid up, you give a boost to his confidence, and remove the stale feeling that everyone is getting from that 2nd line - things might change.

It could happen with Straka too, but at this point in time, with so many other things going wrong are you really willing to take the risk that this move also goes wrong?

Keep in mind December is likely our toughest month opponent wise.

BigE is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2006, 10:57 AM
  #44
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,426
vCash: 500
I do see your points too, BigE...

and like I said, am just mostly sticking to the original post of Straka and Prucha (so I ignore many of the real problems of this team).

I do somewhat agree on Immonen. I like him. I argued he should've gotten a shot last season and I was one of a few who thought he had a good preseason, albeit a slow first game, but good games to follow. Trying wouldn't hurt, but while I like him, I just think Shanny, etc., need someone with a bit more speed to play with them. I dunno, maybe Shanny can float his boat a bit higher and his game will elevate. I'm not against that, but part of my thinking is what's realistic, and swapping Straka and Prucha seems more realistic than calling up Immonen.

Fletch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2006, 12:29 PM
  #45
JR#9*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,733
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE View Post
You're shadow boxing, and that's always the sign of a desparate debater.

I did not say Immonen was the solution to the entire problem, rather that he is an alternative that we have yet to exhaust, and an alternative that doesn't include breaking up the best line in the league.

You've completely ignored every point I've made. Instead you've chosen to discuss your hf pedigree and recycle the same argument you've been laying out for 10-12 posts now. We get it, you started the thread and you've been here since 2002 - great for you. We've read and acknowledged your point, but if you've got nothing else constructive to add, and if the mods have to edit your posts I suggest you bow out here and now.

Until you've got something further to add, I see no further reason to engage in any sort of discussion with you.

Are you F'in kidding me?

What points have you made other than the PP hasn't clicked at a great rate recently and that you wouldn't touch the 1st line despite all the obvious shortcomings throughout the other 3 leaving us as yet again a 1 line team and guess what, one line teams don't win in the NHL.

And the ONLY solution you have offered is to give Immonen a shot despite him not earning a spot that was his for the taking in camp and has since done nothing to merit a callup and I like the comment about all the speed he showed us last year when in fact he is in no way, shape or form a speedster but good try anyway.

And as Fletch has pointed out numerous times in this thread but you still haven't answered or can't cmprehend, Jagr is the guy who makes the 1st line go and I think that is probrably the most obvious statement in all the NHL but it seems like you seem to think removing Straka from that line will make it all fall apart if Straka is removed from it which says something right there unless you can specify exactly what would lead you to come up with that fantastic conclusion.

Why exactly would Jagr-Nyls suddenly become ineffective if a guy who put up 30 goals in 66 games as a rookie were put in Straka's spot?It must be all the open ice Prucha seems to find in the slot when he has shared the ice with Jagr that leads you to believe this.


Last edited by JR#9*: 12-01-2006 at 12:43 PM.
JR#9* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2006, 12:36 PM
  #46
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,623
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JR#9 View Post
And how do you upgarde the other lines when the trades aren't out there to be made and 75% of the league is looking for 2nd line scoring???

Answer---you manage the assets you have to formulate the best, most balanced, effective lineup you can.

We were a one line team last year...how that work out for us?

And why does everyone think that the 1st line will suffer some significant dropoff if Prucha were moved to LW instead of Straka?

Somehow I think Nyls-Jagr will find a way to thrive.
You can smack your head into a wall until it falls off but switching Straka and Prucha is more likely to be a negative than a positive, possibly a wash. The reason there will be a significant dropoff if you make the switch is that Straka is a better offensive player than Prucha and an immensely more talented and devoted defensive player. Straka is the defensive conscience of the line.

You can improve the lines below the first one by bringing up a kid if he is better than what you currently have or through a trade. If that is not a possibility, too bad. We have the personnel we have. I think killing the golden goose by breaking up the best line in hockey is a putrid idea.

By the way, playing with one great line last year got a team universally picked to finish dead last into the playoffs. They are still not a deep team. It's a fact of life. They aren't good enough to win it all as presently constructed. Huffing and puffing and fiddling will not change that.

Resume banging your head if you'd like.


Last edited by chosen: 12-01-2006 at 12:44 PM.
chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2006, 12:58 PM
  #47
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,426
vCash: 500
Wow...

that's a strong prediction last season - If that's the case, I'm wondering how Prucha scored 30 goals in 68 games last season, many of which were spent on a third line, and many of which he didn't receive a lot of PP time. Maybe it was a fluke; if you believe so, then I'll respect your opinion. I personally don't understand the defensive drop-off part since Straka will still play and should still be defensively aware on the second line. Further, if he's so much more immensely talented, he should elevate the games of Cullen and Shanny, to a lesser extent, while playing at his same high level and let's say the top line's a wash because Jagr's Jagr, and thus you've improved overall, no?

And personally, I don't buy off on any predictions. An entire season was lost. All teams had more-than-normal player movement, and the season was more of a restart than a continuation of two seasons ago. The pundits got it wrong throughout the league. Few, if anybody, predicted Carolina to make the playoffs, let alone win the Cup. Buffalo wasn't supposed to be good. Edmonton in the Stanley Cup? Not the Flyers, Tampa, Detroit or Dallas? How about them Leafs? Point is, let's not use the line that the Rangers surprised last season. The entire season was a surprise (except for Ottawa losing in the playoffs).

And finally, was having one line a good thing last season? Was it good when the Rangers played poor post-Olympics and got swept in the playoffs? Wouldn't the point be to improve on that this coming season?

Fletch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2006, 02:37 PM
  #48
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,623
vCash: 500
The one line deal last season was more than a good thing. It was a GREAT thing. It took a team virtually devoid of talent to within a hair of first place. Because it didn't win the Cup it was a bad thing?

Straka's defensive skill is much more needed with Jagr and Nylander than with any other line on the team.

Prucha might still pan out but right now Straka is light years ahead of him and Jagr is happy with Straka. Do you want to see the return of the sulking big baby Jagr? I don't.

They didn't fall apart and get swept because of having one great line. It was because Lundqvist's magic dust evaporated and Jagr got hurt.

I have nothing against trying the swap. I just don't think it will work and it could possibly do damage.


Last edited by chosen: 12-01-2006 at 02:42 PM.
chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2006, 02:45 PM
  #49
JR#9*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 7,733
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
Prucha might still pan out but right now Straka is light years ahead of him and Jagr is happy with Straka. Do you want to see the return of the sulking big baby Jagr? I don't.
.
Not worth responding to.

JR#9* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2006, 03:01 PM
  #50
BigE
Registered User
 
BigE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: San Francisco, CA
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,476
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
and like I said, am just mostly sticking to the original post of Straka and Prucha (so I ignore many of the real problems of this team).

I do somewhat agree on Immonen. I like him. I argued he should've gotten a shot last season and I was one of a few who thought he had a good preseason, albeit a slow first game, but good games to follow. Trying wouldn't hurt, but while I like him, I just think Shanny, etc., need someone with a bit more speed to play with them. I dunno, maybe Shanny can float his boat a bit higher and his game will elevate. I'm not against that, but part of my thinking is what's realistic, and swapping Straka and Prucha seems more realistic than calling up Immonen.
It may be the more realistic option, I agree, given the start he's had to this season. It may just so happen that we're left with no other alternative than to break up that line in order to give us more of a double threat. Prucha might receive a spark on that top line, and as long as Nylander-Jagr aren't separated you're probably preserving the bulk of the chemistry. And Straka's speed might benefit the Shanahan line.

I'm not going to make excuses for Immonen's first 10 AHL games or that horrible -14, but he's come on the last 10 games and I think he's got the tools and maturity level to play. He's 23, and if we don't even try the young center in our organization - who everyone pegged as a future 2nd liner - I think that is a terrible waste of an asset. This is the opportunity this kid needs: significant time in a sink or swim atmosphere.

And what if Immonen brings the spark to that second line that we're looking for, just as he did when he was called up last season, and gets Prucha's game going in the process? You've not only got your double-threat, but you've preserved your 1st line (as I've said many times, likely the best line in the league right now...).

Another thing about Immonen: He may not be as quick as Cullen, or Straka, but he's no slouch.

BigE is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 11:01 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.