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

Let's review what's left...

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-02-2005, 09:29 PM
  #1
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
Let's review what's left...

top line: Rucinsky-Nylander-Jagr
Second line: Hossa-Rucchin-Straka
Third line: Nienimen-[Lundmark, Immonen, Betts, Moore]-[Prucha, Ortmeyer]
Fourth line: [Hollweg, enforcer]-[Betts, Moore, Immonen]-[Ortmeyer, Ward]

In brackets are likely candidates in order I think they stand for various reasons. Who am I missing? Looking at this, there will be some unhappy people. It would be a shame if Lundmark, Immonen, Betts, Prucha, Ortmeyer and Hollweg do not play (although I'm less wed to Lundmark of all in how I picked the spots for these guys). From the sounds of it, Ward doesn't deserve to not play and Moore's played well too.

On defense, this is what's here:

Tyutin-Kasparaitis
Malik-Poti
Rozsival-[Strudwick, Kondratiev, Rullier, Purinton]

In the end, there really only seemed to be one spot, at best available, unless something changes, which of course it could. I put Strudwick there because of his experience, and that's how I feel this may go. Who am I missing?

Fletch is offline  
Old
10-02-2005, 09:38 PM
  #2
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 Fletch
top line: Rucinsky-Nylander-Jagr
Second line: Hossa-Rucchin-Straka
Third line: Nienimen-[Lundmark, Immonen, Betts, Moore]-[Prucha, Ortmeyer]
Fourth line: [Hollweg, enforcer]-[Betts, Moore, Immonen]-[Ortmeyer, Ward]

In brackets are likely candidates in order I think they stand for various reasons. Who am I missing? Looking at this, there will be some unhappy people. It would be a shame if Lundmark, Immonen, Betts, Prucha, Ortmeyer and Hollweg do not play (although I'm less wed to Lundmark of all in how I picked the spots for these guys). From the sounds of it, Ward doesn't deserve to not play and Moore's played well too.

On defense, this is what's here:

Tyutin-Kasparaitis
Malik-Poti
Rozsival-[Strudwick, Kondratiev, Rullier, Purinton]

In the end, there really only seemed to be one spot, at best available, unless something changes, which of course it could. I put Strudwick there because of his experience, and that's how I feel this may go. Who am I missing?
Lundmark, Prucha, Betts, Ortmeyer, Ward and they probably carry Moore too.

Kondratiev as the 6th and Strudwick as the extra.

BigE is offline  
Old
10-02-2005, 09:41 PM
  #3
ATLANTARANGER*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Atlanta, B&R in NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,649
vCash: 500
Also keep in mind something JD said during the game tonite

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch
top line: Rucinsky-Nylander-Jagr
Second line: Hossa-Rucchin-Straka
Third line: Nienimen-[Lundmark, Immonen, Betts, Moore]-[Prucha, Ortmeyer]
Fourth line: [Hollweg, enforcer]-[Betts, Moore, Immonen]-[Ortmeyer, Ward]

In brackets are likely candidates in order I think they stand for various reasons. Who am I missing? Looking at this, there will be some unhappy people. It would be a shame if Lundmark, Immonen, Betts, Prucha, Ortmeyer and Hollweg do not play (although I'm less wed to Lundmark of all in how I picked the spots for these guys). From the sounds of it, Ward doesn't deserve to not play and Moore's played well too.

On defense, this is what's here:

Tyutin-Kasparaitis
Malik-Poti
Rozsival-[Strudwick, Kondratiev, Rullier, Purinton]

In the end, there really only seemed to be one spot, at best available, unless something changes, which of course it could. I put Strudwick there because of his experience, and that's how I feel this may go. Who am I missing?
Teams are allowed to have only 50 total players under contract. He also said that players will be placed on waivers and that we were under 50 total. This could explain why some of our Jr players have not been signed. I won't be surprised to see Puriton put on waivers. Immonen will be sent down in my opinion. Too bad, I liked him with Prucha and Neimenen. Moore will go too I think only because the Betts, Ortmeyer, Hollweg line works well and they are 4th line players. Moore could be something more and needs to play quality minutes. Lunmark has shown me little. An awful lot of wasted motion with little accomplished. Prucha makes things happen, Jamie and Balej you have to wait a whole game to maybe see them make one play.

ATLANTARANGER* is offline  
Old
10-02-2005, 09:43 PM
  #4
BigE
Registered User
 
BigE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: San Francisco, CA
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,476
vCash: 500
Lets not forget that Hossa, Neiminen, Ward and Ortmeyer play either side. Lundmark can shift to the wing and Straka to centre. That affords us a lot of tinkering options and depending upon your view of management, that's either great news or terrible news.

BigE is offline  
Old
10-02-2005, 09:50 PM
  #5
Larry Melnyk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Gloomsville, USA
Posts: 4,376
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch
top line: Rucinsky-Nylander-Jagr
Second line: Hossa-Rucchin-Straka
Third line: Nienimen-[Lundmark, Immonen, Betts, Moore]-[Prucha, Ortmeyer]
Fourth line: [Hollweg, enforcer]-[Betts, Moore, Immonen]-[Ortmeyer, Ward]

In brackets are likely candidates in order I think they stand for various reasons. Who am I missing? Looking at this, there will be some unhappy people. It would be a shame if Lundmark, Immonen, Betts, Prucha, Ortmeyer and Hollweg do not play (although I'm less wed to Lundmark of all in how I picked the spots for these guys). From the sounds of it, Ward doesn't deserve to not play and Moore's played well too.

On defense, this is what's here:

Tyutin-Kasparaitis
Malik-Poti
Rozsival-[Strudwick, Kondratiev, Rullier, Purinton]

In the end, there really only seemed to be one spot, at best available, unless something changes, which of course it could. I put Strudwick there because of his experience, and that's how I feel this may go. Who am I missing?
Is the bracket order how you would like to see it, or how you think the Rangers see it?

My betting is that the first three lines are decided with the only question being Lundmark vs Hossa and everything points to Hossa...

Rucinsky-Nylander-Jagr
Straka-Rucchin-JL/Hossa
Niemenin-Betts-Orts (All three won the jobs)

The 4th line is where the action is....Prucha has to make it...and I think Immonen is the only one assured of being sent down....

Strudwick's position as a top-7 D-man would have an impact here...I think the Rangers keep him in the top 7 and Rullier and Purinton are sent down/let go....

That would leave one of Moore or JL as the 4th C and JL/DM, Ward, and Hollweg fighting for 2-3 spots...maybe all amke it for the first few weeks...

Larry Melnyk is offline  
Old
10-02-2005, 09:50 PM
  #6
MisterUnspoken
Vintage
 
MisterUnspoken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 10,092
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to MisterUnspoken
Top line: Straka-Nylander-Jagr
Second line: Rucinsky-Rucchin-Hossa
Third line: Prucha-Nieminen-Lundmark
Fourth line: Ortmeyer-Betts-Hollweg

Tyutin-Kasparaitis
Malik-Poti (oh god this hurts)
Rozsival-Kondratiev

Something like that I suppose... God that defense is bad.

MisterUnspoken is offline  
Old
10-02-2005, 09:50 PM
  #7
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
E...

the top six, in my opinion is set. There were 5 set coming to camp, and Hossa solidified the sixth. That really leaves one line, and no matter how much you move guys from left, right or center, there isn't much maneuvering left. I'm skeptical about Kondratiev's status now because I'm thinking they'd rather go with experience than youth, even as a third pair defenseman. I like 'Drats and want to see him there - and if his is there, I'd consider it a small step towards the rebuild.

Fletch is offline  
Old
10-02-2005, 09:52 PM
  #8
MisterUnspoken
Vintage
 
MisterUnspoken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 10,092
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to MisterUnspoken
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Melnyk
Is the bracket order how you would like to see it, or how you think the Rangers see it?

My betting is that the first three lines are decided with the only question being Lundmark vs Hossa and everything points to Hossa...

Rucinsky-Nylander-Jagr
Straka-Rucchin-JL/Hossa
Niemenin-Betts-Orts (All three won the jobs)

The 4th line is where the action is....Prucha has to make it...and I think Immonen is the only one assured of being sent down....

Strudwick's position as a top-7 D-man would have an impact here...I think the Rangers keep him in the top 7 and Rullier and Purinton are sent down/let go....

That would leave one of Moore or JL as the 4th C and JL/DM, Ward, and Hollweg fighting for 2-3 spots...maybe all amke it for the first few weeks...

Prucha is very much deserving of 3rd line in my opinion. He has played his butt off and works well with other skill players. I think I'd like to see him and Lundmark play with Niemenen who can create some choas and space. Prucha plays a similiar way and is a solid forechecker.

MisterUnspoken is offline  
Old
10-02-2005, 09:53 PM
  #9
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
Larry...

it's more where I think the Rangers come out in it, with a little bit of my thoughts. Personally I'd take Immonen over Lundmark at center (still think Lundmark's a winger), but I don't see that happening. I may also be inclined to take Prucha over Hossa since I've seen one more, but that's just me. I'd take Kondratiev over Strudwick, but think that experience may win-out. Hollweg definitely makes it over Ward to me.

Fletch is offline  
Old
10-02-2005, 09:55 PM
  #10
BigE
Registered User
 
BigE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: San Francisco, CA
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,476
vCash: 500
Unfortunately, ATL, I agree with your sentiments in regards to Lundmark. At this point in time he makes the roster because he's a former Ranger first rounder...not necessarily because he's been better than Moore or Immonen.

I'm hoping that his shoot-out winner the other night might give him some confidence but at this point I'm not expecting much. It's likely the case that whatever you get in the first 10-15 games is what you're going to see for the rest of his Ranger career. Maybe we can trade him before that time and get something out of him.

BigE is offline  
Old
10-02-2005, 10:00 PM
  #11
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 Fletch
the top six, in my opinion is set. There were 5 set coming to camp, and Hossa solidified the sixth. That really leaves one line, and no matter how much you move guys from left, right or center, there isn't much maneuvering left. I'm skeptical about Kondratiev's status now because I'm thinking they'd rather go with experience than youth, even as a third pair defenseman. I like 'Drats and want to see him there - and if his is there, I'd consider it a small step towards the rebuild.
I was refering to later on in the season, actually. Just a general comment to what we might see in the future.

BigE is offline  
Old
10-02-2005, 10:07 PM
  #12
bobbop
Henrik & Pop
 
bobbop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Suburban Phoenix
Country: United States
Posts: 4,989
vCash: 500
I expect 1-2 trades tomorrow (Poti, Lundmark) and possibly 1-2 waived bye-bye (Purinton, Rullier) wouldn't be surprised if 1-2 new faces also show up. Stay tuned. And that's only if the deal Code is touting doesn't happen!

bobbop is offline  
Old
10-02-2005, 10:09 PM
  #13
MisterUnspoken
Vintage
 
MisterUnspoken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 10,092
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to MisterUnspoken
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbop
I expect 1-2 trades tomorrow (Poti, Lundmark) and possibly 1-2 waived bye-bye (Purinton, Rullier) wouldn't be surprised if 1-2 new faces also show up. Stay tuned. And that's only if the deal Code is touting doesn't happen!
What deal?

MisterUnspoken is offline  
Old
10-02-2005, 10:23 PM
  #14
nyranger61494
YNWA
 
nyranger61494's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: New York, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 3,896
vCash: 500
Code said that the Rangers and Atlanta reached the following deal before Atlanta nixed it last sec:

To NYR:
Kovalchuk
06 2nd Rd Pick

To ATL:
Jagr
Montoya
Prucha
Kondratiev
2 Future #1's

I don't know if we are allowed to post what Code says

nyranger61494 is offline  
Old
10-02-2005, 10:24 PM
  #15
nyranger61494
YNWA
 
nyranger61494's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: New York, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 3,896
vCash: 500
Also Mister Unspoken, Nieminen is not a center, but a poster on another site said that McGill actually did something good with him...Lundmark would take the faceoff but he would then shift towards the wing and let one of his linemates play in the center of the ice...thoughts?

nyranger61494 is offline  
Old
10-02-2005, 10:28 PM
  #16
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
I actually think...

that that package is too much to give up for Kovalchuk. Like it or not, Jagr's still one of the best players in the world - and today, is actually quite affordable. I'd expect a decent return from Jagr if traded today. So, to add Prucha, Kondratiev, Montoya and two firsts seems like waaay too much.

Fletch is offline  
Old
10-02-2005, 10:35 PM
  #17
nyranger61494
YNWA
 
nyranger61494's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: New York, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 3,896
vCash: 500
It Is!!!

nyranger61494 is offline  
Old
10-02-2005, 10:36 PM
  #18
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 Fletch
that that package is too much to give up for Kovalchuk. Like it or not, Jagr's still one of the best players in the world - and today, is actually quite affordable. I'd expect a decent return from Jagr if traded today. So, to add Prucha, Kondratiev, Montoya and two firsts seems like waaay too much.
That I agree with. Way, way, way too much.

BigE is offline  
Old
10-02-2005, 10:39 PM
  #19
BigE
Registered User
 
BigE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: San Francisco, CA
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,476
vCash: 500
Who is "Code" by the way? Is that Ek-lund?

BigE is offline  
Old
10-02-2005, 10:49 PM
  #20
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 BigE
Who is "Code" by the way?
One of Rodent's contributors. I believe he or she is based out of Czech Rep. and privy to insider information over there.

Personally, I don't see how that rumor could be even partially true.

Melrose_Jr. is offline  
Old
10-02-2005, 10:49 PM
  #21
RANGERDIEHARD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: New York
Posts: 929
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigE
Unfortunately, ATL, I agree with your sentiments in regards to Lundmark. At this point in time he makes the roster because he's a former Ranger first rounder...not necessarily because he's been better than Moore or Immonen.

I'm hoping that his shoot-out winner the other night might give him some confidence but at this point I'm not expecting much. It's likely the case that whatever you get in the first 10-15 games is what you're going to see for the rest of his Ranger career. Maybe we can trade him before that time and get something out of him.
Let's give Jamie 1 more season to grow into a top 6 forward, if he is still struggling by March then he should be gone.

RANGERDIEHARD is offline  
Old
10-02-2005, 10:58 PM
  #22
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 RANGERDIEHARD
Let's give Jamie 1 more season to grow into a top 6 forward, if he is still struggling by March then he should be gone.
I'm not past giving him another shot in the regular season, in fact I encourage it. I simply have lowered my hopes and expectations; more accurately, I've resigned myself to seeing much less than his first round potential once indicated.

BigE is offline  
Old
10-02-2005, 11:00 PM
  #23
n8
WAAAAAAA!!!
 
n8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: san francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 7,414
vCash: 500
What I think will be the lines (as opposed to what I'd want the lines to be) The big problem is we have a lot of prospects who really deserve to get a shot on this team but because of certain questionable roster moves that I think Sather did for injury insurance, certain players are Hartford bound until someone stinks up the Garden so much they are released outright (highly unlikely), put on waivers (more likely), or get injured (somewhat likely). Additionally, there are players who just can't be sent to Hartford anymore with clearing waivers so they just really have to play.

LW-C-RW
Straka-Nylander-Jagr
Rucinsky-Rucchin-Lundmark
Nieminen-Moore-Prucha
Hossa-Betts-Ortmeyer
extra. Ward

question. if we send an over ager down to Hartford before the season begins, do they have to clear waivers? I remember reading somewhere if they start the season down there they don't but if they are called up and sent back down again then they would have to clear. Is this at all accurate or does this only apply to a certain age group?

n8 is offline  
Old
10-02-2005, 11:04 PM
  #24
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,771
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melrose_Jr.
One of Rodent's contributors. I believe he or she is based out of Czech Rep. and privy to insider information over there.

Personally, I don't see how that rumor could be even partially true.
That package is just ridiculous. Jagr is arguably the best player in the entire world and he counts only approximately half a max contract against the cap. I know we're focusing on youth here, but I don't know that I'd necessarily offer Jagr for Kovalchuk straight up. If (when) you trade Jagr, it's to get multiple assets in return.

BrooklynRangersFan is offline  
Old
10-02-2005, 11:33 PM
  #25
Janerixon
Registered User
 
Janerixon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 3,730
vCash: 500
I think a trade is very possible but i just dont know for who or for what, i mean a push for boynton would be great but i dont see it happening

the lines i see
straka-nylander-jagr
rucinsky-rucchin-hossa
Niemmen-lundmark-prucha
hollweg-betts-ortmeyer

kasper-tyutin
malik-poti
strudwick-kondratiev

weekes-lundqvist

sc: ward, purinton, roszival

thats what i see slats doing, not exactly the way id go about it, but i think that betts line looked really good tonite, i was at the game and im watching the replay now but betts looked very good besides him missing burying that one behind broduer i think he showed alot of hustle and hard work and orts and hollweg looked good as well except when hollweg was getting pounded

if it was up to me ward, purinton, and roszival would all be gone and they can take poti and malik with them and id insert pock and somone else

we will have to see what happens but im saying the vets will stick with the team

Janerixon 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 02:47 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.