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

The rebuild's over?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-15-2006, 10:02 PM
  #76
ATLANTARANGER*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Atlanta, B&R in NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,649
vCash: 500
For those that think a rebuild is a roster ladden with 21 & 22 year olds is down right foolish. It is not going to happen. This is NY, not Pittsburgh, or Washington where there are only 1 or 2 reporters covering hockey. That has never, ever been the mind set and you can go all the way back to when this franchise was formed.

What we are doing is the right thing. There is absolutely zero reason to force any prospects, none. The downside where a player is put in over his haed makes little sense. The key to rebuilding is the prospects playing"together" many have already done that in Hartford, many more will this year. That's the key. It makes no difference that it is not happening on the MSG ice. They will grow up together in Hartford and share many experiences together. That is as equally important and far more constructive then getting your butt ripped every night in the NHL.

Bring people in gradually and when they are fully equipped is the right thing. In 07-08 & 08-09 we shoudl see many of these kids playing key roles for the Rangers. When that happens, that is the result of an intelligent rebuild. For those that wanted this 2 years ago, get over it. It didn't happen. We are in excellent shape, especially cap wise in 07-08 & 08-09. That is the key.

ATLANTARANGER* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2006, 10:07 PM
  #77
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
Atlanta...

if you're posting in response to recent posts, then you've missed the point. Personally, I'm not even talking about the rebuild, how it should be, who should be a part of it, etc. I'm talking about roster spots that are open for kids. And I'm not saying how many and which ones there should be. I'm just commenting on what there was last season, and who was in competition, and the status of vets. It's well understood that this team's not going be laden with 20 and 21 year olds (and PITT wasn't either, which is why they signed Recchi, Palffy and Gonchar - they just got the wrong bunch of guys). I think everyone can agree that's not the right approach. We can talk about how to rebuild realizing that everyone will have their own ideas of what spots should be open for competition for youth, as opposed to already being filled by vets, but we're not even debating that issue at this time.

Fletch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2006, 08:16 AM
  #78
ATLANTARANGER*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Atlanta, B&R in NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,649
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
if you're posting in response to recent posts, then you've missed the point. Personally, I'm not even talking about the rebuild, how it should be, who should be a part of it, etc. I'm talking about roster spots that are open for kids. And I'm not saying how many and which ones there should be. I'm just commenting on what there was last season, and who was in competition, and the status of vets. It's well understood that this team's not going be laden with 20 and 21 year olds (and PITT wasn't either, which is why they signed Recchi, Palffy and Gonchar - they just got the wrong bunch of guys). I think everyone can agree that's not the right approach. We can talk about how to rebuild realizing that everyone will have their own ideas of what spots should be open for competition for youth, as opposed to already being filled by vets, but we're not even debating that issue at this time.
I think you are missing my point. How many roster spots were filled by kids last year?

Lundqvist, Prucha, Tyutin, D.Moore, Hollweg. That's 5. Do you actually think that another 5 would be opened this year? 2-3 is what you could and should expect.
More likely 2 is the number. Are there players capable of making the squad? Yes. The reality is is that they will be far better served earning their spurs at Hartford. Many of these kids are a year away whether people like to admit it or not. So if they are not ready, who would fill these 5 spots this year?

Based off of what Sather, Maloney, Renney, Clark have done I am more than happy to leave those decisions in their capable hands. If people think they have drafted and traded for these kids to trade them away or leave them to rot on the farm they are nuts. These kids will play when their time has come.

In the mean time we have some vets that will eat up roster space and playing time. Many are on 1 year deals. What happens if some of the kids mature early in this coming season? We trade the vet for picks! Novel idea isn't it. If the kids don't mature early and actually take a full year in Hartford we don't bring back the vet next year and open up roster space.

There is a plan in place. That that plan does not meet with some fans idea of what a rebuild should be, well many of those fans are the same ones 3 years ago that said many of our picks are nothing but 4th liners and career minor leaguers. A rebuild requires patience and a plan. I think both are in place.

I am as anxious as anyone to see these kids play. This group of kids truly represents the 1st time in a long, long while that somewhere between 12-16 players that are home grown will be on our roster. I don't understand the need to rush. The fans want to speed up the process and then they complain that the organization doesn't have the patience to rebuild! Then those same fans complain that the organization doesn't do a complete rebuild where the teams stinks for 4-5 years. We, the fans create the impression that the fans won't sit for a complete rebuild. We can't have it both ways.

I don't know about anyone else, I am very happy with trying to bring kids in with a winning team at the NHL level, surrounded by some quality people. I think this talk about the rebuild being finished is foolish. There are gaps between when your people are ready. That happens to all teams. Look at how young some of our prospects that people want on the roster are. Look at the age of some of Pittsburgh's. They let their kids play together down on the farm. That is what we are doing.

ATLANTARANGER* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2006, 08:26 AM
  #79
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
Atlanta...

I don't know to what post you are responding. You were saying that we'd be foolish to think that this team would be laden with 21 & 22 year olds - I responded saying that wasn't the gist of the posts. You seem to be making a statement rather than responding to a post, which is fine, but you're not making a point that I'm missing. I don't think anywhere did I say there wasn't spots open. I didn't say anywhere spots should be handed out. I do believe that I said something like the youth wasn't beating out vets for a spot - they were beating out other rookies. That was the point of the posts. And there isn't a lot of talk about rushing prospects - remember, certain people have different ideas on the current development of certain prospects, and it's not uncommon for a prospect to come in and get 14-18 minutes as a forward or 16-20 minutes as a defenseman. Many aren't rushing them, at least not in their mind as they believe they're ready. Further, nowhere was it said what was right and what was wrong. I think we're all past that and while we're all not in agreement, there disparity of opinions is pretty narrow.

Fletch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2006, 08:52 AM
  #80
ATLANTARANGER*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Atlanta, B&R in NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 3,649
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
I don't know to what post you are responding. You were saying that we'd be foolish to think that this team would be laden with 21 & 22 year olds - I responded saying that wasn't the gist of the posts. You seem to be making a statement rather than responding to a post, which is fine, but you're not making a point that I'm missing. I don't think anywhere did I say there wasn't spots open. I didn't say anywhere spots should be handed out. I do believe that I said something like the youth wasn't beating out vets for a spot - they were beating out other rookies. That was the point of the posts. And there isn't a lot of talk about rushing prospects - remember, certain people have different ideas on the current development of certain prospects, and it's not uncommon for a prospect to come in and get 14-18 minutes as a forward or 16-20 minutes as a defenseman. Many aren't rushing them, at least not in their mind as they believe they're ready. Further, nowhere was it said what was right and what was wrong. I think we're all past that and while we're all not in agreement, there disparity of opinions is pretty narrow.
Fletch I am answering what you said and specifically about the youth wasn't beating out vets for a spot - they were beating out other rookies. I don't think youths will be out other youths. I think what you will see are the kids spending another year in Hartford, save Immonen & Dawes. If a Byers, or a G.Moore has more talent then a Hollweg or a Ortmeyer, then yes your observation is right. But, is that not an improvement? If you upgrade your bottom 2 lines with better players from within that is also part of a rebuild. Where I disagree is whether those players, whether they be 2nd - 4th liners, are at in their point of development.

You may very well see a 4th line of a Dubi, G. Moore & Korpedo at some point during the season in NY. But Dubi will not be a 4th line center. If that is his level we are in big trouble. G. Moore should end up as a 2nd liner & Korpedo as well.

ATLANTARANGER* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2006, 12:15 PM
  #81
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 9,723
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
this statement: 'You can't fault a vet for beating out a young player. It doesn't mean Managment isn't rebuilding it means the kid isn't ready' is pretty much BS. Forget about the rebuild for a second. The management doesn't sign a vet to a contract that will pay him $2-4 million a year to be beaten out in preseason by a kid. It doesn't happen - heck, that's not even in RangerLand where it doesn't happen. Rucinsky, if signed, has a spot and he's not going to lose it from Dawes - period. End of story. I can tell you that before seeing Dawes and determining if he's ready. A guy like Staal basically had zero chance of sticking last season. Prucha had a hard time cracking the lineup and he did look like he was ready last year, but spots were already taken and he had to wait for an injury to step-up. And that's fine, but lets not say a vet beat out a young player because he wasn't ready - and let's not say that happened last season either.
I was talking about roster spots as in (first line lw second line lw third line lw fourth line lw) Rucinsky (if resigned and you still seem to think it's a given) could lose his 3rd line lw spot to dawes or moore.

Hossa was our 2nd line RW coming out of camp last year.

A guy like Staal had zero chance last year because he wasn't ready. Guys like Tyutin and Drats still made the team. Prucha had a tough time cracking the lineup for about a week. He made his presence known before Rucinsky went down. Rookies beat out vets last year for spots last year. They will again this year. Lets not say it didn't happen last year-It did..

In the end Fletch the guys that are in trouble and could lose there spots in training camp are a mix of vets and youth.
Betts
Moore
Hossa
Ortmeyer
Hollweg
Straka (he could be anything from first line lw to second line center to third line lw)
Cullen (second line winger second line center third line winger third line center)

If you look at the battles going into camp very little is set in stone.

Son of Steinbrenner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-16-2006, 03:49 PM
  #82
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,469
vCash: 500
SoS...

first, show me where I talk about Rucinsky being a 'given' as opposed to 'ifs' and other qualifiers. Rucinsky, if signed, isn't losing a spot - which would be as a third line winger, most likely. Second, Straka's in danger? Be real. To start the season, Straka will be where Renney puts him. He'll get his 16-18 minutes per night. He doesn't get signed for another year at $3.1MM to have a chance to lose his job,

Yeah, Hossa was the second line winger coming out of camp...this is significant and you pointed this out...why? It seems to be an outlier.

We differ on Staal. I think most people think he played quite well in his first game, a game in which the entire team looked out of sync and there were a couple bench minors. It was rough for everyone. Staal couldn't do anything to make the team last year. Renney was using camp to ready his team for the games.

As for the guys 'at risk'...I disagree whole-heartedly on Straka. He'll get 16-18 minutes per night. Cullen...what's the risk? He's signed for four years at nearly $3MM. Either he's a second liner or a third liner. Where's the risk? He's been a third liner most of his career, so if he ends up there, he's where he's been most of his career. The rest are really first and second year players. He will play. He will play decent minutes. I see little risk on his part.

Fletch is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 03:47 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.