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

Blackburn Released by Salmon Kings

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-09-2005, 02:59 PM
  #76
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 21,601
vCash: 500
I've always felt murray has a little more offense in him than it seems...i don't know what he needs to help draw that out but yeah, 4th line minutes in the AHL probably isn't gonna do it. Not saying he's an offensive dynamo waiting to happen but I just get a feeling he could score 15 goals or so in the NHL when he gets his legs under him...

I'd be interested to see what he could do with some more "scoring" ice time

as for montoya in hartford...well for one I think that the rangers have some say in what goes down in hartford. if mcgill isn't giving montoya a fair shot and insists on playing labarbera or valiquette over him for no particular reason, you can be sure the rangers are gonna take issue with that. you don't draft a top goalie to have your AHL coach bench him and not give him a shot. but I also imagine he'd be brought in kind of slowly at first and he's not gonna be given just a free ride if he struggles. same goes for lundqvist.

oh and as for blackburn in the same situation...well the simple fact is that at this point labarbera is at least just as much of an NHL prospect as blackburn. blackburn's injury is one hell of a setback and blow to his "prospect" status. at least labarbera is healthy, even if he doesn't have blackburn's outright skill, that alone basically makes him a better NHL prospect at this point. if blackburn outright earned the chance, that's one thing, but you don't just give him priority now

Levitate is offline  
Old
03-09-2005, 03:04 PM
  #77
ATLANTARANGER*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Atlanta, B&R in NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,649
vCash: 500
I love Murray, but

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch
Murray not playing with offensive players in the AHL is akin to Lundmark not playing on the top two lines in the NHL, as many clamored for (not saying you were one). Many argued that Lundmark will not develop his offensive skills by playing on third and fourth lines. Same with Murray. It's the AHL. What does 4 minutes more do, with, say, Moore and Giroux? It could do a fair amount actually as he's with some more offensive players, in a more offensive role. Is he better than a fourth line AHLer? I don't know, but at a young age, perhaps he did deserve a shot over Gernander, especially if it's development we're worrying about.

On the Montoya, we'll just disagree as to how McGill will react. Labarbera's a sub 2.00GAA goalie. If Montoya were around 3.00, he's not going to get the lion's share of starts, I believe, in McGill's system. If he's struggling, he's not going to keep struggling to find his way out, especially if it is his first pro season. McGill's not going to let his team's record be dragged down by one guy, no matter how highly-touted a prospect he is. That's my feeling on McGill.

I don't think he has the scorer's hands or touch. He has a nose for the net though, same with Hollweg and you don't teach that.

ATLANTARANGER* is offline  
Old
03-09-2005, 04:05 PM
  #78
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
I honestly don't disagree...

but, neither did Graves, and a guy who can go into corners, create turnovers, and wreak havoc in the middle, the kid may get a goal or two if played with some skilled guys (at the AHL level, at this point). Don't mean to say he's an Adam Graves by any stretch of the imagination, but wasn't sure think at 22 he should be labeled that and not given a chance, when at another level (which may not be indicative of his future) he was an OK goal scorer - not really sure how much of a chance he's had to improve on that.

I don't disagree with the way McGill's coaching, but I do think it does go a bit against the point some are trying to make - albeit not the strongest argument.

Fletch is offline  
Old
03-09-2005, 05:00 PM
  #79
Barnaby
Registered User
 
Barnaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Port Jefferson, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,624
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch
but, neither did Graves, and a guy who can go into corners, create turnovers, and wreak havoc in the middle, the kid may get a goal or two if played with some skilled guys (at the AHL level, at this point). Don't mean to say he's an Adam Graves by any stretch of the imagination, but wasn't sure think at 22 he should be labeled that and not given a chance, when at another level (which may not be indicative of his future) he was an OK goal scorer - not really sure how much of a chance he's had to improve on that.

I don't disagree with the way McGill's coaching, but I do think it does go a bit against the point some are trying to make - albeit not the strongest argument.
I'd certainly give him an opportunity to play with some high end skill guys who could get him the puck and give him more room. I'd love to see him be a tough 3rd liner who could pot 18 or so goals.

To get back to the other idea. I believe winning is good for development, so in that sense its good. It also makes more $$$. Player development is still must be #1 tho.

Barnaby is offline  
Old
03-09-2005, 07:13 PM
  #80
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
I'm not 100%..

on either side. I'm just giving my opinion on what McGill would do. It's a fine line. Hopefully there's more than one prospect on the team and one may have to take the back seat for the betterment of the rest. I dunno, and am glad I ain't an AHL coach.

Fletch is offline  
Old
03-10-2005, 06:03 AM
  #81
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 32,374
vCash: 500
Dan Blackburn has a decision to make about his career.Continue to play and risk losing his injury insurance policy or retire and collect the insurance policy

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/10/sp...tml?oref=login

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
03-10-2005, 02:55 PM
  #82
Evil Sather
YOU KILL THE JOE
 
Evil Sather's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: YOU MAKE SOME MO
Posts: 1,975
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch
but, neither did Graves, and a guy who can go into corners, create turnovers, and wreak havoc in the middle, the kid may get a goal or two if played with some skilled guys (at the AHL level, at this point). Don't mean to say he's an Adam Graves by any stretch of the imagination
He's not a stretch of any stretch of Adam Graves. Graves averaged 3/4s of a goal a game in junior as an 18 year old, and 1.5 PPG. Garth barely got half a goal a game, and barely a PPG playing as a 20 year old overager. Big difference.

Evil Sather is offline  
Old
03-10-2005, 03:09 PM
  #83
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 21,601
vCash: 500
god i knew someone would do that...

fletch even said he's not claiming Murray is "Adam Graves", it was just a comparison on their general talents...general being the key word. Graves was not a skill player...not at all. I'm not saying he wasn't skilled in one way or another but he didn't make his living off being more skilled than the next guy, he got his goals by being tough and having that little knack around the net to put in those tough goals.

Murray could have that same general kind of talent...his hands really aren't that bad, he's a tough kid, and given the chance he might be able to be the same type of player who bangs in the rebounds from in front and scores a decent amount of goals that way.

highly highly unlikely he's as successful at it as graves was, but cmon...when we make comparisons do we always need someone to jump in and compare stats and say "no way!" No one is saying Murray will be the next Adam Graves and score as many goals/points as him...

Levitate is offline  
Old
03-10-2005, 03:35 PM
  #84
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 18,530
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levitate
god i knew someone would do that...

fletch even said he's not claiming Murray is "Adam Graves", it was just a comparison on their general talents...general being the key word. Graves was not a skill player...not at all. I'm not saying he wasn't skilled in one way or another but he didn't make his living off being more skilled than the next guy, he got his goals by being tough and having that little knack around the net to put in those tough goals.
Graves without a doubt did some "vitamins" after junior years too. He reported to his first camp in Detroit at 170 lbs and was cut, the year after he reported at 215 lbs...

When it comes to Murrays potential I agree with Fletch that Murray could ship in with some Graves type of goals. But in order to do so Murray have to improve his game overall so that what ever line he plays on is good enough to on a regular basis get the puck up ice and substain pressure.

It was allot easier in the "Graves era" for garbage players to score goals, back then if you had a great center on your line you were bond to spend allot of time in the offensive zone.

Ola is offline  
Old
03-10-2005, 03:53 PM
  #85
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
Murray was never...

a 20 year old over-ager. He was 19 his last season in juniors. In fact, he started his AHL career quite early, just turning 20 years of age that September. And like I said, I didn't mean to say he was Graves by any stretch of the imagination, but of course we're basing all that on junior stats (and Murray and a point per game and more than .5 goals per game, wasn't that bad). If he could be a third line NHLer, which is what one would hope, he wouldn't be playing on a third or fourth line in the AHL, which is part in parcel of my point.

Fletch is offline  
Old
03-10-2005, 04:00 PM
  #86
bleedgreen
Moderator
 
bleedgreen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: colorado
Posts: 11,024
vCash: 500
in his first four seasons in the nhl (212 games), graves had all of 23 goals. he wasnt close to a 20 goal scorer till his first season on the stacked rangers, when he was about 24 yrs old. no reason why murray cant get at least that far - and he still has some time to get there. graves wasnt a goal scorer when he started - he became one in time with hard work and good linemates.

bleedgreen is offline  
Old
03-10-2005, 04:19 PM
  #87
E-Train
Registered User
 
E-Train's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Long Island
Posts: 1,454
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleedgreen
in his first four seasons in the nhl (212 games), graves had all of 23 goals. he wasnt close to a 20 goal scorer till his first season on the stacked rangers, when he was about 24 yrs old. no reason why murray cant get at least that far - and he still has some time to get there. graves wasnt a goal scorer when he started - he became one in time with hard work and good linemates.
Exactly, he was 23 in '91-'92..he should of had 40+ goals that year playing with Mess. He was snakebit early that season and then picked up the scoring as the year went on. From last season's cameo, I see a better offensive player in Murray than he has shown in the AHL. He scored the one goal in PIT from long distance and was real close on a few others, I really like his hustle and speed (despite the odd skating style). We'll see over the next couple years if he can do anything on offense at the NHL level.

E-Train is offline  
Old
03-11-2005, 05:04 AM
  #88
Tekneek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,892
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLYLine4LIFE
Why would that be a bad call or sarcasm? With the goalies we have in our system Val is not going to be a Ranger goalie backup or starter anytime soon.
I would say he has proven that he can play in the AHL. He's not trying to make his way into a starting role in the AHL. He is a better goaltender than what quite a few other teams are riding on. His NHL numbers, when given a chance, are pretty good as well. Why no one has given him a better chance is a little surprising, given the stats...

Tekneek is offline  
Old
03-11-2005, 05:06 AM
  #89
Tekneek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,892
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barnaby
Yea, I'm saying if Blackburn can handle the AHL, and you have confidence in his comeback then he should get the back-up spot. Let's see if he really can get back to where he was. What's the point of keeping him on the bench or in an inferior league in favor of Valiquette? Valiquette will be lucky to become an NHL back-up. You'd give him the spot over 1-2 more wins?
Look at Valiquette's stats instead of being consumed by him being the backup in Hartford. Him backing up Jason does not mean he is immediately a second-tier goalie. Besides that, the Rangers must think it is in their best interest to bank on Valiquette rather than roll the dice on a damaged Blackburn. This is a strong signal to Dan that his NHL career is likely finished. The Rangers would be the most interested in promoting his rehab attempt and even they aren't willing to put him in the AHL. The reason you play Valiquette over Blackburn is because you can depend on Stephen being able to suit up again and continue stopping pucks next October. You don't know what Dan is going to do, nor does it seem likely that someone with that disability will make it in the NHL.

I hate to see a career ended like this, but it doesn't look good for Blackburn. He might be able to make it somewhere in the minors, but I doubt he will make it back to the NHL. Ultimately, he could probably make more money on his insurance than on a playing contract.


Last edited by Tekneek: 03-11-2005 at 05:12 AM.
Tekneek is offline  
Old
03-11-2005, 12:05 PM
  #90
Barnaby
Registered User
 
Barnaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Port Jefferson, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,624
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tekneek
Look at Valiquette's stats instead of being consumed by him being the backup in Hartford. Him backing up Jason does not mean he is immediately a second-tier goalie. Besides that, the Rangers must think it is in their best interest to bank on Valiquette rather than roll the dice on a damaged Blackburn.
Bank on Valiquette? He's gonna be a UFA, and we all know he has no major role in the Rangers future. He may be a backup for a year at best in NY. If your giving up on Backburn then ok. If you have confidence in him, then he must get a shot. You need to see if he'll be a serious part of the Rangers plans or a guy they won't re-sign.

Barnaby is offline  
Old
03-11-2005, 12:13 PM
  #91
FLYLine24
The Mac Truck
 
FLYLine24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 31,262
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tekneek
I would say he has proven that he can play in the AHL. He's not trying to make his way into a starting role in the AHL. He is a better goaltender than what quite a few other teams are riding on. His NHL numbers, when given a chance, are pretty good as well. Why no one has given him a better chance is a little surprising, given the stats...
Yea i wouldnt say he doesnt have a NHL career in front of him...just not with the Rangers.

FLYLine24 is offline  
Old
03-12-2005, 06:57 AM
  #92
Tekneek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 3,892
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barnaby
Bank on Valiquette? He's gonna be a UFA, and we all know he has no major role in the Rangers future. He may be a backup for a year at best in NY. If your giving up on Backburn then ok. If you have confidence in him, then he must get a shot. You need to see if he'll be a serious part of the Rangers plans or a guy they won't re-sign.
If the organization thinks winning a Calder Cup, or at least going deep in the playoffs, will be more important to the development of their players than watching the dualing-blockers' show, they stand to gain far more from keeping Valiquette than bringing Blackburn up. I'd say that sounds like the position the team is taking, or they have already written Dan off and pushing him on Charlotte is a final favor.

Tekneek is offline  
Old
03-12-2005, 11:46 AM
  #93
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 13,232
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tekneek
If the organization thinks winning a Calder Cup, or at least going deep in the playoffs, will be more important to the development of their players than watching the dualing-blockers' show, they stand to gain far more from keeping Valiquette than bringing Blackburn up. I'd say that sounds like the position the team is taking, or they have already written Dan off and pushing him on Charlotte is a final favor.
I think it's the former, about the Calder Cup being important to the development of that team... not the latter. The organization is excited about the progress he's made, but like me, they wish to see some success in the EC before bringing him up further. He played well in Victoria, but a lot of what happened there was a reflection of the team. The thought is: Let's see how he plays behind the Rangers/Wolfpack/Checkers system.

Tawnos is online now  
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 08:54 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.