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

Rags reassign 5 to Pack

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-29-2005, 09:24 AM
  #51
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BringBackNeilSmith
At some point, now that we're nearly into the season, it would be cool if some of us could shift the dynamic of our thinking subtly from "are we rebuilding? are we rebuilding? are we rebuilding? are we rebuilding? are we rebuilding?" to "given the pieces that are here, are the best players being selected for each spot on each team?".
To begin with, stating "given the pieces that we have" does not tell the whole story. We (Ranger fans) were told that this year is going to be different than the last 8. We were told that we were going to have a true rebuild. When you start to bring in the "best players being selected to play on the open spots", you start to shift away from the "rebuilding" notion. Sure the "best" player to play on a particular spot will probably be an experienced veteran. Why? Becuase they will probably not make rookie mistakes. However, a true rebuilding team should have something more than just a "Kid" 4th line.
A rebuilding team fills in their open rosted spots differently than one that is looking to come in 8th overall and make the playoffs. Sure, we can start to discuss how the "best" players should fill the slots. But, then we need to drop the pretense that the Rangers are rebuilding. At that point, we start to look at this team as we have every other Ranger team for the last decade. Namely, how can they fill a roster that will compete and make the 8th overall spot.
The way this team is to be looked upon and the expectations that are derived from that depend very much on whether or not this is to be construed as a rebuilding team or not.

True Blue is offline  
Old
09-29-2005, 09:30 AM
  #52
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 True Blue
To begin with, stating "given the pieces that we have" does not tell the whole story. We (Ranger fans) were told that this year is going to be different than the last 8. We were told that we were going to have a true rebuild. When you start to bring in the "best players being selected to play on the open spots", you start to shift away from the "rebuilding" notion. Sure the "best" player to play on a particular spot will probably be an experienced veteran. Why? Becuase they will probably not make rookie mistakes. However, a true rebuilding team should have something more than just a "Kid" 4th line.
A rebuilding team fills in their open rosted spots differently than one that is looking to come in 8th overall and make the playoffs. Sure, we can start to discuss how the "best" players should fill the slots. But, then we need to drop the pretense that the Rangers are rebuilding. At that point, we start to look at this team as we have every other Ranger team for the last decade. Namely, how can they fill a roster that will compete and make the 8th overall spot.
The way this team is to be looked upon and the expectations that are derived from that depend very much on whether or not this is to be construed as a rebuilding team or not.
I think you are only going to become more frustated, because if anything, I think the Rags will try to add more skill on O through a trade, and that player will be an established NHL player.

HAPPY HOUR is offline  
Old
09-29-2005, 09:37 AM
  #53
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 21,599
vCash: 500
Quote:
I've heard Pens,Canes,Lanche, BJS,,Habs, Preds,Devs, Sens, Yotes, Bolts, Nucks, Caps.
yeah i've heard that term used a lot too

Levitate is online now  
Old
09-29-2005, 09:38 AM
  #54
BringBackNeilSmith
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Warren County, NJ
Posts: 244
vCash: 500
By my last figuring, I expect that we are likely to have 4 forwards, 3 defensemen and a goaltender with less than one full season's experience in the NHL (Immonen, Moore, Prucha, Betts, Tyutin, Kondratiev, Lundqvist, and things are looking up a bit for Pock). You can add or subtract one here and there (Pock no, Hollweg yes, etc.) but in general I'd have to say that 8 of 22 or 23 roster spots being filled by players with next to no NHL experience is sort of enough rebuilding for one year unless the talent is there to do much more, and so far Lampman is the only demotion that appears arguable. A black-and-white approach to this topic just isn't real productive and extreme negativity isn't borne out by the decisions that have been made so far. There are some things that could still go wrong (in my own mind, sending Immonen, Kondratiev or Prucha down would probably be serious errors based on preseason play to date)... but they haven't yet, you know?

BringBackNeilSmith is offline  
Old
09-29-2005, 09:42 AM
  #55
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 Levitate
yeah i've heard that term used a lot too
LOL I guess its better than the Polesmokers.

HAPPY HOUR is offline  
Old
09-29-2005, 09:45 AM
  #56
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by happy hour
because if anything, I think the Rags will try to add more skill on O through a trade, and that player will be an established NHL player.
That is my point. The way this team is coached, the way that it plays and the way that it fills it's roster spots depend on whether or not it is to be considered a "rebuilding" team. If it is not a rebuilding team, then the way it will be judged will be much harsher than if it was a young team. But, since the Rangers are to be a "younger but not young" team, and one that is doing away with the silly notions that it is somehow rebuilding, then I do not want to hear "Be patient with the youngsters". One can only be so patient when it comes to the young 4th line.
I know that I keep harping on "Are we rebuilding or not" theme. But I feel that it is very relevant. Our expectations and goals of a rebuilding team are far different than the one that looks to be forming before our very eyes.
To add to that theme, the NJ Star Ledger had a quote to the effect that Pock is being kept around as insurance for Rozsival. Alluding to the fact that a spot in the top 6 is Rozsival's to loose and that Pock will only play if Rozsival is physically incapable.
On a more personal note, I find it very disappointing that management screamed how this year will be different and how the team is heading on a different direction. To me, it just seems more of the same. Sorry if I do not consider an all-rookie 4th line to be steps in the right direction.

True Blue is offline  
Old
09-29-2005, 09:50 AM
  #57
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
I think people are...

generally disappointed because we got a chance to see (in some cases a small chance) the prospects and realize few should be in an important role in the NHL. By important, I'm saying something something other than third pair defenseman, and third or fourth line forward. Many wanted to see a rebuild, which would've meant seeing guys like Dawes and Prucha, and even Balej, Giroux, and others, get longer looks in top six forward positions and if they didn't look to play the part, or weren't obviously ready, just fill the hole (like in previous years with various AHLers); if losses mounted, who really cares. Same for the defense. You have Tyutin, Pock, 'Drats, Lampman, Rullier, among a couple others, who conceivably could've made the team, but to start the camp (without Rozsival's injury) there weren't many spots for the small group and many thought we should've seen each several times, as opposed to going into the fourth preseason game seeing Pock once and Rullier once.

Basically the Rangers brass talked about this year being different and that there would be room for yoots. They didn't say how much room, and didn't share with us what their true feelings about many of these guys were coming into camp, as certain guys were destined for Hartford or Juniors from the word go, which is fine, since they need to run a team. Further, after all the signings they had, I don't know if there was much cap room to fill the roster with vets anyways, and giving 2-4 year contracts may prove to be imprudent, so the cap may've forced Sather's hand a bit here.

I am somewhat disappointed personally, although I thought a good deal of these prospects weren't ready anyways, but still thought some things could've/should've been done differently. But I do believe that Sather, Renney & Co. think they have a playoff contender - and that's dangerous, in my opinion, but it will open up roster spots throughout the season - let's just hope the plug is filled from within, which given the cap, may be, unless we're talking February and a guy's near UFA status.

Fletch is offline  
Old
09-29-2005, 09:53 AM
  #58
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BringBackNeilSmith
By my last figuring, I expect that we are likely to have 4 forwards, 3 defensemen and a goaltender with less than one full season's experience in the NHL (Immonen, Moore, Prucha, Betts, Tyutin, Kondratiev, Lundqvist, and things are looking up a bit for Pock).
As I said, today's Ledger alluded to the fact that Pock is only insurance if Rozsival is not healthy. That leaves room for one rookie defenseman (Tyutin aside) in the top 6. And that is only if Purinton or Strudwick do not take that spot. Combine that with the notion that our promised rebuild will consist of one rookie on the 3rd line and an all-rookie 4th line, and I am very dissapointed at all the BS that management threw our way over the last year.

" black-and-white approach to this topic just isn't real productive and extreme negativity isn't borne out by the decisions that have been made so far."

Sorry, but an all-rookie 4th line and one on the 3rd line pretty much appears to be black and white to me. To me, that is very negative. Not what I have hoped for and not what I was told all year was going to happen.

"There are some things that could still go wrong (in my own mind, sending Immonen, Kondratiev or Prucha down would probably be serious errors based on preseason play to date)... but they haven't yet, you know?"

Oh, I know. But all I have is past history upon with which to base my beliefs on.

True Blue is offline  
Old
09-29-2005, 09:58 AM
  #59
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 21,599
vCash: 500
i hate it when articles pull crap like that..

"pck appears to be insurance blah blah blah"

based on what? what gave them this idea? did the rangers say anything? did this come from anything besides the reporters imagination?

maybe rozsival does go into the lineup as a regular but it's the stupid speculation like that which pisses me off

if you're writing an article and are going to say something like that, you better have something to back it up

Levitate is online now  
Old
09-29-2005, 10:00 AM
  #60
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
I guess there are differing opinions, TB...

personally, in the limited action I've seen Pock over the last year, I haven't been too impressed. I've only seen him in one preseason game, and didn't think much of his effort against the fourth liners and AHLers that he was charged to face. His asset would be on the PP, but even in Hartford he didn't get a lot of time (in the games I saw) and he looked weak at the point (in one preseason game). Maybe he too needs a bit of time to find his offensive game (my opinion), and right now, remembering what I've seen from Rozsival, I like Rozsival better - he's better on the PP, and he's more physical and better defensively. Same with Lampman, who I didn't think much of anyways, and I finally realized why...he looks exactly like Mike Mottau out there. He moves like Mottau. He moves the puck like Mottau. And he hits and plays defense like Mottau - the Mottau that played 10 or so NHL games and played alongside Leetch and looked pretty steady (at least to me). But he wasn't an NHLer, and I've been critical of Lampman after getting burned on my opinion of Mottau. Perhaps unfairly, but I didn try to watch him closely to give him a fair shot - since I want to see kids grow in this organization (although in a year or two, guys like Liffiton and Barnaka, and perhaps Taylor, may help us forget him).

Fletch is offline  
Old
09-29-2005, 10:01 AM
  #61
BringBackNeilSmith
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Warren County, NJ
Posts: 244
vCash: 500
Fletch: not sure why you feel the management thinks this club is a contender, and would be interested in hearing what that's based on, especially as all the signings they've made, either in terms of talent or contract length, appear to be stopgap, "be competitive" measures rather than attempts to put the group into a top-tier talent position. What's your impression built on?

Other than that, I'm on board with all the rest of your post...my own major disappointment was Dawes' quick send-off as I have a feeling he's the real deal, but hey, we didn't see the rest of camp and perhaps the reasoning wasn't altogether faulty. At any rate, I'd just rather deal with realities now so we can keep the dialogue fresh and meaningful. If and when Ward gets Prucha's spot and Strudwick plays up front instead of Moore, and Purinton gets a regular 3rd pairing shift instead of Kondratiev, I'll happily-unhappily get back into kvetching mode, but not today!


Last edited by BringBackNeilSmith: 09-29-2005 at 10:01 AM. Reason: removed mild language
BringBackNeilSmith is offline  
Old
09-29-2005, 10:01 AM
  #62
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 True Blue
That is my point. The way this team is coached, the way that it plays and the way that it fills it's roster spots depend on whether or not it is to be considered a "rebuilding" team. If it is not a rebuilding team, then the way it will be judged will be much harsher than if it was a young team. But, since the Rangers are to be a "younger but not young" team, and one that is doing away with the silly notions that it is somehow rebuilding, then I do not want to hear "Be patient with the youngsters". One can only be so patient when it comes to the young 4th line.
I know that I keep harping on "Are we rebuilding or not" theme. But I feel that it is very relevant. Our expectations and goals of a rebuilding team are far different than the one that looks to be forming before our very eyes.
To add to that theme, the NJ Star Ledger had a quote to the effect that Pock is being kept around as insurance for Rozsival. Alluding to the fact that a spot in the top 6 is Rozsival's to loose and that Pock will only play if Rozsival is physically incapable.
On a more personal note, I find it very disappointing that management screamed how this year will be different and how the team is heading on a different direction. To me, it just seems more of the same. Sorry if I do not consider an all-rookie 4th line to be steps in the right direction.
Well said, but who do you feel was slighted? If you were the Rags G.M what specific player/players would you (at this time) plug in on your first two lines?

HAPPY HOUR is offline  
Old
09-29-2005, 10:04 AM
  #63
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch
But I do believe that Sather, Renney & Co. think they have a playoff contender
I agree and that is where, IMO, most problems originate. It just seems more and more that the rebuilding BS that we were fed over the last year was just that. BS. It is more and more apparent that the approach this year is once again, rebuild while contend for the Cup.
Most of the vet foward signings that we did not argue with, were done with the thought that they would be converted into more assets at the deadline. However, the team that I see being assembled before me is not one that will follow through with such actions.
Just really dissapointed AGAIN.

True Blue is offline  
Old
09-29-2005, 10:07 AM
  #64
BringBackNeilSmith
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Warren County, NJ
Posts: 244
vCash: 500
You know, if this team is built "right" (according to me!), then 2nd and 3rd lines are going to be more or less interchangeable anyway and ice time will probably depend more on who's got the hot hand anyway. I'm kind of assuming:

Rucinsky-Rucchin-Lundmark
Niemenen-Immonen-Prucha

The talent types and quality differences between those lines may not turn out to be so terribly different and if those "3rd line" guys play as well as a lot of us hope they will, I don't really think "top six" is going to be a meaningful distinction. We're going to have a top 3 and a bottom 3 and a MIDDLE 6, I suspect. Being a so-called 3rd liner in this group isn't so terrible.

BringBackNeilSmith is offline  
Old
09-29-2005, 10:08 AM
  #65
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by happy hour
Well said, but who do you feel was slighted? If you were the Rags G.M what specific player/players would you (at this time) plug in on your first two lines?
You are asking me what I would do as a GM? I would not have signed so many veterans and left room for kids to play meaningfull minutes. I would also not start the summer by saying that as many as 10 rookies will make the team and that this will be a young team. Then, I would not be forced to backtrack and state that the team will be younger but not young.
I would have signed one less veteran forward (call him Rucinsky) and one less veteran defenseman (call him Malik). I would have allowed for kids to audition on the top lines throughout preseason. What is the harm of trying Prucha out with Jagr? What would have been the harm of seeing what Dawes can do on the PP?

True Blue is offline  
Old
09-29-2005, 10:21 AM
  #66
Davisian
Registered User
 
Davisian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Broomfield, CO
Posts: 6,079
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by happy hour
Islanders-Isles Rangers-Rags Makes for easier typing. I've never heard anybody actually SAY Rags before. I've heard Pens,Canes,Lanche, BJS,,Habs, Preds,Devs, Sens, Yotes, Bolts, Nucks, Caps.

And 'gers just sounds stupid..


I'm not happy with Murray, Weller and Lampan being sent down now, but one way or another they needed to get this team pared down, and lines settled.

I also wish one less vet Forward and 1 less vet defenseman were signed, but rebuilding's different here. I never hope for injuries, but they're a given.

We'll see more youth on this team this season than any in recent memory.

I'm done talking about how much I effin' loathe Sather, I'm ready to see what this team has..

Davisian is offline  
Old
09-29-2005, 10:22 AM
  #67
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 True Blue
You are asking me what I would do as a GM? I would not have signed so many veterans and left room for kids to play meaningfull minutes. I would also not start the summer by saying that as many as 10 rookies will make the team and that this will be a young team. Then, I would not be forced to backtrack and state that the team will be younger but not young.
I would have signed one less veteran forward (call him Rucinsky) and one less veteran defenseman (call him Malik). I would have allowed for kids to audition on the top lines throughout preseason. What is the harm of trying Prucha out with Jagr? What would have been the harm of seeing what Dawes can do on the PP?
OK fine , but how about now. Lets get passed all the Czech signings. I like the idea of Prucha with Jagr (assuming Petr can play as well on the left as he can on the right) but camp has shown that Dawes has NHL skills, but he is just not ready. Playing Dawes, Jessiman, Baranka, Liffiton twenty minutes a night in Hartford is still part of the process of rebuilding. I think we have to face the fact that our prospects on O are not really top-notch. I think that IF Jessiman turns out to be a bust (WAY to early to tell) we are in big trouble and makes it all the more necessary to land a player like Kessel or sign a player like Kovalchuk.

HAPPY HOUR is offline  
Old
09-29-2005, 10:22 AM
  #68
BringBackNeilSmith
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Warren County, NJ
Posts: 244
vCash: 500
Just to keep this grounded, here's Colin Stephenson in the Ledger:

"On defense, veterans Jason Strudwick and Dale Purinton, and youngsters Thomas Pock and Joe Rullier are all likely battling for the final two spots (assuming Renney chooses to carry eight defensemen). Pock, a smooth, two-way player, probably right now is insurance against Michal Rozsival's ankle injury. Rozsival has yet to play a preseason game, but he has skated the last two days and might play over the weekend."

So a) it's one reporter's take and b) probably devalued by his idea that Strudwick is competing specifically for a spot on D, when it's looking more likely (in my mind, anyway) that he'll be carried an an extra forward who gives the coach some important lineup flexibility on the backline if needed.

While there's probably some truth in it, I'd like to see more of BOTH these guys before developing an unshakeable opinion and don't plan to get bent out of shape on this one.

BringBackNeilSmith is offline  
Old
09-29-2005, 10:23 AM
  #69
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
Neil...

or should I call you BringBack? The team, as constructed, if healthy, is not that bad of a team, dare I say. The top six forwards, Jagr, Straka, Nylander, Rucinsky and Rucchin, are all guys who have scored 20, 30, 40, 50 or 60 goals in this league. If healthy, they will provide significant offense. Of course we all say they will not be healthy, but, Sather didn't acquire them thinking they won't be healthy. We all said Lindros won't last...we all said Bure's knees were shot...we all said Malakhov will not last (and the first season, he missed in its entirety save two games)... So these guys were acquired with the thought of playing out the season.

Go to the defense...why acquire Malik and pay him so much for so long? Because they look at a +/- and a puck-moving defenseman and think he's better than we think. Kaspar's kept and they think he's good, among other things. They acquire Rozsival because again, they think they're getting someone of quality who is cheap. And then there's Tyutin, and who knows what their thoughts of Poti are. And Weekes is not a bad goalie.

So my reasoning is partially how this team is constructed. Additionally, since a season was lost, and the rules have changed, the landscape makes it easier for a team like the Rangers to re-tool into a contender since there was so much turnover and a lot of re-jiggering was done (or at least I believe Sather is thinking this way).

Of course then there are the words of Sather himself, but that's all BS and I wouldn't insult you with that.

Fletch is offline  
Old
09-29-2005, 10:23 AM
  #70
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 32,364
vCash: 500
Dale Purinton serves no purpose on this team.At least,Jason Strudwick has played wing in his NHL career.When the Rangers tried Purinton on the wing two years ago,he balked at the move.Dale doesn't even fight anymore.Strudwick protected Bryce Lampman by disposing of Colton Orr.Think Purinton would have done that?He hasn't done that in years?Does Purinton realize he is fighting for a roster spot?The Rangers should look into moving Purinton or just place him on waivers hoping another team claims him considering his cap # is only $522,500

Will Michal Rosival even play a pre-season game?He is hoping to get into a game this weekend.If he is not ready to go,put him on the IR

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
09-29-2005, 10:25 AM
  #71
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
What's meant by insurance?

keeping him up as a 7th of 8th defenseman, instead of sending him down and getting quality minutes as all 22 year olds should? It's just strange thinking of a 22 year old with 4 games in the NHL as experience being considered an insurance policy, like that's the only reason he's around, for a Rozsival injury. He was here before Rozsival and he should be competing for a spot with him. I'm just not understanding the insurance policy. That's what Joel Bouchard was for.

RangerBoy...Purinton would've jumped Orr too. I don't think anybody can say that he doesn't stand up for his teammates.

Fletch is offline  
Old
09-29-2005, 10:27 AM
  #72
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch
The team, as constructed, if healthy, is not that bad of a team, dare I say.
I agree. While very soft, it may not be a bad team. My problem, is that it is not a rebuilding team, which is what I was told would be iced.

True Blue is offline  
Old
09-29-2005, 10:30 AM
  #73
Davisian
Registered User
 
Davisian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Broomfield, CO
Posts: 6,079
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
I agree. While very soft, it may not be a bad team. My problem, is that it is not a rebuilding team, which is what I was told would be iced.

That's my point.. I'mnot happy about it, but I no longer care as much as I just want to see some effin' Ranger hockey.

And see them win.

Davisian is offline  
Old
09-29-2005, 10:31 AM
  #74
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy
Dale Purinton serves no purpose on this team.
Let's try this route again. Despite the legions of haters, Dale is very popular in the locker room. It is for what he does on the ice and behind the scenes. He is a very popular teammate.

"Dale doesn't even fight anymore."

You are aware that since Brashear came over to the Flyers that Dale is the lone Ranger to best him in a fight, right? And wasn't it Dale who was the only one to constantly drop the gloves w/ Fedoruk and never get bested by him? And aren't Brashear and Fedoruk considered top 5 heavyweights?

"Think Purinton would have done that?"

Yes. That is one of the reasons that his teammates love him. He stands up for any of them. If Brashear does not scare him, I hardly think that Orr does.

True Blue is offline  
Old
09-29-2005, 10:33 AM
  #75
BringBackNeilSmith
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Warren County, NJ
Posts: 244
vCash: 500
Just don't call me late for dinner

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch
or should I call you BringBack? The team, as constructed, if healthy, is not that bad of a team, dare I say. The top six forwards, Jagr, Straka, Nylander, Rucinsky and Rucchin, are all guys who have scored 20, 30, 40, 50 or 60 goals in this league. If healthy, they will provide significant offense. Of course we all say they will not be healthy, but, Sather didn't acquire them thinking they won't be healthy. We all said Lindros won't last...we all said Bure's knees were shot...we all said Malakhov will not last (and the first season, he missed in its entirety save two games)... So these guys were acquired with the thought of playing out the season.

Go to the defense...why acquire Malik and pay him so much for so long? Because they look at a +/- and a puck-moving defenseman and think he's better than we think. Kaspar's kept and they think he's good, among other things. They acquire Rozsival because again, they think they're getting someone of quality who is cheap. And then there's Tyutin, and who knows what their thoughts of Poti are. And Weekes is not a bad goalie.

So my reasoning is partially how this team is constructed. Additionally, since a season was lost, and the rules have changed, the landscape makes it easier for a team like the Rangers to re-tool into a contender since there was so much turnover and a lot of re-jiggering was done (or at least I believe Sather is thinking this way).

Of course then there are the words of Sather himself, but that's all BS and I wouldn't insult you with that.
I see where you're going here, so what disagreement I have is probably just a metter of degree. Sather IS almost impossible to repose faith in... but for one thing, I think Mr. Palm Springs is letting Maloney/Renney run a lot more of the show at this point, so I'm evaluating that with a little more open mind. In that context, I think they're seeing a very fluid situation in the league this year and sure, I think some of these moves have a "hey, you never know" sort of hopefulness about them. But aside from Malik (I may have forgotten something....) there are no long-term commitments here that I see locking serious NHL-level talent in the minors long after it's ready. One other thought... there are some real good players that you enumerate among the forwards, but you gotta admit, between age and recent history, the only thing that AIN'T a given is good health (Jagr's eternal groins, Straka's everything, indications that Rucchin was losing steam in his last year in Anaheim). So my interpretation at this point is that they're just trying to ensure a good enough team so that the squad's morale can be kept afloat while all is in flux.

BringBackNeilSmith 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 03:18 PM.

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.