HFBoards

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

The new Jagr?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-17-2005, 09:00 AM
  #26
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,046
vCash: 500
Who did Carter fetch...

for Washington? To me, getting Jagr was fine for Carter because I didn't think the Rangers would get anything uselful out of Carter. Jagr will make other players around him better just as a result of other teams focusing on him. That could give confidence to whomever he plays with (I guess in the fashion of Knuble playing with Thornton).

Fletch is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 09:36 AM
  #27
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,432
vCash: 500
Quote:
when was this, when the season was over and he played with Jagr? I don't even remember him scoring many points at that point - but then again, didn't he have four goals all season?
Yes, i meant when the season was "over" (if you were refering to my post, if not, oh well!). Hlavac does have a great deal of skill and ability but he's not what you call "consistant".

Quote:
Sorry Lev, but great players finish.
uhh, i'm not saying he's a great player as in wayne gretzky great, i just meant great as in he has a lot of skill and can look pretty damn amazing at times...but again, he isn't consistant with it and seems to have problems finishing. i'm sorry if my use of that word was confusing, i was using it more to describe the ability he has than the actual results he gets with it.

Quote:
for Washington? To me, getting Jagr was fine for Carter because I didn't think the Rangers would get anything uselful out of Carter. Jagr will make other players around him better just as a result of other teams focusing on him. That could give confidence to whomever he plays with (I guess in the fashion of Knuble playing with Thornton).
the caps got jared aulin. kind of a balej equivalent player i think (not necessarily in playing style, haven't seen him play much, but in terms of upside, IMO)

Levitate is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 10:53 AM
  #28
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,046
vCash: 500
39 points...

65 AHL games, and 23 years old...he does sound a lot like Balej...

Fletch is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 11:28 AM
  #29
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,432
vCash: 500
last year was also a "down" year for him, like it was for balej

i think he's also had some trouble staying healthy...just going off of random memories i have of the info that floated around when he was traded

Levitate is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 11:37 AM
  #30
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 FLYLine4LIFE
The title of this thread alone is under-rating his talents. Saying he is playing like he should....he was playing like that in NY as well. He just wasn't surrounded by the same talent like he was on Team Czech. Every Jagr thread I go to has plenty of people saying...hes not the same, blah blah blah..yea well hes not going to put up 130 points seasons anymore, hes not with 66 anymore and it seems to be 5x harder to score goals then it was 10 years ago. He was lazy in WSH? He still had a 35 goal/80 point season with them...sure he took a few nights off....just like 95% of EVERY NHL player...if only he wasn't lazy he would have had 70 goals/160 points. . The real reason most people attack Jagr every chance they get....salary. GET OVER IT.
A few nights off? Clearly you need to watch more hockey. Jagr could score 130 pts with Sandy McCarthy on his wing...and that's exactly the point. The guy is so talented that scoring 35 goals is a disappointment. He can play hard for two shifts a game and come away with two points, imagine if he played hard for an entire game!

The reason most people 'attack' Jagr is not only because of his salary. I don't have a problem with paying (potentially) the best player in the world, the greatest sum of money in the league. He is attacked because he could be so much more than he is, he just doesn't feel like it.

The thread title doesn't under-rate him, it speaks the truth. How can the truth under-rate a player? The old Jagr was a lazy punk...this NEW Jagr is not.

BigE is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 11:43 AM
  #31
FLYLine24*
 
FLYLine24*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 29,102
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE
A few nights off? Clearly you need to watch more hockey. Jagr could score 130 pts with Sandy McCarthy on his wing...and that's exactly the point. The guy is so talented that scoring 35 goals is a disappointment. He can play hard for two shifts a game and come away with two points, imagine if he played hard for an entire game!

The reason most people 'attack' Jagr is not only because of his salary. I don't have a problem with paying (potentially) the best player in the world, the greatest sum of money in the league. He is attacked because he could be so much more than he is, he just doesn't feel like it.

The thread title doesn't under-rate him, it speaks the truth. How can the truth under-rate a player? The old Jagr was a lazy punk...this NEW Jagr is not.
10 years ago he could score 130 points with McCarthy on his wing....he is older now and it is harder to score goals. Not a chance in hell he could pull that off again. Lets not forget hes only had two 50 goal seasons. BTW is strictly your "opinion" that he could do so much more but he doesn't feel like it...once again how many players in the NHL give it there all, 110% every single shift? Like Lev said if they did they would be burnt by the end of the season.

FLYLine24* is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 11:44 AM
  #32
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 Levitate
this is very true...no one in the NHL (hyperbole aside) really gives 100% every shift of every game. some guys are just better at "hiding" it than others...they're invisible for a game and don't do a whole lot but don't look like they're dogging it. with the NHL season being as long as it is, if guys don't pace themselves somewhat then they'll burn out at the end
I have no problem with a guy pacing himself. With that said, lets not confuse things here. Jagr does not pace himself. If Jagr did even half of what pacing entails he'd win the scoring championship every year.

Although the original point is a good one and it's the reason why I think we need to go back to a 70 game season. Cut out some road trips and save some gas...the hockey will benefit from this.

BigE is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 11:59 AM
  #33
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 29,778
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levitate
uhh, i'm not saying he's a great player as in wayne gretzky great, i just meant great as in he has a lot of skill and can look pretty damn amazing at times...but again, he isn't consistant with it and seems to have problems finishing. i'm sorry if my use of that word was confusing, i was using it more to describe the ability he has than the actual results he gets with it.
Tom Poti has a lot of skill and can look pretty damn amazing at times doesn't make him a great player. Great players don't get traded three times in two years (or whatever it was). And that's my point, great players are consistent. Great players become great players based on results and production.

SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 12:33 PM
  #34
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,432
vCash: 500
uh, that's your definition of the word, used in a specific way. I used it in a different way to describe something else. honestly, this is nitpicking at semantics.

I used to great player to describe his skills, not his production or "status" in the NHL. If you want to use it that way, then by all means please do so. Just don't jump on my back for using it in a different way that's not really even incompatible with what you're saying.

Levitate is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 12:49 PM
  #35
Barnaby
Registered User
 
Barnaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Port Jefferson, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,428
vCash: 500
Jan Hlavac and "great player" don't belong in the same paragraph let alone sentence...

Barnaby is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 01:09 PM
  #36
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 29,778
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levitate
uh, that's your definition of the word, used in a specific way. I used it in a different way to describe something else. honestly, this is nitpicking at semantics.

I used to great player to describe his skills, not his production or "status" in the NHL. If you want to use it that way, then by all means please do so. Just don't jump on my back for using it in a different way that's not really even incompatible with what you're saying.
It's not nitpicking. I just fail to see how a guy who fails to score 20 goals can be considered or called a great player. It takes more than a few nifty moves to be a great player. Heck this is a player who really doesn't excell in anyone one aspect of the game. Yet he's great?

SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 02:47 PM
  #37
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 Levitate
uh, that's your definition of the word, used in a specific way. I used it in a different way to describe something else. honestly, this is nitpicking at semantics.

I used to great player to describe his skills, not his production or "status" in the NHL. If you want to use it that way, then by all means please do so. Just don't jump on my back for using it in a different way that's not really even incompatible with what you're saying.
I hate to jump on you here because the other guys are already arguing against you but the definition of great player in the hockey world isn't really up for debate. You're either a great player or you're not. Jan Hlavac is not a great player, nor is Tom Poti.

BigE is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 02:53 PM
  #38
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,046
vCash: 500
True BigE...

can't confuse players with talent and no desire with players with talent and desire.

Fletch is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 02:53 PM
  #39
mydnyte
Registered User
 
mydnyte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Country: Italy
Posts: 10,305
vCash: 500
When he's healthy/happy, there is nobody in the game better.

mydnyte is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 03:03 PM
  #40
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
Question

Quote:
Originally Posted by Melrose_Jr.
Because his defense isn't the greatest, and because the Rangers defense was non-existant, he wouldn't be a good fit in New York.

I have no problem with Jagr the player, but Jagr the Ranger simply didn't make sense at the time he was aquired and frankly, makes pretty much zero sense now. He could some back and pile up points for the Rangers like it was 1991 all over again, and it wouldn't matter unless the entire philospohy over the organziation had done a 180 since the last game in 2004. Until the Rangers put themselves in a position to allow Jagr to help them, I can't get that excited about his mere presence.

While I understand your point as to why you didn't want him, if you take Jagr away from the Rangers, who's going to score goals? I can't think of one 30-goal guy. We have nobody. I am not saying I was for getting Jagr. But now that our team has him, he is a threat every shift. And if they enforce obstruction and Jagr is happy here, you could see some of the old Jaromir return. Because no one can handle him one-on-one. He's a house.

Kovy274Hart is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 03:05 PM
  #41
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 Barnaby
Jan Hlavac and "great player" don't belong in the same paragraph let alone sentence...

I'm of the opinion that Hlavac lost his confidence after the Lindros deal. He was never going to pan out in Philly's system. I bet if Sather had wised up and kept him here, he would have consistently put up 30 goals.


Jan has the ability. It's mental.

Kovy274Hart is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 03:06 PM
  #42
RangerBoy
1994 FOREVER
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,517
vCash: 500
The new Jagr?He is 33 years old.Not 23 years old

This guy will be a blight on the Rangers cap

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 03:45 PM
  #43
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,046
vCash: 500
Kovy...

perhaps Hlavac didn't have it in him. He was happy and played well for one season. If he lost his confidence, then likely that one season was a fluke as he's not strong enough mentally for this game night-in and night-out. I actually wasn't a fan of the Czechmates line; thought they were way too streaky, although I can't deny the production of that second line.

The new Jagr is 33...he can still average about a point-per-game, which is likely good for a top 10 scoring finish in the NHL, and that's on a below-average team with below-average scorers. That ain't so bad to have around; it does take some pressure off others to produce constantly as Jagr has proven over the years that he can take the pressure.

Fletch is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 03:58 PM
  #44
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 Kovy274Hart
While I understand your point as to why you didn't want him, if you take Jagr away from the Rangers, who's going to score goals?
My point is, the team needs to tighten up defensively so that when Jarg scores both of the team's goals on a given evening, they're in a position to live off that offense. If the Rangers continue to foresake the defensive aspect of the game, Jagr's offense alone even at the top of his game can't bring the team success.

Melrose_Jr. is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 04:09 PM
  #45
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,046
vCash: 500
Agreed Melrose, but...

unfortunately the Rangers have a lot of holes to fill. Defense is one hole. Offense is another hole. And goaltending is another hole.

Fletch is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 04:12 PM
  #46
Trottier
Very Random
 
Trottier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: San Diego
Posts: 27,527
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mydnyte
When he's healthy/happy, there is nobody in the game better.
But here's the thing: forget about Jagr's past. He possesses (and has utilized much of the time) undeniable world-class skills. Also, undeniably, his passion in recent years is subject to much scrutiny.

The question is whether or not you want to rebuild a team around a player who is great "when he's...happy." (And make no mistake, he is the centerpiece of this NYR team, regardless of whether he will be around if/when they become a highly competitive team again.) With numerous young, inexperienced kids vying for a roster spot next season (whenever that is), having a small foundation of reliable veterans will be critical to NYR. Some people make the mistake of overlooking how important vets are in a rebuilding situation. Ice a roster of newbies without veteran guidance and you are planting the seeds for ingrained, long-term failure.

On one level, if you get an inspired Jagr, you will have the best of both world, a Cup-pedigree veteran who still can go out and win games by himself. That's leadership. On the other hand, if you get the brooding Jagr, the results can be counter-productive, for that's the last thing you want out of your "role-models".

Stability, it seems to me, is the key among vets and top players on teams, whether those teams are good, bad, rebuilding or otherwise. It's why I don't see my team, NYI, ever going anyplace with Alexei Yashin as their centerpiece. Superb talent, but not a leader. Not reliable anyway.

If Jagr brings consistent effort and added maturity to the ice every night, this current NYR team could be very interesting to follow, even in these early rebuilding stages. If he is the uninspired enigma of the last several seasons, all the nice individual stats that he will inevitably end up with at season's end will not have a meaningful/positive impact on NYR and especially it's younger players. Just ask the Caps.


Last edited by Trottier: 05-17-2005 at 10:08 PM.
Trottier is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 04:45 PM
  #47
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,046
vCash: 500
Trottier...

even an uninspired Jagr should be in the top 15 in scoring - on a bad team. I don't know if that's such a bad thing.

Fletch is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 08:13 PM
  #48
BigE
Registered User
 
BigE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: San Francisco, CA
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,476
vCash: 500
I've got mixed thoughts in regards to Jagr being on our rebuilding teams throughout the next 3-5 years. Much in the same way that was mentioned above, he's either going to provide great leadership or none at all.

The real guy to worry about, in my opinion, is Bobby Holik. He doesn't want any part of a rebuilding team and his leadership is somewhat questionable, especially with so many young kids coming into the system. If he doesn't want to be here, he's only going to hurt us. He'll take up icetime and his blunt, straightforward attitude is bound to cause a stir with the younger guys.

To me, Jagr also takes up a spot and playing time on a team that isn't likely going to be able to use all of his talents anyway. We're not going to make the playoffs for probably another two or three years - what do we need him for? If he's 33 or 34 by the time we start playing and 37 by the time we make the playoffs, is it really worth it? Does having Jagr around benefit us in any other way than a questionable leadership role? I can think of other, cheaper leaders that would be fantastic for introducing all of our kids to the NHL game and enstilling that work ethic in them. Granted, Jagr brings the skill level that maybe only five guys in the league have...the question is can others learn from him and to what degree.

I dunno, maybe I'm just babbling but it's food for thought - I'm certainly not fully committed to any of what I just said here.

BigE is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 08:27 PM
  #49
ChrisKreider20
Oh Hai Guise
 
ChrisKreider20's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,311
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLACKBURN
He had a great world championship with the Czechs and showed glimpses of what he is capable of. In the final against Canada he was a bull and looks like he finally has a passion for the game again.

"I'm glad it's behind me. I won it finally. But hopefully the NHL will start and I'll busy there and we'll go far with the New York Rangers." JJ

I saw this quote and thought it was encouraging that he wants to return to the NHL, maybe New York will have the Jagr that was a dominant, passionate superstar back in the 90's.

Do you guys think he is a changed man or is he still going to be a lazy, injury prone whiner when he's back in North America?
maybe we should give him a good centre...we don't have to interrupt the rebuilding phase but maybe we can sign 1 marquee centre to help him out.

ChrisKreider20 is offline  
Old
05-17-2005, 08:43 PM
  #50
Barnaby
Registered User
 
Barnaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Port Jefferson, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,428
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rancid
maybe we should give him a good centre...we don't have to interrupt the rebuilding phase but maybe we can sign 1 marquee centre to help him out.
Id rather keep the money to plug a need later. All it does is help us win another 5 games, still miss the playoffs, but get a worse draft slot.

Barnaby is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:37 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.