HFBoards

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

Rangers sign Roszival

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-02-2006, 11:27 PM
  #151
Pizza
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 9,915
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
believe it or not, a more-maligned defenseman, Poti, did get some pluses while playing with Jagr too. He didn't score much, and most think his defense sucked, yet he was +16. Yeah, it's not +35, but it's hard to get to +35 when you're out there with guys who aren't scoring much. Could he to have been +35? It's speculation, but I actually do not see why not. If you remember how many pluses were a result of both defensemen never being involved in the play, or Lundqvist bailing out his team (so as to not get a minus), I think you'd believe that it wasn't so much Rozsival out there. Granted, you can't put any Joe out there and get the same results as I don't think anybody believes Rozsival's garbage, but at the same time, no need to overestimate the guy.
I'm not pimping the guy or anything, I'd just say that the critiques are a bit over blown.

People keep talking about replacing him, but with whom? Could you replace him with someone that fits as well with the team or plays as well with and is liked as well by JJ. Probably not. I'm not pretending to be as expert as many of you, but I saw enough games to know that the guy fit in and played pretty well.

What I do know is we have several young guys we are grooming. One or two should be ready by the time Rozy's contract is up. As I said prior, he is a serviceable stop gap for two years until more youngsters are ready.

Pizza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2006, 08:18 AM
  #152
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,006
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pizza View Post
People keep talking about replacing him, but with whom?
If you take it in the context that Rozsival is a 3rd pairing defenseman masquerading as a top-pair defenseman, then the answer is easy. Staal, Pock & Lampman are ready for a real shot as a #6 defenseman. If Rozsival is a 3rd pairind defenseman (which on most days he is), then your answer is right there. Plus Baranka could be ready by mid-year, with Liffiton being a long-shot.
Quote:
What I do know is we have several young guys we are grooming. One or two should be ready by the time Rozy's contract is up. As I said prior, he is a serviceable stop gap for two years until more youngsters are ready.
And therein lies the main problem. By most accounts, Staal is ready for a shot THIS year. Now he will not get that chance. Fast-forward to next year. Guess what, if Rachunek is still here, Staal still has not shot because Rozsival became the 5th defenseman to be signed through the next two years.

Now tack on the fact that Baranka most likely does not need two more years in Hartford and you have two young defensemen that will be locked out. The problem in your placeholder theory is that there should be several defensemen ready BEFORE Rozsival's contract expires. And please do not say that bodies will be moved to make room, as no one can site examples in the recent past of when vets were moved for rookies. Let alone two of them.

True Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2006, 08:57 AM
  #153
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,001
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue View Post
And therein lies the main problem. By most accounts, Staal is ready for a shot THIS year. Now he will not get that chance. Fast-forward to next year. Guess what, if Rachunek is still here, Staal still has not shot because Rozsival became the 5th defenseman to be signed through the next two years.

I'd disagree, TB. Most observers I've read feel Staal is not quite ready. His best option is to go to Hartford, but, he's not eligible to do so.

jas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2006, 08:59 AM
  #154
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,006
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jas View Post
I'd disagree, TB. Most observers I've read feel Staal is not quite ready. His best option is to go to Hartford, but, he's not eligible to do so.
Jas, you know as well as I that his year in juniors made the statement that AT THAT level, he has nothing left to prove. As he cannot play in Hartford, he will never be given the chance to see if he could have taken the #6 defenseman job by the horns. I would have rather given him the opportunity.

Please note that I said he is ready for a shot, not be handed the job.

True Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2006, 09:07 AM
  #155
jas
Unsatisfied
 
jas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 13,001
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue View Post
Jas, you know as well as I that his year in juniors made the statement that AT THAT level, he has nothing left to prove. As he cannot play in Hartford, he will never be given the chance to see if he could have taken the #6 defenseman job by the horns. I would have rather given him the opportunity.

Please note that I said he is ready for a shot, not be handed the job.
Fair enough. And, much like you, I did not want to see the return of Rozsival. But, since his contract IS the going rate for mediocre D-men, him being traded is not an unlikely possibility.

jas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2006, 09:26 AM
  #156
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,006
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jas View Post
But, since his contract IS the going rate for mediocre D-men, him being traded is not an unlikely possibility.
Agreed on both counts, which is exactly why I did not want him resigned.

True Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2006, 10:21 AM
  #157
94now
Registered User
 
94now's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Snow Belt, USA
Country: United Nations
Posts: 6,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
believe it or not, a more-maligned defenseman, Poti, did get some pluses while playing with Jagr too. He didn't score much, and most think his defense sucked, yet he was +16. Yeah, it's not +35, but it's hard to get to +35 when you're out there with guys who aren't scoring much. Could he to have been +35? It's speculation, but I actually do not see why not. If you remember how many pluses were a result of both defensemen never being involved in the play, or Lundqvist bailing out his team (so as to not get a minus), I think you'd believe that it wasn't so much Rozsival out there. Granted, you can't put any Joe out there and get the same results as I don't think anybody believes Rozsival's garbage, but at the same time, no need to overestimate the guy.
http://ordinaryleastsquare.typepad.c...shirtbulletin/
Quote:
The two biggest knocks against Rozsival are that his plus-minus stats are the result of riding the coattails of Jaromir Jagr and Henrik Lundqvist, and that he is a giveaway machine. As far as giveaways go, any puck-moving top-unit defenseman will inevitably turn the puck over -- Chris Pronger led the league with 110, Sergei Zubov and Brian Rafalski were the next two right around 100 each, and the likes of Zdeno Chara, Bryan McCabe, Rob Blake, Chris Chelios, and eighteen other defensemen were tagged with more giveaways than the 65 Rozsival was charged with. The 6'2-204 Ranger even outhit the 6'6-220 Pronger by 79 to 65.

Being part of a high-scoring first unit on a successful team can't help but improve your plus-minus, but that unit could not possibly be as successful as they were with an omnipresent defenseman who stinks as bad as many fans think Rozsival does. Jagr had 71 even strength points, yet the opposition didn't even get half as much back on him, with Jagr, not noted for his defense, ending up +34. Rozsival was just about equal to Jagr at +35. Over in San Jose, Joe Thornton went +31 while scoring 74 even strength points, yet no defenseman was more than +17 -- and that guy, Tom Preissing, was already +4 when Thornton arrived. No other Shark defenseman was more than +10.

Rozsival didn't even play exclusively with Jagr -- Rozsival played 519 more shifts than Jagr's 1800-plus. If he was really that much of a horror show, he had at least that many chances (two out of every seven shifts) to be more of a minus player without the benefit of backing up the Rangers' leading scorer. In point of fact, Rozsival had nearly identical plus-minus stats with and without Jagr -- overall, he was +18 with Jagr, +17 without Jagr (on the ice for 35 even strength goals for and 17 against at the same time as Jagr, 35 goals for and 18 against with players other than Jagr).

Of course the ready answer to this is Henrik Lundqvist. Sure, Rozsival was better when Lundqvist was in net -- so was everyone. Yet Rozsival was +9 in Weekes's first 30 games before going -3 in Weekes's last two starts during the season-ending losing streak. On the flip side, in the nine games in which Lundqvist was not at his best, giving up four of more goals, Rozsival was +3, going minus in only one of those games despite the Rangers being outscored 42-22 in going 2-6-1. Weekes gave up four or more ten times, with Rozsival even overall, +3 (with never a minus game) in the first eight of those before going (as already noted) -3 in Weekes's last two starts

94now is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2006, 03:42 PM
  #158
Pizza
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 9,915
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue View Post
If you take it in the context that Rozsival is a 3rd pairing defenseman masquerading as a top-pair defenseman, then the answer is easy. Staal, Pock & Lampman are ready for a real shot as a #6 defenseman. If Rozsival is a 3rd pairind defenseman (which on most days he is), then your answer is right there. Plus Baranka could be ready by mid-year, with Liffiton being a long-shot.

And therein lies the main problem. By most accounts, Staal is ready for a shot THIS year. Now he will not get that chance. Fast-forward to next year. Guess what, if Rachunek is still here, Staal still has not shot because Rozsival became the 5th defenseman to be signed through the next two years.

Now tack on the fact that Baranka most likely does not need two more years in Hartford and you have two young defensemen that will be locked out. The problem in your placeholder theory is that there should be several defensemen ready BEFORE Rozsival's contract expires. And please do not say that bodies will be moved to make room, as no one can site examples in the recent past of when vets were moved for rookies. Let alone two of them.
I would agree that the players you mentioned are ready for a hard look, but Rozy's signing may indicate that the Rangers are unsure if any are ready to step into the NHL. While most of what I read and saw showed Staal playing pretty well at the end of last year, nobody seemed particularly blown away. Most of what I saw indicated he had some work to do development wise. Pock seems pretty weak on D. Lampman was injured much of the year. Baranka likely needs more time also.

I'm also mindful of the Rangers management stated commitment to get the kids into the lineup as soon as they are ready...and not before. They have said they will not rush another kid into a role he's not ready to handle.

MSG is no place for a young man who is not ready for it as has been made very clear over the years. When Staal or any other kid is ready, I'm confident the Ranger brain trust will promote them to MSG. Making a deal to move a vet out of the way, does not seem to me a thing they would shy from with such a promising crop of prospects on the way. On the contrary, I believe they cannot wait to get some of these kids in front of the faithful. That may be an unpopular, uncool or naive position to take as far as some here are concerned, but since spring of '04 Ranger management have done pretty much what they said they would do.

Pizza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2006, 03:56 PM
  #159
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,006
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pizza View Post
I would agree that the players you mentioned are ready for a hard look, but Rozy's signing may indicate that the Rangers are unsure if any are ready to step into the NHL. While most of what I read and saw showed Staal playing pretty well at the end of last year, nobody seemed particularly blown away. Most of what I saw indicated he had some work to do development wise. Pock seems pretty weak on D. Lampman was injured much of the year. Baranka likely needs more time also.
Off course not, as that would entail actually trusting a rookie. It is rather funny how last year, the board was lit up with posts of how Staal simply dominating juniors and how there needs to be a place for him. Now, as the season dawns closer and there are no open spots, I am seeing more and more of "He really did nothing impressive overall and needs to develop further" type of posts. It almost seems like justification (please note that this not directed to you or anybody else specifically....just what I am seeing). Weak as Pock seems, he was never worse than anyone else during his NHL games. Baranka does need more time, but does he really need 2 more years? Lampman already made the team out of camp once, seems reasonable to assume that he could hold down the job of a #6 defenseman.
Quote:
I'm also mindful of the Rangers management stated commitment to get the kids into the lineup as soon as they are ready...and not before.
I've heard that before. I also remember the lip service that was paid to calling up players from Hartford last year. And in the end, it was just that....lip service. IMO, being definitively ready for a real shot to show that you belong is different that being defintively ready to step in and play. If you are ready for a shot, then you need a place to be available in case you show that you are ready. After all, how can you really tell if a player is ready or not unless you are willing to give them a shot?
Quote:
They have said they will not rush another kid into a role he's not ready to handle.
Again, in this particular case, we are talking about the role of a #6 defenseman. A role that was held down for quite some time by Strudwick last year.
Quote:
When Staal or any other kid is ready, I'm confident the Ranger brain trust will promote them to MSG. Making a deal to move a vet out of the way, does not seem to me a thing they would shy from with such a promising crop of prospects on the way.
Do you recall the last vet that was dealt so that a rookie can play?
Quote:
On the contrary, I believe they cannot wait to get some of these kids in front of the faithful.
I think that last year's success has changed that. But that is only my opinion.

True Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2006, 05:44 PM
  #160
polako
Registered User
 
polako's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Country: Lebanon
Posts: 1,178
vCash: 500
Thanks for the data, 94now

It brings a good benchmark into the discussion. Of course, I'm sure both sides of the argument will try to spin the numbers to support their cases.

polako is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2006, 06:28 PM
  #161
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,035
vCash: 500
It's easy to spin both ways...

and the numbers are easy to disect - as much of the numbers are meaningless, particularly the shifts. Jagr had more PP shifts, quite possibly, and Rozsival had far more PK shifts. The important number is the number of goals with/without Jagr. Personally, I thought his +/- was higher than that with Jagr. I also thought he may've been on the ice for more ES goals as I did do an analysis through the end of December where the number of goals against was in the 30s, but that included short-handed goals. Nonetheless, we all watched a majority of the games. We all have our opinions. Most opinions were formed based on what people saw, and not the stats you see after the game. There's been many times where I said, man did that guy have a bad game defensively (not talking about Rozsival) and then after the game you look at the stats and the guy was +2. It's a team game and you evaluate each piece and make comments/conduct analyses on where each player best fits. Some people just don't like Rozsival. Some love him. Others, like me, like him but would rather have seen a defenseman other than Rozsival out there as part of the unit of five (like a real offenseman). Obviously there's not much of a logical choice with the roster the way it is and we'll all live watching him play with Jagr.

Fletch is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-03-2006, 10:10 PM
  #162
Pizza
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 9,915
vCash: 500
In referring to Staal's play at the end of last year, I was thinking about Hartford mainly. He did well there too, just nowhere near as dominating as we heard he was in junior. Which is only to be expected I guess. However; a number of people including Leslie Treff who saw him play several times at Sudbury, commented on how his game could use improvement.

I have no problem trusting a rookie. Hey they all gotta be rookies at some point. I just don't want 'em half baked. I'd rather they season properly in Hartford, juniors or where ever.

Pizza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2006, 05:43 AM
  #163
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,035
vCash: 500
If the kid can skate...

and keep up with the North American game, he probably should be here, and taking his lumps here, and suffer the growing pains here. There are many, many elite talents (I'm not actually calling Staal one) who struggled as 18, 19 and 20 year olds in the NHL, so the notion of him being baked, or his development screwed up because he struggled at the NHL level is something I don't necessarily agree with (there are other factors too, of course). The question would be if he went to juniors, does he develop much? If it's the same challenge level, or lower, than the previous year, I'm not sure how much you do develop and very often there's a tendency to get bored, and complacement, and that never helps either. It's like a MLB team playing a AAA team. Great for a tune-up before the season, but to do it every day to hone one's skills? Extreme example and not an exact analogy, but if the kid's a quick learner, and he can keep up at the NHL level, he probably should be here.

Fletch is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2006, 11:20 AM
  #164
94now
Registered User
 
94now's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Snow Belt, USA
Country: United Nations
Posts: 6,445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
If the kid can skate...and keep up with the North American game, he probably should be here, and taking his lumps here, and suffer the growing pains here.
Not in NY, not here. Buffalo, Carolina, Columbus - yes. But here people want to see a DOMINANT performance. That is why they only like Jagr and Lundqvist. AND NO ONE ELSE if you take a closer look. Nylander? Naah...Straka? Too soft. While many know what actual softness is, what they mean is NOT DOMINANT ENOUGH. That is why they call for Chara, Lecavalier and others. That is why they want to rid of EVERYONE who doesn't promise dominance, even if this kid is part of the rebuild they were calling for. In fact, majority see the rebuild as a continuous search for possible dominant player within the farm. Staal gonna be the one!! No? Then Dawes gonna be the one? No? Who else is there? Let's bring the boy from kindergarten, may be he will be as dominant as Brian Leetch was at his prime! Let's bring Leetch back, may be he can be the Leetchie of the old! It is all the same all the time over the years. Sather didn't get it at first and almost got canned. He himself wasn't dominant enough. Now he knows. He will keep his future stars away from MSG up until they dominant enough to satisfy the stupid and ignorant crowd that only NY (and Toronto) can produce. NO STAAL FOR YOU. Look what you did to Tyutin, morons!!!
Shanahan is brought in to satisfy your thirst for dominance. JUST ******* EAT IT AND LEAVE ROZY ALONE!!! Let us build a real team.


Last edited by 94now: 08-04-2006 at 12:37 PM.
94now is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2006, 12:01 PM
  #165
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,006
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 94now View Post
Not in NY, not here. Buffalo, Carolina, Columbus - yes. But here people want to see a DOMINANT performance. That is why they only like Jagr and Lundqvist.
Absolutely not true. In fact, the comment could not be further from the truth.
Quote:
AND NO ONE ELSE if you take a closer look. Nylander? Naah...Straka? Too soft.
Calling either a soft player has absolutely nothing to do with either not being a dominant player. And you would have to search far and wide to find someone who, overlall, was not satisfied with the performance of either.
Quote:
While many know what actual softness is, what they mean is NOT DOMINANT ENOUGH. That is why they call for Chara, Lecavalier and others. That is why they want to rid of EVERYONE who doesn't promise dominance, even if this kid is part of the rebuild they were calling for. In fact, majority see the rebuild as a continuous search for possible dominant player within the farm.
I don't often say this about many posts, and please forgive me, but everything you write here is an utter crock. You are oversimplyfing people's thoughts and lumping them all in an altogether feeble effort to strenghten your overall weak argument.

Like I said I am sorry for that, but it is rare when I see such outrageous posts.
Quote:
Staal gonna be the one!! No? Then Dawes gonna be the one? No? Who else is there? Let's bring the boy from kindergarten, may be he will be as dominant as Brian Leetch was at his prime! Let's bring Leetch back, may be he can be the Leetchie of the old! It is all the same all the time over the years.
Can you even come up with any evidence to support your points? People want Leetch back becuase he could be the Leetch of old? Do you really believe what you are writing? No, that is not why some wanted Leetch. People wanted Leetch, because if you are not going to give a rookie a chance, then he is very much an upgrade over someone like Rozsival. Especially given that a one-year Leetch contract is much better than a two-year Rozsival commitment.
Quote:
Sather didn't get it at first and almost got canned. He himself wasn't dominant enough. Now he knows. He will keep his future stars up until they dominant enough to satisfy the stupid and ignorant crowd that only NY (and Toronto) can produce.
This just gets weirder and stranger by the sentence. Sather should have been canned becuase he made bad trades, bad UFA signings and did nothing but amass the league's highest payroll, while having one of the league's worst teams. It has nothing to do with "dominance" and everything to do with incompetence.
Quote:
NO STAAL FOR YOU. Look what you did to Tyutin, morons!!!
Shanahan is brought in to satisfy your thirst for dominance. JUST ******* EAT IT AND LEAVE ROZY ALONE!!! Let us build a real team.
I cannot even begin to comment on this gibberish.

True Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2006, 12:29 PM
  #166
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 29,778
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue View Post
Can you even come up with any evidence to support your points? People want Leetch back becuase he could be the Leetch of old? Do you really believe what you are writing? No, that is not why some wanted Leetch. People wanted Leetch, because if you are not going to give a rookie a chance, then he is very much an upgrade over someone like Rozsival. Especially given that a one-year Leetch contract is much better than a two-year Rozsival commitment.
As perhaps the biggest supporter of the bringing back Leetch, I'll explain my rationale. Leetch, on a bad team that traded the evetualy Hart winner scored more points than any Ranger defenseman and in fewer games. The front office obviously felt that they needed more offense from the blueline otherwise they would not have traded for Ozo.

It has nothing to do with hoping he becomes the Leetch of all that's just a ridiculous idea. It does have to do with using Leetch in a manner that gets the most out of him. That, is with a stay-at-home defenseman (like Ward), playing third pair minutes and on the PP.

So yeah, it has nothing with hoping Leetch reverts to his older form. It does have to do with a preference to commit to Leetch for one year rather than Rozsival for more than one. I'd even give Leetch more for one year than Rozsival than the annual rate for Rozsival, (I'd rather give Leetch one year at 3M than give Rozsival two years for 5M).

__________________
SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2006, 12:32 PM
  #167
94now
Registered User
 
94now's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Snow Belt, USA
Country: United Nations
Posts: 6,445
vCash: 500
I did not mean you, TB, in particular

Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue View Post
Absolutely not true. In fact, the comment could not be further from the truth.

Calling either a soft player has absolutely nothing to do with either not being a dominant player. And you would have to search far and wide to find someone who, overlall, was not satisfied with the performance of either.

I don't often say this about many posts, and please forgive me, but everything you write here is an utter crock. You are oversimplyfing people's thoughts and lumping them all in an altogether feeble effort to strenghten your overall weak argument.

Like I said I am sorry for that, but it is rare when I see such outrageous posts.

Can you even come up with any evidence to support your points? People want Leetch back becuase he could be the Leetch of old? Do you really believe what you are writing? No, that is not why some wanted Leetch. People wanted Leetch, because if you are not going to give a rookie a chance, then he is very much an upgrade over someone like Rozsival. Especially given that a one-year Leetch contract is much better than a two-year Rozsival commitment.

This just gets weirder and stranger by the sentence. Sather should have been canned becuase he made bad trades, bad UFA signings and did nothing but amass the league's highest payroll, while having one of the league's worst teams. It has nothing to do with "dominance" and everything to do with incompetence.

I cannot even begin to comment on this gibberish.
The original post was a generalization taken to extreme intentionally to make my logic more clear.

Your reply (although unusually weak) suggest that your got my point entirely. You just so disagree with it that you have hard time to come back. I have to apologize for name calling in my post that most probably made you to react.
We tried to assemble the all-star teams via UFA and we failed. What I see is the desire to do the same again, but trough trades and picks. Whether it is doable or not is not the question. I think the idea is a flaw.

94now is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2006, 01:02 PM
  #168
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,035
vCash: 500
It seemed as though, 94..

the Garden Faithful took well to guys like Hollweg, Moore, Betts, Ward, and other non-superstars because they worked hard. The only young guy in recent memory to get booed was Tyutin, and it was during a period in which he was showing little heart out there. I wouldn't worry about a 19 year old getting booed - as I really wouldn't worry about Staal dogging it. It was an odd situation since prior to him, only Poti on the current team, and really not many others in recent years, were booed. Further, it's not something I think about when deciding if a kid's ready to play.

Fletch is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2006, 01:44 PM
  #169
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Tromelin
Posts: 9,481
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
and the numbers are easy to disect - as much of the numbers are meaningless, particularly the shifts. Jagr had more PP shifts, quite possibly, and Rozsival had far more PK shifts. The important number is the number of goals with/without Jagr. Personally, I thought his +/- was higher than that with Jagr. I also thought he may've been on the ice for more ES goals as I did do an analysis through the end of December where the number of goals against was in the 30s, but that included short-handed goals. Nonetheless, we all watched a majority of the games. We all have our opinions. Most opinions were formed based on what people saw, and not the stats you see after the game. There's been many times where I said, man did that guy have a bad game defensively (not talking about Rozsival) and then after the game you look at the stats and the guy was +2. It's a team game and you evaluate each piece and make comments/conduct analyses on where each player best fits. Some people just don't like Rozsival. Some love him. Others, like me, like him but would rather have seen a defenseman other than Rozsival out there as part of the unit of five (like a real offenseman). Obviously there's not much of a logical choice with the roster the way it is and we'll all live watching him play with Jagr.
the fact is the numbers don't lie.

Is Rozsival great?

No but he isn't as bad as "some people" have made him out to be. The guy is a #4 defenseman who does the job. I've had to read for months about rozsival "nightly hooking penalty" when it just wasn't TRUE. Us BLUEshirt fans have seen better players on paper than Rozsival bomb here. The guy fits the team..

Now on to the next point..

When is having to many NHL ready defenseman a bad thing. If Staal has to go back to junior is it really going to make him worse? Is Liffiton really better than Rozsival?
Do we really expect our team to not be hit by injuries throughout another season? (yes i know we were hit hard at the end but not as much during the main portion of the schedule) Rozsival was called part of Jagrs entourage and it was thought that Jagr was the sole reason he played (something i proved wrong time and time again but oh well) Now what do the Jagr entourage people have to say with Sykora and Rucinsky both not coming back? When the youth is ready the guys will be traded. People are projecting us to have 5 guys under contract on defense next season but what are the odds of the Rangers not moving somebody? The point is we have a defenseman that played well and is still young enough to improve his game in Rozsival.

Now on to the next point..

Sather had god awful UFA signings but his trades and drafts deserve credit not anytthing else. He got the best player in hockey for Anson "friggin" Carter. Can we name the last bad trade Sather has made? Ozo is probably the answer but he traded a 3rd round pick for him and many people were happy with the move at the time. Honestly what was the last bad trade the guy has made as GM?

Son of Steinbrenner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2006, 01:58 PM
  #170
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,035
vCash: 500
Where have you been, SoS?

noticeably absent. I agree that he may not be as bad. I think he's between a 4 and #6, since the numbers do lie a bit, I believe.

As for the hooking penalties...the guy took about 48 minors. Most of them were obstruction. Why people exaggerate his penalties is because his penalties always seemed to be inopportune, lazy penalties; moreso than any other Ranger defenseman. People remember a couple, if not several, penalties while already a man down. He took a lot of lazy minors. I don't think that number lies too much. Will it continue this season? He really wasn't much of a penalty taker from what I remember about him in PITT - perhaps it's the fact that he's getting more ice time and against greater competition and since he's really not a top pair guy, he sometimes struggles on that top pair.

I don't think having Staal go to juniors make him worse. Also, I'm not totally convinced that it makes him better than if he stayed (assuming he shows he improved from last season and can handle it). Would it really be that bad to have a 19 year old, potential top pair defenseman begin his career at an age when many other defensemen started? It's not totally out of the ordinary, and that won't kill him either.

Is Liffiton better than Rozsival? Right now, I doubt it. In two years, who knows. Could Liffiton (or another defenseman) be a 6th defenseman and someone else be Malik's partner, like Ward? Possibly. Would it be better or worse for the team today and tomorrow? That's the $64K question to which one can't answer today. We won't get to know, and I'm not advocating we should, but understand there is another thought to what should be done, one that involves more risk, but it's not totally outrageous.

Regarding the entourage - I don't believe in the entourage conspiracy. I do believe Sather brought in guys to bridge to this season and put together a team he thought would gel quickly and be cohesive all the while other teams scrambled to get that cohesiveness. Come the end of the season, he recognized the band aid needed re-jiggering because of numerous factors including the rest of the league finally found cohensiveness and players got their legs back, and thus he put some guys in that resemble the types of guys that he's been drafting (character/north-south player - almost looking like the Oilers).

As for the GMing...not commenting as that's an entirely different thread. I will say the Ozo signing did leave a bad taste in my mouth and negated some good he had done.

Fletch is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2006, 02:38 PM
  #171
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Tromelin
Posts: 9,481
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
noticeably absent. I agree that he may not be as bad. I think he's between a 4 and #6, since the numbers do lie a bit, I believe.

As for the hooking penalties...the guy took about 48 minors. Most of them were obstruction. Why people exaggerate his penalties is because his penalties always seemed to be inopportune, lazy penalties; moreso than any other Ranger defenseman. People remember a couple, if not several, penalties while already a man down. He took a lot of lazy minors. I don't think that number lies too much. Will it continue this season? He really wasn't much of a penalty taker from what I remember about him in PITT - perhaps it's the fact that he's getting more ice time and against greater competition and since he's really not a top pair guy, he sometimes struggles on that top pair.

I don't think having Staal go to juniors make him worse. Also, I'm not totally convinced that it makes him better than if he stayed (assuming he shows he improved from last season and can handle it). Would it really be that bad to have a 19 year old, potential top pair defenseman begin his career at an age when many other defensemen started? It's not totally out of the ordinary, and that won't kill him either.

Is Liffiton better than Rozsival? Right now, I doubt it. In two years, who knows. Could Liffiton (or another defenseman) be a 6th defenseman and someone else be Malik's partner, like Ward? Possibly. Would it be better or worse for the team today and tomorrow? That's the $64K question to which one can't answer today. We won't get to know, and I'm not advocating we should, but understand there is another thought to what should be done, one that involves more risk, but it's not totally outrageous.

Regarding the entourage - I don't believe in the entourage conspiracy. I do believe Sather brought in guys to bridge to this season and put together a team he thought would gel quickly and be cohesive all the while other teams scrambled to get that cohesiveness. Come the end of the season, he recognized the band aid needed re-jiggering because of numerous factors including the rest of the league finally found cohensiveness and players got their legs back, and thus he put some guys in that resemble the types of guys that he's been drafting (character/north-south player - almost looking like the Oilers).

As for the GMing...not commenting as that's an entirely different thread. I will say the Ozo signing did leave a bad taste in my mouth and negated some good he had done.
Yeah, with the impending expansion of the family we just closed on a new house. Moving with somebody that is on bed-rest while still trying to maintain a staff at work that is ready to kill me "AC that was going on and off all week in the building I lease" life has been too hectic for the boards of late. As I get older the respect i have for my parents just grows and grows and frankly i have it much easier than they did.
I agree with you about Rozsival. His top end is a #4 defenseman but that isn't knock againts the guy. Do we have anything better than him ready to step in? No and I'd rather see older guys that are at the end of there careers go before Rozsival (KASPAR) The numbers aren't 100% accurate and Fletch I was killing Rozsvial on the boards until January.

Obstruction penalties are subjective. Is he out of postion and has to hook somebody or is the ref calling the game way to tight. I know you and I agree that the Refs called the games like *** last season. It wasn't a Rangers problem but a league wide problem. His nightly hooks were a part of hockey throughout the NHL. Its something we are going to have to live with.

I don't think Staal going back to junior is going to happen but I'm not againts it. He might not be ready and the Rangers have need to rush him. As I've said in other threads I don't think Kasper is going to be 100% to start the year. That's the spot I see Staal getting and maybe with his play he bumps another defenseman out of the lineup when Darius is healthy. The Rangers have depth on defense and it's something to be happy about because defenseman are like pitchers in baseball. You just can't have enough.

As for the entourage and Sather stuff what else is there lef to say.

It's nice to have free time to post..

Son of Steinbrenner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2006, 02:40 PM
  #172
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
SOS, I agree with you with Rosival.

Playing Devil's Advocate for second, I think the disconnect comes from the role vs. the talent.

Rosival as said, is a good #4 or 5 defenseman. But I think a lot of people get frustrated when a guy who is at that level is playing so much with Jagr. From there I think the frustration boils over into other areas.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2006, 02:49 PM
  #173
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,035
vCash: 500
Obstruction calls are subjective...

and I think the refs called horribly inconsistent games until the last month or so when they decided to let a lot go, and in the playoffs where they let even more go and the games had flow again. But on Rozsival, again, his penalties seemed to be a lot, inopportune, and obvious.

One thing I noticed about Rozsival is he reacts in his zone slowly. That either led to him being beat, or him taking a penalty. I'm not sure if you noticed the same thing, but often he just seemed stuck. Not really out of position, but not reacting quickly.

And you know my opinion on Rozsival. I liked him before the season began (liked him in PITT). Wasn't in love with the signing because I wanted that spot open, but looking at him exclusive of everything else, I liked the player. And there are attributes I still like about him and believe he may be better this year than last (he has heart - and uses it effectively). And perhaps if Ward wasn't signed I'd be more open to his signing (I haven't based this signing by the way).

We'll see on Staal. Like with some yoots, I think he needs an outstanding camp (and an open spot) to make the team, or at least play up to 10 NHL games. That would be a nice compromise and traveling with an NHL team for a month, praciticing and getting into a few games may not hurt him much. I just don't know if juniors does a lot, which is why I don't think that would hurt him. But in the end, I think he'll be a victim of a numbers game (unless somehow he plays so well that they can't send him down - not sure that's happening).

Good to have you back.

Fletch is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2006, 02:51 PM
  #174
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Tromelin
Posts: 9,481
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
SOS, I agree with you with Rosival.

Playing Devil's Advocate for second, I think the disconnect comes from the role vs. the talent.

Rosival as said, is a good #4 or 5 defenseman. But I think a lot of people get frustrated when a guy who is at that level is playing so much with Jagr. From there I think the frustration boils over into other areas.
The Rangers could go out and get a young Brian Leetch but if he doesn't have chemistry with Jagr how good is the team going to be? Rozsival is what he is but I'd rather know what I have with him at $2 million than have Kubina (for example) at $5 million a year and not know what I have.

I understand the frustation with Rozsival to a point. Certain people just don't like the guy and I'm not sure if there is a middle ground on this topic..

Son of Steinbrenner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2006, 03:07 PM
  #175
Fletch
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 21,035
vCash: 500
Sometimes SoS...

you take a chance. It's hard to imagine Jagr having more points, but if there was a guy on defense bringing up the puck and dishing it off to Jagr, then perhaps it would've been possible. And on the PP too - it's not too unreasonable to think a defenseman could've had 60 points last season while playing with Jagr (and there was room for improvement on the PP). The difference in points and what the Rangers actually got (assuming simliar defensive prowess) is first place in the division and home ice and competing for first place in the conference. Chemistry could be a problem, but sometimes you take a chance (this is purely hypothetical since I don't want to get into the possible signings, who was missed, etc., since I can barely remember at this point).

Fletch is online now   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 10:03 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.