HFBoards

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

Rangers season already on thin ice

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-21-2013, 06:41 PM
  #51
Fire Sather
Play Like a Pug
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 19,229
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to Fire Sather
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dash Three One Dash View Post
There's a difference between a bad start and an abortion of a start. This one is the ladder. If they start pulling it together and winning from here on out I would not complain but I would be shocked as ****.

I'd buy the "bad start" burrito if it came with "trying hard out there" sauce. Unfortunately, this dinner is bland and gives me diarrhea. I just don't see this team suddenly turning it around without something happening to drastically help it do so.
It isn't, yet.

If we lose the next 2 and head home 2-7, then yes it is.

Spilt and get us home 3-6 and maybe we'll be ok

Fire Sather is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2013, 06:48 PM
  #52
vipernsx
Flatus Expeller
 
vipernsx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 6,506
vCash: 566
Quote:
Originally Posted by Callahan Auto View Post
This team is not nearly bad enough to warrant a complete rebuild when rebuilding does not guarantee you a Crosby, Ovechkin, etc. It's a smarter idea to continue to draft well and manage assets the best we can. We haven't been perfect but if you don't think we've been doing a better job building a squad the last few seasons than we did in the early 2000s, you aren't watching the same team.
Clark & Gorton leading a rebuild rather than Renney & Sather is a good start.

I believe the purge of 03 was done with the intention of playing prospects in 04. Had the Rangers done that, they would have had their sites set on Sid drafting in 05. As we know history didn't happen that way. To that end, if the Rangers purged this year and played prospects next season, they'd be in prime position to nab McDavid who's the next Crosby to come along.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fire Sather View Post
It isn't, yet.

If we lose the next 2 and head home 2-7, then yes it is.

Spilt and get us home 3-6 and maybe we'll be ok
It's not just the win/loss ratio. It's the margin by which they've lost and how absolutely terrible they've looked. 9-2, 6-0, 4-0, it's been a long time since the Rangers have played this bad.

vipernsx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2013, 08:41 PM
  #53
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 14,276
vCash: 500
This kinda reminds me of the 1980s. The Rangers went from an old challenging team (late 70s) to a younger, quick team who just couldnt get past the Isles and Flyers dominance (1986 being the anomaly like 2012). They had some talent but were wildly inconsistent -- one night they blow out the Islanders or Oilers and the next they lose to Winnipeg or Toronto.

The Rangers arent good enough to compete with the top teams. They have a bunch of pluggers, good defensemen and a team attitude, but its just not enough to consistently challenge for a Cup.

They are the Cubs. The sooner the fanbase realizes that the more enjoyable the experience can be.

But I have no idea why anybody would pay money to see them pay. Whatever blows your hair back I guess.

GWOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-21-2013, 09:12 PM
  #54
Kovy274Hart
Registered User
 
Kovy274Hart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Shaolin
Country: United States
Posts: 1,498
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Kovy274Hart
Quote:
Originally Posted by Callahan Auto View Post
Obviously but you need to make the playoffs in order to win the cup and the odds of the best team winning the cup aren't great (7 game series aren't totally representative of quality). If we can make the playoffs and get Hank hot, we always have a shot at the cup.
You really believe a mismatched roster like theirs is good enough to win a Cup? They'll be lucky if they make it and win a round. The roster isn't conducive to playing the up tempo style AV wants. That's why it made no sense hiring him. He's overrated to begin with. Already we've seen him not use a timeout and he stands there chewing his gum aimlessly. After the humiliation to the Devils, he has the nerve to say they only gave up eight chances. As if that matters? There was little to no effort. They didn't respond after giving up two. Think the old teams with Dubinsky would've quit?

Without Callahan, Hagelin and Nash, the Rangers are very easy to play against. Note I put Nash behind the first two because he's soft to begin with. For a guy his size and skill set, he doesn't always harness it. He plays too much on the perimeter and doesn't finish checks. Also never hustles back and is guilty of lazy penalties. This is what they signed up for. Now, he's been concussed twice and that contract looks like an albatross. Big time. That's what Sather gets for listening to trolls like Brooks. You can't run a team this way. You don't break up a roster that made the Conference Final.

In addition, the lack of quality scoring depth is inexcusable. Sather has done nothing since subtracting Dubinsky, Anisimov and Prust. Even Mitchell and Fedotenko were solid role guys. There's a reason Pouliot is on his fifth roster. And AV insists on overplaying Pyatt because he had him before. It doesn't help that Zuccarello hasn't done anything. And Stepan has struggled after missing camp. Now, they're banking on Miller and Kreider to provide a spark when neither is probably ready to play top 2 lines. Kreider is more mature. He must show more consistency to stick. JT hasn't done much since his recall. He's only 20. Fast probably should go back down.

At least there's more in terms of prospects at Hartford. The organization must stay patient and let them develop. Only then will it get better.

Kovy274Hart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-22-2013, 09:07 AM
  #55
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,007
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRKindms View Post
This is just not true. How many times did Torts have to call a time out in the first few minutes of a game because the team wasn't ready to play and were playing uninspired or sloppy hockey.

True they might not have "quit" on the game but they sure as shyte weren't ready to play on numerous occasions over Torts tenure.
So what? That is what all good coaches do. How many such in-game adjustments has AV made?

One thing to have a slow start in a game and get yelled at. Quite another to not even bother to show up for the game at all.

True Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-22-2013, 12:31 PM
  #56
NYRKindms
Registered User
 
NYRKindms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 575
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue View Post
So what? That is what all good coaches do. How many such in-game adjustments has AV made?

One thing to have a slow start in a game and get yelled at. Quite another to not even bother to show up for the game at all.
my point was that the players on this team have had trouble being ready to play under both coaches. Torts made in game adjustments to try to rectify the issue, AV not so much but the constant is the players on the team not being ready when the puck drops

Thats on the players.

There just doesn't seem to be that killer mentality on this team of pro athletes. They seem more than happy to collect a pay check and hope for the best.

NYRKindms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-22-2013, 12:37 PM
  #57
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,007
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRKindms View Post
my point was that the players on this team have had trouble being ready to play under both coaches.
Rare are the instances that the players were not ready to play for Tortarella. So far, it seems that the players are not ready to play on most occasions for AV.

True Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-22-2013, 12:46 PM
  #58
TankLarkin
Registered User
 
TankLarkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Rochester, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 519
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWOW View Post
This kinda reminds me of the 1980s. The Rangers went from an old challenging team (late 70s) to a younger, quick team who just couldnt get past the Isles and Flyers dominance (1986 being the anomaly like 2012). They had some talent but were wildly inconsistent -- one night they blow out the Islanders or Oilers and the next they lose to Winnipeg or Toronto.

The Rangers arent good enough to compete with the top teams. They have a bunch of pluggers, good defensemen and a team attitude, but its just not enough to consistently challenge for a Cup.

They are the Cubs. The sooner the fanbase realizes that the more enjoyable the experience can be.

But I have no idea why anybody would pay money to see them pay. Whatever blows your hair back I guess.
excellent analogy to early eighties. The one wild card is the games were always worth the price of admission because of the nature of the game back then (no instigator rule).

TankLarkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-22-2013, 12:59 PM
  #59
Drewbackatu*
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,048
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Tortorella nipped that right away when he saw it. It was one of his best attributes as coach. He didnt sit there and make excuses for these players like half this board is doing.
Thattaboy BRB, you tell him!

Drewbackatu* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2013, 07:58 AM
  #60
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 14,276
vCash: 500
The window opened quickly in 2006. Nobody saw it coming. It's now 2013-14. Nine seasons with the best goalie in the league and only one CF appearance. No excuse. Carolina, Buffalo, Ottawa, Philly, Pens, TB, NJ, Montreal, Boston have all made the CF since the 2005 lockout. Only Boston and Pitt has built anything sustainable. Everybody else has bottom fed except the Rangers.

San Jose has been this good for a decade and no SCF. They were sellers last season. Some called it waving a white flag. It actually turned their season around (moving Burns to wing helped).

GWOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2013, 08:04 AM
  #61
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 14,276
vCash: 500
Remember Philly in 2007. Lost season, but it let Carter and Richards play a ton. They got JVR with the high pick.

It's still early, but if the season is lost by December, start selling and allow guys like Kreider, Miller, Fast and Mcilrath some ice time. It can showcase them as well.

GWOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2013, 08:07 AM
  #62
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 28,191
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWOW View Post
Remember Philly in 2007. Lost season, but it let Carter and Richards play a ton. They got JVR with the high pick.

It's still early, but if the season is lost by December, start selling and allow guys like Kreider, Miller, Fast and Mcilrath some ice time. It can showcase them as well.
Exactly. There are countless examples of teams losing one season and being competitive the next.

NYR Viper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2013, 08:09 AM
  #63
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 14,801
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWOW View Post
The window opened quickly in 2006. Nobody saw it coming. It's now 2013-14. Nine seasons with the best goalie in the league and only one CF appearance. No excuse. Carolina, Buffalo, Ottawa, Philly, Pens, TB, NJ, Montreal, Boston have all made the CF since the 2005 lockout. Only Boston and Pitt has built anything sustainable. Everybody else has bottom fed except the Rangers.

San Jose has been this good for a decade and no SCF. They were sellers last season. Some called it waving a white flag. It actually turned their season around (moving Burns to wing helped).
I dont think any of those early post-lockout teams were true contenders. I think the window to compete opened in '11-12.

In hindsight, Sather should have worked to add to that core. Not tear down the depth for a perceived need that, ultimately, ushered in an unwanted culture change as well.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2013, 08:17 AM
  #64
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,007
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
I dont think any of those early post-lockout teams were true contenders. I think the window to compete opened in '11-12.

In hindsight, Sather should have worked to add to that core. Not tear down the depth for a perceived need that, ultimately, ushered in an unwanted culture change as well.
That said, much as I did not like Renney, the seeds for building an identity were being sewn.

But your other statement is spot on. And that was not hindsight. There were loud warning about dismantling the core. Sather's problem is that he is still stuck in Edmonton. But Gretzky and Messier are not skating here. And the core that he tore down, was better than the sum of its parts.

True Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2013, 08:20 AM
  #65
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,751
vCash: 500
Philly tried to get back in it when they added Zhitnik from the Islanders for Freddy Meyer and a draft pick. They traded Zhitnik to Atlanta for Coburn when they finally admitted defeat. That was the same year Atlanta added Tkachuk from the Blues. Forsberg was the one piece they sold. They got two former #1 picks,a #1 and #3. They swapped the #1 back to Nashville for the negotiating rights to Hartnell and Timonnen. Then they swapped Pitkanen and Geoff Sanderson to Edmonton for Lupul and Jason Smith in the summer of 2007. Holmgren added Biron from the Sabres. They had Richards,Carter and Umberger. They made the eastern conference finals in 08. Rangers management needs to wake up. Having the Rangers bottom out wouldn't be the worst thing for the franchise.

RangerBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2013, 08:28 AM
  #66
Vitto79
Registered User
 
Vitto79's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sarnia
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,399
vCash: 500
Sure this season blows so far but I don't think even if they suck and start to sell its a horrific thing.

They can retool in a Yrs time........I am fine with keeping Stepan, Brassard, Nash, Callahan, Hagelin, Dorsett as 6 Forwards but after that get rid of most of these bums......I mean Boyle likely has some value so see ya get a young player back..........who cares about Pyatt and Pouliott......obvsiously Asham and Powe are done since they have been waived and no one picked them up. Zuccarello has really been a disappointment as I thought he would be better and if he doesn't pick it up well see you too buddy

Bright side is Hartford has done real well. Miller, Kreider, Lindberg, Fast, Hrvik, Kristo,etc..........someone has to be a solid NHLer.......right?

Fill in with balzy deals and UFAs from there

G with Hank is set assuming he signs.........LD is solid they just need to retool RD. I think Girardi should go this yr.

Vitto79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2013, 08:53 AM
  #67
Trxjw
Moderator
Bored.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 16,435
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
Philly tried to get back in it when they added Zhitnik from the Islanders for Freddy Meyer and a draft pick. They traded Zhitnik to Atlanta for Coburn when they finally admitted defeat. That was the same year Atlanta added Tkachuk from the Blues. Forsberg was the one piece they sold. They got two former #1 picks,a #1 and #3. They swapped the #1 back to Nashville for the negotiating rights to Hartnell and Timonnen. Then they swapped Pitkanen and Geoff Sanderson to Edmonton for Lupul and Jason Smith in the summer of 2007. Holmgren added Biron from the Sabres. They had Richards,Carter and Umberger. They made the eastern conference finals in 08. Rangers management needs to wake up. Having the Rangers bottom out wouldn't be the worst thing for the franchise.
Bingo. You can do it quickly without "blowing it up" entirely. We have some pieces that could get us some very nice assets in trade, and we could be no worse than we are now by the time next season rolls around. A couple good trades, a solid draft, and a key FA signing or two could put this team in far better shape than they are now.

Trxjw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2013, 08:59 AM
  #68
HatTrick Swayze
Tomato Potato
 
HatTrick Swayze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,286
vCash: 500
It's tough because I think you an also make the arguments that several core shakeups are why the Flyers could never fully gel and get over the hump. They've more than had the talent. You have to make some ballsy moves, and I have no doubt that the Rangers could do that and "survive" likely even improve. But what is consistency for a core worth?

I don't think the Rangers core is near good enough which is the harsh reality. Which means they would be better off shaking it up. But long term are you better off with the shake up or trying to grow a new core?

__________________
"Here we can see the agression of american people. They love fighting and guns. when they wont win they try to kill us all." -HalfOfFame
HatTrick Swayze is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2013, 09:06 AM
  #69
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 14,801
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trxjw View Post
Bingo. You can do it quickly without "blowing it up" entirely. We have some pieces that could get us some very nice assets in trade, and we could be no worse than we are now by the time next season rolls around. A couple good trades, a solid draft, and a key FA signing or two could put this team in far better shape than they are now.
In order to do this, the powers that be are going to have to declare the type of team they want to field, and make tough decisions about the core regarding who stays and who goes. They've shown zero willingness to plan that way.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2013, 09:08 AM
  #70
Riche16
Pessimistic-Realist
 
Riche16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: FL
Country: United States
Posts: 3,436
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HatTrick Swayze View Post
It's tough because I think you an also make the arguments that several core shakeups are why the Flyers could never fully gel and get over the hump. They've more than had the talent. You have to make some ballsy moves, and I have no doubt that the Rangers could do that and "survive" likely even improve. But what is consistency for a core worth?

I don't think the Rangers core is near good enough which is the harsh reality. Which means they would be better off shaking it up. But long term are you better off with the shake up or trying to grow a new core?
The "core" wasn't good enough... which is why Dubi and Ani were dealt.

The core is still not good enough, or at the very least split... i.e. too young/inexperienced & not ready to play with the older members of that established core.

Cally, Staal, Girardi, McD... Stepan. Ready to go. Miller, Kreider, even MDZ... not quite there yet.

Riche16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2013, 09:08 AM
  #71
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 28,191
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
In order to do this, the powers that be are going to have to declare the type of team they want to field, and make tough decisions about the core regarding who stays and who goes. They've shown zero willingness to plan that way.
Exactly. It's a mish-mosh of a random assortment of players at the moment.

NYR Viper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2013, 09:12 AM
  #72
Trxjw
Moderator
Bored.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 16,435
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HatTrick Swayze View Post
It's tough because I think you an also make the arguments that several core shakeups are why the Flyers could never fully gel and get over the hump. They've more than had the talent. You have to make some ballsy moves, and I have no doubt that the Rangers could do that and "survive" likely even improve. But what is consistency for a core worth?

I don't think the Rangers core is near good enough which is the harsh reality. Which means they would be better off shaking it up. But long term are you better off with the shake up or trying to grow a new core?
Yeah, I think Philly definitely went a bit too far. They had some success, but they kept tinkering with it instead of letting the problems work themselves out. Then that whole Richards/Pronger thing happened and it's been all downhill from there.

The biggest step is identifying the core, and how far you're willing to pare back the team. Does Girardi go? Stralman? Del Zotto? Callahan? Do you dangle Lundqvist to see what's out there? Once you've done that, you need to be really honest with yourself and figure out where you need to improve.

Trxjw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2013, 09:16 AM
  #73
Jersey Girl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trxjw View Post
Bingo. You can do it quickly without "blowing it up" entirely. We have some pieces that could get us some very nice assets in trade, and we could be no worse than we are now by the time next season rolls around. A couple good trades, a solid draft, and a key FA signing or two could put this team in far better shape than they are now.
With a real GM this sounds like a plan, but we're talking about (queue Allen Iverson's 'practice' speech)...Sather. We're not talking about a good GM, one who knows what he's doing, we're talking about...Sather. It's just...Sather.

Jersey Girl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2013, 09:18 AM
  #74
Trxjw
Moderator
Bored.
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Land of no calls..
Country: United States
Posts: 16,435
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
In order to do this, the powers that be are going to have to declare the type of team they want to field, and make tough decisions about the core regarding who stays and who goes. They've shown zero willingness to plan that way.
You're right. Though I wouldn't say they've shown zero willingness to plan that way. The 11-12 team was a result of some planning to build that kind of identity. The emphasis on character when drafting. A solid read on what our farm was producing. That all developed into that blue collar identity. Unfortunately, what they did wrong came after they tasted success. They disturbed the group too much and it fell flat on it's face.

Ironically, I think the Rangers would could do very well if the marketed this year as a transition year. The draft is close to Ranger territory, and drafting a star certainly wouldn't hurt the bottom line.

Trxjw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-23-2013, 09:18 AM
  #75
OverTheCap
Registered User
 
OverTheCap's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 9,618
vCash: 500
I've always felt our core was never good enough offensively, but at least they had an admirable work ethic.

But if the lack of compete and effort continues, the Rangers have to seriously consider if this is the type of core they want to build around. The players on this team should be playing hard and with a chip on their shoulders no matter who the coach is.

OverTheCap is online now   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 12:01 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.