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

Rumblings from the press box

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-25-2006, 08:02 AM
  #76
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 18,445
vCash: 500
PIZZA&TrueBlue- We defenitly though have better depth of small LW's then PP QB D's. Prucha& Dawes vs. Pck. So we wouldn't be dealing from a postion of strength, but from a position where we a stronger to fill a position where we are weaker. Thats a fact.

Ola is offline  
Old
01-25-2006, 08:28 AM
  #77
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,413
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ola
PIZZA&TrueBlue- We defenitly though have better depth of small LW's then PP QB D's. Prucha& Dawes vs. Pck. So we wouldn't be dealing from a postion of strength, but from a position where we a stronger to fill a position where we are weaker. Thats a fact.
What's a fact is that only Prucha has shown that he is capable of playing on the top 2 lines at the NHL level. Everybody else have shown no such thing. As of right now, we only have one player under the age of 30 on the top 2 lines. Until anyone else shows that ability, dealing any forwards with top 6 potential is not dealing from stregth, but further depleting an area that we currently appear to be weak in.

True Blue is offline  
Old
01-25-2006, 09:00 AM
  #78
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 18,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
What's a fact is that only Prucha has shown that he is capable of playing on the top 2 lines at the NHL level. Everybody else have shown no such thing. As of right now, we only have one player under the age of 30 on the top 2 lines. Until anyone else shows that ability, dealing any forwards with top 6 potential is not dealing from stregth, but further depleting an area that we currently appear to be weak in.
I don't get your point. First of all I don't look at it from the same perspective as you. It makes more sense to look at each position and cathegory of players. But even if we look past the simularities between Prucha and Dawes, which are striking, you just says that we would depleting an area we currently appear weak in. But we would do that to strenthen one area in which we defenitly are even weaker in(offensive D's). Right?

We don't have a single future potential PP QB. We have Prucha on LW. So I think it would makes sense to deal Dawes for a young PP QB like Liles, if possible of course. Lets say we didn't have Lundqvist and Montoya, only Weekes and Jussi Markkanen. Would you deal Dawes for a Montoya? Its the same thing.

Ola is offline  
Old
01-25-2006, 09:33 AM
  #79
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,413
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ola
I don't get your point. First of all I don't look at it from the same perspective as you. It makes more sense to look at each position and cathegory of players.
I do not look at is as how we are doing on LW, RW, C, LD & RD. I look at defensive prospects and forward prospects. That is what makes sense to me. Our defensive prospects are in much better shape that our offensive prospects. We only have one forward under the age of 30 who has proved himself a capable top-2 line player. A team building for the future should have more than that. Until Dawes & Immonen show that they can handle the NHL game, we cannot hang our hats on them. Until Korpikoski, Dubinsky & Jessiman can do what Immonen and Dawes are doing at the AHL level, we cannot even begin to discuss them as possibilities.

"But we would do that to strenthen one area in which we defenitly are even weaker in(offensive D's). Right?"

Wrong, becuase the strength of our farm system is in defensemen and goalies, not top-6 forwards.

"We don't have a single future potential PP QB."

We also have only one forward under 30 that we can hand our hat on as being a top 6 player.

"We have Prucha on LW. So I think it would makes sense to deal Dawes "

No for the reasons discussed above.

"for a young PP QB like Liles, if possible of course."

For some reason, I cannot see Dawes being enough.

"Lets say we didn't have Lundqvist and Montoya, only Weekes and Jussi Markkanen. Would you deal Dawes for a Montoya? Its the same thing."

It's not the same thing becuase you are talking fantasy and not reality. Sure I would deal a possible 2nd line forward for an elite goalie prospect. But that is not the case, nor would it get it done. If we had the depth on future top 6 forwards that we do on defense or goalies, then you could do it. But we do not.

True Blue is offline  
Old
01-25-2006, 10:37 AM
  #80
funky
Registered User
 
funky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Saskatoon, Sask
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,166
vCash: 500
No but as an L.A fan how bout you deal us Montoya for Tukonen and a pick. Tukonen and Korpo get to play together again and the pick can bolster your prospect tank while L.A possibly gets there goalie of the future. BTW Tuk's is a power forward, not sure if the Rags like them or not, he he, kidding. I am a Rangers fan second.

funky is online now  
Old
01-25-2006, 11:00 AM
  #81
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 18,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
I do not look at is as how we are doing on LW, RW, C, LD & RD. I look at defensive prospects and forward prospects. That is what makes sense to me. Our defensive prospects are in much better shape that our offensive prospects. We only have one forward under the age of 30 who has proved himself a capable top-2 line player. A team building for the future should have more than that. Until Dawes & Immonen show that they can handle the NHL game, we cannot hang our hats on them. Until Korpikoski, Dubinsky & Jessiman can do what Immonen and Dawes are doing at the AHL level, we cannot even begin to discuss them as possibilities.

"But we would do that to strenthen one area in which we defenitly are even weaker in(offensive D's). Right?"

Wrong, becuase the strength of our farm system is in defensemen and goalies, not top-6 forwards.

"We don't have a single future potential PP QB."

We also have only one forward under 30 that we can hand our hat on as being a top 6 player.

"We have Prucha on LW. So I think it would makes sense to deal Dawes "

No for the reasons discussed above.

"for a young PP QB like Liles, if possible of course."

For some reason, I cannot see Dawes being enough.

"Lets say we didn't have Lundqvist and Montoya, only Weekes and Jussi Markkanen. Would you deal Dawes for a Montoya? Its the same thing."

It's not the same thing becuase you are talking fantasy and not reality. Sure I would deal a possible 2nd line forward for an elite goalie prospect. But that is not the case, nor would it get it done. If we had the depth on future top 6 forwards that we do on defense or goalies, then you could do it. But we do not.
Hm that was what the discusstion was about, sending a package for Liles with Dawes. Not Dawes for Dennis Sonnenberg... Wouldn't it be better to post that in your first reply, not the tenth? (j/k)


Last edited by Ola: 01-25-2006 at 11:06 AM.
Ola is offline  
Old
01-25-2006, 09:20 PM
  #82
bobbop
Henrik & Pop
 
bobbop's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Suburban Phoenix
Country: United States
Posts: 5,084
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerseyRangers
Right now if the season was to end today you've got St. Louis, Pittsburg, Washington, Columbus and Chicago as your bottom 6 teams. I can only see Washington, Chicago and possibly Columbus needing a goalie. Will be interesting.
How convienent is it that Montoya was raised in Chicago? I don't know exactly when will be the right time to make a goaltender trade but if the Hawks pick is high enough to bring back a franchise forward, this would be a logical play. It also puts Montoya in the Western Conference.

bobbop is offline  
Old
01-26-2006, 07:01 AM
  #83
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,413
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ola
Hm that was what the discusstion was about, sending a package for Liles with Dawes. Not Dawes for Dennis Sonnenberg... Wouldn't it be better to post that in your first reply, not the tenth? (j/k)
The discussion was also whether or not to trade our few top 2-line prospects for defensive help/prospects. You said yes, and I said no.

True Blue is offline  
Old
01-26-2006, 08:10 AM
  #84
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 18,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
The discussion was also whether or not to trade our few top 2-line prospects for defensive help/prospects. You said yes, and I said no.
I wrote that if we could have Liles, or someone like him, for Poti, Immonen and Dawes I would make the trade. Nothing else. Sorry...

Ola is offline  
Old
01-26-2006, 09:07 AM
  #85
JerseyRangers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Jersey City, NJ
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 1,618
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbop
How convienent is it that Montoya was raised in Chicago? I don't know exactly when will be the right time to make a goaltender trade but if the Hawks pick is high enough to bring back a franchise forward, this would be a logical play. It also puts Montoya in the Western Conference.
Of all the possible trade partners for Montoya I'd like Chicago the best. Not advocating trading Montoya but if its gonna happen then somewhere out West would be preferable to sending him in our conference.

JerseyRangers is offline  
Old
01-26-2006, 09:18 AM
  #86
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,413
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ola
I wrote that if we could have Liles, or someone like him, for Poti, Immonen and Dawes I would make the trade. Nothing else. Sorry...
Right, and I am saying that we have so few prospects that can be thought of as being realistically on our top 2 lines,that I would not trade either Immonen or Dawes. Whether or not Jessiman, Dubinsky & Korpikoski can be thought of as top-2 line players remains to be seen. Right now, only Immonen and Dawes are demonstrating that they could be ready for such roles.
Believe me, I love Lauri K. and beat the drum for him on the days leading up to the draft. However, it would be rather silly of me to presume that he will be in the position that Dawes is in until he comes over and proves it.

True Blue is offline  
Old
01-26-2006, 10:28 AM
  #87
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 18,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JerseyRangers
Of all the possible trade partners for Montoya I'd like Chicago the best. Not advocating trading Montoya but if its gonna happen then somewhere out West would be preferable to sending him in our conference.
I want to see Montoya in the NHL before he is traded. There is just such a big diffrence in value between a prospect and a NHL player. Montoya is already quit a big name in the league. He is also so flashy that he will get noticed, he is right up there with Dipietro and Turco in handling the puck. If he can come to NY and in a backup roll, where he plays against the bad teams in the league, put up good numbers we could possibly get a really good young player straight up for him. Not a franchise player but maybe for example someone like Gaborik/Havlat. He could also be used in a big package for a great player like Crosby/Thornton/Heatly.

Right now we would probably have to include him in a big package if we want something in return...

Ola is offline  
Old
01-26-2006, 02:25 PM
  #88
oldtimer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BROOKLYN
Posts: 131
vCash: 500
I don't understand

why people are high on Korpikowski and Jesiman. Statistics-wise they have been nothing but hugh disappointments. Korpi in particular - He has a grand total of TWO goals all season, for goodness sake! TWO, plus three assists. Wow. Don't tell me about lack of ice time; if he earned it, he would be given it: no coach wouldn't play the best players. Almoost as bad is Hugh Specimen. Big doesn't mean good - Jeff Toms, John Tripp were also large persons. I think Dawes has more potential than either one of the bigger stiffs - yet people are OK with dealing him just because he's not big. How big was Marcel Dionne?

oldtimer is offline  
Old
01-26-2006, 02:45 PM
  #89
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldtimer
why people are high on Korpikowski and Jesiman. Statistics-wise they have been nothing but hugh disappointments. Korpi in particular - He has a grand total of TWO goals all season, for goodness sake! TWO, plus three assists. Wow. Don't tell me about lack of ice time; if he earned it, he would be given it: no coach wouldn't play the best players. Almoost as bad is Hugh Specimen. Big doesn't mean good - Jeff Toms, John Tripp were also large persons. I think Dawes has more potential than either one of the bigger stiffs - yet people are OK with dealing him just because he's not big. How big was Marcel Dionne?
Jessiman I've been disappointed with. Korpikoski not as much simply because of the Finnish league and his particular role and age.

Edge is offline  
Old
01-26-2006, 04:48 PM
  #90
GarretJoseph*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 7,614
vCash: 500
Colorado are not trading Liles.

GarretJoseph* is offline  
Old
01-26-2006, 05:50 PM
  #91
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 18,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oldtimer
why people are high on Korpikowski and Jesiman. Statistics-wise they have been nothing but hugh disappointments. Korpi in particular - He has a grand total of TWO goals all season, for goodness sake! TWO, plus three assists. Wow. Don't tell me about lack of ice time; if he earned it, he would be given it: no coach wouldn't play the best players. Almoost as bad is Hugh Specimen. Big doesn't mean good - Jeff Toms, John Tripp were also large persons. I think Dawes has more potential than either one of the bigger stiffs - yet people are OK with dealing him just because he's not big. How big was Marcel Dionne?
I took 30 minutes to write a reply and it was lost because this ****ing **** place is always overloaded...

Here is the short version.

Anyway Korpikoski is a great skater and will be able to stand out at all level because of his wheels. He also have tremendous attitude.

Jessiman is just a very talented athleet. He have a great stride and smooth hands. Pace is everything in hockey, if a coach plays Jeff Toms with two talented players that line will loose 0.5 seconds everytime Toms recives a pass or takes a turn. Jessiman is 65 but he moves like he is 511. Once he gets his feets moving faster he will be able to play with the best in the league without slowing them down. Its a asset for anycoach to have a player Hugh's size who can play with anyone.

The reason Lauri K and all other young players in Europe needs 2 years before they start scoring in the European leagues could be the subject of a doctors exam. Coaches here have no reason to "boost" a young kids number, on the contreary. Lauri is on loan for TPS. They know he won't be there next year. With the big ice its more important to be organized then talented. Its harder to get assists here ect.

Ola is offline  
Old
01-26-2006, 05:56 PM
  #92
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
I think Korps is a safer player than Jessiman, though not quite with the potential upside.

Korps game is all in the way he understands the game and does the little things. That's something Jessiman hasn't been able to put together consistently yet and time will tell if he can.

I think both are good enough players (though I think Jessiman's not quite as much of a natural athlete nor would I say he skates like a guy who is 5'11).

I think potential wise they are two different players so the expectations are different.

Edge is offline  
Old
01-26-2006, 06:15 PM
  #93
McRanger
Registered User
 
McRanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,944
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
I think Korps is a safer player than Jessiman, though not quite with the potential upside.

Korps game is all in the way he understands the game and does the little things. That's something Jessiman hasn't been able to put together consistently yet and time will tell if he can.

I think both are good enough players (though I think Jessiman's not quite as much of a natural athlete nor would I say he skates like a guy who is 5'11).

I think potential wise they are two different players so the expectations are different.
Any chance you caught his play in Hartford, or have talked to a professional who has? The updates are great from posters, but I fear some may be more optimistic than objective...

McRanger is offline  
Old
01-26-2006, 08:47 PM
  #94
Fish
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: New Zealand
Posts: 2,177
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
I think Korps is a safer player than Jessiman, though not quite with the potential upside.

Korps game is all in the way he understands the game and does the little things. That's something Jessiman hasn't been able to put together consistently yet and time will tell if he can.

I think both are good enough players (though I think Jessiman's not quite as much of a natural athlete nor would I say he skates like a guy who is 5'11).

I think potential wise they are two different players so the expectations are different.
The thing that disappointed me most with Korpikoski in the handful games I've seen him play the past couple of years is his pretty pedestrian shot...mind you Straka gets by with a fairly ordinary shot, though he does make up for it with some nice passing.

Fish is offline  
Old
01-26-2006, 10:31 PM
  #95
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by McRanger
Any chance you caught his play in Hartford, or have talked to a professional who has? The updates are great from posters, but I fear some may be more optimistic than objective...

I have not actually caught Jessiman live in Hartford yet, I've seen him 2 or 3 times on tv. Most of my opinions are based more on College and ECHL.

I think Hugh's level of achievement will come down to one thing and one thing alone: his ability to think on the ice. It's not a matter of hard work, and he's never going to be the most skilled guy on any team, it's a matter of whether his mental game can work at a faster pace. It either will or it won't.

Scouts have always been mixed on him, with more leaning towards not being crazy about him. Now having said that, there have been so damn good players who they felt that way about. Personally I wouldn't have taken him, but as a Ranger fan I hope he makes it.

Edge is offline  
Old
01-26-2006, 10:33 PM
  #96
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish
The thing that disappointed me most with Korpikoski in the handful games I've seen him play the past couple of years is his pretty pedestrian shot...mind you Straka gets by with a fairly ordinary shot, though he does make up for it with some nice passing.
Korps is not a natural goal scorer. I'd say right now his top end potential is maybe 25 goals, but Korps is game isn't really about scoring per say. He's more of a line's rudder. His play steers it and holds it together, but doesn't really "drive" it so to speak.

He reminds me a lot of Radek Dvorak, and I've personally always liked Dvorak.

Edge is offline  
Old
01-26-2006, 10:48 PM
  #97
nyranger61494
YNWA
 
nyranger61494's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: New York, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 3,896
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
Korps is not a natural goal scorer. I'd say right now his top end potential is maybe 25 goals, but Korps is game isn't really about scoring per say. He's more of a line's rudder. His play steers it and holds it together, but doesn't really "drive" it so to speak.

He reminds me a lot of Radek Dvorak, and I've personally always liked Dvorak.
Edge, or anyone else who has seen alot of Korpikoski...how about a comparison to Niklas Sundstrom?

nyranger61494 is offline  
Old
01-27-2006, 12:42 AM
  #98
Pizza
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 10,321
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
Korps is not a natural goal scorer. I'd say right now his top end potential is maybe 25 goals, but Korps is game isn't really about scoring per say. He's more of a line's rudder. His play steers it and holds it together, but doesn't really "drive" it so to speak.

He reminds me a lot of Radek Dvorak, and I've personally always liked Dvorak.
Hope he scores more than Dvorak does. Devo has 6 goals this year.

Pizza is offline  
Old
01-27-2006, 04:40 AM
  #99
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 18,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
I think both are good enough players (though I think Jessiman's not quite as much of a natural athlete nor would I say he skates like a guy who is 5'11).

I think potential wise they are two different players so the expectations are different.
I think that was in reply to my last post, I was a little unclear. I wrote that he moves like someone who is 511, not skates. He isn't bent over like B. Grahame. He have the strength in his abdominals to build up good speed while turning. He is just a good skater. He is comfortable changing from forward to gooing backwards at high speed so that he can take a pass at any time. Though even in Darthmouth he was heavy compared to someone 5'11. The first game of the year in the AHL this year he was extremely heavy and did not skate as well as he did in the ECAC. I think that was a conditioning issue though and IMO won't hurt his future.

Ola is offline  
Old
01-27-2006, 04:45 AM
  #100
Fish
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: New Zealand
Posts: 2,177
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge
Korps is not a natural goal scorer. I'd say right now his top end potential is maybe 25 goals, but Korps is game isn't really about scoring per say. He's more of a line's rudder. His play steers it and holds it together, but doesn't really "drive" it so to speak.

He reminds me a lot of Radek Dvorak, and I've personally always liked Dvorak.
Granted he's not a natual goal scorer, but is his offense good enough for the top two lines? I'm not sure yet...

Fish 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 11:00 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.