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

Lessons for the Rangers

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-06-2008, 02:46 PM
  #1
Forechecker
Registered User
 
Forechecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Country: Netherlands
Posts: 4,322
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Forechecker
Lessons for the Rangers

Lynn Zinser has a good piece in today's Times about the lessons the Rangers could learn from the Red Wings:

Quote:
The Rangers, in contrast, have done seemingly the opposite in picking their players in recent years. Instead of dedicating themselves to a guiding philosophy, they have been working on the “take the best player available” model ,and while they have collected a lot of talent, the talent has not fit. There is a serious disconnect between Tom Renney’s coaching philosophy and the team’s player-gathering philosophy. That was their biggest problem this season.

It is the difference between going to the grocery store with a list of ingredients for a recipe and wandering around in the store looking for things that look good. The Red Wings are tinkering with a gourmet recipe and the Rangers gravitate to things that look yummy. Lots of yummy things mixed together do not necessarily taste good.

It's the scouting, stupid.

Forechecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2008, 03:07 PM
  #2
otto1219
Registered User
 
otto1219's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 998
vCash: 500
i dont know how much better the wings are, i mean datsyuk, zetterberg, and holmstrom were all 6 round + players. Im not saying their scouts are not good, but i do think they got lucky with these players turning into great hockey players.

otto1219 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2008, 03:30 PM
  #3
HockeyBasedNYC
Registered User
 
HockeyBasedNYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Here
Country: United States
Posts: 13,160
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by otto1219 View Post
i dont know how much better the wings are, i mean datsyuk, zetterberg, and holmstrom were all 6 round + players. Im not saying their scouts are not good, but i do think they got lucky with these players turning into great hockey players.
Its a little bit of both...

You never know how good the players will become...

I mean look at Lundqvist.

Plus its still relatively early for the kids on the Rangers, they really havent formed an identity yet and they arent all Crosby's and Malkins...

They all take a step forward next year and they find some ingredients that mesh well with Gomez and Drury and they might be more improved.

I tend to slightly agree with what the article says, which is why i think they should get that recipe down - and for me it doesnt include Jagr.

HockeyBasedNYC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2008, 03:48 PM
  #4
HockeyBasedNYC
Registered User
 
HockeyBasedNYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Here
Country: United States
Posts: 13,160
vCash: 500
Another thing becomes apparent when reading an article like this.

We see them ever year after the finals.

Last year everyone thought the mantra was to get bigger, tougher with a focus of skill on the back end because the Ducks won. Now its sticking to a plan and drafting well in the lower rounds. If the Penguins won the cup it would be about tanking it and building a team through draft picks and surrounding that youth with the right veterans.

Bottom line is, you need to have a well put together franchise, with players who want to play hard in a system built by a good coach with a little bit of luck on your side.

Yeah the Wings have done a great job, and maybe their team is a dynasty. But every team has its own limitations and experiences to draw from and build on. Theres no set formula for success in this league. Common traits, yes... but no set plan.

And in that article it said there was no "overriding theme" to why they signed drury and gomez and thats false. There is an overriding theme in NYC and its keeping fannies in the seats.

HockeyBasedNYC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2008, 04:03 PM
  #5
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 29,559
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyBasedNYC View Post
Another thing becomes apparent when reading an article like this.

We see them ever year after the finals.

Last year everyone thought the mantra was to get bigger, tougher with a focus of skill on the back end because the Ducks won. Now its sticking to a plan and drafting well in the lower rounds. If the Penguins won the cup it would be about tanking it and building a team through draft picks and surrounding that youth with the right veterans.

Bottom line is, you need to have a well put together franchise, with players who want to play hard in a system built by a good coach with a little bit of luck on your side.

Yeah the Wings have done a great job, and maybe their team is a dynasty. But every team has its own limitations and experiences to draw from and build on. Theres no set formula for success in this league. Common traits, yes... but no set plan.

And in that article it said there was no "overriding theme" to why they signed drury and gomez and thats false. There is an overriding theme in NYC and its keeping fannies in the seats.
well...with the fact that jagr, shanny, jagr, malik, mara, rozsival, avery are all possibly leaving this year...i would say gomez and drury are those veterans....except those veterans are still in their prime....thats another reason they were paid so well...they have a ton of experience already at their ages....i think sather had a plan to move on after this year and allow gomez and drury to become the new leaders however now he thinks that jagr may have a couple more years and he doesnt want to treat him poorly.....i think its time to move on from jagr and let gomez and drury help the younger players and sign redden and smith for the defense as they would be the leader back there....that gives four legitimate leaders for the forwards and defense...i say thats the way the rangers should build with all their youth looking up to the right players and those four are pretty good role-models as you have a goal-scorer/grinder/professional, playmaker/smooth skater/great attitude, physical/battler, ppqb/puck mover....that pretty much covers most players....that would be the best thing to happen for this organization IMO......but it wont happen

NYR Viper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2008, 04:14 PM
  #6
HockeyBasedNYC
Registered User
 
HockeyBasedNYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Here
Country: United States
Posts: 13,160
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyviper87 View Post
well...with the fact that jagr, shanny, jagr, malik, mara, rozsival, avery are all possibly leaving this year...i would say gomez and drury are those veterans....except those veterans are still in their prime....thats another reason they were paid so well...they have a ton of experience already at their ages....i think sather had a plan to move on after this year and allow gomez and drury to become the new leaders however now he thinks that jagr may have a couple more years and he doesnt want to treat him poorly.....i think its time to move on from jagr and let gomez and drury help the younger players and sign redden and smith for the defense as they would be the leader back there....that gives four legitimate leaders for the forwards and defense...i say thats the way the rangers should build with all their youth looking up to the right players and those four are pretty good role-models as you have a goal-scorer/grinder/professional, playmaker/smooth skater/great attitude, physical/battler, ppqb/puck mover....that pretty much covers most players....that would be the best thing to happen for this organization IMO......but it wont happen
I dont want Jagr signed either for the same reason.

You are "stuck" with Gomez and Drury for the most part so you have to build around them now rather than extending "Jagr's team" another 1 or 2 years when thos 2 are 2 years older. It might be too late by then.

What i dont understand is the bolded part, though i know why you said it. Why should the "treatment" of a player be considered when that player could mean the difference between a team that moves forward into a new age and one that is holding onto the past half-assed?

We all want to treat players well. Especially those who are great players like Jagr. Had Jagr earned his extension, fine. But he didnt. And now the Rangers should move on. Its not about treating him poorly. Its business and they should have a plan moving forward. Trying to fit him in and getting side pieces ala a semi-retired Straka or Rucinsky is NOT a good plan. Having a 38 year old Jagr in 2010 getting third line minutes isnt either.

Everything about Jagr is how he is treated and his feelings. Thats why everyone defers to him and the powerplay doesnt work. He is such a unique player and commands the attention of building a team around him... if you sign him for two years, its the easy way out and exactly what this team should steer clear of.

Ive been saying this since the Rangers were shaking hands with the Penguins and now others are settling into the offseason and seeing that signing Jagr might not be the best idea, especially if its for more than one year for what will likely be a pretty hefty price tag.

HockeyBasedNYC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2008, 04:55 PM
  #7
Speedtrials
Registered User
 
Speedtrials's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Alphabit City
Country: United States
Posts: 1,048
vCash: 500
I can't say I agree with this criticism at all. We are just now starting to see what Ranger draft picks are going to be the future of the team. Those players like Dubinsky, Dawes, Callahan, Korpikoski, and Girardi have all spent some time in Hartford learning to play the type of game the Rangers wanted them to play. Our next group of prospects Anisimov, Byers, Sanguinetti, Bourret, and Sauer are all learning or going to be learning to play that same type of game with the Pack. Cherepanov is a wildcard into where he will start his North American career. However, most of our prospects have been taught a certain way in how the Rangers demand they play in order to stay in the NHL. With the uncertainty of this off-season it is possible we might take a step back, from this past season. However, as an organization I see a plan that is slowly coming together to put a young, hardworking, and defensive-minded team that will be able compete every year.

Speedtrials is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-06-2008, 05:00 PM
  #8
ThirdEye
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New York
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 11,671
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyBasedNYC View Post
I dont want Jagr signed either for the same reason.

You are "stuck" with Gomez and Drury for the most part so you have to build around them now rather than extending "Jagr's team" another 1 or 2 years when thos 2 are 2 years older. It might be too late by then.

What i dont understand is the bolded part, though i know why you said it. Why should the "treatment" of a player be considered when that player could mean the difference between a team that moves forward into a new age and one that is holding onto the past half-assed?

We all want to treat players well. Especially those who are great players like Jagr. Had Jagr earned his extension, fine. But he didnt. And now the Rangers should move on. Its not about treating him poorly. Its business and they should have a plan moving forward. Trying to fit him in and getting side pieces ala a semi-retired Straka or Rucinsky is NOT a good plan. Having a 38 year old Jagr in 2010 getting third line minutes isnt either.

Everything about Jagr is how he is treated and his feelings. Thats why everyone defers to him and the powerplay doesnt work. He is such a unique player and commands the attention of building a team around him... if you sign him for two years, its the easy way out and exactly what this team should steer clear of.

Ive been saying this since the Rangers were shaking hands with the Penguins and now others are settling into the offseason and seeing that signing Jagr might not be the best idea, especially if its for more than one year for what will likely be a pretty hefty price tag.
I'm not sure I agree with you, but you do make a valid argument. If Jagr goes we'll able to sign a player that will better compliment the two centers we got during the previous offseason, and more importantly, will be able to play defense as well. It also forces our younger guys to step up a bit because they will naturally have to be more responsible. Also, our PP has been horrendous, and I'm not sure it will improve next year with an almost 40 year old Jagr out there hogging up time and passing the puck back and forth to Roszival. And another thing to note is that, although the players have requested of Sather to bring Jagr back, it's really impossible to know how they really feel. They obviously aren't going to voice their displeasure publicly, and will show the guy respect

On the bright side, Jagr can still provide us with 70+ points of offense without even trying. Also, Dubisnky has played well with him, so you'll be giving up on that project altogether.

Really curious to see what will happen.

ThirdEye 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 09:58 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.