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

Devs Vs Rangers:Then and now...

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-07-2007, 12:38 PM
  #1
HAPPY HOUR
Registered User
 
HAPPY HOUR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 5,253
vCash: 500
Devs Vs Rangers:Then and now...

From the mid to late 90s to 2007 I have noticed an amazing turn of events that honestly has me profoundly confused. The debate has gone on for a long time as to why the Devils consistently ice a quality team. We as Rangers fans give them credit for excellent drafting, good coaching, and have critiicized them also for "boring hockey",the "trap" and Lous ability to manipulate the system.

What I find most frustrating as a Ranger fan, is the N.J Devils ability to change. Starting in the mid 90s the Rangers always seemed to have the better skating teams, but would continously get checked into the ice, and physically worn down by, guys like Holik, Mckay, Peluso. On the defensive side guys like Stevens, Daneyko, Fetisov would bang our forwards hard all night, and take there heads off in front of their net. Many Rangers fans (me included) complained that all the Devils did was hook and hold. They would get their one goal lead, and then stack up the neutral zone, and force the Rangers to dump it, and then go get it. Well,the Rangers never got it.

Fast forward to 2005. I was convinced that these rule changes would put the Devils into scramble mode and force them to revamp their whole philosophy that they had so skillfully mastered.So last night as I sit in front of the tv watching the Rangers vs the Devils for the hundreth time I am watching a Devil team that is still boring, BUT has a completley adapted squad that outskates the Rangers in every facet of the game. They are faster on the dump ins. They are faster carrying the puck through the neutral zone, and they are faster from the front of their nets on a save or deflected shot to to corner boards. It kills me to give credit where credit is do to a hated rival,but the Rangers always seem to not be able to catch on to the games direction. When we had guys like Reijo.Mark Pavelich,Jan Erixon, Mike Rogers, they were superior skaters in a game that had tons of cheap shots ,Intimidation and disregard for rules such as slashing and elbowing.

Then they took that out of the game (sadly IMO )........On to players like Nedved,Dvorak and Hlvac who got hooked and held all night to no avail. So what to the Rangers do. They decide to draft bigger skaters and D-men to play with the likes of teams like the Devils. Great. But then we have a lockout and sweeping rule changes. Somehow (and this is my main point) the Devils come out with players like Parise, Gionta, Martin, Zajac, Oduya, who as far as I can see skate like they have an extra gear compared to the Rangers. The Rangers again are caught going in the wrong direction drafting or trading for the likes of Jessimen, Falardeau, Liffiton,Taylor, who are big and have some talent, but IMO are too slow for the game the way it is played today.

I have realized that the last two drafts 2005, and 2006 are absolutley critical to the future of this franchise right now, and we better pray that guys like Ryan Callahan, Nigel Dawes, Bobby S, Korps come through because riding Staal with either Lundy or Monty will not get it done.
The current New York Rangers are at a crossroads(again) and I'm not confident thinking about that right now.


Last edited by HAPPY HOUR: 02-07-2007 at 07:59 PM. Reason: grammar
HAPPY HOUR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2007, 01:29 PM
  #2
HockeyBasedNYC
Registered User
 
HockeyBasedNYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Here
Country: United States
Posts: 12,947
vCash: 500
Agree with some of what you have to say. Some good points in there about player types and drafting, but i still think its too early to tell whats going to transpire the next few years with both of these teams - specifically the goalies and how they effect each team. But to me the Devil - Ranger comparison is very interesting.

Broduers tenure with the team has no doubt effected the style of play that they continue to stick to year in and year out. Once he begins to diminish in his career and retire, the team is going to be forced to adjust and that is something that is not going to be easy, unless Lou finds the next Broduer. (which would really blow) He in no doubt has been one of the most influential players on any franchises history. Its tough to compare sports... but I always relate him to the Yankees and Mariano Rivera, hes always in the back just waiting. And think of how the Yankees will have to lick their wounds once he is gone, theyve been setting up their bullpen for him for the last 12 years.

Lundqvists development is also a question for the Rangers, as he gains experience the team begins to shift differently as well. Hockey teams are always built with the idea of the goalie on out and we have a very good young sophmore goalie who is only going to get better IMO. The rest of the team and drafts have to mature as well and thats really up to them and the upper management filling in the holes. (When Jagr goes, who's the star?) This recent acquistion of Avery could be a big one considering he can play and fight. TO me the most important idea with that trade is that he hopefully build a tought identity on home ice and thats something that is sorely needed.

Good post, but next time could you please break into paragraphs!??


Last edited by HockeyBasedNYC: 02-07-2007 at 01:41 PM.
HockeyBasedNYC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2007, 01:43 PM
  #3
Skroob*
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 3,064
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by happy hour View Post
SNIP
Paragraphs are your friend.

Skroob* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2007, 01:44 PM
  #4
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 29,976
vCash: 500
Awards:
The team has lost two Hall Of Fame defensemen and seemingly hasn't missed a beat. You have to appreciate/respect/admire that.

__________________
SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2007, 02:23 PM
  #5
HAPPY HOUR
Registered User
 
HAPPY HOUR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 5,253
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyBasedNYC View Post
Agree with some of what you have to say. Some good points in there about player types and drafting, but i still think its too early to tell whats going to transpire the next few years with both of these teams - specifically the goalies and how they effect each team. But to me the Devil - Ranger comparison is very interesting.

Broduers tenure with the team has no doubt effected the style of play that they continue to stick to year in and year out. Once he begins to diminish in his career and retire, the team is going to be forced to adjust and that is something that is not going to be easy, unless Lou finds the next Broduer. (which would really blow) He in no doubt has been one of the most influential players on any franchises history. Its tough to compare sports... but I always relate him to the Yankees and Mariano Rivera, hes always in the back just waiting. And think of how the Yankees will have to lick their wounds once he is gone, theyve been setting up their bullpen for him for the last 12 years.

Lundqvists development is also a question for the Rangers, as he gains experience the team begins to shift differently as well. Hockey teams are always built with the idea of the goalie on out and we have a very good young sophmore goalie who is only going to get better IMO. The rest of the team and drafts have to mature as well and thats really up to them and the upper management filling in the holes. (When Jagr goes, who's the star?) This recent acquistion of Avery could be a big one considering he can play and fight. TO me the most important idea with that trade is that he hopefully build a tought identity on home ice and thats something that is sorely needed.

Good post, but next time could you please break into paragraphs!??

Thanks for the heads up....And to think of all those years in private school...

HAPPY HOUR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2007, 02:59 PM
  #6
towely
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: new jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 326
vCash: 500
i think the biggest difference between the two teams are the rangers build a team around its players and the devils built a team based on a system.
for example the rangers will get a couple star players and try to find the missing peices to compliment their game and keep trading away in the hopes they will find this lucky combo ( kinda like the way we change our lines around every game ).

where the devils team is built around a system of dicipline and team defensive play and you either buy into or not and if not lou will get rid of you.
the way lou has been doing it based on a system is almost like having a couple of fail safes built in in which i mean that when they trade for players and draft players they are not nessacarily looking for super stars with high pay checks that have crazy skills. they are looking for and building around players that are very diciplined and team oriented hard playing blue collar type of players. one of the fail safes to this method is particularly in the draft that the qualitys in the players he looks for do not generally get these players a high ranking in the draft because most of the league is caught up in the hoopla of finding the next gretzky and the players lou looks for kinda slip under the radar so this method keeps him from getting roped into the hyped up draft busts as well as insures he use his picks wisely.

the devils and the rangers are the absolute perfect example in hockey to the old adage of that you can put a team together of the twenty best players in the game and if they do not play as a team and adhere to a system they will be no better then average.
the devils have proven time in again that if you take a team of hard working average players and they play as a team and adhere to a system that it may not produce the big numbers the end result will be positive and far above avereage.

towely is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2007, 03:03 PM
  #7
Bluenote13
Believe In Henke
 
Bluenote13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BKLYN, NYC
Posts: 23,764
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
The team has lost two Hall Of Fame defensemen and seemingly hasn't missed a beat. You have to appreciate/respect/admire that.
Carolina won without any key D-men to speak of...

I don't know, it seems all you have to do is have a system and stick to it.
The Devils have always been a systems team and they've lived and died by it.

We on the other hand have been through how many coaches? How many times have we tried to use 'The best defense is a good offense' bit? Oiler theory 101, getting sick of it already....

Bluenote13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2007, 03:19 PM
  #8
dave4
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 637
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluenote13 View Post
Carolina won without any key D-men to speak of...
Not true! They had Aaron Ward on D, and Matt Cullen running the point on the power play. We only have....oops.

dave4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2007, 06:43 PM
  #9
Lou's Koolaid
I live here
 
Lou's Koolaid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: KWT660
Country: United States
Posts: 7,768
vCash: 132
You know for most of last season it looked like the Rangers and Devils had switched jerseys and the Rangers had taken a page out of the Devils book with sound defence and team play, and seem to play well against Newjersey this year.What has happened to them this year has the coach lost his team?

Lou's Koolaid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2007, 06:59 PM
  #10
Finest
Puck Fittsburg
 
Finest's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 5,587
vCash: 500
The diffrence in my eyes is what someone above me posted, the Devils have a system. They have had this same system since god knows how long and they have never strayed, no matter if they won or lost the knew that if they stuck to the system it would pay off. So their trades and draft picks have reflected that idea of sticking to the system, they havent traded for any "super-star" players rather draft/trade to fit their needs and home grow all the players they have. Where as the Rangers arent as patient, they want the cup to have been won yesterday, the overall philosphy seems to be when things arent working out they way they had hoped, they need to dismantle and try again. Not to mention they havent been able to actually use those players who they have drafted or traded for in the proper way and usually will deal them to some other team with managment who understands that players need certain things in order to flurish. I'm not even going to get into the trading of youth for over the hill vets who bring nothing but doctors bills and false hope to the fans. Basically how I see it, the Rangers need to figure out what they want to do and stick to that plan year in and year out, if its a solid plan and you have the proper coaches you will eventually have sucess, the fans may not be as pateint but as an organization you cant please everyone all the time and sometime's missing the playoffs will show you what you need to improve on. The trick is improving on those needs which as we all know is something that they didnt do over those 7-8season without making the post season. To sum it up the Devils have always had direction the Rangers have always had "quick fixes" that dont pan out. That ofcourse is my $0.02

Finest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2007, 07:27 PM
  #11
The New Originals
Registered User
 
The New Originals's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: A.V. Land
Country: United States
Posts: 4,971
vCash: 500
I'm pretty sure the Devils don't draft for what they need, but instead draft the best possible player they can get.

The New Originals is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2007, 07:27 PM
  #12
ATLANTARANGER*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Atlanta, B&R in NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,649
vCash: 500
The key to NJ's success has always resided with Lame Lou. He brought the style to NJ. He has brought in one coach after another schooled in the Montreal Canadiens trapping, tight defensive game. Was Colly Campbell that said that the individual parts were not equal to the whole? The consistancy on the ice collates directly to the consistancy in the front office. Lame Lou's handprint is clearly on the franchise.
They have a goalie who excels in that system and they continually build arounf that basis.

Your premise and those of others are valid, pointing out the loss of key players and not missing a step. So the question becomes, is it the system or the players? You could argue that players like Stevens, Neidermayer, Daneyko, Holik, etc were made good by playing in that system, after all NJ has not come anywhere near replacing the caliber of those players. So how much better were those players made by playing in that system?

There is no short answer. It it and always is a combination of skill, discipline and consistancy of the organizaton.

ATLANTARANGER* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-07-2007, 08:27 PM
  #13
towely
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: new jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 326
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ATLANTARANGER View Post
The key to NJ's success has always resided with Lame Lou. He brought the style to NJ. He has brought in one coach after another schooled in the Montreal Canadiens trapping, tight defensive game. Was Colly Campbell that said that the individual parts were not equal to the whole? The consistancy on the ice collates directly to the consistancy in the front office. Lame Lou's handprint is clearly on the franchise.
They have a goalie who excels in that system and they continually build arounf that basis.

Your premise and those of others are valid, pointing out the loss of key players and not missing a step. So the question becomes, is it the system or the players? You could argue that players like Stevens, Neidermayer, Daneyko, Holik, etc were made good by playing in that system, after all NJ has not come anywhere near replacing the caliber of those players. So how much better were those players made by playing in that system?

There is no short answer. It it and always is a combination of skill, discipline and consistancy of the organizaton.
i think the answer to your question is both because lou had the system and by having those players mentioned gave lou the cornerstones to build the sytem to what he invisioned and what it is today.

i think the system would have never evolved the way it did without those players and i dont think its fair to the players mentioned to say they would not have had good sucessfull careers without it. but in this particular case i think it boils down to lou had the vision and the players from the start had the ability and understanding of his vision to make it work and together created something that still lives on after most of these players are gone

towely 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 11:21 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.